Much of yesterday's controversy surrounding Mitt Romney's work at Bain Capital comes down to a very narrow question. Both sides agree that Romney was a well-compensated CEO of his firm from 1999 to 2002. Both sides agree that Bain orchestrated controversial investments, layoffs, and bankruptcies during that time.
But while Romney's critics say he's responsible for the actions of his company, Romney's defenders say the buck stops somewhere else -- he may have been Bain's sole stockholder, chairman of the board, chief executive officer, and president, but he didn't really do any real work. Indeed, the argument goes, he wasn't even there.
Rachel played a clip last night from Romney's 2002 gubernatorial campaign in which he said of the time period in question, "I was in Utah full time. I had no responsibility for management at Bain Capital."
Overnight, new reports call these claims into further question.
Mitt Romney's repeated claim that he played no part in executive decision-making related to Bain Capital after 1999 is false, according to Romney's own testimony in June 2002, in which he admitted to sitting on the board of the LifeLike Co., a dollmaker that was a Bain investment during the period.
Romney has consistently insisted that he was too busy organizing the 2002 Winter Olympics to take part in Bain business between 1999 and that event. But in the testimony, which was provided to The Huffington Post, Romney noted that he regularly traveled back to Massachusetts. "[T]here were a number of social trips and business trips that brought me back to Massachusetts, board meetings, Thanksgiving and so forth," he said.
Romney's sworn testimony was given as part of a hearing to determine whether he had sufficient residency status in Massachusetts to run for governor.
So, on the one hand, Romney said he was in Utah "full time," was gone from Bain, and had no role in Bain's operations "in any way." On the other hand, Romney also said he wasn't in Utah "full time," and he remained actively involved in Bain investments after his alleged departure.
Politico reported overnight that the Romney campaign, when asked if Romney attended meetings and/or had contact with Bain between 1999 and 2002, "declined" to answer.
Oops.
At a certain level, I suspect many of these details will be lost on the public. It might matter to the voting mainstream that Romney's claims clearly contradict one another, but the specifics will almost certainly get lost in the shuffle.
But the lingering problem for the Republican presidential hopeful is the lasting damage. Romney has already taken a hit for getting rich by laying off so many American workers, then he took another hit for investing so much of his vast wealth in offshore tax havens.
Now he's being forced to effectively tell the public, "Sure I was the CEO of my own firm, and sure I was paid handsomely, and sure I filed formal documents that said I was in charge, but don't worry, the buck stops somewhere else."
I keep thinking of a working class family in Columbus, Ohio, listening to this. It seems hard to imagine that family thinking, "Yeah, let's make that guy president."
Leave a Comment:
He was in Utah full time, yet he was also in Mass?
Simple explanation! Romney is twins.
(No need for a VP. . .)
Hey, this is the same guy who says the person he put in charge of his blind trust (okay, actually, it's more of a mildly astigmatic trust, but work with me) in 2003 must have set up the Bermuda corporation Romney set up in 1997 and that Romney transferred to Anne one day before he was sworn in to office as Governor.
Don't you see? Romney clearly has a time machine at his disposal. And with a time machine, he could easily seem to be in two places at once.
Of course! Now it all makes sense...
and they're both evil!
:-)
Romney, the bad copy of "Dr. Who" in politics - but his time machine is about as accurate in destinations as the TARDIS is.
Evidently the trolls haven't figured out how to spin this yet, because as of this writing, I don't see any of them here.
I have thought the same thing.....3rd or 4th blog reading on this subject, and actually have had to look for trolls, which I have found none.....This is such a steamy, stinky, pile of crap, even they want nothing to do with it........
The bottom line here is that Mitt Romney lied. He either lied to the federal government and his own investors when saying that he was managing Bain when he really was not, or else he has been lying for the past decade every single day as he ran for president and Massachusetts governor in insisting he was out at Bain in '99 and before all of those dastardly firings and outsourcing. This scandal cuts to the heart of Mitt's supposed qualifications for the job and for that of any presidential candidate. Honesty and integrity are required of our commander in chief, and Romney has displayed neither quality. This could being down his entire candidacy. He should drop out immediately.
http://www.sunstateactivist.org
"The bottom line here is that Mitt Romney lied"
Thus proving him to be the perfect republican.
But Glenn Kessler said........
Right. I'm giving him 3 Pinocchios on his review of this situation.
Kessler deserves 5 Pinnocchios for mendacity in the face of evidence.
Pinnocchios, hell. Five Goebbels.
It's really simple. He has told so many lies that he can't keep track of them. Isn't that a pathological liar?
"Always tell the truth. It's easier to remember."
Sad to say but there are plenty of White working class families thinking "Yeah let's make that guy president...as long as the Muslim Kenyan is voted out of office." I know because I very often receive plenty forwarded emails from them. I grew up in an Irish Catholic working class family and I have had too many discussions with family members about how they are ultimately digging their own economic graves.
A family member was in the CWA (union) and enjoys a very substantial pension with benfits that has allowed him to retire quite comfortably, yet he supports Romney. I constantly remind him that his is the last generation of working class Americans that will be able to enjoy such material and medical comforts in retirement and by voting for Romney he will accelerate the destruction of the same unions who have done so much for him. Yet his visceral mistrust of someone not like him overrides such reasoning. He HATES Obama and I know it is primarily due to his racism. He has voted Democratic in the past but he didn't in 2008 and he will not this year.
Jay Leno did "Jay Walking" last night. The interviewees could have been representative of the working class family of Columbus, OH - IF they could afford to vacation in southern CA. Jay showed them photos of famous tourist destinations: Mount Rushmore, Stonehenge, The Vatican, etc. and asked if they knew where the sites are located and the name of the sites. Answers were 100% wrong - from a police officer, teacher, and some less defined roles.
But they all get to vote. How many will be like the nails ladies who get it and how many will be like the family member of doyles14?
Yes, because I'm sure that Jay Leno would devote precious airtime to showing you the people who got it right.
so, Bernie, could you have got them right?
I don't know about Bernie, but I agree with him that the "funny" answers are the wrong answers, and I could get all 3 right.
Just saying.
Since I live in LA and used to live in the vicinity of the NBC Studios in Burbank, and ran across Jay Leno at the local Pavilions one night when he was doing "Jay Walking" I can attest to the fact he doesn't do the people who would get the questions right. He came up to me, gave me a look and shook his head, "Naah, you'd probably know the answers." To which I replied, "I know I do." Which got a laugh from him. But those people he does get really are real - which is scary as hell.
Thanks for your post Doyles 14, it really brings to light that the hate of Pres. Obama is not because of his policies, but because he is black..This is also a reality within our Congress & Senate, sad to say..A vote for Romney by MANY in this country will simply be a vote against our 1st. black president..I did not agree with many of Bush's policies, but never professed hatred for him, as a matter of fact I liked his awkward silliness..Our 1st black pres. has shown that racism in America was far from dead, just hidden behind closed doors..And with the onset of the tea party racism was brought to the public square, the congress & the senate...It is a shameful time for America...
When Romney was running for gov.of Mass he claimed he created 10,000 job's.Now he say's he created 100,000 job's.In other word's he's taking credit for job's that were created by Staple's , Sport's Authority, etal.after he left Bain.Now he claim's he's not responsible for the closing of business' because he was out of town "saving"the Olympic's.That's like saying Jamie Dimon was not responsible for the losse's suffered by his company because of a rogue trader in Europe.If your name is on record as the CEO or Owner of a company,you are responsible,but Romney want's it both way's.
I was sort of wondering about his speech at the NAACP convention where he claimed that as president he would create a lot of jobs. But hasn't it been determined that the government 'doesn't create jobs'??
Why was Bain paying him so much in salary if he wasn't doing any work for them?
More proof that "The Market" works? Proof that everyone in the US has the same opportunity as Mitt and kids?
I guess Mitt likes getting "free stuff".
Hey, it was only 100K in salary. In Rmoney land, that's like the token "one dollar and other good and valuable consideration" recited in many contracts.
It was a "salary range" of 100K + exact amount was not disclosed.
I believe we only know it was 6 figures, so it has to be at least 100k, but it could be as much as 999k.
If it was under seven, it was chump change to Mittens. But the thing is, any amount of salary is damning. CEO's, especially CEO's of corporations they own themselves, want to take all of their compensation as dividends, but the IRS won't let them. If you're an employee of the company, but pay yourself no salary, or a nominal salary, and take ten million in dividends, the IRS will deem it a tax scam and make its own call on how much of that ten million should be salary. So the game is to pay yourself a substantial enough sum to keep the Service from doing that--and my guess would be he paid himself close to the exact dollar amount where the 25% bracket ended that year.
My point here is that if he was really just a passive investor in 2002 who had withdrawn from active management of the company, he could have taken 100% of his compensation in a form taxable as capital gains rather than ordinary income. The fact that he didn't means he was, in fact, working enough that he was scared the service would disallow the treatment of the rest of his comp as capital gains if he didn't take a salary.
Any relationship between Romney and the truth is so distant even the Mormon Church can't find it.
To quote President (then candidate) Obama - "a President has to do more than one thing at a time..." I think the lying about it is the issue.
in a few words since romney is a genetic rambler he is predestined to bait and switch, flip and flop because his "brain" has been washed.
he's so used to lying in the moment, he never thinks twice about it
The odd thing is that he's telling such easily disprovable lies. Is that something pathological, to lie when you know you'll get caught? Or maybe he was just betting on the media being too lazy to call him out. That's usually a safe bet, but it looks like he lost this time.
The odd thing is that he's telling such easily disprovable lies. Is that something pathological, to lie when you know you'll get caught?
If you read the famous article "On B.S." you will find that a liar is someone who knows the truth and says otherwise, while a B.S.er is someone who doesn't care what the truth or the lie is. And Romney has spent his life not being held accountable for his lies.
"I keep thinking of a working class family in Columbus, Ohio, listening to this."
While I'd like to "hope" that working class people will actually pay attention, as was shown in Wisconsin - people vote against their own economic interests for a variety of reasons!
It really boils down to one thing - either Romney lied on the SEC filings that he was in charge of Bain, or Romney lied to the people of Massachusetts to become Governor! Either way he's a liar, and his performance of lying to suit the audience during this campaign season - should disqualify him especially among those who claim to have a moral center!
We've lived thru Shrub and the unnecessary war started in Iraq, do WE the PEOPLE really want Shrub II on steroids?
As I remember, the Repubs impeached Clinton for lying under oath. If Romney was under oath while swearing to these two statements, then he lied under oath in one case or the other.
It's obvious, as many of the comments above have stated, that Romney will say anything at anytime to support what he wants to achieve. It seems that he doesn't even worry that it might not 'make sense' to others because he doesn't care about them anyway. Other people are just a means to an end that gets him what he wants. Pathological liar and criminal mind at work... He thinks no one has the right to question his actions or motives because they're 'less than'....
Mitt lies because he is allowed to lie. His Republican cohorts cover those lies and counter the truth. The conservative media refuse to call him on the varience of truths. His wife certainly has nothing to say.
So Mitt is elected president.
Imagine his fireside "chats" with the American people, the empty sentiments.
Imagine his cabinate advisors trying to crack the glass of his constructed reality to get facts into his head.
Imagine him at the G8 or G20 Summit expected to discuss climate change or the global economy.
Imagine him needing to work with Congress, moreover perhaps a Democratic majority Congress. (hey, I can dream)
Imagine Mitt being "tested by an international crisis" and addressing it with anything close to clear eyes and a rational head.
Imagine Mitt being confronted with a Katrina, a collapsed bridge due to failing US infrastructure, another dip in our economy, or anything that might overload that protected cage he has existed in his whole life. Oh, he will handle executive privilage and luxury and the presidental image just fine, but can Mitt handle the hard work, the challenges, the afronts on his world view, the cultures and ideologies of international leaders, when he refuses to accept the diversity of his own countrymen and women.
That Mitt lies is just the tip of the iceberg. Behind those lies is a weak spoiled character who wants the world his way with no personal accountability and an ego that feels he can lead a nation. The person he lies most to, is himself.
Yes, and now just imagine Nov. 7th, Mittens playing with his car elevator making it go up and down all day long because he has nothing else to do.....
Where is our Joe Wilson who dares stand up while Mitt jabbers on and yell, "you lie!"
No wonder he ordered the email purge from his governors staff computers.
Yes, let's visit that one again!
Anyone in the campaign feeling slighted, and wants to blow a whistle?
The ceo's on wall st must be grateful to mit for telling everyone their occupations are just card board cut outs and do not matter , and that they are responsible for nothing , while pulling down $100 million packages
Yet another conformation for Washington DC to stop looking to wall st for job creation and the betterment of our communities and america , romney is pulling the curtain back for all to see , which is what I was hoping for in this election
All I can say is that I am sorry his dear mother Lenore has passed away. I think she would take him by the ear, sit him down and tell him how he should be conducting himself. Alas she is gone and has no idea what a dispicable liar he has become.
so, now we'll have a felon in chief?
Romney surely has worked himself into a curious position.
Actually it'll be the 3rd felon the other 2 being Nixon and Shrub....
Isn't the period where he was saying he was living full time in Utah also the same period which he is being investigated for for voting in a Massachuset election while not a resident of the state? Please check these timelines out.
Behold the "Fact-Checker"/Romney Campaign Feedback Loop in Action.
Here's Rmoney's response at TPM:
See how that works there? Kessler and the people in Florida are insisting that they were right all along because Romney says he wasn't involved in Bain after 1999, and, by golly, they're taking his word. (Because when a straight-shooter like Romney says that in the heat of a political campaign, any little inferences that might logically drawn from information submitted under penalty of perjury to the SEC or the Commonwealth of Massachusetts may not be drawn, because shut up!) Then Romney says that the "independent fact checkers" have confirmed that what Romney says is true.
July, 2012 will be remembered as the month when the last shovels of dirt were thrown on the graves where the credibility of the so called "fact checkers" was interred after the "Republicans will End Medicare is the 'Lie of the Year'" killed it.
But Obama is a Kenyan still, even after showing his papers.
The facts that never convince Republicans, are the same facts that never convict Republicans. Such is the luxury of control.
This Commission report was in 2002 and this commission was regarding Romney's eligibility to run for Governor of Massachusetts. As part of its ruling in favor of Romney’s residency eligibility, the panel noted Romney testified to the commission he traveled to Massachusetts where he sat on the board of one notable Bain-related company, the office supply chain, Staples. Romney “testified that he was a director of Staples, Marriott International and Life Like,” the commission’s finding states.
So when did he resign as director of Staples, Marriott International and LifeLike all three Bain related companies.
Is this not also the time period in which he is accused of not meeting the residency requirements in Massachusets because he listed his primary residence as Utah as far as income tax goes, but listed his son's address when he went to vote? The guy lies easier than most people breathe. Come on paid journalists do the homework!
David Corn at POLITICO has a good article about a Bain company from 98/99 that owned stock in a Chinese company dependent on outsourced American jobs. Mitt truly makes me miss such pillars of integrity of the old GOP like Spiro Agnew.
Why are we so preoccupied with all this tit for tat BS? There are unemployed people who could benefit from a real jobs program. Real people are being disenfranchised. Real people are gaining healthcare that the right wants to take away. So why are we chasing lies and undressing the Rooster when it's the hens that quit laying?
In some ways it looks like "tit for tat BS".
But the fundamental question is who Gov. Romney would be working for if he was elected President. The question about what he did at Bain (and when he did it) is crucial.
We are at a critical juncture in this country.
Are we going to be a country where the economic and political institutions benefit and are controlled by a broad base of the citizens [Inclusive]. Or will these institutions benefit and be controlled by a small group, to the detriment of the rest [Extractive]? {"Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity, and Poverty" by Daron Acemoglu and James Robinson}
The out-sourcing of jobs and the tax codes are obvious examples of policies that benefit only the small, wealth and politically powerful group. Add in campaign financing and voter restrictions, and the picture is very very scary.
What I have learned about Romney - especially his activities with Bain but also his stated priorities - is that he would be working for the small, wealth and politically powerful group.
Here's why.
mitts-business-is-not-yours.gif (600×514)
Does this really need to be answered? It's a political winner for the President in his race against Romney. End of story. His supposed strength and sole stated qualification for the Presidency is being undermined and his mendacity exposed in the same story. What's not to like? Passing jobs initiatives and retaining ACA won't go anywhere if Mittens becomes President. So the focus is on beating him, soundly, and creating big enough coattails to maintain the Senate and close the gap in the House.
A lot of it comes down to the character of our president. One beloved image of the presidency is Harry Truman's famous "The Buck stops Here" plaque. Taking responsibility is an essential part of leadership. It's why leaders are paid the big bucks. It's why leaders-in-name-only are looked on with contempt.
A certain captain took a sentence of hard labor at a dilithium mine because he admitted that the captain is responsible for the actions of his crew. It was not an expedient position to take, but it showed the quality of leadership that always inspired his crew to go to great lengths to succeed for him. If Kirk had said to the Klingon tribunal, "I had no control over the photon torpedoes. I was on the bridge. It wasn't my responsibility, and it wasn't my fault." does anyone think the Enterprise would have defied Starfleet Command to rescue him?
Because elections have consequences, such as:
Romney is a Rove and Koch brothers puppet. If it came out today that Romney fathered 20 children from 17 women; if it came out today he laundered billions of dollars from Maddoff's personal fortune into offshore bank accounts; if it came out today he always hated Mickey Mouse and John Wayne, IT WOULD NOT MAKE A DIFFERENCE TO ANYONE WHO JUST HATES OBAMA.
It's not about this country and what is good for us as Americans. It IS all about getting rid of this black man in the White House. It IS all about ethnic and lower/middle class cleansing.
Unfortunately, the GOP is NOT what it used to be. It is now the POG (Party of Greed). The wealthy have and are changing America to what THEY envision it to be. They are liars and the Republican Congress should be completely and utterly ashamed of themselves.
When the new Tea Party Republcans took office last year, they took a week to take turns reading the constitution. How nice. They should have done it before they took office. They have tried to repeal the AHCA 31 times. How nice. NOT! They have blocked every jobs bill that has come before them. They have almost brought this country to financial ruin by voting NOT to raise the debt ceiling. And the list goes on and on and on.
I wonder how much it costs the tax payer for just one of those HR repeal sessions to repeal the AHCA. Then times that by 31. Then they blame joblessness, a bad economy and anything else they can on President Obama.
Truly, amazing.
Keith: I'd stick with GOP, Greedy Old Party.
Unfortunately, the GOP is NOT what it used to be. It is now the POG (Party of Greed). The wealthy have and are changing America to what THEY envision it to be. They are liars and the Republican Congress should be completely and utterly ashamed of themselves.
You might want to go read Doris Kearns Goodwin's book, "No Ordinary Time" about how FDR led the country during WW2. Reading about how the "not what it used to be" GOP's actions then reads as if you were studying today's GOP. THESE PEOPLE HAVE ALWAYS BEEN SCUM! Go back to 1872 and you have Mark Twain saying "Consider a congressman, then consider an idiot. Ah but I repeat myself." In 1924 you have H.L. Mencken saying "In this world of pain and sorrow there are many things to be thankful for. As for myself, I am thankful I am not a Republican." Go read any of Upton Sinclair's books and you find Republican characters acting then just like they do today - particularly read "Babbitt." In the late 1950s my great-grand-uncle, who had spent 38 years working for Harry Truman distilled his political knowledge gained from that experience to "The only 'good Republicans' are pushing up daisies."
The truth is, the Republican party has always been what it used to be, and still is.
TCinLA: Maybe you can find other missives with Republican Party predecessors (which was originally formed to fight against immigration) the Whigs (Lincoln was a Whig) and the Federalists (Alexander Hamilton). Also, Democrats more often side with Republicans than vice-versa, so I find it difficult to "blame" Reps for anything unless it was a vote where Dems did not join them. Since Reagan especially, Democrats have been complicit in many major votes where one's definition of "scum" might apply to the legislators casting those winning votes.