Now that the question of Mitt Romney's departure from Bain Capital has blown up into a major subplot of the campaign season, it's worth reviewing how the controversy initially evolved—in part because, even as journalists (starting with MoJo's David Corn) have continued to uncover questions about the timing of Romney's retirement, professional fact-checking shops continue to maintain it's unfair to tie Romney to Bain's outsourcing investments.
why, this is his claim to fame that uniquely qualifies him to be the best chance at correcting what he and his party and Bain created putting us in this jackpot.
if they could not or cared not that the ditch was coming into view, why trust the untrustworthy their agenda has become more extreme so next ditch could be wider and deeper then ever.
no matter what they claim now, listen to their rhetoric same game different year. they have no plan except the one they are dusting off that culminated in what and where the US is now.
"…questions regarding the timing of Romney's departure from the private equity firm he founded…The SEC documents [reviewed by MoJo] undercut that defense, indicating that Romney still played a role in Bain investments until at least the end of 1999."
big money affords you any and all manners of deceit, forgery, false testimony, taking so long to respond gives question to what are they doing with the "evidence"?
