1) He still owned the company. Any talk of him not being involved in decision-making is pure nonsense, only to be believed by the irretrievably naive. He was the responsible party, period.
2) The idea that he wasn’t aware of what a company he was investing $75 million dollars in did strains credibility far beyond the breaking point.
3) Again, LifeNews exists to provide cover for the compromised fake Republicans who work hard to pass themselves off as “pro-life” when they are nothing of the sort.
As I showed you far back up this thread, Stericycle was taken to task years before the times in question for “improperly” disposing of the remains of murdered babies.
“The Mother Jones story itself, however, cited public OSHA violations by Stericycle from 1991 — well before the Bain investment — which included improperly keeping ‘body parts, fetuses, and dead experimental animals in unmarked storage containers, placing workers at risk.’”
Sorry to annoy you with facts.
Apparently the timeline means nothing to you. The facts mean nothing to you. To reiterate:
1) MR took his leave absence from Bain Capital in February 1999 in order to run the Winter Olympics. According to Wikipedia, he was not involved in day-to-day operations or investment decisions at Bain from that point.
2) Bain invested in Stericycle in August of 1999.
3) There is no evidence of Stericycle being involved in the removal of aborted human remains until 2003, at which time MR was governor of MA and long gone from Bain.
I don’t deny that Bain invested in Stericycle and that MR was a passive shareholder. But since Bain invested in Stericycle in 1999, and there is no evidence that the company was involved with the removal of aborted remains until 2003, your charges are utterly baseless and carry no water whatsoever.