Mitt caught in a direct lie?

[Wiglaf]

I'm laughing about how you can so easy accept that a guy who was CEO, Chairman, President and sole stockholder of a firm between 1999 and 2002 was somehow not responsible in any way, shape or form for the activities of that firm during that time. Despite attending various board meetings of firms owned by Bain, his name and signature appearing on numerous pieces of paperwork and so on.

It's almost like you would have to be quite incredibly naive to accept this based purely on Romney's word, especially when his word seems to change depending on who he happens to be talking to at the time.

If Romney was trying to cover up something I cared about then yes I would probably want more evidence than his word that he didn't do it. But because he is trying, at most, to cover up making millions of dollars for his company in a completely legal and sensible way, his word and his company's word are good enough for me. So I ask again, do you have a girlfriend and why are you not spending time with her?

Keep in mind, even if lying is somehow a big deal in politics, and even if being a successful businessperson is a bad thing, we still have no proof Romney did anything after 1999 aside from attend a few Thanksgiving dinners and board meetings. That hardly means he had any real active role in the company. So, how's your sex life?

[kentonio]

So I ask again, do you have a girlfriend and why are you not spending time with her?

Your mom's busy this weekend, so I have time on my hands.

Keep in mind, even if lying is somehow a big deal in politics, and even if being a successful businessperson is a bad thing, we still have no proof Romney did anything after 1999 aside from attend a few Thanksgiving dinners and board meetings. That hardly means he had any real active role in the company.

Sure.

[Wiglaf]

This is hysterical.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-creamer/romney-denial-of-responsi_b_1673255.html?utm_hp_ref=politics

The article takes this form:

Mitt Romney is lying about not having an active role in his corporation, because he had the title of CEO, and to normal people, that means he had an active role in his corporation. There's mounting evidence Mitt Romney is lying. It's mounting so much I don't need to give you any of it.

Mitt Romney was a successful businessperson who had to fire some people, which makes him evil. President Obama has never had to fire anyone or close down any auto plants whatsoever, not at all.

Did I mention Mitt Romney is a gay hater? Because there's evidence from 50 years ago he totally was one.

By the way, Mitt Romney has a Swiss bank account, which is inherently evil because normal people don't have that either.

Mitt Romney hangs around rich people at fundraisers, which is very shady and evil, unlike President Obama, who has most definitely never eaten at George Clooney's house with 20 celebrities.

Trickle-down economics (??) failed, and the way to decrease the national debt is not to throw out the president who just raised it by trillions of dollars, but to tax Mitt Romney.

QED.

[kentonio]

It just keeps coming, doesn't it..

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."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...n_1674209.html

[Wiglaf]

Because if there's one thing swing voters care about, it's whether Mitt Romney ever recorded a recordable instrument a decade ago.

[kentonio]

Mitt Romney is lying about not having an active role in his corporation, because there's mounting evidence Mitt Romney is lying. It's mounting so much it's difficult to believe a functioning human being could not see it.

Mitt Romney was a successful vulture capitalist who closed down companies, fired thousands of employees and shipped American jobs overseas. He never lost money on any of these deals and is as such as inspiration to republicans everywhere.

Did I mention Mitt Romney is a gay hater? He is a top figure in a church which just 4 years ago played a fundamental role in overthrowing gay marriage in California and has a long anti-gay record.

By the way, Mitt Romney has a Swiss bank account, which is inherently awesome because hiding your money in foreign banks away from the prying eyes of the IRS is obviously patriotic.

Fixed that for you.

[kentonio]

Because if there's one thing swing voters care about, it's whether Mitt Romney ever recorded a recordable instrument a decade ago.

Ah, so we've moved from 'not guilty' to 'who cares if he's guilty'?

[Wiglaf]

I think I've said consistently that he's probably not guilty and that even if he was no one would really care. This scandal falls squarely in the partisan jerkoff category. 100% of people who think it is damning are voting for Obama anyway.

By the way, Mitt Romney has a Swiss bank account, which is inherently awesome because hiding your money in foreign banks away from the prying eyes of the IRS is obviously patriotic.

[DinoDoc]

Except there is evidence for goodness sake in the form of the SEC filings and Mitt Romney's own words over various times. So far the only defense appears to be that him having full control over Bain, sitting on board meetings, being named on filings and so forth is somehow irrelevant because Bain and Romney say so.

Why have no independent fact checking organizations found anything to support the substance of the Obama campaign's allegations?

[DaShi]

"The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence."

[kentonio]

The FactChecker.org position seems to be based on the somewhat wriggly idea that Staples etc were not technically subsiduaries of Bain and so he wasn't actually working for Bain. Despite being the 100% stockholder, CEO, Managing Director etc etc of Bain at the same time.

[Wiglaf]

SHUT UP! SHUT UP!!!!!

[Dinner]

Except there is evidence for goodness sake in the form of the SEC filings and Mitt Romney's own words over various times. So far the only defense appears to be that him having full control over Bain, sitting on board meetings, being named on filings and so forth is somehow irrelevant because Bain and Romney say so.

Not to mention he was still getting paid $100,000 by Bane for the years 2000, 2001, and 2002. Romney would have us believe he did absolutely nothing and they just gave him $300,000 for nothing. My guess is he was still involved with the big picture even if not the day to day stuff especially since Romney was quoted in an interview at the end of 2001 saying he was finally going to be retiring from Bain. Gee, 2001 seems to be after 1999.

[Dinner]

Why have no independent fact checking organizations found anything to support the substance of the Obama campaign's allegations?

The allegations were just made a few days ago. So far, politifact hasn't made a ruling one way or another on it.

[Wiglaf]

$100,000 is nothing. Absolutely nothing.

And Politifact is a joke. Get real.