• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

1999-2002 tax returns would reveal the reality of Romney and Bain

Turin

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 17, 2010
Messages
1,479
Reaction score
813
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
He needs to release these tax returns and the nature of his accounts overseas if he wants to be transparent on his involvement and lack of involvement. Follow the money trail.

Romney can't shirk responsibility for Bain - CNN.com

Since he will not release his income tax returns for 1999-2002, we have no idea how high this salary really was. If Romney was not "involved" in the operations of Bain Capital, why was he being paid? As sole shareholder, why did he keep himself on as CEO? Also, at least with respect to the Stericycle deal, he invested as an individual along with the Bain entities. Why is Romney's story about his relationship to Bain and its investment activities at odds with the documents his firm filed?

He needs to release his tax returns from 1999 -2002 ... after all his big platform is how to handle "our economy".

He keeps blowing off he knows how to do it yet he is so secretive about his own finnaces and the dismantling of American companies by Bain.
 
Last edited:
He doesn't "need" to for any legal reason

He doesn't "need" to for any political reason in terms of what'd benefit his campaign.

Please, inform us about why he "needs" to do it. In reality, it seems you should be saying "I WANT him to".

What you WANT is not what he NEEDS to do.
 
What's more, I'm sure the reaction would be, to clean records, "oh, OK. Nothing to see here." :roll:

Actually, it would be a great play by Romney -- hold out, continually saying "you REALLY want to see them? REALLY?" Get the other side frothing, release them, have nothing see, and then say "sure am glad we wasted all that time NOT talking about important things, like the piss-poor economic record of this Administration."
 
If there was absolutely nothing in the 1999-2002 tax records liberals would just ask for more and move the goal post yet again

Basically the Obama Campaign thinks that the Romney Campaign can do their opposition research for them since they don't have any bombshells yet and can't run on Obama's record.
 
He doesn't "need" to for any legal reason

He doesn't "need" to for any political reason in terms of what'd benefit his campaign.

Please, inform us about why he "needs" to do it. In reality, it seems you should be saying "I WANT him to".

What you WANT is not what he NEEDS to do.

Well from your logic we could say any candidate does not need to let us know their position on issues or past handling of such.

Romney is running on his ability to handle the economy and what he did with Bain and yet tries to distance himself from Bain's dismantling of American companies and jobs ... yet while filing from 1999-2002 he was CEO and shareholder claims on all legal he claims he really was not. Why not open up his 1999-2002 tax returns and let us see how much he was earning from Bain "while he was really not with them".

Bain engaged in businesses or business practices that Romney now finds politically inconvenient, so he is attempting to absolve himself of responsibility for these deals.
But the CEO, sole director and sole shareholder of an entity is legally responsible, and should be held accountable, for any wrongdoing or questionable activities of the company he heads. If Romney wants the American public to judge him by his business successes, we also need to judge him by his business failures and see the entire record of his financial dealings.
 
Last edited:
Well from your logic we could say any candidate does not need to let us know their position on issues or past handling of such.

Romney is running on his ability to handle the economy and what he did with Bain and yet tries to distance himself from Bain's dismantling of American companies and jobs ... yet while filing from 1999-2002 he was CEO and shareholder claims on all legal he claims he really was not. Why not open up his 1999-2002 tax returns and let us see how much he was earning from Bain "while he was really not with them".

Do some research. The 1999 - 2002 Bain issue has been debunked and Obama has been proven, once again, to be a liar who wants to change the focus to anything but the economy.

Even if Romney's tax records are perfect, legal, on the up-and-up etc....Obama will find some legal tax write off to spin and distort into another talking point so sheeple like you can do his bidding and spread more slanderous lies (like the ones about Bain), thereby taking the focus off the real issue that matters to the voters....The economy.
 
Well from your logic we could say any candidate does not need to let us know their position on issues or past handling of such.

Romney is running on his ability to handle the economy and what he did with Bain and yet tries to distance himself from Bain's dismantling of American companies and jobs ... yet while filing from 1999-2002 he was CEO and shareholder claims on all legal he claims he really was not. Why not open up his 1999-2002 tax returns and let us see how much he was earning from Bain "while he was really not with them".

Give it up. The political strategy here by the Obama Campaign is transparent and amateur. You can't just make up any supposition you wish, slander someone as a felon, and then put the entire burden of proof on the accused to disprove a negative. You want to talk about Bain Boogeymen under the bed and in the closet because you can't talk about Obama's record as president.

Does Mitt Romney love outsourcing? - The Washington Post

The Facts

The Obama campaign pointed us to a series of SEC filings and news accounts showing that three companies within Bain Capital’s portfolio sent jobs overseas. Romney served as chief executive of the firm, which specialized in private-equity investment and leveraged buyouts during his tenure there. He left the company in February 1999 to become president and chief executive of the committee that organized the 2002 Olympics in Salt Lake City.

One example of outsourcing came from the Holson Burns Group, a manufacturer of photo albums and picture frames. The company opened and then closed several new U.S. plants before outsourcing most of its production to the Far East by 1993, six years after Bain took control of the business.

The Obama campaign also mentioned Canadian electronics maker SMTC Manufacturing, which announced in March 2001 that it planned to move one of its production operations, then located in Denver, to Chihuahua, Mexico.

A third company, Modus Media, announced in June 2000 that it would open a plant in Guadalajara, Mexico after cutting 200 jobs from a plant in Fremont, Calif.

Notice a problem with the last two examples? The outsourcing occurred in 2000 and 2001. Romney left Bain in early 1999.

We’ve gone over this problem with the Obama campaign before, awarding three Pinocchios to a January memo the team released blaming Romney for job losses and bad deals that took place after the former executive had stopped working for Bain.

We discovered that Romney’s name appeared on Bain SEC filings between 1999 and 2002. But a 2002 statement the former executive filed with the Massachusetts State Ethics Commission said he was a “passive, limited partner [with] no management capacity” in the Bain entities in which he held ownership.

We also learned that the creditors who sued some of Bain’s companies and executives over dividend payments around the time in question did not name Romney in their lawsuit. Plaintiffs generally try to list as many people as possible as defendants to encourage settlement, so it’s highly unlikely that Romney had any involvement with Bain’s businesses during this period.

These facts essentially exonerate Romney from allegations that he was responsible for any outsourcing, bad deals and layoffs that occurred with Bain’s companies in the early 2000s. (Note: it may make a difference if the initial investment took place while Romney was actively running Bain Capital, but that is not the case here.) So that leaves just one possible example of outsourcing out of scores of investments made by Bain under Romney’s leadership.

:2wave:

Romney was asked to save the Olympics on Feb 2nd. He took the job 9 days later. Not only did Romney save the Olympics. He actually led the Olympics to a PROFIT. Name one thing Obama has led or invested in that has earned a profit. Don't name the Auto Companies because they still owe the taxpayers 24 billion from the initial bailout.
 
Well from your logic we could say any candidate does not need to let us know their position on issues or past handling of such.

Legally, they don't.

Politically? I think there's a FAR better argument to be made that an individual will have more to gain then to lose with regards to presenting their positions on issues or past handling of stuff then there is an argument to be made in terms of the net gain/loss for Romeny releasing his Tax Returns. Romney's Tax Returns are a very SPECIFIC issue so it's very easy to make an argument about that SPECIFIC issue regarding the net positive/negative of releasing his tax returns and then judging the need based on that. An ambiguous make believe scenario regarding a politician who won't talk about his positions or his past handling of issues is far more difficult to make a statement on because it's an imaginary situation with a large amount of factors being completely unknown. Essentially it'd come down to this....if it'd net help their campaign to talk about those things, then they'd be smart to talk about them. If it'd be net drag on their campaign to talk about those things, then they'd be smart not to talk about them. In either case, they don't NEED too...though it may be benefial to do it.

Romney is running on his ability to handle the economy and what he did with Bain and yet tries to distance himself from Bain's dismantling of American companies and jobs ... yet while filing from 1999-2002 he was CEO and shareholder claims on all legal he claims he really was not. Why not open up his 1999-2002 tax returns and let us see how much he was earning from Bain "while he was really not with them".

Because there's no net positive that will realistically come out of him releasing his tax returns. None. The extremely likely scenario is that, unless his taxes are 100% sterling clean to the point that it's entirely and unquestionably unspinnable....something which, given the skill on a Presidential level of party operatives to spin things and given the length and complication of a tax return for an individual with his financial standings, would be as likely as me walking outside to find the sky Maroon in color...that the net effect on Romney's campaign would be MORE negative then the net effect on his campaign if he didn't release them.

As such, there's no political reason or need for him to release them.

If you wish to make an argument as to why it WOULD be a net positive comparative to not releasing them, be my guest to do it here or in the thread linked in my signature.
 
He doesn't "need" to for any legal reason

He doesn't "need" to for any political reason in terms of what'd benefit his campaign.

Please, inform us about why he "needs" to do it. In reality, it seems you should be saying "I WANT him to".

What you WANT is not what he NEEDS to do.

If he already doesn't "want" to do what voters want him to do, why should we even consider him as our leader?
He "needs" to be open about his finances if we are to trust him with ours.
 
Well from your logic we could say any candidate does not need to let us know their position on issues or past handling of such.

Romney is running on his ability to handle the economy and what he did with Bain and yet tries to distance himself from Bain's dismantling of American companies and jobs ... yet while filing from 1999-2002 he was CEO and shareholder claims on all legal he claims he really was not. Why not open up his 1999-2002 tax returns and let us see how much he was earning from Bain "while he was really not with them".

Do you feel that same way about Obama's sealed college records? What could those tell us about who he is and what he believes? Would they tell us his "positions on issues and past hadling of such"?


Why to you think obama has paid lawyers to keep those records sealed from view?
 
If he already doesn't "want" to do what voters want him to do, why should we even consider him as our leader?
He "needs" to be open about his finances if we are to trust him with ours.

Releasing those records would just give the media and the obama campaign something to make into a big deal to get the voters minds off of obama's abject failures and socialist leanings.

Romney has nothing to gain by releasing those tax returns.
 
Do you feel that same way about Obama's sealed college records? What could those tell us about who he is and what he believes? Would they tell us his "positions on issues and past hadling of such"?


Why to you think Obama has paid lawyers to keep those records sealed from view?

Obama is not running on his college records yet if he was he should release them. In fact ... I do know how difficult the Occidental/Columbia undergraduate program is and only the stellar and creme de la creme are admitted to that program. I also know Obama's very respected record at Harvard. You can read it directly from the Harvard law Review.

http://www.law.harvard.edu/news/obama-at-hls.html

Obama and Romney should both have their personal finances transparent if they want to run as public servants.


Romney's platform is economics and no ... nothing has been debunked on what Romney did for Bain and his offshore accounts.

It is all hidden and the Obama campaign is exactly correct to question this secrecy of offshore accounts, dismantling and outsourcing of jobs with Romney's signature on the documents ... especially if Romney wants to question Obama on specific polices that saved American companies and kept our economy from the nosedive it was in when he took office.

Documents filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission Schedule 13 D reports contradict Romney's statements and his very own own signature in black.

Some of these documents were Schedule 13D reports, required to be filed pursuant to the Williams Act whenever any person or group acquires 5% or more of the stock of any public company. The purpose of such reports is to notify the securities markets of a possible change in control of a public company.
 
Last edited:
Obama is not running on his college records yet if he was he should release them. In fact ... I do know how difficult the Occidental/Columbia undergraduate program is and only the stellar and creme de la creme are admitted to that program. I also know Obama's very respected record at Harvard. You can read it directly from the Harvard law Review.

Obama first made history at HLS

Obama and Romney should both have their personal finances transparent if they want to run as public servants.


Romney's platform is economics and no ... nothing has been debunked on what Romney did for Bain and his offshore accounts.

It is all hidden and the Obama campaign is exactly correct to question this secrecy of offshore accounts, dismantling and outsourcing of jobs with Romney's signature on the documents ... especially if Romney wants to question Obama on specific polices that saved American companies and kept our economy from the nosedive it was in when he took office.

Documents filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission Schedule 13 D reports contradict Romney's statements and his very own own signature in black.

Want to talk about off shoring jobs? Ok, lets do that. GE, Solar panels from China, stimulus money to a Finnish car maker. What Bain did, it did with its own money. What obama did, he did with OUR money. Big difference.
 
Obama is not running on his college records yet if he was he should release them. In fact ... I do know how difficult the Occidental/Columbia undergraduate program is and only the stellar and creme de la creme are admitted to that program. I also know Obama's very respected record at Harvard. You can read it directly from the Harvard law Review.

Obama first made history at HLS

Obama and Romney should both have their personal finances transparent if they want to run as public servants.


Romney's platform is economics and no ... nothing has been debunked on what Romney did for Bain and his offshore accounts.

It is all hidden and the Obama campaign is exactly correct to question this secrecy of offshore accounts, dismantling and outsourcing of jobs with Romney's signature on the documents ... especially if Romney wants to question Obama on specific polices that saved American companies and kept our economy from the nosedive it was in when he took office.

Documents filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission Schedule 13 D reports contradict Romney's statements and his very own own signature in black.

Back to Harvard, Occidental, and Columbia. Why has obama paid lawyers over a million dollars to keep those records sealed? simple question, whats your answer?
 
Back to Harvard, Occidental, and Columbia. Why has obama paid lawyers over a million dollars to keep those records sealed? simple question, whats your answer?
Barack Obama's records at Occidental remain sealed under the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Rights Act, which applies to all students. Unless Obama gives Occidental permission to release his record, it is illegal for them to do so, and Obama has not given Occidental permission, according to Tranquada.

PolitiFact | E-mail claims Obama's college transcripts reveal Indonesian citizenship
 
Barack Obama's records at Occidental remain sealed under the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Rights Act, which applies to all students. Unless Obama gives Occidental permission to release his record, it is illegal for them to do so, and Obama has not given Occidental permission, according to Tranquada.

PolitiFact | E-mail claims Obama's college transcripts reveal Indonesian citizenship

By not releasing those records do you believe that Obama is "hiding something"?
 
Barack Obama's records at Occidental remain sealed under the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Rights Act, which applies to all students. Unless Obama gives Occidental permission to release his record, it is illegal for them to do so, and Obama has not given Occidental permission, according to Tranquada.

PolitiFact | E-mail claims Obama's college transcripts reveal Indonesian citizenship

Ok, thats all well and good. But why not release them and end the speculation? And its more than the privacy act, he has paid a law firm to ensure that those records remain sealed. Why?
 
Ok, thats all well and good. But why not release them and end the speculation? And its more than the privacy act, he has paid a law firm to ensure that those records remain sealed. Why?
Tiger, your conspiracy theory hold no water, why would he pay "a law firm" to "protect" something that can't be released without his say so.

As far as your and Chucky's curiosity goes, what relevance does his or Mitt's college transcripts from 20+ years ago have? Again, the universities they attended were fine with the transcripts.
 
Tiger, your conspiracy theory hold no water, why would he pay "a law firm" to "protect" something that can't be released without his say so.

As far as your and Chucky's curiosity goes, what relevance does his or Mitt's college transcripts from 20+ years ago have? Again, the universities they attended were fine with the transcripts.

First, I could not find an picture of a bobcat so I used a tiger. I do know the difference.

The law firm is Perkins Coie,LLP of Seattle. I don't know why he paid them, but he did.

College transcripts and applications show who the person is, what he studied, and how they scored on tests. It could also show how the tuition was paid. His thesis, which is also hidden, would show what he felt was important to write about.

New question for you: why have both Barack and Michelle's law licenses been cancelled?

You on the left DEMANDED bush's college and military records, and you got them. Why is obama different?
 
Originally Posted by Dion
Obama is not running on his college records yet if he was he should release them. In fact ... I do know how difficult the Occidental/Columbia undergraduate program is and only the stellar and creme de la creme are admitted to that program. I also know Obama's very respected record at Harvard. You can read it directly from the Harvard law Review.

Obama first made history at HLS

Obama and Romney should both have their personal finances transparent if they want to run as public servants.


Romney's platform is economics and no ... nothing has been debunked on what Romney did for Bain and his offshore accounts.

It is all hidden and the Obama campaign is exactly correct to question this secrecy of offshore accounts, dismantling and outsourcing of jobs with Romney's signature on the documents ... especially if Romney wants to question Obama on specific polices that saved American companies and kept our economy from the nosedive it was in when he took office.

Documents filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission Schedule 13 D reports contradict Romney's statements and his very own own signature in black.

Want to talk about off shoring jobs? Ok, lets do that. GE, Solar panels from China, stimulus money to a Finnish car maker. What Bain did, it did with its own money. What obama did, he did with OUR money. Big difference.

You did not reply to my post yet deflected to GE which has nothing to do with this and yes it is a private American corporations that has not made the best decisions for out country imo. Obama is not in charge of GE btw.

The Obama administration could not on day 1 stop the millions of outsourced products yet he did directly enact policies that contributed to saving one of our last strong manufacturing base ... the auto industry.

In fact ... we can follow the money. Why is Romney afraid for us to follow his money trail?
 
I contracted for Perkins Coie in Seattle about 14 years ago. Got nothing to do with this, but I hadn't heard the name of the firm in a while . . .
 
Here is a fair assessment of this administrations policies on saving our last solid auto manufacturing base.

Did Obama Save Detroit? - Businessweek

Notice we can follow the money on the auto bail out and we got some results ... Why is Romney who is running for POTUS denying his involvement in BAIN when he signed Securities and Exchange Commission Schedule 13 D reports during this time period that outsourced jobs and he personally profited?
 
You did not reply to my post yet deflected to GE which has nothing to do with this and yes it is a private American corporations that has not made the best decisions for out country imo. Obama is not in charge of GE btw.

The Obama administration could not on day 1 stop the millions of outsourced products yet he did directly enact policies that contributed to saving one of our last strong manufacturing base ... the auto industry.

In fact ... we can follow the money. Why is Romney afraid for us to follow his money trail?

Oh, here we go with the GM bailout. Do you have any idea who the real winner was in that fiasco? The UAW. If GM had been allowed to go into bankruptsy and reorganize into smaller more efficient units, each of those new companies would have had a union representation vote---the UAW was scared of that. Since they supported obama with money they had his ear. Now the UAW owns a large portion of GM and we the taxpayers are on the hook for the rest of it.

What does GE have to do with outsourcing? the CEO of GE, Imelt, is on obama's jobs council, that council is supposed to be focused on saving US jobs.

BTW, do you think that all GM cars are now built in the US? check it out, they are not.
 
I contracted for Perkins Coie in Seattle about 14 years ago. Got nothing to do with this, but I hadn't heard the name of the firm in a while . . .

Its a good firm. I worked with them in the past also.
 
Oh, here we go with the GM bailout. Do you have any idea who the real winner was in that fiasco? The UAW. If GM had been allowed to go into bankruptsy and reorganize into smaller more efficient units, each of those new companies would have had a union representation vote---the UAW was scared of that. Since they supported obama with money they had his ear. Now the UAW owns a large portion of GM and we the taxpayers are on the hook for the rest of it.

What does GE have to do with outsourcing? the CEO of GE, Imelt, is on obama's jobs council, that council is supposed to be focused on saving US jobs.

BTW, do you think that all GM cars are now built in the US? check it out, they are not.

Of course not on your last question ... yet he helped it from the collapse that began in 1999 and stopped a downward spiral.


There are growing signs of revival in the auto industry, as companies reopen plants, add shifts, and hire workers

Agree: Auto industry employment has increased by 55,000 in the year ended in June, the fastest rate since 1999. Nine of GM's 11 manufacturing and assembly plants skipped the traditional summer shutdown. The Chrysler plant that makes the 2011 Jeep Grand Cherokee also stayed open. One Chrysler and four GM facilities have added shifts.
 
Back
Top Bottom