Mitt Romney's bane of existence at the moment is his role with former company Bain Capital. One side says he should be investigated and disqualified from the presidential race. Another says all this brouhaha is nothing but political maneuvering.
According to the Huffington Post, Romney has some serious explaining to do, because what he is saying and what he has officially recorded seem to be two completely different things. Meanwhile, over at the Washington Post blog, Gregg Kessler doesn't see any discrepancies in the GOP candidate's SEC paperwork. So, who's right? Should Romney be investigated for fraud?
Well, the only way to determine this is to look at the facts.
According to the Romney camp, the former Bain CEO left the company in early 1999. What happened beyond that date?
- In November of that year, months after Romney supposedly left Bain, he signed off on documents authorizing the acquisition of Stericycle, a company that profits off the disposal of aborted fetuses. This essentially made him a profiteer from abortion services. Conservatives can spin it all they want, but that is one fact they can't explain away. Sorry, pro-lifers.
- In January 2000, he signed a deal with VMM Merger Corp.
- In February 2000, Romney signed SEC paperwork to acquire Wesley Jensen Visioncare, Inc.
- A year later, in 2001, he signed paperwork for ChipPAC, Inc.
Now, Kessler would have you believe that this was all "boilerplate," and that Romney was nothing more than a mere figurehead at Bain. However, that argument simply doesn't wash. The presumed GOP frontrunner was listed as the "sole stockholder, chairman of the board, chief executive officer, and president" of the company, which would indicate he knew Bain's every move at the time he signed off on each one.
Those who are familiar with situations such as this are calling foul because Mitt Romney simply can't say one thing and claim another. In essence, he is trying to convince the reader that an SEC filing means nothing, that it's all just a formality that doesn't really have any legal standing. Of course, this couldn't be further from the truth because the SEC is a federal entity and lying on paperwork could land a less well-connected and wealthy person in jail.
In an effort to safe face, the Romney campaign is looking for ways to spin this in such a way as to make President Obama look like the bad guy. It's kind of hard to do when you've got a reputation as a two-faced liar.
To answer the question, "should Romney be investigated for fraud?", the answer is a resounding "yes!"
Â©2012 Reno Berkeley for Gather News.