Mitt Romney stayed at Bain 3 years longer than he stated

Originally posted by charles1952
But on Romney and the SEC filings, I am persuaded by the Washington Post article (and the articles it links to) that the was no criminality in Romney's statements about Bain. It's a pretty thorough article, if you can find the time, you might want to read it.

With respect,
Charles1952

No worries on the RP thing.

I did in fact read the entirety of the WP article (from this morning) which they followed with a less forgiving article on the matter this afternoon which I qouted at the top of this page...but since then they have moved it to the "Paid Subscriber" portion of thier site.

The case made by the firts WP article that the SEC doesn't require the "Owner" to be a "Decision Maker" is frankley ludicrous. The "Owner" who signed those docs...in this case Romney...is by the very nature of the signature and authority required to have knowledge and authority over the company...

Karmel, the former SEC commissioner, said the contradictory statements could have legal implications in some instances.


“If someone invested with Bain Capital because they believed Mitt Romney was a great fund manager, and it turns out he wasn’t really doing anything, that could be considered a misrepresentation to the investor,’’ she said.

www.boston.com... age=2

Romney eventually negotiated a retirement agreement with Bain Capital in 2002. The agreement was made retroactive to February 1999.

The Boston Globe reported Thursday that a Massachusetts financial disclosure form Romney filed in 2003 stated he still owned 100 percent of Bain Capital in 2002. Romney was elected to one term as Massachusetts governor in 2002.

___

www.newser.com...

This explains his dilemma.

His campaign and Bain make no bones that this is how it went down:

Campaign spokeswoman Andrea Saul insisted Romney left Bain in February 1999 and "had no input on investments or management of companies after that point."

The campaign also issued a statement from Bain saying that "due to the sudden nature of Mr. Romney's departure, he remained the sole stockholder for a time while formal ownership was being documented and transferred to the group of partners who took over management of the firm in 1999. Accordingly, Mr. Romney was reported in various capacities on SEC filings during this period."

This retroactive the retirement agreement is the source of the confusion. IMHO.

With all the confusion about this, CNN has an article that seems to favor Romney's story.

At least about some of it.

for what it's worth;

FORTUNE -- Mitt Romney did not manage Bain Capital's investments after leaving to run the Salt Lake City Olympic Games, according to confidential firm documents obtained by Fortune.

The timing of Romney's departure from Bain became a lightning rod earlier today, when The Boston Globe published an article suggesting that Romney remained actively involved with the firm longer than he and his campaign have claimed. The sourcing is largely SEC documents that list Romney as Bain Capital's CEO and sole shareholder through 2002 -- or three years after Romney officially left to run the Salt Lake City Olympic Games.

These claims are very similar to ones made last week by David Corn in Mother Jones, which we disputed at the time.

Now Fortune has obtained new evidence that supports Romney's version of events.....[continues]

Documents: Romney didn't manage Bain funds

and this article has more.
along with pertinent links to the older stories.

.....................Sure, Romney's name appeared on Bain's SEC filings. But he didn't make Bain's decisions. He only benefited financially from them. Now you see why the Obama campaign thinks it can drag this out over weeks and months. Explaining why Romney himself wasn't really CEO during his leave of absence (when he was trying to save the American Olympics, for Pete's sake!) involves explaining some complicated corporation-fu. In the meantime, the Obama campaign can use "outsource" in every other graf of its press releases, and ignore the Fact-Check squads.
When is a CEO Not a CEO?

Keep in mind that the "Leave of Absence" agreement is the question (or the "problem, depending on the point of view).
We need to find That document.

reply to post by Indigo5


F&S for the OP, yet another expose' of the Romney lying machine. I think his problems with Bain Capital are far from being over, you might even say they've only just begun.

There's another new article out now regarding the truth, or lack thereof, about his tenure with Bain and the truth behind his blind trust funds entitled, "Where The Money Lives," that can be found here;

www.vanityfair.com...

Good reading, to say the least.

I'm surprise the obamar campaign came out with this before the RNC.

I don't think it will matter too much both parties are still scare of Ron Paul and will wait for the hard hits until he is out of the way...

I mean think about it, if the osama campaign came out with something that made mittens drop out of the race the only one who would be left is Ron Paul.

To bad the RP campaign isn't exposing these issues with full force.

Is anyone else having flashbacks of the Bush/Kerry election?

No one wanted Bush reelected, but no one wanted Kerry elected.

This seems the same to me. No one wants Obama to have 4 more years, but no one wants Romney either.

Next week: Obama campaign discloses that Mitt Romney was once a Kitten Pornographer. MSM dutfully spreads the story.

the globe originally broke this story.

then debunked it later.

now the globe with breaking news again.

who cares anyway?

did romney outsource $29 billion of TAXPAYER money to foreign countries?

no that was obama...

Originally posted by charles1952
reply to post by fourthmeal

 

He's going to jail soon anyway, for Federal election crimes.

Wow, thanks. I missed that news. Have charges been filed against him, indictments obtained, any DAs or prosecutors working an official investigation?

No, it's a Ron Paul fanboy delusion.

reply to post by Indigo5

As Fortune put it, “the contemporaneous Bain documents show that Romney was indeed telling the truth about no longer having operational input at Bain -- which, one should note, is different from no longer having legal or financial ties to the firm.”

Why do you people keep dragging the dead horse out to beat? Romney had no part of Bain after '99, and all the evidence agrees upon that. There is a book written by Boston Globe writers (the same Globe doing the OP article) which talks about the crisis that ensued when Romney quite in '99. You may separate from your wife and leave the house you both shared years before the divorce is finalized and your name is legally off the house. That doesn't mean you still live there.

Wow looks like fact check.org doesn't know how to do their own fact checks. I think it was the liberal media who came up with that date right? Sooooo now you have them finding out that they got simple maths wrong and they are kicking themselves trying to spin it around to being something bad.

Hey guess what idiots, do u have on record Romney saying when he left? And have you ever heard of Bill Gates? He's still chairman of Microsoft even tho he doesn't exactly spend every waking moment there!

The Obama idiots have officially hit an all time low proving once again they know nothing about business or the economy!!!!!!

reply to post by jjf3rd77


Yes, Romney claims he left in '99, which is when he left. He was legally the CEO until '02, but is listed as a passive member and had nothing to do with them. This is a non-issue.

Fact check.org rebuked the Obama campaign story. I meant to say Liberal media! Fact check had been cooperative in this investigation!

This came out last night regarding the Boston Globe story. Boston Globe editor Martin Baron e-mailed Mitt Romney’s communications director regarding a request for correction:

Dear Ms. Gitcho:

We received your request late this afternoon for a correction regarding this morning’s Globe story. Having carefully reviewed that request, we see no basis for publishing a correction. The Globe story was entirely accurate.

The Globe story was based on government documents filed by Bain Capital itself. Those described Governor Romney as remaining at the helm of Bain Capital as its “sole stockholder, chairman of the board, chief executive officer, and president” until 2002. The story also cited state financial disclosure forms filed by Romney that showed he earned income as a Bain “executive” in 2001 and 2002, separate from investment earnings.

Globe will not issue correction to Romney

Regardless as to whether it's true or not it puts Romney in a bad light. Voters will be unsure and will start questioning the viability of Romney's candidacy. My next door neighbor is a Republican and is now unsure of who to vote for. He is not liking what he's hearing about Romney (swiss bank account, tax returns, Bain, etc...)

And this puts Ron Paul in a better light. Romney has not secured the nomination yet.

Well Gee.. It looks like someone in Boston may have jumped the gun and didn't do their homework before posting something damaging about a candidate and it turns out it may have been fabricated. Wouldnt be the first time the Dems made up stories to try and discredit a candidate. Got forbid we try to run a campaign talking about issues and how we are going to fix the economy. Lets just smear the other guy. No wonder have of this site thinks it is the lesser of two evils. No one wants to run on issues any longer.

But even as Mr. Obama’s campaign continued to trumpet The Globe’s disclosures, other reports emerged on Thursday to support the Romney campaign’s assertion that he did not have any operational control over Bain after 1999.

A statement from Charlyn Lusk, a spokeswoman for Bain Capital, reiterated Mr. Romney’s position that he “has had absolutely no involvement with the management or investment activities of the firm or with any of its portfolio companies since the day of his departure” in 1999.

Ms. Lusk said that “due to the sudden nature of Mr. Romney’s departure, he remained the sole stockholder for a time while formal ownership was being documented and transferred to the group of partners who took over management of the firm in 1999.”

“Accordingly,” she added, “Mr. Romney was reported in various capacities on S.E.C. filings during this period.”

www.nytimes.com...

www.foxnews.com...

reply to post by Indigo5


Wow! That's incredible!

Wait a minute. How does this make believe scandal give us 200,000 jobs every

month? The American people are hurting and you're throwing political BS at us?

----------
It must be an election year.

Distract - Divert - Divide


You have no choice. Obama cannot run on his record. It's a disaster.

reply to post by TheTardis

Um yeah, I understand that. I am in finance and have an MBA fron NYU Stern. When you put your name on an SEC filing stating you are CEO of a company and still receive money from business deals you are entirely in a different realm. Romney got caught lying on the national stage. the man has lied since he began runing for President in 2000 and office in 1994. Romney provided John McCain 23 years of tax returns and McCain chose Sarah Palin............

reply to post by Eurisko2012
Up until three months ago we were creating 200+ jobs a month for the last couple years. 4 Million jobs have been created under Obama even though all his jobs bills have been blocked by congress.

Originally posted by SebastianQuinn
reply to post by Eurisko2012

 

Up until three months ago we were creating 200+ jobs a month for the last couple years. 4 Million jobs have been created under Obama even though all his jobs bills have been blocked by congress.

Thats funny because he had enough control of congress to push Obamacare through and he is signing executive orders left and right to give himself power. Stop using the congress is blocking him thing. And 200+ jobs per month? Thats not even scratching the surface of what we need.

But please show me what bills congress blocked that would have saved us all?