PhoenixDark
Banned
Actually it's likely totally true and he probably wasn't involved in the day to day operations but that's meaningless. Most Americans have no idea what the life of an executive involves so if there are documents that say he was running the company for those three years then that's what he should have stated.
If he was a passive owner, I think this wouldn't be a big story; Fact Check is actually standing by their defense of Romney, based on this very argument. But it begs the question whether the majority stock holder, president, and chairmen of the company attended any meetings with the board of directors. I'd imagine he did.
Regardless, Romney's general claim that he left the company in 1999 is clearly false