BAINGATE Explained: People, this is no joke and SEC should press the tax issue [View all]

[uponit7771]

1.) Romney said in FEC and other filings he was NOT operationally leading Bain.

2.) Bain said in Federal filings rMoney WAS operationally leading Bain

3.) Tax Returns would show if rMoney took tax benefits from ....OPERATIONAL control of Bain making him either have to explain to the SEC wtf is up or explain to the IRS wtf is up....either way....that's not good for prez candidate.

4.) rMoney will not SHOW taxes from that period....as of the Boston Globe Story rMoney NOW has something tangible to hide


Lying to SEC is serious offense, Martha Stewart was jailed for less....

I miss anything?

Regards

Edit

P.S. How this ties into FactCheck is FactCheck pretty much said the same thing I said above but left out the tax returns issue. If rMoney took TAX benefits from control of Bain that would be an ESTABLISHMENT in writing that rMoney was OPERATIONALLY controlling Bain and not just a prima facia controller of the company (controller in name only) as both WAPo and FactCheck claim rMoney to be.

As FactCheck stated rMoney could go to jail for a clip if rMoney was in operational control of Bain during that period and it wasn't just on the face control cause he was "busy with the Olympics"

This is interesting