General Discussion

spanone

(135,844 posts) Fri Jul 13, 2012, 08:52 PM Jul 2012

why doesn't mitt just introduce the person/persons that ran bain capital from 1999 on?

surely the person/persons would be glad to step forward and explain

that through the years in question, they made the decisions for bain capital and mitt was not at all involved.

put it all to rest.

12 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

why doesn't mitt just introduce the person/persons that ran bain capital from 1999 on? (Original Post) spanone Jul 2012 OP

No one is willing to take the fall for him lunatica Jul 2012 #1

Because malaise Jul 2012 #2

bingo! you win! spanone Jul 2012 #3

I'm still wondering why no one in the press is asking this. senseandsensibility Jul 2012 #4

Did you ring them up? randome Jul 2012 #8

Cuz Mitt went to run in the Olympics. NYC_SKP Jul 2012 #5

Because he would have to name them. pnwmom Jul 2012 #6

He can't say it was anyone else because that would mean he would have lied to the SEC when The Wielding Truth Jul 2012 #7

Good question. chollybocker Jul 2012 #9

someone was making decisions... should be easy. of course, unless it was mitt. spanone Jul 2012 #12

That individual is still in denial liberal N proud Jul 2012 #10

rMoney as CEO at Bains may have committed a serious business crime. SDjack Jul 2012 #11

lunatica

(53,410 posts)

1. No one is willing to take the fall for him

Reply to spanone (Original post)

Fri Jul 13, 2012, 08:53 PM

Jul 2012

Bain's silence on this is to save their own asses. Not his.

malaise

(269,054 posts)

2. Because

Reply to spanone (Original post)

Fri Jul 13, 2012, 08:54 PM

Jul 2012

It's the man in the mirror

spanone

(135,844 posts)

3. bingo! you win!

Reply to malaise (Reply #2)

Fri Jul 13, 2012, 08:56 PM

Jul 2012

senseandsensibility

(17,066 posts)

4. I'm still wondering why no one in the press is asking this.

Reply to spanone (Original post)

Fri Jul 13, 2012, 08:56 PM

Jul 2012

Not even Rachel, Lawrence, Jennifer,etc.

randome

(34,845 posts)

8. Did you ring them up?

Reply to senseandsensibility (Reply #4)

Fri Jul 13, 2012, 08:59 PM

Jul 2012

NYC_SKP

(68,644 posts)

5. Cuz Mitt went to run in the Olympics.

Reply to spanone (Original post)

Fri Jul 13, 2012, 08:57 PM

Jul 2012

Never could picture him in running shorts but whatever...

pnwmom

(108,980 posts)

6. Because he would have to name them.

Reply to spanone (Original post)

Fri Jul 13, 2012, 08:58 PM

Jul 2012

And then he would have to explain why for three years their names weren't on the SEC forms.

The Wielding Truth

(11,415 posts)

7. He can't say it was anyone else because that would mean he would have lied to the SEC when

Reply to spanone (Original post)

Fri Jul 13, 2012, 08:58 PM

Jul 2012

he signed the filings saying he was in charge. He is caught. He has committed a felony.

chollybocker

(3,687 posts)

9. Good question.

Reply to spanone (Original post)

Fri Jul 13, 2012, 09:00 PM

Jul 2012

Since a corporation is a person, how could it survive for so long without a head?

spanone

(135,844 posts)

12. someone was making decisions... should be easy. of course, unless it was mitt.

Reply to chollybocker (Reply #9)

Fri Jul 13, 2012, 09:40 PM

Jul 2012

liberal N proud

(60,336 posts)

10. That individual is still in denial

Reply to spanone (Original post)

Fri Jul 13, 2012, 09:01 PM

Jul 2012

?1341260966

SDjack

(1,448 posts)

11. rMoney as CEO at Bains may have committed a serious business crime.

Reply to spanone (Original post)

Fri Jul 13, 2012, 09:10 PM

Jul 2012

No one wants to touch a criminal project. He may have been forced to ride it out, hoping that it would never be detected. But, running for prez makes him vulnerable.

Reply to this discussion