An investigative piece in the Boston GLobe by Beth Healy and Michael Kranish pretty much shreds the claim that Mittens had nothing to do with Bain Capital after 1999.
Interviews with a half-dozen of Romneyâ€™s former partners and associates, as well as public records, show that he was not merely an absentee owner during this period. He signed dozens of company documents, including filings with regulators on a vast array of Bainâ€™s investment entities. And he drove the complex negotiations over his own large severance package, a deal that was critical to the firmâ€™s future without him, according to his former associates.
Indeed, by remaining CEO and sole shareholder, Romney held on to his leverage in the talks that resulted in his generous 10-year retirement package, according to former associates.
â€œThe elephant in the room was not whether Mitt was involved in investment decisions but Mittâ€™s retention of control of the firm and therefore his ability to extract a huge economic benefit by delaying his giving up of that control,â€ said one former associate, who, like some other Romney associates, spoke only on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak for the company.
Yes, this article documents that Mittens kept the CEO title not because he thought he might come back after the Olympics, but so he could squeeze the biggest possible severance package out of the company.
Other must-reads — Ryan Grim and Zach Carter, “Mitt Romney Avoided Major Tax Hit By Shifting Stock Of Offshoring Firm”
Paul Krugman, “Pathos of the Plutocrat“