2012 Presidential Election (free for all edition)

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

Fact of the matter is, if your name is on that SEC document saying you are in charge, you are in charge and are responsible whether you are making decisions or not. It's like she said, either you are lying to the American people or you are lying to the SEC.

I personally believe he was lying to the SEC. Was he running the ship during those 3 years? Most likely not, but had his company been a beacon of light during those years he's claiming to be absent, you can rest assure he would be saying he was in charge.

Romney was busy saving the 2002 Olympics for the USA. This article from the NY Times, certainly no friend of conservatives:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/19/us...pagewanted=all

Again, all the Bain crap was vetted thoroughly by the Ds in MA when Romney ran for Gov. It had no teeth then and has no teeth now.

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

Romney was busy saving the 2002 Olympics for the USA. This article from the NY Times, certainly no friend of conservatives:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/19/us...pagewanted=all

Again, all the Bain crap was vetted thoroughly by the Ds in MA when Romney ran for Gov. It had no teeth then and has no teeth now.

So you are saying he committed a felony by lying to the SEC right? It has to be one or the other.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

So you are saying he committed a felony by lying to the SEC right? It has to be one or the other.

No the left is trying to say he lied to the SEC.

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by firstdown

No the left is trying to say he lied to the SEC.

I'm confused. Which is it with you guys? Was he responsible or not? According to you guys, he's not responsible for the actions of the company from '99-'02. Fine, if that's the stance you want to take, then you are agreeing that he lied to the SEC during those 3 years by signing documents and having him listed as the President/CEO.


Sammy is saying that Romney wasn't in charge of Bain from '99-'02 and even posted links. If what Sammy is said is true, then he lied to the SEC.


Again, it has to be one or the other.


Sammy is saying he wasn't in charge because he was at the Olympics, and ultimately lied to the SEC.


You (FD) are saying he was in charge and didn't lie to the SEC. Right?

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

I'm confused. Which is it with you guys? Was he responsible or not? According to you guys, he's not responsible for the actions of the company from '99-'02. Fine, if that's the stance you want to take, then you are agreeing that he lied to the SEC during those 3 years by signing documents and having him listed as the President/CEO.


Sammy is saying that Romney wasn't in charge of Bain from '99-'02 and even posted links. If what Sammy is said is true, then he lied to the SEC.


Again, it has to be one or the other.

Which laws did he break if your saying he broke a law?

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by firstdown

Which laws did he break if your saying he broke a law?

If he left the company in 1999, then his name shouldn't have been on the company's SEC filings as listed at the CEO. We call this falsifying documents or lying.


He's claiming he left the company in 1999. (to escape the bad deeds from Bain)


SEC documents show he didn't leave the company.



So, I ask again. Which is it?

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

If he left the company in 1999, then his name shouldn't have been on the company's SEC filings as listed at the CEO. We call this falsifying documents or lying.


He's claiming he left the company in 1999. (to escape the bad deeds from Bain)


SEC documents show he didn't leave the company.



So, I ask again. Which is it?

You need to start reading your own links. He relinquished control of the company. I really do not know how all that works but if there was any wrong doing it would have come out by now when he ran for govoner.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

If he left the company in 1999, then his name shouldn't have been on the company's SEC filings as listed at the CEO. We call this falsifying documents or lying.


He's claiming he left the company in 1999. (to escape the bad deeds from Bain)


SEC documents show he didn't leave the company.



So, I ask again. Which is it?

You're choosing to not read the links or just being obtuse:

from the WaPo link: "We consulted with securities law experts, with many years of experience with these forms. One expert examined this document at our request. He suspected that someone had simply duplicated a filing that had been made many times before, though he acknowledged, “it looks inartful in retrospect.” He pointed out that the titles are basically meaningless, that someone can be listed as a chief executive and actually have no responsibilities whatsoever. "

also: "Moreover, there is another document — the 2002 Massachusetts Ballot Law Commission report that certified that Romney could run for governor. The findings in this report were the result of weeks of testimony and investigation. We have embedded the report below."
Romney Ballot Law Commission Decision

Game, set, and MATCH. Move on.

How about some answers on Rezko, Bill Ayers, billions in green energy pay-offs to Obama bundlers, Fast & Furious, the crappy economy, etc., etc., etc. As usual Obama supporters won't respond to those questions, or they respond with typical Dem/lib talking points that have no substance.