View Full Version : Judge Tells Bain To Come Clean! (More Romney Lies)

Gayle in MD
09-20-2012, 06:41 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Bain Capital Complaint Should Be Made Public, Court Rules

A judge has ruled that certain information involved in a lawsuit against Bain Capital, the private equity firm where Mitt Romney made his fortune, should be released to the public.

U.S. District Judge Edward Harrington said in a decision on Friday that the public has the right to see a new complaint filed as part of a class-action antitrust lawsuit that claims Bain Capital and 10 other private equity firms colluded with one another to keep the costs of leveraged buyouts low. The plaintiffs recently filed another complaint with new information, but that complaint has not yet been made public because of opposition from Bain Capital lawyers, who say doing so could hurt the company's business because of increased scrutiny during the election news cycle.

Harrington disagreed. "The Defendants have failed to explain how the particular information that they have redacted causes specific and severe harm," he wrote in the decision. "It is further unclear to the Court whether the redactions are narrowly tailored to addressing that harm."

Still, Bain Capital lawyers have about three weeks to submit a second redacted version of the complaint and to "demonstrate with greater particularity" how potential harm to the company's business interests could trump the public's right to see the complaint, according to the decision.

A heavily redacted version of the complaint recently was leaked to The New York Times. The document includes emails suggesting that the private equity firms worked together to keep buyout costs low.

Romney, the Republican presidential nominee, co-founded Bain Capital in 1984 and ran the company until 2002. Romney's and Bain's lawyers say he was not involved in the company at the time of the deals covered by the lawsuit.



Recent Headlines on Mitsey and Bain....

SEC Filings List Romney As 'Chief Executive Officer'
According to the &lt;em&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.boston.com/news/politics/articles/2012/07/12/government_documents_indicate_mitt_romney_continue d_at_bain_after_date_when_he_says_he_left/" target="_hplink"&gt;&lt;em&gt;Boston Globe&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/em&gt;, Securites and Exchange Commission documents filed by Bain Capital after February 1999 list Romney as the private equity firm's "stole stockholder, chairman of the board, chief executive officer, and president."

$100,000+ Salary
The &lt;em&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.boston.com/news/politics/articles/2012/07/12/government_documents_indicate_mitt_romney_continue d_at_bain_after_date_when_he_says_he_left/" target="_hplink"&gt;Globe&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/em&gt; also found financial disclosure forms filed by Romney that indicate he still owned 100 percent of Bain in 2002, and earned at least $100,000 as an "executive" for the firm in 2001 and 2002.

2002 Testimony
As &lt;a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/12/mitt-romney-bain-departure_n_1669006.html?utm_hp_ref=politics" target="_hplink"&gt;The Huffington Post&lt;/a&gt; reported, sworn testimony given by Romney in 2002 undermined his claims that he left Bain in 1999. In that testimony, given as part of a hearing to determine if he had sufficient Massachusetts residency to run for governor, Romney said that he "remained on the board" of the LifeLike Co., which Bain held a stake in at the time. LifeLike's 2000 &lt;a href="http://www.sos.state.co.us/biz/ViewImage.do?fileId=20001165127&masterFileId=19961077091" target="_hplink"&gt;corporate filing&lt;/a&gt;, filed with the state of Colorado, lists Romney as a director.

More SEC Filings
HuffPost's Jason Cherkis and Ryan Grim identified at least &lt;a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/13/mitt-romney-bain-sec_n_1671819.html" target="_hplink"&gt;six documents&lt;/a&gt; filed by Bain Capital with the SEC from 1999 to 2001 that were signed by Mitt Romney. Most of the documents refer to Romney as the "reporting person."

'Managing Member' In 2002
HuffPost &lt;a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/15/mitt-romney-bain-capital_n_1674209.html?utm_hp_ref=politics" target="_hplink"&gt;reported&lt;/a&gt; on a 2002 corporate document filed with the state of Massachusetts that shows Romney listed as one of two managing members of Bain Capital Investors, an entity of the private equity firm.

Signed Documents After 1999
Romney signed an SEC filing in November 1999 pursuant to Bain's partial acquisition of medical-waste firm Stericycle, &lt;em&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/07/mitt-romney-bain-financial-disclosure" target="_hplink"&gt;Mother Jones&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/em&gt; reported. The filing noted that he was the "sole shareholder, Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and President" of the Bain entities involved in the $75 million deal.

2001 & 2002 SEC Filings
&lt;a href="http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2012/07/no_romney_didnt_leave_bain_in_1999.php" target="_hplink"&gt;Talking Points Memo&lt;/a&gt; uncovered two SEC filings from July 2000 and February 2001. In both, Romney lists his "principal occupation" as "Managing Director of Bain Capital, Inc."

1999 News Reports
As Slate's &lt;a href="http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2012/07/13/did_the_romney_campaign_create_the_swift_yachting_ story_.html" target="_hplink"&gt;Dave Weigel&lt;/a&gt; pointed out, Romney's campaign has cited news reports from 1999 that clearly state that Romney left Bain in 1999. However, those same news reports state that Romney would still be involved with the company. "Romney said he will stay on as a part-timer with Bain, providing input on investment and key personnel decisions," read one such report from the &lt;em&gt;Boston Herald&lt;/em&gt;

Former Partner Speaks Out
A former Bain Capital partner, Ed Conard, said during an appearance on MSNBC's "&lt;a href="http://upwithchrishayes.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/07/15/12751962-former-bain-capital-partner-says-romney-was-legally-ceo-of-bain-capital-until-2002" target="_hplink"&gt;Up W/Chris Hayes&lt;/a&gt;" that Romney was "legally" the CEO and sole owner of Bain Capital until 2002, as an ownership battle dragged on after Romney left to take over the Salt Lake City Olympics. "We had a very complicated set of negotiations that took us about two years for us to unwind. During that time a management committee ran the firm, and we could hardly get Mitt to come back to negotiate the terms of his departure because he was working so hard on the Olympics," Conard said.

Relationships With Problematic Companies
HuffPost's Sam Stein &lt;a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/16/mitt-romney-bain-capital_n_1677133.html" target="_hplink"&gt;reported&lt;/a&gt; that SEC filings link Romney to politically problematic companies after his alleged 1999 departure from Bain: &lt;blockquote&gt;A Huffington Post review of SEC files unearthed six separate occasions in which Romney was listed as a member of "the Management Committee" of both Bain Capital Investment Partners and BCIP Trust, "deemed to share voting and dispositive power with respect to" shares held of DDi. In one of those filings, Romney is listed as president and managing director of Bain Capital, Inc. The dates of those filings range from April 14, 2000 to May 10, 2001 -- all after Romney had left for Salt Lake City. In one March 2001 filing, Romney signed the document as the "reporting person."&lt;/blockquote&gt;

'General Partner'
According at a &lt;a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/16/mitt-romney-bain_n_1677259.html" target="_hplink"&gt;document&lt;/a&gt; filed with the California Secretary of State's office in July 1999, Romney was listed as a "general partner" at Bain Capital Partners. Romney's signature appears on the document. Romney remained on record as a general partner until California was notified of his resignation in June 2003.

Gayle in MD
09-20-2012, 06:47 AM
A new study by the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service has found that over the past 65 years, tax cuts for the rich have not led to economic growth and instead are linked to greater income inequality in the United States.

The study found that cutting taxes for the rich does not increase saving, investment, or productivity growth. "The top tax rates appear to have little or no relation to the size of the economic pie," the study said.

Two graphs show the lack of connection between tax rates for the rich and economic growth:

The authors noted that top-tier tax rates could have an effect on "how the economic pie is sliced." The study noted that in 1945, when the richest families had to pay a marginal tax rate of more than 90 percent, the top 0.1 percent of U.S. families accumulated 4.2 percent of all income gains. In 2007, in contrast, when the top marginal tax rate was 35 percent (which it still is), the top 0.1 percent of U.S. families captured 12.3 percent of all income gains.

Two graphs from the study show a clear connection between higher taxes for the rich and less income inequality:

Those findings are inconvenient for the Romney campaign. In a continuation of trickle-down economic theory, the Republican presidential nominee has argued that cutting taxes for the rich would "stimulate entrepreneurship, job creation, and investment," thus "breathing life into the present anemic recovery."

Romney has said he wants to extend all of the Bush tax cuts, while President Obama wants to extend those tax cuts only on the first $250,000 of taxable income. Romney also wants to slash marginal tax rates and taxes on investment income, as well as eliminate the estate tax -- all of which would disproportionately benefit the rich.

A recent study by Owen Zidar, a PhD student in Economics at the University of California at Berkeley, also found that tax cuts for the rich are not correlated with economic growth. But Zidar did find that tax cuts for the bottom 90 percent of income earners can stimulate economic growth and job creation.

(Hat tip: the New York Times' David Leonhardt.)

Also on HuffPost:

Loading Slideshow
Workers are not reaping the gains of their extra productivity.
Worker productivity grew 11 times more quickly than worker pay between 1979 and 2011: While &lt;a href="http://stateofworkingamerica.org/key-findings/" target="_hplink"&gt;worker productivity rose 69 percent&lt;/a&gt;, median hourly compensation rose just 6.5 percent, according to the Economic Policy Institute. [Chart credit: &lt;a href="http://stateofworkingamerica.org/chart/swa-wages-figure-4u-change-total-economy/" target="_hplink"&gt;Economic Policy Institute&lt;/a&gt;]

CEO pay has skyrocketed.
Maybe it's time to consider your CEO's massive pay package as a cut out of your own paycheck. &lt;a href="http://stateofworkingamerica.org/wages/" target="_hplink"&gt;CEO pay is more than 200 times&lt;/a&gt; that of a typical worker, up from 30 times that of a typical worker in the late 1970s, according to the Economic Policy Institute.

There aren't enough jobs.
At its current rate of job creation, the U.S. will not return to its pre-recession unemployment rate of around 5 percent before 2020, according to the Economic Policy Institute.

Job growth was slow even before the recession.
From the Economic Policy Institute: "The business cycle from 2000-2007 is the weakest full business cycle on record for job creation, due to the fact that demand was insufficient to drive overall GDP gains that were robust enough to generate strong job growth." It appears that the middle class squeeze has hurt job creation and economic growth.

We are poorer than we could be.
Households in the middle fifth of income distribution would have been making $18,897 more per year as of 2007 if their incomes had grown as quickly as overall average incomes between 1979 and 2007, according to the Economic Policy Institute. (The sizable income growth for top earners since 1979 skewed the overall average.)

The rich have captured most income growth.
The top one percent captured 60 percent of total income growth between 1979 and 2007, while the bottom 90 percent was left with just 9 percent of the total, according to the Economic Policy Institute. Moreover, the top one percent's incomes rose 241 percent, in contrast to 11 percent growth for the bottom fifth and 19 percent growth for the middle fifth. [Chart credit: &lt;a href="http://stateofworkingamerica.org/chart/swa-income-figure-2a-real-median-family/" target="_hplink"&gt;Economic Policy Institute&lt;/a&gt;]

Wages have grown more quickly for the rich.
Wages for the top one percent spiked 131 percent between 1979 and 2010, while wages for the bottom 90 percent of workers rose just 15 percent over that same period, according to the Economic Policy Institute. [Chart credit: &lt;a href="http://stateofworkingamerica.org/chart/swa-wages-figure-4h-change-real-annual-wages/" target="_hplink"&gt;Economic Policy Institute&lt;/a&gt;]

The poorest Americans are earning less than in 1979.
Americans in the bottom tenth of the wage distribution earned less last year than the lowest earners did in 1979, accounting for inflation, according to the Economic Policy Institute. Meanwhile, the real wages of the median worker rose only 6 percent between 1979 and 2011.

The American Dream is eroding.
"Families headed by early baby boomers (born between 1945-1954) are the last generation (on average) to achieve higher living standards than the one that preceded them," the Economic Policy Institute says. Among families with incomes below $28,000 in 1994, less than 1 percent made it to the top fifth of incomes 10 years later, according to the Economic Policy Institute.

This has been a lost decade.
On average, hourly pay has not grown at all since 2002 for workers with a college degree or with only a high school degree, according to the Economic Policy Institute. Wages have not grown for college graduates in nearly every occupation, and college graduates in the 70th income percentile or lower have had stagnant or falling wages since 2000. [Chart credit: &lt;a href="http://stateofworkingamerica.org/chart/swa-wages-figure-4a-change-total-economy/" target="_hplink"&gt;Economic Policy Institute&lt;/a&gt;]

10 Ways The U.S. Is Getting Worse For Most Americans
1 of 11

Economic Policy Institute
<span style="color: #990000">

Back around 2006 Citibank coined the term "plutonomy" representing an economy driven by the wealthy. They named several "plutonomy stocks" that had performed much better than average stocks because they sell products to the wealthy.

These companies do most of their manufacturing overseas. Purchasing from them does nothing to stimulate job creation in the USA. This is the big lie about trickle-down economics. The plutonomy is stimulating foreign countries.

Same link as above for these articles.

09-20-2012, 07:31 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Judge Tells Bain To Come Clean! </div></div>No he didn't. What he has told them to do is...<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">to submit a second redacted version of the complaint and to "demonstrate with greater particularity" how potential harm to the company's business interests could trump the public's right to see the complaint</div></div>Why don't you people actually read what you are quoting. Do you not think that would be important?