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 Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Tom Rinaldo

(23,187 posts)

8. Another contradiction

Reply to targetpractice (Reply #5)

Sun Jul 15, 2012, 09:53 AM

Jul 2012

Romney supposedly remained PAID CEO etc. for three years beause it took that long to handle the negotiations and to legally work out his departure. It's not like Baincould afford a good legal team to write up a draft of the agreements and handle the needed paperwork to codify them. It took 3 years because Romney didn't sign off on leaving Bain for three years. His severance date was retgroactive but he kept the salary he "earned" for those 3 years.

Romney is a fool for trying to run away from Bain's record between 1999 and 2002.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

8 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

"By a common sense standard......" [View all] Avalux Jul 2012 OP

It's not like he literally had to be at any particular office or place treestar Jul 2012 #1

So the income from Bain after 1999 was for doing NOTHING, Kelly? Brickbat Jul 2012 #2

Unfortunately, that never came up. Avalux Jul 2012 #4

No, Ma'am . . . uh, we don't. madashelltoo Jul 2012 #3

When did he stop making money from Bain? targetpractice Jul 2012 #5

Another contradiction Tom Rinaldo Jul 2012 #8

Yeah, it's totally common sense to get paid more than $100,000 in SALARY for doing nothing alcibiades_mystery Jul 2012 #6

the mighty alcibiades! Viva_La_Revolution Jul 2012 #7