rMoney commits felony

[Juan_Bottom]

your picture says 2001!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Earlier you were saying 2002!!!!!!!!!!!

OMFG FELONY COMMITTED BY JUAN BOTTOM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/1 ... 74209.html

A corporate document filed with the state of Massachusetts in December 2002 -- a month after Romney was elected governor -- lists him as one of two managing members of Bain Capital Investors, LLC "authorized to execute, acknowledge, deliver and record any recordable instrument purporting to affect an interest in real property, whether to be recorded with a Registry of Deeds or with a District Office of the Land Court."

There's just a lot of documentation saying that he was in charge of Bain.

[Phatscotty]

Obama will cease to be a hypocrite for demanding Romney's past records when Obama UNSEALS his past records, which Obama continues to hide, and which Juan Bottom continues to give a pass too.

Aren't you being a little bit hypocritical here JB? Why shouldn't Obama release his records???

[Juan_Bottom]

He released his birth certificate like you Tea Party Killers wanted.
Romney gave McCain 28 years of tax records when he wanted to be VP. But he wont release them to the public.
Aren't you being a bit hypocritical?

[notyou2]

Why was Romney participating in board meetings if he was no longer concerned with running the company? He should have resigned from the board. He didn't, and furthermore, he continued to attend board meetings in person and by conference call, therefore he is guilty of filing false documents to the SEC, which appears to be a felony offense.

Apparently NS and PS can't grasp this.

[Phatscotty]

Obama is the one with the outsourcing problem. Obama has sent BILLIONS of dollars overseas over the last 3.5 years.

[Juan_Bottom]

please don't get off topic

Former Bain Capital partner says Romney was 'legally' CEO of Bain Capital until 2002
http://upwithchrishayes.msnbc.msn.com/_ ... until-2002

A former partner at Bain Capital, who worked at the firm when Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney was in charge, acknowledged on Sunday that Romney was “legally” the chief executive officer and sole owner of Bain Capital until 2002, not 1999 as Romney has previously stated, and said that Romney was engaged in a “complicated set of negotiations” over his exit pay for at least two years after he says he left the firm.

“Mitt’s names were on the documents as the chief executive and sole owner of the company,” Ed Conard, who served as a partner at Bain Capital from 1993 to 2007, said in an exclusive interview with Up w/ Chris Hayes. Asked again if Romney was chief executive officer of Bain Capital from 1999 to 2002, Conard said, “Legally, on documents, I suppose, yes.”

Despite Romney's statements that he left in 1999, Conard's new remarks suggest that, in fact, Romney's continued ownership of the firm enabled him to negotiate a better exit deal. "We had to negotiate with Mitt because he was an owner of the firm," Conard said.

[GreecePwns]

Both Obama and Romney committed gross illegal acts, NS and PS are guilty of not acknowledging this or choosing to willfully ignore it for "their guy" Romney.* Symmetry, I don't know if he acknowledges Obama's wrongdoings in Libya etc. I'll admit I skimmed so I don't know for sure. Juan Bottom seems willfully ignoring Obama's wrongs or trolling to fill the void pimpdave left. He definitely has posted more intelligently in the past.

In a just world, both of these men would be in jail for committing crimes.

This may be a nonimportant issue in a presidential race, but it is another example of Romney's willingness to say and do literally ANYTHING for power.

*Night Strike won't deny that Romney is his guy very intensely. PS will claim he is a Ron Paul guy, but he's talking like he's fully thrown his support behind Romney, while ignoring the candidate in this race closer to Paul ideologically (Gary Johnson).

[Phatscotty]

Romney is not my guy.

This is just a non issue. Simple as that

curious, what is the gross illegal act Romney committed? (we all know obama's )

[GreecePwns]

Who will you vote for in this election, if you plan on voting?

In all seriousness, not trolling or anything.

[Phatscotty]

Who will you vote for in this election, if you plan on voting?

In all seriousness, not trolling or anything.

I am voting against Obama, which means I am plugging my nose and voting for Romney. But that does not make him my guy. What is going on here (not necessarily including you) is people are trying to box me and Strike in to being viewed as Romney lovers. I'm in this thread because of how weak I think this attack is by Obama, and not because I am defending Romney.

[Juan_Bottom]

Juan Bottom seems willfully ignoring Obama's wrongs or trolling to fill the void pimpdave left. He definitely has posted more intelligently in the past.

HE KILLED OSAMA.
AND NO I HAVEN'T.

Where are all the 60 tapes of the plane hitting the Pentagon??? hmmm?
I've heard witnesses say a military cargo plane hit it, a small plane, a large jet, a single engine plan, and a missle.

[Woodruff]

There's plenty of laws in the US which no one enforces because they're inconsequential, or because there's more valuable laws to enforce. In New Orleans, it's illegal to practice voodoo in the city limits, and it's also illegal to murder people. Which law should be enforced with more resources? The relative consequences do matter, and that's completely evident with law enforcement and the use of such resources.

Since resources for enforcing law and order are scarce, then it makes sense to place a priority on enforcing the law in regard to the consequences of any crime. Of course, the court should be involved with Romney and this allegation. However, the reactions among people is telling. They'll jump on something so minor, and completely overlook their Main Man when he kills innocent civilians.

That some crimes get overlooked ain't a good reason to ignore a crime. Nor is it a good idea to dismiss a potential felony on the basis of the idea that someone he's competing against politically might well be getting away with something worse.

I'm surprised to see BigBallinStalin so up in arms about this, when I don't remember his angst about the anti-Obama stuff of similar (or worse) nature. While at the same time talking about how hypocritical people are about it.

[Phatscotty]

There's plenty of laws in the US which no one enforces because they're inconsequential, or because there's more valuable laws to enforce. In New Orleans, it's illegal to practice voodoo in the city limits, and it's also illegal to murder people. Which law should be enforced with more resources? The relative consequences do matter, and that's completely evident with law enforcement and the use of such resources.

Since resources for enforcing law and order are scarce, then it makes sense to place a priority on enforcing the law in regard to the consequences of any crime. Of course, the court should be involved with Romney and this allegation. However, the reactions among people is telling. They'll jump on something so minor, and completely overlook their Main Man when he kills innocent civilians.

That some crimes get overlooked ain't a good reason to ignore a crime. Nor is it a good idea to dismiss a potential felony on the basis of the idea that someone he's competing against politically might well be getting away with something worse.

I'm surprised to see BigBallinStalin so up in arms about this, when I don't remember his angst about the anti-Obama stuff of similar (or worse) nature. While at the same time talking about how hypocritical people are about it.

it's because he is being less biased and more objective than the rest of us.

I admit I've already decided how I feel about Obama, and that isn't going to change.

[Woodruff]

*Night Strike won't deny that Romney is his guy very intensely. PS will claim he is a Ron Paul guy, but he's talking like he's fully thrown his support behind Romney, while ignoring the candidate in this race closer to Paul ideologically (Gary Johnson).

Phatscotty appears to be voting for not-Obama.

[Phatscotty]

*Night Strike won't deny that Romney is his guy very intensely. PS will claim he is a Ron Paul guy, but he's talking like he's fully thrown his support behind Romney, while ignoring the candidate in this race closer to Paul ideologically (Gary Johnson).

Phatscotty appears to be voting for not-Obama.

Something I have openly stated numerous times.

[Woodruff]

There's plenty of laws in the US which no one enforces because they're inconsequential, or because there's more valuable laws to enforce. In New Orleans, it's illegal to practice voodoo in the city limits, and it's also illegal to murder people. Which law should be enforced with more resources? The relative consequences do matter, and that's completely evident with law enforcement and the use of such resources.

Since resources for enforcing law and order are scarce, then it makes sense to place a priority on enforcing the law in regard to the consequences of any crime. Of course, the court should be involved with Romney and this allegation. However, the reactions among people is telling. They'll jump on something so minor, and completely overlook their Main Man when he kills innocent civilians.

That some crimes get overlooked ain't a good reason to ignore a crime. Nor is it a good idea to dismiss a potential felony on the basis of the idea that someone he's competing against politically might well be getting away with something worse.

I'm surprised to see BigBallinStalin so up in arms about this, when I don't remember his angst about the anti-Obama stuff of similar (or worse) nature. While at the same time talking about how hypocritical people are about it.

it's because he is being less biased and more objective than the rest of us.

I admit I've already decided how I feel about Obama, and that isn't going to change.

You also appear to have already decided how you feel about Romney, and that doesn't appear to be something that's going to change either.

For my part, I would like to see what those tax returns say. It seems to me that this whole "situation" with Romney would be completely dissipated by seeing them, as then we would see if salary/investments/etc from Bain were involved. I think that if they were involved, this is a very big deal. And it wouldn't bother me in the least to find out that it's not an issue at all.

[Night Strike]

please don't get off topic

Former Bain Capital partner says Romney was 'legally' CEO of Bain Capital until 2002
http://upwithchrishayes.msnbc.msn.com/_ ... until-2002

A former partner at Bain Capital, who worked at the firm when Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney was in charge, acknowledged on Sunday that Romney was “legally” the chief executive officer and sole owner of Bain Capital until 2002, not 1999 as Romney has previously stated, and said that Romney was engaged in a “complicated set of negotiations” over his exit pay for at least two years after he says he left the firm.

“Mitt’s names were on the documents as the chief executive and sole owner of the company,” Ed Conard, who served as a partner at Bain Capital from 1993 to 2007, said in an exclusive interview with Up w/ Chris Hayes. Asked again if Romney was chief executive officer of Bain Capital from 1999 to 2002, Conard said, “Legally, on documents, I suppose, yes.”

Despite Romney's statements that he left in 1999, Conard's new remarks suggest that, in fact, Romney's continued ownership of the firm enabled him to negotiate a better exit deal. "We had to negotiate with Mitt because he was an owner of the firm," Conard said.

"Legally, on documents, I suppose, yes."

That sounds like a really emphatic answer there. I'm sure he sounds hesitant because he knows that Romney was CEO in name only, aka "legally". He knows that Romney was not actively managing the group, which is what Romney's statements have clearly said.


And Phatscotty's point earlier is completely valid: why is no one demanding for everything about Obama's past to be unsealed and revealed? Why is Obama allowed to stay hidden but Romney has to be fully exposed (and twisted into something false)?

[Juan_Bottom]

It probably has something to do with this being self-inflicted damage.

[Juan_Bottom]

Also the words "retroactively retired" are a pretty dumb combination.

[notyou2]

please don't get off topic

Former Bain Capital partner says Romney was 'legally' CEO of Bain Capital until 2002
http://upwithchrishayes.msnbc.msn.com/_ ... until-2002

A former partner at Bain Capital, who worked at the firm when Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney was in charge, acknowledged on Sunday that Romney was “legally” the chief executive officer and sole owner of Bain Capital until 2002, not 1999 as Romney has previously stated, and said that Romney was engaged in a “complicated set of negotiations” over his exit pay for at least two years after he says he left the firm.

“Mitt’s names were on the documents as the chief executive and sole owner of the company,” Ed Conard, who served as a partner at Bain Capital from 1993 to 2007, said in an exclusive interview with Up w/ Chris Hayes. Asked again if Romney was chief executive officer of Bain Capital from 1999 to 2002, Conard said, “Legally, on documents, I suppose, yes.”

Despite Romney's statements that he left in 1999, Conard's new remarks suggest that, in fact, Romney's continued ownership of the firm enabled him to negotiate a better exit deal. "We had to negotiate with Mitt because he was an owner of the firm," Conard said.

"Legally, on documents, I suppose, yes."

That sounds like a really emphatic answer there. I'm sure he sounds hesitant because he knows that Romney was CEO in name only, aka "legally". He knows that Romney was not actively managing the group, which is what Romney's statements have clearly said.


And Phatscotty's point earlier is completely valid: why is no one demanding for everything about Obama's past to be unsealed and revealed? Why is Obama allowed to stay hidden but Romney has to be fully exposed (and twisted into something false)?

Make your own thread on this. This is clearly off topic and the OP has respectfully requested that you stay on topic.

[Night Strike]

If Obama really believed that Romney had committed a felony (and had real evidence), he would have eagerly had Eric Holder announce an indictment against Romney. Instead, he announced the "felony" in a campaign ad. If a felony was committed, bring the charges. Otherwise, the Obama campaign knows they're lying just to distract from their abysmal economy and the other real issues of the campaign. Remember, Obama has to do everything he can to avoid running on his record because the American people have thoroughly rejected that record.

[GreecePwns]

And Romney is running on his record, which has been resoundingly approved by the electorate.

[Timminz]

I think the most interesting thing is the hypocrisy of some people, to be drooling all over Romney's past records, but when it comes to Obama's past records, they get very defensive and say that we have no need or no right to see Obama's past records, followed by all kinds of excuses.

Of course, I don't expect anything different

This reminds me: I've been having trouble finding Mitt Romney's college records. Does anyone know where I could find a complete record of Mitt Romney's educational history?

[Woodruff]

If a felony was committed, bring the charges.

On this one specific item, I certainly agree with you. A lack of formal charges smells of a lack of conviction.

[Juan_Bottom]

Despite the fact that Romney himself has said that he had to go back to Bain to sit in board meetings and stuff, I'm going to set that aside for this post.

Is Romney saying that even though he was the owner and president of Bain until 2002, he did nothing to stop the company from shipping American Jobs overseas? He did nothing to stop Bain's shady practice of overloading American companies with debt and then closing them for good, keeping all the profits?
His excuse is that he wanted nothing to do with the company he owned's business practices?

He was still the President/Owner until they reached a settlement deal (in 2002-3) so at any time he could have ended this practice. And he received a salary that whole time too... he profited from the Corporation's shipping jobs overseas and did nothing to stop it? Because he negotioated such a huge windfall salary for himself, might it not also be argued that Bain had no choice but to ship American jobs overseas to pay the salary that Romney demanded?