 |
| "Wait, what did I just say?" |
Gillespie on Sunday sought to clarify the matter, saying that Romney initially thought he would be leaving Bain on a temporary basis, but the challenges of the Olympics led him to “retire retroactively.”
"There may have been a thought at the time that it could be part time, but it was not part time," Gillespie said.
"He took a leave of absence and in fact he ended up not going back at all, and retired retroactively to 1999 as a result," he added.
He "retired retroactively?"
Well isn't THAT convenient?
Let's face it Romney WAS working for Bain Capital several years after he claimed that he had retired, and documents prove he was still listed as a "managing member" as late as 2002.
And then there's this from testimony in front of the Massachusetts Ballot Law Commission:
“When I left my employer in Massachusetts in February of 1999 to accept the Olympic assignment,” Romney testified before the state Ballot Law Commission on June 17, 2002, “I left on the basis of a leave of absence, indicating that I, by virtue of that title, would return at the end of the Olympics to my employment at Bain Capital, but subsequently decided not to do so and entered into a departure agreement with my former partners.”
Romney’s lawyer at the hearing said that Romney’s work in the private sector continued unbroken while he ran the Olympics.
“He succeeded in that three-year period in restoring confidence in the Olympic Games, closing that disastrous deficit and staging one of the most successful Olympic Games ever to occur on US soil,” said Peter L. Ebb from Ropes & Gray.
“Now while all that was going on, very much in the public eye, what happened to his private and public ties to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts? And the answer is they continued unabated just as they had.”
"Retroactive retirement." give me a break!
Keep talking, Ed.
ReplyDeleteI hope everyone is wearing comfortable shoes, because Romney's top advisers are extending our already-too-fucking-long visit to Making-shit-up-as-they-go-along-istan.
I bet SEC is forced to give Mitt Romney "a pass" on this, or Bain Capital will be forced to fall on its sword, and good ol' Teflon Mitt will slide away a scot free.
ReplyDeleteScott free with the SEC---but not with the voters--except the paint chip eaters and corporatists who are going to vote for him anyway.
Deleteretroactive
ReplyDeletejust like an etch-a-sketch
indeed
Delete1) He lied to the SEC.
ReplyDelete2) He lied to the State of Massachusetts.
3) He is lying to the American voters.
4) All of the above.
but whoever he lied to, he stands by those remarks
Delete"I don't remember what I said, but I stand by it, whatever it was!" Mitt, June 2012
Delete'I stand by whatever I said or think I said.'
Delete'Unless it gets me in trouble.'
'Then it's Obama's fault and unfair.'
'That's when I get to shake my Etch A Sketch.'
Mitt rMONEY for STOOPID 2012.
Guess there are now questions about his IRA and the amount in it - over a million dollars!
ReplyDeleteThe guy is as dishonest as they come. Not at all qualified to be president of the USA.
OBAMA/BIDEN 2012
Mitt's IRA is over $102,000,000.
DeleteHe can only put 30K+ a year in it legally.
He may have undervalued the investments he put into it. This would be against the law.
Mitt is a crook.
I'm of the Rmoney = felon opinion. But what would we get as a candidate then?
ReplyDeleteNow you know why, even though she wasn't scheduled to be a part of the convention except perhaps as a guest, our dear friend Sarah rented space close by.
DeleteShe will be ready and waiting, freshly bathed, perfumed, coiffed and dressed in the finest raiment, just waiting for that clarion call for a rill candidate, don'tcha know.
Stay tuned.
Why Sarah Piglin of course.
DeleteThis was discussed on this site several months ago - how Sara would be waiting for the eleventh hour call and would come dancing onto the stage to a roaring crowd. I've got to believe she's laying down at night doing herself and dreaming of that rush of orgasmic delight as she mounts the stage to accept the nomination. Faster Sara, faster.
DeleteIs this the retroactive truth?
ReplyDeleteCan the Republicans retroactively choose another candidate?
DeleteGo Ron Paul!
"Retroactive" is the Romney equivalent of Nixon's "inoperative". Romney might be the first candidate presumptive to be impeached.
ReplyDelete======
From Time April 23, 1973
"THE Nixon Administration has developed a new language—a kind of Nix-speak. Government officials are entitled to make flat statements one day, and the next day reverse field with the simple phrase, "I misspoke myself." White House Press Secretary Ronald Ziegler enlarged the vocabulary last week, declaring that all of Nixon's previous statements on Watergate were "inoperative." Not incorrect, not misinformed, not untrue—simply inoperative, like batteries gone dead. ..."
Is that sort of like "I bepissed myself?"
DeleteOT
ReplyDeleteGryphen,
Here is a great article from a Christian site. I have no idea if the site is good, but the article is great and should be read by everyone who is in an abusive relationship. Not everything "Christian" is bad. http://global.christianpost.com/news/how-to-respond-to-verbal-emotional-abusers-78253/
The issue is muddled further because many of Mitt's 'gone from Bain' time frames conflict with residency requirements in Massachusetts and would have made him not eligible to run for governor. Ouch!
ReplyDelete'Oh, What a fateful web we weave,
When first we practise to deceive."
Mittens/Winkie 2012!
Which is where the felon moniker arises. And the TeaTHUGS liek Scott are worried about voter fraud - looks like they have a candidate fraud problem.
DeleteDid he gave back his salary of OVER $100K retroactively?????
ReplyDeleteI bet not.
retroactive retirement, that's the best laugh I've had all week. I wonder how late he was up last night dreaming up that line. And why that term is JUST NOW showing up if that's what it was all along.
Me smells a liar with his pants on fire.
Retroactive = Radioactive I hope!
ReplyDeletefromthediagonal
I had dinner with an old g.f. last night and she asked me to recount for her how I saw the way things ended. If ONLY I'd had the presence of mind to talk about retroactivity. Instead I was left gasping for explanation and failed miserably.
ReplyDeleteI understand the retro stuff. I lost my job one year from now if Romney gets elected.
ReplyDeleteH/T to opus1dog
So by this logic, Sarah Palin isn't a Quitter! She just "retroactively retired."
ReplyDeleteTime to lose all these Bozo's (apologies to the real Bozo the Clown!) and give our hard-working President a sane Congress.
Remember, remember, the sixth of November!
Democratic LANDSLIDE!!!
She was also retroactively pregnant in 2008.
DeleteHas anybody read this yet from FORBES? Romney's in big trouble if he's being questioned by Forbes!
ReplyDeletehttp://www.forbes.com/sites/tjwalker/2012/07/14/35-questions-mitt-romney-must-answer-about-bain-capital-before-the-issue-can-go-away/
thanks, phoebes
Deletethis is one of the most comprehensive lists that i've seen to date.
I just finished reading the Forbes list of 35 questions. At least someone in the media are paying attention.
DeleteYou all need to slow down. Think like a cat. Don´t go for the quick kill. Play with Mitt. Watch him squirm. Have fun.
ReplyDeleteAnd let the far right throw their dollars away!
Just wait for what comes out AFTER the convention.
DeleteElection fraud anyone???
ReplyDeleteUsed Bain business as a reference point in order to qualify as a "resident" in order to run for MA governor.
PMom_GA
http://www.bradblog.com/?p=9397
Delete"Far be it for me to call TPM's Josh Marshall "stupid", though it does make for a more eye-catching headline. It also happens to be a fact, as I see it, that Romney's refusal to release his tax returns from any year prior to 2010, and especially his local state return from 2010, is about hiding evidence of a felony crime, as much or likely more than it is about hiding embarrassing details of off-shore bank accounts in the Cayman Islands, Bermuda, Switzerland, etc."
Only a Republican candidate can "retire retroactively." If a Democratic candidate ever tried that nonsense, they'd be tarred and feathered in the press at the very least.
ReplyDeleteBeaglemom
O/T but Baldy related....
ReplyDelete"Mitt still hasn’t invited Sarah to the GOP’s nomination assembly in Tampa, and the Tea Party is livid. Peter J. Boyer on how the snub could sabotage Romney’s tenuous ties to the grassroots—and why Palin is keeping the week open, just in case."
Queries to the Romney camp about any possible Palin role at the convention meet with a stony silence. Palin does not seem surprised. “What can I say?” she responded in an email from Alaska, when asked by Newsweek about the convention, just before heading to Michigan to deliver an Obama-thumping speech. “I’m sure I’m not the only one accepting consequences for calling out both sides of the aisle for spending too much money, putting us on the road to bankruptcy, and engaging in crony capitalism.”
“In accepting those consequences,” she added, “one must remember this isn’t Sadie Hawkins and you don’t invite yourself and a date to the Big Dance.”
The Romney camp will not comment on Palin, or on plans for the convention, but one adviser associated with the campaign suggested that Palin would be prohibited from speaking at the Republican convention by her contract with Fox News. “It’s true I’m prohibited from doing some things,” Palin says, “but this is the first I’ve heard anyone suggest that as an excuse, er, reason to stay away from engaging in the presidential race. I’m quite confident Fox’s top brass would never strip anyone of their First Amendment rights in this regard.” (Fox says her contract would not prohibit speaking at the convention if she sought permission.)
Palin is keeping the dates open in late August, just in case. In any event, she says, she plans to be politically active between now and November, starting with a Michigan Tea Party appearance, sponsored by Americans for Prosperity. “No matter the Romney campaign strategy,” she says, “I intend to do all I can to join others in motivating the grassroots made up of independents and constitutional conservatives who can replace Barack Obama at the ballot box.”
OH BOYAAAA!!! Baldy is not going quietly into the night!
Link...
http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2012/07/15/sarah-palin-still-waiting-for-romney-invite-to-tampa.html
That should have read "staged by Americans for Prosperity." There were reportedly a whole 400 people at this free event, but I bet Baldy got paid.
DeleteAnd can you see her 'asking permission' to give a hate speech?
Never. How can she go out and give the ones she does while under contract to a 'news' outlet. Sarah isn't 'fair' or 'balanced.' Isn't she representing them?
And Sarah, if you start in on Obama and terrorists again, there may be some Secret Service people who want to talk to you about AIP.
Can you imagine, for a moment, a Palin/Obama debate?
DeleteBwaaaaahhhhhhhhhaaaaaa! Run Sarah Run!
Jonathan Alter (MSNBC analyst) on twitter:
ReplyDelete#retroactively Gillespie is same guy who said idiotically that WashPost confused "outsource" and "offshore". Bad spin Hall of Fame.
And John Edwards retroactively got a divorce.
ReplyDeleteSo who signed the checks? Was Mrs. Romney in charge...and had a signature stamp in her hand (Mitt's signature).
ReplyDeleteIs there a letter of delegation regarding authority...
O/T has anyone ever seen this picture of Baldy? I knew she was lizard...look at that tongue! Ewwww!
ReplyDeletehttp://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/former-alaska-governor-sarah-palin-addresses-the-news-photo/138760560
Is there maybe some way Sarah can get a retroactive birth certificate to show around? That would be a rilly big help.
ReplyDeleteMaybe a retroactive pregnancy or two, also too.
I've tweaked this a bit for a tweet...
Deletehttp://tinyurl.com/bn38mzc
PMom_GA
Conservative Pundits Wonder If Romney’s Hiding Something In Unreleased Tax Returns
ReplyDeleteIt’s a bad sign for Mitt Romney when conservatives begin to question why the presumptive Republican nominee won’t release more of his tax returns. But on Sunday, that’s what happened. Conservative analysts joined Democrats in wondering whether Romney is just being impolitic in not releasing several years worth of returns — or whether he’s trying to hide something.
Democrats have been calling on Mitt Romney to release more than one year of his tax returns with a series of web videos and public statements. So far, he has released his 2010 returns and an estimate of his 2011 returns.
To politicos across the ideological spectrum, Romney’s unwillingness to release anything beyond these two years raises the question: if it’s worth the bad press to keep the tax returns private, they must contain something worse.
“The cost of not releasing the returns are clear,” said conservative columnist George Will, on ABC’s “This Week.” “Therefore, he must have calculated that there are higher costs in releasing them.”
On the ABC roundtable, Republican strategist Matthew Dowd had a similar take.
“There’s obviously something there, because if there was nothing there, he would say, ‘Have at it,’” Dowd said. “So there’s obviously something there that compromises what he said in the past about something.”
“Many of these politicians think, ‘I can do this. I can get away with this. I don’t need to do this, because I’m going to say something and I don’t have to do this,’” Dowd said. “If he had 20 years of ‘great, clean, everything’s fine,’ it’d all be out there, but it’s arrogance.”
In the last week, several Republicans have advised Romney to release his returns. That list includes former Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour, former RNC chairman Michael Steele and Alabama Gov. Robert Bentley, who called for “total transparency” and said he releases all his tax returns. On “Fox News Sunday,” the Weekly Standard’s editor Bill Kristol added his voice to the list as well, calling for Romney to “release the tax returns tomorrow” and “take the hit for a day or two.”
The speculations from Will and Dowd jibe with what Obama surrogates have been saying, and reveal why the president’s backers see a political benefit to harping on Romney’s tax returns.
On ABC’s “This Week,” Chicago’s mayor and Obama’s former chief of staff Rahm Emanuel said that in 2008, John McCain saw 23 years of Romney’s tax returns and opted for Sarah Palin instead.
“The Romney campaign isn’t stupid,” Emanuel said. “They have decided that it’s better to get attacked on a lack of transparency, lack of accountability to the American people, versus telling you what’s in those taxes.”
more...
http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/07/conservative-romney-taxes-returns-hiding-something.php
Retroactive Retirement?
ReplyDeleteCan you retroactively change your sources/types of income and your taxloops used too?
Just wondering. . .
-----------
Interesting read~ ~ ~Vanity Fair/August re:Mitt's Moolah "Where the Money Lives"
From WIKIPEDIA....
ReplyDeleteQuote: "Although he [Romney] had left open the possibility of returning to Bain after the Olympics, Romney made his crossover to politics permanent with an announcement in August 2001.[46] His separation from the firm was finalized in 2002.[52] Romney negotiated a retirement agreement with Bain Capital that allowed him to receive a passive profit share and interest as a retired partner in some Bain Capital entities, including buyout and Bain Capital investment funds, in exchange for his ownership in the management company.[53][54] Because the private equity business continued to thrive, this deal would bring him millions of dollars in annual income.[54]"
Does FINALIZING Romney's leave of absence starting in 1999 in 2002 make it "retroactive"???
How STUPID does this douche bag think we are????
What pissed me off about Gillespie today was that he managed to get in all the Fox slams at the President, and Gregory just sat there.
ReplyDeleteJeebus H. Krisp. What else is Rmoney going to retroactively redact? This is just another form of a Rmoney's flip flops.
ReplyDeleteI want to ask the local Mormon guy kids who come to my door, is what Mitt does something all Mormons do?
Is a major Mormon skill being able to retroactively change the past to suit some current or present agenda.
I'm curious as the Mormon church also retroactively makes everyone a Mormon after they die.
I have some library books that are due in three days. But I guess I can just wait another week and then return them retroactively!
ReplyDeleteTom, FL :^)
if you are sole stockholder, who are your partners? why does mitt and others refer to his partners in Bain during the timeframe where mitt was sole owner?
ReplyDeleteGryphen, what's the big problem?? If you would do about 2 seconds worth of research you would learn that Gillespie is simply following a basic tenet of his religion - Republicanarianism, which has almost nothing to do with canaries, by the way - called "Lying For The Presidency". That's where their God commands them to say and do anything in order to elect a Republicanarian president. It's called Freedom of Religion, dude! Get used to it!!
ReplyDeleteHaven't you ever wondered why the vast majority of Republican politicians are lying sacks of shit? Well, now you know! So lay off Gillespie AND Mittens! They're going to heaven for their lying! Hooray!!
(I dont even have to tell you where you're going...)
Retroactive retirement makes sense to people who baptize the dead.
ReplyDeleteIt's simple-
ReplyDeleteretroactive retirement = rewriting history = attempts to be above and beyond reproach
What astonishes me is that Romney has been essentially running for President for 5 1/2 years. Did it never occur to him and his various campaign managers that these questions would come up?
ReplyDeleteDid they not realize that he was going to have to release his tax records like every other candidate?
Did they not realize his business and financial histories were going to be scrutinized?
Can they all possibly be that stupid? Or is it complete arrogance in thinking he didn't have to follow the same rules as everyone else? Either way, those are NOT qualities I want in a President!
Is Romney's retroactive retirement similar to Bristol Palin's revirginization?
ReplyDeletePhuket Tom