Felons should be arrested and put on trial

Even Rich Mormon Republicans Are Subject To The Law

Tuesday, August 7, 2012


Forum Post: Is Mormon one percenter Harry Reid Running Interference for Mormon One Percenter Mitrt Romney?

Posted 8 minutes ago on Aug. 8, 2012, 1:20 a.m. EST by fiftyfourforty (829)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
Things are not always what they seem. Before Reid opened his mouth the issues were really aboutpossible Romney criminality. 1- Had Romney tried to evade taxes illegally with UBS in Switzerland? a- Could be resolved by revealing his 2009 and 2010 returns completed including the absent to this day Foreign Bank Account Reports. That would settle when he let the IRS in on his Swiss account. The IRS had nailed UBS and forced them to fork over the names and account numbers of US tax evaders in 2009. These evaders were given an opportunity to confess, take a penalty and avoid possible prison time. The FBAR would resolve whether or not Romney was a caught criminal who took a deal.
2- His Individual Retirement Account. Complete tax returns for the past ten years would explain how he parlayed a $30,000 annual contributions into a pile up to $100,000,000! This would take incredible skill and luck, or it would take illegal "self dealing."
http://www.keystoneprogress.org/blog/2012/07/patriotic-millionaires-demand-mitt-romney-release-tax-returns.html "Patriotic Millionaire and former Google Software Engineer David desJardins (CA) says:
"Mitt Romney owes a detailed explanation to the American public about how he got $100 million or more in his IRA, without illegal self-dealing. The Individual Retirement Account is a tool for Americans to save for retirement, something most Americans desperately need. If Romney took advantage of quasi-legal manipulations to use his IRA instead as a vehicle for hiding hundreds of millions of dollars from the IRS and avoid paying even the low 15% rate on his income, we should know how he did it and whether it was legal, or not.""
3- Did Romney vote in Massachusetts while not a resident of that state? Some people suspect that. He claimed to be living in his son's basement in Mass. while running the Utah Olympics. Interesting.
"Patriotic Millionaire and Co-CEO of eScription Paul Egerman (MA) says:
"Why doesn't Governor Romney want Americans to see his tax returns? Perhaps, he wants to hide the truth about how little in taxes people like Mitt Romney and me have paid on many millions of dollars of income. Or, perhaps he wants to hide the way that he's used paper losses to get refunds on prior years' returns. He needs to release at least 10 years of returns. Governor Romney should also come clean and release at least the past ten years of his Massachusetts state "
I'll be quick about this. On August 12, 2011, Mitt Romney filed this report with the Federal Election Commission. On the 27th page it states: Mr. Romney retired from Bain Capital on February 11, 1999 to head the Salt Lake Organizing Committee. Since February 11, 1999, Mr. Romney has not had any active rolewith any Bain Capital entity and has not been involved in the operations of any Bain Capital entity in any way.
This statement is false. A lie.
As Talking Points Memo's Josh Marshal reported on July 10th, Securities and Exchange Commission filings show Romney listed as the CEO, president, and sole owner of Bain capital. You are not "retired" if you are the CEO and president of a company. Other SEC docs indicate that Mitt Romney drew a salary of "over $100,000" for being CEO of Bain. That, by definition, is not being retired. These SEC documents also state that Romney's "principal occupation" was being the CEO of Bain Capital. That, by definition, is not being retired.
Being CEO and President is not having" any active role" or not being involved "in any way". If you are the sole owner of a private entity, you are legally responsible for that entity. You are "involved" in that entity. Had Bain Capital participated in an illegal action, Mitt Romney would have been held financially and possibly criminally liable for that action.
Even with this just this evidence, Mitt Romney ought to be arrested for lying to a federal agent. A crime that carries a penalty of 5 years maximum in prison.
More beyond the cover for those who seek it.
But for all the legal twisting and squirming that Mitt's surrogates have been doing to protect him from the legal jeopardy that he put himself in- they cannot escape the fact that Mitt Romney, in sworn testimony to Massachusetts election officials, stated that he served on the board of the LifeLike corporation and returned to Massachusetts to serve in that capacity after he left "retired" in 1999 to save the Olympics. Presumably and almost certainly, he served on its board because he owned shares in the company through his ownership of Bain Capital.
That by definition is "being involved" in a Bain Capital entity. Even he served on LifeLike's board in the capacity of an individual investor (and not in his Bain capacity), he would still be "involved" with this Bain entity as an individual investor.
There is much, much more evidence out there to contradict Romney's claim (which came today in the form of Ed Gillespie's PREPOSTEROUS claim that Mitt Romney "retired retroactively" from Bain Capital. But that's not what this blurb is about. This blurb is about arresting Mitt Romney.
Either he lied to the SEC and state of Massachusetts in the early years of the past decade, or he lied to the FEC on August 12, 2011. Mitt Romney from the information available to us, is guilty of a federal crime. He needs to go to court to defend his innocence. Now, I'm not suggesting anyone attempt a citizen's arrest of Mitt Romney (the Secret Service would quickly stop you). What I'm suggesting is that we start asking questions of the FEC and Justice Department. Perhaps we should start by phoning in, and asking the FEC these questions:
1) Has the FEC investigated the discrepancies between Mitt Romney's FEC filing in 2011 and Bain's SEC filings in the early 2000's?
2) If the FEC has not begun an investigation (or the person on the phone won't state whether they have or not) ask whether this person knows about these discrepancies.
3) If they do not know, inform them of the discrepancies by stating: "In the early 2000's Bain Capital listed Mitt Romney as their owner and CEO, who drew a salary of over $100,000. Yet in 2011, Mitt Romney filed a document with the FEC stating that he retired from Bain in 1999. It appears likely that Mitt Romney lied to the FEC in 2011. The FEC should investigate these discrepancies."
4) If they do know of the discrepancies, ask why they have yet to launch an investigation, and state that they should launch an investigation.
I believe we should start a political and organizational movement to give the government the political will to arrest Mitt Romney. I should state upfront that I don't necessarily want to lead that movement, but I am willing to lend my voice and limited knowledge of politics to it. I will also add that the Obama campaign is absolutely NOT the correct vehicle to express this frustration through or toward. Asking a sitting president to call for the arrest of his political opponent looks weak and in the long run could set a dangerous precedent. I believe the correct vehicle for this movement is the Occupy movement. Think about it. A wealthy member of the 1 percent believes he is above the law and would have us sit idly by while he clearly and flagrantly violates the law. If Joe poor man lies to the DEA during a drug bust, he goes to jail- even if he was just a witness to the illegal activity. However, if Mitt Romney lies to the FEC just because he wants to be president, he goes on scott-free, possibly to the presidency. We should at least expect the people running to lead us to be truthful.
If we don't demand some type of justice here, then what are we about? What is this nation about? Would it be lies, and justice for everyone but the privileged?
That is all.
The Boston Globe isn't the first media outlet to point out that it sure looked like Mitt was fibbing about leaving Bain Capital in February 1999, but it's getting more attention this time, since they've got the Bain Capital documents to prove it and it looks like that little lie might actually be a big felonious whopper. According to the Globe, although Mitt Romney states on his federal financial disclosure forms that he left the company before the Y2K panic came and went, the company's filings with the SEC tell a different story — they show that Romney was listed as Bain's CEO until 2002. But public Securities and Exchange Commission documents filed [after 1999] by Bain Capital state he remained the firm's "sole stockholder, chairman of the board, chief executive officer, and president." Also, a Massachusetts financial disclosure form Romney filed in 2003 states that he still owned 100 percent of Bain Capital in 2002. And Romney's state financial disclosure forms indicate he earned at least $100,000 as a Bain "executive" in 2001 and 2002, separate from investment earnings. So, why does this matter? First, it shows that it sure looks like Romney was actually involved in activities that the GOP Presidential candidate has disavowed — that thing about the fetus disposal company, layoffs and downsizing and outsourcing of jobs — even though the paper trail shows that his income as a CEO was, according to a former Bain employee, suspiciously low. For Romney's sake, let's hope that this all gets sorted out, because according to FactCheck, if Romney had falsified federal financial disclosure forms, he's got some 'splaining to do. Because that's a felony.

So Harry Reid perhaps changes the subject from overt criminality to run of the mill ordinary one percenter within the letter of the law tax avoidance. Clever.

No comments:

Post a Comment