Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
8 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

aint_no_life_nowhere

(21,925 posts)
1. The principal officers in a privately held corporation are often its sole shareholders
Sat Jul 14, 2012, 03:24 PM
Jul 2012

I believe Romney's position as corporate officer was President. I'd be very interested in seeing Bain's stock transfer ledger to see when he stopped being sole shareholder, to whom he sold his shares, and for how much. If he continued as sole shareholder after 1999, then he had every incentive to know and authorize exactly what the company was doing in his absence while he was at the Olympics.

liberal N proud

(60,334 posts)
2. The Olympics were a trophy for Romney
Sat Jul 14, 2012, 03:27 PM
Jul 2012

He sees the Presidency the same way.

He was not interested in the Olympics, the future of the organization, games or the event it's self. It was an addition to his resume, nothing more.

He wants to be President for the same reason and would have the same attitude, it's not about the American people, the republic, jobs or anything else, just his resume.

For people like Romney, it is about finishing the game with more than anyone else.

thelordofhell

(4,569 posts)
4. That's rmoney in a nutshell----He just wants to be President
Sat Jul 14, 2012, 03:44 PM
Jul 2012

He won't know what to do once he is President. That's when the puppet masters take control........just like they did with shrub.

PSPS

(13,584 posts)
3. More telling is his the selection of the term "sole employee" on the forms.
Sat Jul 14, 2012, 03:38 PM
Jul 2012

Plus, he was paid far more than $100K. That's just the top bracket one can choose on the disclosure form ("over $100,000.&quot It could have been a billion dollars for all we know. And all the money he's hiding in secret bank accounts is likely earning big returns as it's almost certainly co-mingled with funds from various drug lords, gun runners and corrupt dictators -- the most frequent users of secret bank accounts. For all we know, he was in a joint venture with Gaddafi.

hedgehog

(36,286 posts)
5. That's new info for me - there's some tax dodge in there somewhere, I'm sure!
Sat Jul 14, 2012, 03:52 PM
Jul 2012

But if he was the sole employee, who was minding the store?

TeamPooka

(24,216 posts)
6. and the Olympics wasn't "volunteer work" either unless $285K a year is volunteering
Sat Jul 14, 2012, 07:31 PM
Jul 2012

which for Mittens it might be...
Like his speaking fees, it's not much right?

"The athletes haven't," he said. "Our job is to go to work for the athletes." Romney pledged to spend no more money than the games take in, to spare taxpayers, to protect the environment and to take no salary until the Olympics are over and profitable. When he is paid, it will be $285,000 per year - the same rate as his predecessor, Frank Joklik, who resigned Jan. 8. Joklik claimed to know nothing about the excesses of bid executives while he served as chairman of the committee. He will remain on SLOC's board of trustees. Romney will have to sever ties with any companies that do business with the games. Bain Capital has ownership stakes in many companies and Romney serves on various corporate boards. "

http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/default.aspx?pageid=438&n=romney-hired-to-lead-salt-lake-games-from-scandal-1999-02-13

renate

(13,776 posts)
7. I've wondered much the same thing
Sun Jul 15, 2012, 05:12 PM
Jul 2012

Why would somebody with a deal as sweet and unfathomably profitable as the one Romney had with Bain give it up for a one-time gig at running the Olympics for less than the price of a dressage horse? It just doesn't make good business sense.

Evergreen Emerald

(13,069 posts)
8. There has been some misunderstanding about the amount he was paid
Sun Jul 15, 2012, 05:49 PM
Jul 2012

The paper work he filled out had two options: above 100,000 or below. For all we know, he could have been making 10X that amount. The reporting that states he made 100,000 for executive pay is inaccurate...if only we could see his tax returns...

By the way: this information came from the interview L. O'donnell had with the reporter from the globe who broke the story.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»If Mittens was the sole s...