Sun Jul 15, 2012, 09:50 AM

Mitt Romney Bain Capital Document Lists Him As 'Managing Member' In 2002

Source: Huffington Post

WASHINGTON -- Add another document to the pile of evidence contradicting Mitt Romney's continued insistence that he ended his active role with Bain Capital in early 1999, part of his long-running effort to avoid responsibility for the company's activity, related to outsourcing and bankruptcies, during the years that followed.

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."

In August 2011, Romney told federal authorities, as part of the financial disclosure process, that he "retired from Bain Capital on February 11, 1999 to head the Salt Lake Organizing Committee . Since February 11, 1999, Mr. Romney has not had any active role with any Bain Capital entity and has not been involved in the operations of any Bain Capital entity in any way."

Bain Capital Investors is a Bain Capital entity.

-snip-

Read more: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/15/mitt-romney-bain-capital_n_1674209.html

The HuffPo article links to this PDF file at Huffington Post, showing the document:

http://big.assets.huffingtonpost.com/Bain2002.pdf

12 replies, 2266 views

Reply to this thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum

Replies to this discussion thread

12 replies	Author	Time	Post
Mitt Romney Bain Capital Document Lists Him As 'Managing Member' In 2002 (Original post)	highplainsdem	Jul 2012	OP
But he says he was a limp, passive member	BeyondGeography	Jul 2012	#1
He's twisting in the wind now ...	bemildred	Jul 2012	#2
The Big Mo Will Be Hard to Restart	bucolic_frolic	Jul 2012	#3
After Chris Hayes' interview with Edward Conard on Up,	Ilsa	Jul 2012	#4
I think you're right.	randome	Jul 2012	#6
Thank you for your concern.	aquart	Jul 2012	#8
Yeah, his name was on his tax returns since Feb. 1999 and beyond also.	Amonester	Jul 2012	#10
Thank you for your concern.	aquart	Jul 2012	#9
In 2001, he listed Bain Capital as his 'principal occupation' on an SEC doc	muriel_volestrangler	Jul 2012	#11
In that case he perjured himself when he ran for governor	starroute	Jul 2012	#12
Same old Mitt, greatest flip-flopper ever, cover one lie with another lie.	Thinkingabout	Jul 2012	#5
deeper and deeper the Mittster sinks into the Bain quagmire.	DCBob	Jul 2012	#7

Response to highplainsdem (Original post)

Sun Jul 15, 2012, 09:54 AM

BeyondGeography (21,327 posts)

1. But he says he was a limp, passive member

Reply to this post

Response to highplainsdem (Original post)

Sun Jul 15, 2012, 09:56 AM

bemildred (67,518 posts)

2. He's twisting in the wind now ...

Public meltdown.

Reply to this post

Response to highplainsdem (Original post)

Sun Jul 15, 2012, 10:00 AM

bucolic_frolic (708 posts)

3. The Big Mo Will Be Hard to Restart

These issues are already wasting Rmoney's precious campaign capital: time.

And this one won't go away.

How sweet it is!

Reply to this post

Response to highplainsdem (Original post)

Sun Jul 15, 2012, 10:06 AM

Ilsa (31,706 posts)

4. After Chris Hayes' interview with Edward Conard on Up,

I think pursuing this might be a losing cause. Yeah, his name was on the letterhead, he still had power and control, but he wasn't there to manage Bain. EC said they could barely manage to contact RMoney to negotiate the principals' payout, and that he wasnt there for management decisions.

Still, I think he should "own" the company decisions even while he was absent and negotiating his payout since they were still paying him a token salary. I think Mitt's campaign messed this up. If Mitt disagrees with how they managed the company, he should say so. If he doesn't, just own it.

I'm not convinced that there is much more to gain from this. Please, convince me otherwise.

Reply to this post

Response to Ilsa (Reply #4)

Sun Jul 15, 2012, 11:35 AM

randome (12,777 posts)

6. I think you're right.

Last edited Sun Jul 15, 2012, 11:36 AM USA/ET - Edit history (1)

We need to think like devil's advocates before we get carried away to a place too far.

Just because his name was on some papers is not enough for us to say, 'Gotcha!'

It's enough to bludgeon and embarrass him with.

Reply to this post

Response to randome (Reply #6)

Sun Jul 15, 2012, 11:47 AM

aquart (67,538 posts)

8. Thank you for your concern.

Reply to this post

Response to randome (Reply #6)

Sun Jul 15, 2012, 12:22 PM

Amonester (10,185 posts)

10. Yeah, his name was on his tax returns since Feb. 1999 and beyond also.

Let's have a look at what was in them all up to current.

Woopsie. No show.

Reply to this post

Response to Ilsa (Reply #4)

Sun Jul 15, 2012, 11:50 AM

aquart (67,538 posts)

9. Thank you for your concern.

I have a fabulously underpriced bridge for you to buy, too.

Reply to this post

Response to Ilsa (Reply #4)

Sun Jul 15, 2012, 01:09 PM

muriel_volestrangler (65,374 posts)

11. In 2001, he listed Bain Capital as his 'principal occupation' on an SEC doc

                               February 11, 2001

...

                                                                      SCHEDULE A

                                                                      ----------

                             EXECUTIVE OFFICERS OF

                       BAIN CAPITAL INVESTORS VI, INC..

 Name/Title                 Business Address              Principal Occupation

 ----------                 ----------------              --------------------

W. Mitt Romney,             Two Copley Place              Managing Director of

Chief Executive Officer,    Boston, MA 02116              Bain Capital, Inc.

President and Managing

Director

Joshua Bekenstein,          Two Copley Place              Managing Director of

Treasurer and Managing      Boston, MA 02116              Bain Capital, Inc

Director

...

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1054290/000092701601001009/0000927016-01-001009-0001.txt

He had power and control, he listed it as his principal occupation, he was paid a salary of over $100,000. Fine, he didn't do day-to-day management; but what he told the Office of Government Ethics does not match with the above:

Twice, first in 2007 during his earlier presidential bid and again this year, Romney filed personal disclosure forms with the Office of Government Ethics which explicitly state that Romney left Bain in early 1999. “Mr. Romney retired from Bain Capital on February 11, 1999, to head the Salt Lake Organizing Committee. Since February 11, 1999, Mr. Romney has not had any active role with any Bain Capital entity and has not been involved in the operations of any Bain Capital entity in any way,” his ethics filings from June state.

http://www.salon.com/2012/07/02/when_did_romney_leave_bain/

Reply to this post

Response to Ilsa (Reply #4)

Sun Jul 15, 2012, 01:59 PM

starroute (10,397 posts)

12. In that case he perjured himself when he ran for governor

When Romney ran for governor of Massachusetts, there were questions raised about whether he could meet the residency requirements because of having lived in Salt Lake City for the previous three years, and he gave sworn testimony that he'd traveled to Massachusetts regularly for both personal and business meetings.

If Romney was really totally detached from the operations of the company, then he perjured himself in giving that testimony. (Much as he may have committed voter fraud when he voted for Scott Brown in 2010 despite not living in the state.)

In addition, I'm coming to suspect that Romney's "retroactive" resignation from Bain would not have gone into effect if he'd lost the 2002 election. I don't know exactly how the dates line up -- and perhaps no one has yet stated just when those papers were signed -- but it would explain why there was that three year delay better than his current excuse of "it's complicated."

Reply to this post

Response to highplainsdem (Original post)

Sun Jul 15, 2012, 11:19 AM

Thinkingabout (1,789 posts)

5. Same old Mitt, greatest flip-flopper ever, cover one lie with another lie.

Probably expect the same as president, I only signed the bill because it was sent to me, don't hold me responsible, I can't help it, don't hold me responsible for anything, I just want to be president.

Reply to this post

Response to highplainsdem (Original post)

Sun Jul 15, 2012, 11:44 AM

DCBob (14,773 posts)

7. deeper and deeper the Mittster sinks into the Bain quagmire.

lovely!

Reply to this post

Latest Breaking News (Forum)