RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment

Parry writes: "Mitt Romney cites 'independent fact-checkers' to spare him from having to explain exactly what he did with Bain Capital after February 1999. But those 'fact-checkers' are covering Romney's political flanks."

Mitt Romney at the NAACP convention in Houston, 07/11/12. (photo: Reuters)
Mitt Romney at the NAACP convention in Houston, 07/11/12. (photo: Reuters)

The Romney 'Fact-Checking' Scandal

By Robert Parry, Consortium News

15 July 12


elf-styled "independent fact-checkers" at the Annenberg Center and the neoconservative-dominated Washington Post have positioned themselves as ardent defenders of Mitt Romney's claims that his Bain Capital tenure ended in 1999 despite questions raised by contradictory information submitted by Romney himself.

Indeed, the behavior of these "fact-checkers" is rapidly becoming the journalism scandal of Campaign 2012 as the likes of Brooks Jackson at Annenberg's and the Post's Glenn Kessler act more as querulous lawyers protecting Romney than as journalists seeking the actual facts surrounding Romney's curious business narrative.

Much as the Post's Ceci Connolly and the New York Times' Katharine Seeyle engaged in aggressive - and dishonest - journalism to portray Vice President Al Gore as a serial liar during Campaign 2000, Jackson and Kessler are performing a similar role in portraying President Barack Obama and his campaign officials as liars now. [For the history, see's "Al Gore v. the Media" or Neck Deep.]

Yet, despite the pro-Romney protectiveness from Jackson and Kessler, the questions raised by the Obama campaign and a number of journalists about Romney's dubious claims are clearly legitimate. These questions about whether Romney completely divorced himself from his venture capital firm when he rushed off in February 1999 to head the Winter Olympics stem, in large part, from public disclosures that Bain Capital filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

For instance, one summary of Bain investments via Bain Capital Fund VI, dated Feb. 13, 2001, lists Romney as "the sole shareholder, sole director, Chief Executive Officer and President of Bain Capital and thus is the controlling person of Bain Capital."

Yet, in his presidential campaign disclosure form in 2011, Romney declared that he "has not been involved in the operations of any Bain Capital entity in any way" after leaving Boston for Salt Lake City, Utah, and the Olympics job on Feb. 11, 1999. Jackson and Kessler treat Romney's bald assertion as fact despite the conflicting evidence.

There are also logical questions that any journalist worth his or her salt would ask: "Mr. Romney, does your claim mean you had no contact with your former Bain associates by telephone, e-mail or in person in that time frame? Did you really build a Chinese Wall between yourself and your company?"

Common sense would tell you that Romney did have conversations with his long-time subordinates. There was no legal reason not to, and he was involved enough to sign some of the SEC forms listing him as the person in charge. (Only later, after it became clear that Bain-related plant closings and job outsourcing after February 1999 were a political liability, did Romney start insisting that his separation had been total.)

If Romney now confirms that he had some contacts with Bain executives, the next questions would be when, what, why and with whom. Are there e-mail messages or memos that could be examined? So, instead of offering those kinds of details, he cites the work of these "independent fact-checkers" to shield him from the inquiries.

TV Excuses

It was a startling aspect of Romney's brief round-robin interviews with five TV networks on Friday that he was allowed to skate away with squirrelly responses to these questions.

For instance, in the NBC interview, correspondent Peter Alexander asked, "after February 1999 you never attended a single meeting for Bain, a business meeting, even by phone, attending a meeting regarding Bain or Bain-controlled entities?"

Calm and collected with a patronizing smile on his face, Romney responded: "You've got quite a few questions there, so let's go through them. I didn't involve myself in any way with Bain Capital's enterprise after February 1999."

Alexander followed up: "Not participating in a single meeting either in person or by phone?"

Romney answered: "I can't recall a single meeting or a single participation in an investment decision by Bain or personnel decision."

Even if Romney's answer could be technically true - and it contradicts what Romney told the Boston Herald when he headed off to Utah with his stated intent to "stay on as a part-timer with Bain, providing input on investment and key personnel decisions" - there are many other business-related topics not covered by Romney's narrow denial.

Romney also is hair-splitting when he references Bain "entities" in his federal campaign disclosure. While the average reader might think Bain's investments would fall under this "entities" rubric, Romney apparently is excluding his board membership on behalf of Bain at companies in which Bain held major interests, such as Staples and LikeLife.

On that point, Annenberg's bends over backwards into a protective crouch for Romney, saying, "We think the term 'Bain Capital entity' on Romney's disclosure forms could only refer to Bain's various investment funds, not to companies in which it invested." Gee, how understanding of you!

Missing Hours

These "independent fact-checkers" also show little curiosity about discrepancies over how much time Romney was allegedly working during this time period. accepted self-serving accounts about Romney working 16-hour days, seven days a week, after he arrived in Salt Lake City. But Kessler instead cites Romney's statement to a Massachusetts election board that - as head of the Winter Olympics - he "worked, on average, over 12 hours per day, 6 days per week." One might wonder where the missing 40 or so hours went.

But the two "fact-checking" teams appear more interested in shutting off lines of inquiry about Romney's work at Bain Capital than in getting to the bottom of the many mysteries. Kessler even takes the position that it's no big deal to file false SEC forms.

"There is a journalistic convention that appears to place great weight on 'SEC documents,'" Kessler wrote. "But these are public filings by companies, which usually means there are not great secrets hidden in them. The Fact Checker [i.e. Kessler], in an earlier life covering Wall Street, spent many hours looking for jewels in SEC filings."

Though it's hard to judge how inept Kessler was in examining SEC documents, I spent four years editing securities-regulation coverage for Bloomberg News and some of our reporters were quite adept at mining the filings for nuggets. It's also an area where companies must tell the truth, with minimum spin, or face serious consequences.

Many corporate executives, at places like Enron and WorldCom, went to jail, in part, for filing false or misleading disclosure documents. It is indeed a potential felony to knowingly sign and submit SEC records with materially false information, such as telling potential investors that a person is in charge when the person is not in charge.

One of the "great secrets" hidden in SEC filings should not be that the guy listed as CEO isn't really the CEO.

Whether a criminal case can be built upon Bain Capital's admittedly false filings may be open to question - given statutes of limitations and other issues - but it's hard to understand how "fact-checkers" would take such a forgiving view of a politician signing false and misleading documents.

What does it say about Mitt Romney that he would repeatedly sign legal documents that contained information that he knew to be untrue - and why would "fact-checkers" defend him for doing so.

But's Jackson and the Post's Kessler treat these transgressions with a "boys will be boys" casualness, almost as if one is supposed to rally to the defense of well-bred white men who run powerful private-equity firms and have lots of money.

Kessler wrote that he "concluded that much of the language saying Romney was 'sole stockholder, chairman of the board, chief executive officer, and president' was boilerplate that did not reveal whether he was actually managing Bain at the time." Yet, whether "boilerplate" or not, the filings were false and/or misleading.

Kessler even adds that "there is no standard definition of a 'chief executive,' securities law experts say, and there is no requirement for anyone to have any responsibilities even if they have that title." Oh, really? Here's how Investopedia (a reference source that Kessler has cited in the past) defines a "chief executive officer":

"The highest ranking executive in a company whose main responsibilities include developing and implementing high-level strategies, making major corporate decisions, managing the overall operations and resources of a company, and acting as the main point of communication between the board of directors and the corporate operations. The CEO will often have a position on the board, and in some cases is even the chair."

To claim repeatedly over a period of more than two years that someone was the CEO - and thus the "controlling" person - if that were not true represents what many securities regulators would call a "material" deception.

Though Bain did file some documents without reference to Romney, as Kessler notes, that does not and should not absolve the firm or Romney from responsibility for filing others with what they now say is false information.

A Different Tone

While devising endless excuses for Romney and his Harvard Business School buddies, these same "independent fact-checkers" heap scorn on the African-American president and his campaign for daring to raise these impertinent questions about the much-admired Romney.

Annenberg's mocked a six-page letter from Obama's campaign with the flippant response, "your complaint is all wet." In giving Obama "three Pinocchios" for pointing out the discrepancies in Romney's Bain story, Kessler said he spared Obama a fourth Pinocchio (a total "whopper") with the grudging admission that "there is grey area" regarding Romney's last few years at Bain Capital.

In a larger sense, however, this issue of exactly when Romney left Bain is a ruse, a diversionary line of defense that Romney has been building since he ran for Massachusetts governor in 2002. The reason for this ever-expanding moat is that it lets Romney deny responsibility for Bain-related plant closings and off-shoring of jobs that occurred from 1999 to 2002.

But the key question is not when Romney left but who set in motion the strategies that led to the plant closings and the job off-shoring. It was Romney who pulled the trigger on investments in companies whose business model involved facilitating these actions for other companies.

For instance, as Washington Post investigative reporter Tom Hamburger explained in a front-page story on June 21, Romney's venture capital firm "owned companies that were pioneers in the practice of shipping work from the United States to overseas call centers and factories making computer components."

In other words, Bain Capital wasn't just investing in companies that shipped jobs overseas themselves, Bain owned companies that were trailblazing the practice of outsourcing American jobs to low-wage companies like China and India. The story said:

"A Washington Post examination of securities filings shows the extent of Bain's investment in firms that specialized in helping other companies move or expand operations overseas. …

"Bain played several roles in helping these outsourcing companies, such as investing venture capital so they could grow and providing management and strategic business advice as they navigated this rapidly developing field."

A Lucrative Foray

As Hamburger reported, "Bain's foray into outsourcing began in 1993 when the private equity firm took a stake in Corporate Software Inc., or CSI, after helping to finance a $93 million buyout of the firm. CSI, which catered to technology companies like Microsoft, provided a range of services including outsourcing of customer support. Initially, CSI employed U.S. workers to provide these services but by the mid-1990s was setting up call centers outside the country.

"Two years after Bain invested in the firm, CSI merged with another enterprise to form a new company called Stream International Inc. Stream immediately became active in the growing field of overseas calls centers. Bain was initially a minority shareholder in Stream and was active in running the company, providing 'general executive and management services,' according to SEC filings. …

"The corporate merger that created Stream also gave birth to another, related business known as Modus Media Inc., which specialized in helping companies outsource their manufacturing. … Modus Media grew rapidly. In December 1997, it announced it had contracted with Microsoft to produce software and training products at a center in Australia. Modus Media said it was already serving Microsoft from Asian locations in Singapore, South Korea, Japan and Taiwan and in Europe and the United States."

All those events occurred while Romney acknowledges that he was the hands-on CEO at Bain Capital. Hamburger also describes continuation and expansion of these outsourcing activities after February 1999. But those activities were simply an extension of what Romney had started.

To pretend that there was some bright line between the "good" Bain Capital before February 1999 and the "bad" Bain Capital afterwards is downright silly. It is even sillier for "independent fact-checkers" to suggest that Romney had no responsibility for what his own company did.

If these supposed "fact-checkers" really cared about facts, perhaps they would use their new status as Romney's favorite defenders to ask the Republican presidential candidate to release Bain Capital's internal records that would show whether he did or did not have any contacts with his subordinates after February 1999.

The "fact-checkers" might also press him to release his tax returns. So far, all they have done is throw brickbats at others who have tried to raise questions regarding the vetting of a man who wants to be President of the United States but doesn't want to tell the American people much about how he earned his money or even where it is.

Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories in the 1980s for the Associated Press and Newsweek. His latest book, "Neck Deep: The Disastrous Presidency of George W. Bush," was written with two of his sons, Sam and Nat, and can be ordered at His two previous books, "Secrecy & Privilege: The Rise of the Bush Dynasty from Watergate to Iraq" and "Lost History: Contras, Cocaine, the Press & 'Project Truth'" are also available there. your social media marketing partner


A note of caution regarding our comment sections:

For months a stream of media reports have warned of coordinated propaganda efforts targeting political websites based in the U.S., particularly in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election.

We too were alarmed at the patterns we were, and still are, seeing. It is clear that the provocateurs are far more savvy, disciplined, and purposeful than anything we have ever experienced before.

It is also clear that we still have elements of the same activity in our article discussion forums at this time.

We have hosted and encouraged reader expression since the turn of the century. The comments of our readers are the most vibrant, best-used interactive feature at Reader Supported News. Accordingly, we are strongly resistant to interrupting those services.

It is, however, important to note that in all likelihood hardened operatives are attempting to shape the dialog our community seeks to engage in.

Adapt and overcome.

Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News

+103 # wwway 2012-07-15 22:25
I was wondering when the public would be hit with a fact check scandal. Such a scandal would turn folks away from using those sources. A public who can't trust any source is doomed. A public who doesn't demand honest debate is already doomed. That's Americans.
I lost faith in PolitiFact because they didn't assign a Pants On Fire to Congressman Kyle for his out right lie about Planned Parenthood.
Americans work and raise their families. They want to plan vacations and enjoy a good life. They don't have time to spend all day reading and doing their own research. The media, and especially Republicans know this and fashion their message to this. They have no respect for honest debate and complete distain for Americans in general so they aren't going to tell the truth. They'll let the media and the fact checkers to their dirty work.
+106 # Billy Bob 2012-07-15 22:28
So, either Romney is lying to the American public and is directly responsible for moving jobs away from American soil for personal profit...

OR he's lying to the SEC and is directly responsible for committing a crime.

I'm not voting for him either way.
+8 # BradFromSalem 2012-07-17 08:48

You convinced me.

I won't vote for him either. And, I am going to borrow Obama's time machine and go back and change my vote for Governor of MA to O'Brien, the Democrat.
+102 # ellenandron 2012-07-15 22:36
I wrote Fact Check Friday night. I have not had a response.
"I am still shocked that this came from you because I considered Fact Check a reliable source. In this case, you have lost sight of your job of getting the Facts but are drawing conclusions based on the testimony of people making judgment calls,or people who have repeatedly lied on a wide range of topics or stakeholders or people who are speculating...
You seem to accept Romney's version because his name was absent from the senior investment managers listings from 1999-2002, but he still owned... the company and he was the CEO.Pray tell,if you had a multi million dollar d were still its CEO, would you not be evaluating the business and influencing how it was being conducted?
He says he was a part timer. How would he then not voice his opinions on the day to day activities as well as the over all performance?
Gov.Granholm, on War Room, showed records from Bain which clearly showed that Mr. Romney was still playing an active role in some of Bain's companies during that time. Did you look at copies of those papers? How could you have drawn a different conclusion from them? ...
Bad enough that a presumptive candidate for President would lie about anything, but then to attack his accusers of lying is completely henious. I hope your poor judgment in this is not out of bias.but I shall be very cautious before I accept your judgment calls in the name of fact checking again."
+25 # vgirl1 2012-07-16 05:45
Kudos to you.

These groups need to know that America is watching and that they are fooling no one with their less than objective analyses and conclusions, especially when the facts truly and unequivocally contradict their conclusions.

That is when we know they are not worth their salt and their conclusions not worth the paper they are printed on.
+47 # BeaDeeBunker 2012-07-15 22:38
I smell a rat; a rat in fine clothing, but still a rat.
One thing all should know about the behavior of rats; when cornered, their survival instincts rise to a fevered pitch, and they become ferocious and deadly, and as a single rat, act way beyond their actual number.
Is it any wonder that the conservative number of rats in the city of New York is over 80 million?
+15 # 2lilluc 2012-07-16 05:28
Hey BeaDeeBunker, don't it make you wonder Where the rat catchers are when you need them? I'd call this an outright rat plague! Maybe we can lure them over a cliff into the ocean....a very high cliff....a very deep ocean.
+18 # 2lilluc 2012-07-16 05:43
If there were not so much at stake, I would consider the continuing saga of Romney's perfidious behavior as par for the republican course, but we are in fact talking about a man asking to be considered worthy of being the leader of the free world. That he has not one worthy bone in his body still seems to elude some people. It's astonishing really how many Americans are willing to cut of their nose despite their face. Why? The political map that bleeds red right across middle America signifies individual people who don't seem to mind losing even more than they already have.
+3 # BeaDeeBunker 2012-07-16 16:56
Quoting from your recent comment:
"It's astonishing really how many Americans are willing to cut of their nose despite their face."
I agree with the sentiment that you meant to confer, that being, that people are willing to vote against their own best interests, but the words you used are confusing and don't make sense. I understand leaving out the second 'f' as a simple typo, but the use of the word "despite" misses the point of the saying. Please allow me to gently and respectfully correct you on this one small point. I think you will enjoy the impact of the saying a lot more.
One cuts off their nose TO SPITE their face, not DESPITE their face. This makes the saying more in line with the idea being conveyed of doing something against ones own best self interest.

As far as where all the rat catchers have gone, I can only offer this analysis.
With over 8 million people in NYC, who are mostly litter illiterate, and who eat out a lot thus creating lots of 'food' garbage, the rats consider the streets, the basements and the littered tunnels of the subway system, the best free buffet in the lower 48! I tend to divide people into two distinct groups...those who litter and those who don't. It tells me all I need to know about a person's character. There are not enough 'rat catchers' to keep up with the armies of well fed (often on gourmet scraps), street smart rats!
+8 # cordleycoit 2012-07-15 23:20
Yet another crook taking aim at the White House. Grifters are a menace,look at where we are at financially, look at where we are at as a weakling world power. We Americans bring death and disaster to any contact any where in the globe.
+23 # angelfish 2012-07-16 01:48
Isn't it abundantly clear by now that Willard "Mitt" Romney is a Bald-faced liar? He's not a "Flip-flopper", he's a LIAR, plain and simple. It's one thing to "mis-speak" or misquote something on occasion but this man is either extremely simple or totally mendacious. WHO can trust him to be the Leader of the Free World when he can't say with ANY clarity or authority what he had for Breakfast this morning?! Remember and never, EVER vote ReTHUGlican! The People, United, will NEVER be defeated!
+17 # Fairly balanced 2012-07-16 02:00
Nicely balanced article. I've been wondering about Kessler at WaPo - he gave short shrift to the SEC filings and ignored Romney's testiomy to the Massachusetts Commission in which he said he continued to be involved in Bain post-1999, albeit not on a day-to-day managerial posture. Can't have it both ways, Mitt.
+7 # overanddone 2012-07-16 03:34
If I were a Partner at Bain or any similar business, that was in the wealth creation business, which included all of the activities alleged: turning workers pensions, into their profits, shipping high wage jobs overseas, while supplying capital to grow low wage retail jobs in the US, adhering to the law and dedicated top their stated mission, growing the money invested, mostly successfully. Why would not you own the achievement pre 1999, post 1999 and for always, you did your job you did it well own it. Is this great wealth building performance a qualification for president, the sole one your running on. Maybe, let the voters decide.
Since Romney is running from it now not running on it, maybe he's having second thoughts?
-61 # Robt Eagle 2012-07-16 04:05
Where are all of Obama's documents that he refuses to release about his college days and community activism??? Besides, SNOPES is a blatant front for the liberals, so this entire article is BS as usual!!!
+18 # bmiluski 2012-07-16 10:38
[quote name="Robt Eagle"]Where are all of Obama's documents that he refuses to release about his college days and community activism???
EXACTLY what sort of information would you like? You people are quick to accuse but are never good with the follow-through.
+7 # Billy Bob 2012-07-16 20:43
I agree with bmiluski. Be more specific. Are you saying he didn't deserve to the in charge of the Harvard Law Review. That's a pretty prestigious accomplishment and unbelievably competitive. Do you know something the Harvard Law School does NOT know about his accomplishments when he was there?

Be specific. What's your accusation? What do you know that Harvard doesn't know?
0 # BradFromSalem 2012-07-17 10:51
The Boston Globe even reprinted an article they published from when he was named President of the Law Review. Oh wait, its his time machine again! Perhaps President Obama was actually born on Gallifry?
+8 # Billy Bob 2012-07-16 20:45
The irony here is that by accusing him of faking his scholastic resumé you allowed us to think about the fact that he headed the Harvard Law Review. You inadvertently reminded us of how extremely talented he actually was as a student. I know that wasn't your purpose, but it's pretty comical, don't you think?
+14 # 2lilluc 2012-07-16 05:18
I'm sorry, I know this is irrelevant, but did anyone get a good look at that picture! Are we absolutely certain that he's human? If you cut him does he bleed, or would his wiring and motherboard be revealed.
+14 # vgirl1 2012-07-16 05:40
We all just need to remember the sources when we see the so called results of the fact checkers.

I believe nothing fact checked by Politico or the Washington Post. They have proved themselves time and time again unqualified as objective fact checkers.

I think many Americans have reached the same conclusion.

Regardless, they can fact check all they want the document trail is there, more documents will continue to surface, and the Dems will be able to continue to address the documents as the facts no matter the spin the punidiots and so called fact checkers try to push.

Follow the documents. Follow the money.
+33 # fredboy 2012-07-16 05:42
As truths surface, let's remember the power of accusations, even when proven: Republicans will vote for their candidate if you show them photos of the candidate attacking their children. The GOP is no longer a party, it is a mind-warping cult.
+23 # feloneouscat 2012-07-16 06:04
Here is the biggest problem.

Why has Romney never bemoaned what Bain did in his name?

Can anyone cite between 1999 and 2002 when Romney went "OMG look what Bain did!?!?". He had time to spend on the board of Lifelike yet never bothered in all that time to see what Bain was doing?

Sounds very hard to believe.
+12 # Peacedragon 2012-07-16 06:06
All of this will soon be history. We will reelect Obama and go on with our lives.
+14 # amber2opal 2012-07-16 09:42
Quoting Peacedragon:
All of this will soon be history. We will reelect Obama and go on with our lives.

The terrifying reality is that Romney is leading in some polls, tied in others.
+5 # Billy Bob 2012-07-17 00:13
If polls are that important to you I'd suggest you check out this web site:

It's the ONLY poll related site you'll ever need to check. It looks at ALL of the national and state specific polls and puts them into an algorithm based on the previous accuracy of each. It then comes out with a mock election result if the election were held today, which can be broken down state by state. It's very detailed and makes predictions you'd have a hard time arguing with. It's been available since before the 2004 election and has, to my knowledge, accurately predicted everything that's gone on since.

Right now, it has Obama ahead in a pretty commanding way, by 297 electoral votes, to 212 for mittens. Twenty-nine electoral votes are currently up for grabs.

As of today, the only real battleground states are Florida, Iowa, and North Carolina. If you're worried about Florida, think about this. Virginia, Nevada, New Mexico, Colorado, Pennsylvania and Ohio are firmly in the Obama camp right now. That was definitely NOT the case when Kerry ran against bush jr. If Obama were to lose Florida, it wouldn't have much impact right now. If he were to win it, it would be a landslide.

You definitely NEED to check it out before worrying about any single individual poll. It's a lot more comprehensive and has a strong track record of being unbelievably accurate.
+15 # dick 2012-07-16 06:31
Since virtually all Bain activities during & for awhile after Salt Lake were CONTINUATIONS of what Mitt had a hand in, why the FACT CHECKER whitewash? They KNEW they'd appear in Romoney ads. Were they CREATING ads for Willard? BLAST 'EM!
+24 # Floridatexan 2012-07-16 06:51
The only way Romney could possibly win the presidency is through Republican election fraud. We can't let that happen.
+21 # amber2opal 2012-07-16 09:45
Quoting Floridatexan:
The only way Romney could possibly win the presidency is through Republican election fraud. We can't let that happen.

What do you call the voter ID purge in states with Republican govenors? That's voter fraud in the mildest of terms.
+18 # bmiluski 2012-07-16 10:40
Quoting Floridatexan:
The only way Romney could possibly win the presidency is through Republican election fraud. We can't let that happen.

Then we need to protest the use of electronic voing machines that can be easily hacked and mnipulated and DO NOT keep any sort of hard copy of the votes cast.
+16 # Rita Walpole Ague 2012-07-16 06:55
Suggestion for universities across the globe: a "Karlroving 101", mandatory for receiving a B.S. in any and all fields.

Best way to put an end to all the dirty trickery, from outright lying our nation into oh so profitable for the 1%ers war/endless warmode, to constant MSDing (manipulating, spinning, distracting), primarily through the now corp. controlled and anything but free press 'mess' media ? Educate students, as early as high school level, as to what karlroving is, and how to be on the constant lookout for it.

Lots and lots to do to... UNDO THE COUP !
+21 # Elroys 2012-07-16 07:18
Don't let this one aspect of Romney's tenure at Bain dilute the campaign. All Romney cared about at Bain is maximization of short term profits and making as much money for himself, at ALL costs - killing jobs and sending them overseas is merely a detail towards short term profit maximization, and this, along with extreme individualism is this mindset that is destroying our economy, job, our nation and planet. Romney represents the worst of this mindset. If you like extreme greed and selfishness, vote for Romney.
+12 # trottydt 2012-07-16 07:33
Got to give it to these "fact checkers"; they really have brass balls! Brazen to the extreme.
+16 # ThinkRodan 2012-07-16 08:26
ROMNEY probably thinks he's still at CRANBROOK giving HAIRCUTS TO PEOPLE he doesn't like! He now has a BIGGER GANG like KOCH & ADELSON! Let the public BEWARE before they get TRIMMED!
+21 # FactsFirst 2012-07-16 08:48
Tax returns are like birth certificates: make them public. Right, Donald?
+16 # sgmp 2012-07-16 09:11
What to do when the newspapers no longer have the desire to investigate, and the fact checkers are biased, the issues are made so complicated that most of us give up on understanding, and the news we get one day, morphs into new scandals the next day????
For starters -- join a group that wants an amendment to the Constitution to get money out of politics.
Cold comfort....isn' t it.
+17 # jwb110 2012-07-16 09:34
He's a crook and the big bucks behind him are crooks! Pretty simple, huh?
+14 # RNF123 2012-07-16 10:05
I knew I smelled a rat as to the "fact checking organizations" when they defended Romney who was either a resident of Utah or Massachusetts but not both when he ran for Governor. As others have said, the issue of his income tax returns was not addressed fully and when you file an SEC registration statement, the LAW requires you to be honest as does Sarbanes Oxley or face severe consequences. It is not a joke and Romney is a lawyer.
+9 # ellenandron 2012-07-16 10:05
Here's an addendum to my previous comment. You can see the Granholm discussion of the papers from Bain here:
+17 # vgirl1 2012-07-16 11:04
The false fact checkers are not what we need to worry about.

The voter supression laws, which allow gun permits as valid ids for voting but not ids like SS, Medicare or Medicaid cards or student ids etc., are the danger for election 2012.

These laws represent the biggest voter fraud ever perpetrated on the US voting population.
-18 # jimattrell 2012-07-16 12:53
Looks like most of you don't understand legal process. I sold my business 2 1/ 2 years ago (after watching Obama policies and anti-business threats take us from 100 employees to 30 employees) and I still recieve legal documents for signature as if I was the owner that I am required to sign. It all takes time and I for one am very grateful that Romney saved our Olympics. He can (and will if given a chance) bring Hope and Change!
+11 # ericlipps 2012-07-16 13:56
Quoting jimattrell:
Looks like most of you don't understand legal process. I sold my business 2 1/ 2 years ago (after watching Obama policies and anti-business threats take us from 100 employees to 30 employees) and I still recieve legal documents for signature as if I was the owner that I am required to sign. It all takes time and I for one am very grateful that Romney saved our Olympics. He can (and will if given a chance) bring Hope and Change!

Yes, but hope for whom and change in whose favor? Moneybags Mitt's record doesn't suggest that the beneficiaries of a Romney presidency will be, well, anyone posting on this site--you included.
+6 # Billy Bob 2012-07-16 20:50
You remind me of robby eagle. He doesn't have a specific accusation about the President's scholastic record, but just a general half-hearted attempt at bringing it up. The only trouble is that his opinion is directly at odds with Harvard University.

You do the same thing. Rather than being specific, you talk in general terms and equate two completely unrelated subjects as though you expect us to fall for it.

Apparently the law, as it's understood by the SEC itself doesn't have your understanding of what the law "should be".

Mittens either lied on forms that the SEC does NOT want you to lie on, OR he's lying to the American public now. There are simply NO other options. DEAL WITH IT.
+8 # charsjcca 2012-07-16 20:41
Honestly, I am only interested in one thing-the Hillary Rodham question from 2008: "Who do you want answering the White House telephone at 3:00AM." That is what other heads of state wish to know. Can they be assured that this Mormon cultist will understand their plight and be responsible for what he said at high noon?

In a word, who is this Mitt Romney and what does he stand for, what are his core values. Two weeks ago a poll was released in Alabama and told that some 24% of the electorate were not intending to vote for a Mormon cultist. Governor Robert Bentley danced on the issue this weekend at the Republican Governors shindig. If Romney can not win in Alabama where can he win?

I have not heard one word that reassures urban America that Romney understands their world. Recall that in 1992 William Jefferson Clinton rolled out his vision for the American people and when the media went to George H. W. Bush seeking his vision he uttered that "he did not understand this vision thing." The people understood his statement and voted for Clinton because he connected. No one is interested in Romney's resume. We all have one of them.

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.