Mitt Romney sold a drugged horse

[Antitrust32]

So this is Romney's wife's horse.... and the vet hired by the buyer drugged the horse and gave the buyer a shady and unethical pre-purchase exam...

What does this have to do with Mitt Romney? seems like it has nothing to do with Mitt Romney.

Unless Mitt Romney knew anything about the horse being drugged... which it seems he didnt... and it seems like the horse was his wifes animal.. Than saying this problem reflects on Mitt Romneys character is pretty much the same as Dell saying Obama's rapist cousin reflects on Obama's character.

Hopefully the vet who did this gets into some trouble.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

So this is Romney's wife's horse.... and the vet hired by the buyer drugged the horse and gave the buyer a shady and unethical pre-purchase exam...

What does this have to do with Mitt Romney? seems like it has nothing to do with Mitt Romney.

Unless Mitt Romney knew anything about the horse being drugged... which it seems he didnt... and it seems like the horse was his wifes animal.. Than saying this problem reflects on Mitt Romneys character is pretty much the same as Dell saying Obama's rapist cousin reflects on Obama's character.
Hopefully the vet who did this gets into some trouble.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Rudeboyelvis

No - Wrong. It is about Romney's character - you've made that clear - you called him a "Serial Liar" and "Scum".

Why are you saying, "Wrong"? when I said the thread was not about fast and furious, it is about Romney? Apparently we agree - it is indeed about Romney's morals, business ethics and character.

He is a serial liar, because well, he's been caught lying about stuff. Time after time. Not just the usual political exaggeration, but "pants on fire" lies. After he's been corrected on the facts.

That's a problem. A moral problem. I lived through Nixon. And Clinton. And Cheney. And Rove. And Scooter Libby. Lying at that level is a major problem.

I'll call Romney a "great businessman" for making that horse deal and getting $125,000 for a lame, useless pasture ornament. Is that better?

What do you call people that have lame horses doped so they can be sold for big bucks for a job they can no longer do because they are lame? I call them, "scum".

I have always hated Romney's political stances - but now this shows me the man has nothing worth admiring personally, either.

You see, I don't know - I tend to wait for facts to be presented before I rush to judgement...That what us adults do.

Yup. I've read the witness statement document. All of it. The drug report. Because that's what adults do. So I have the facts, thanks.

As someone that knows precisely what pre-purchases entail from the veterinary viewpoint, and having bought and sold horses of my own, I have reached the considered, adult conclusion that Romney is lying, cheating scum that will have a no longer servicable horse drugged, to sell it for $125,000.

When you grow up, perhaps you will understand. I don't have the time nor the inclination to "read the actual complaint" so I simply concede your point. Again, what adults do.

Unlike you, I did take the time to read the entire complaint before I even posted the thread, and thus have the facts informing my opinion.

Rather childish of you to tell me, "when you grow up", for something I did before I started the thread. And you haven't done at all.

What I do know for a fact, is that your criminal in the white house has more blood of innocent civilians on his hands than any president in memory.

Apparently you've forgotten George W. Bush.

Oh - and again, this thread is about Romney. Not how much you dislike our current President. You called Obama a deity - I never have. Don't put words in my mouth falsely characterizing my opinion, thanks.

[bigrun]

Apparently you've forgotten George W. Bush.

You beat me to it...

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

So this is Romney's wife's horse.... and the vet hired by the buyer drugged the horse and gave the buyer a shady and unethical pre-purchase exam...

You mean the Romney's vet? The one that colluded with the owner, via the owner's agent?

The owner that knew the horse was not showable for 2 1/2 years before the sale due to severe "worse I've ever seen" low ringbone?

The owner that knew the horse was treated for chronic lameness due to that ringbone repeatedly with steroids, Adequan, Lubrisyn?

The owner that knew that ringbone like that ends the horses career?

The owner that knew the horse had a compensatory soft-tissue lameness in the contralateral front leg? Because the ringbone leg hurt so much, too much weight was on the other leg - even not being ridden?

The owner - Romney - then decided to sell the unshowable lame ringbone-riddled horse as an "upper level dressage horse" for $125,000?

What does this have to do with Mitt Romney? seems like it has nothing to do with Mitt Romney.

Not if you close your eyes and simply admire Romney's ability to make money

[Antitrust32]

you should put a Mrs. in front of the Romney part because you make it seem like Mitt sold the horse.


Why would the buyer not use a vet they trusted for the pre purchase exam?


This whole thing is very very shady, but it doesnt seem to have anything to do with Mr. Romney.

The vet should lose their practice.

[Antitrust32]

also the buyer needs to take it up with the vet they hired.

[Antitrust32]

i just read the whole report.


This thing has 100% absolutely nothing to do with Mitt Romney.

The Dr. Doug vet seems pretty much entirely at fault. Plus this was Ann Romney's horse, not Mitt Romney's horse.

I dont see how any individual could read that report and reflect poorly on Mitt Romney, unless there is an agenda to fill.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

you should put a Mrs. in front of the Romney part because you make it seem like Mitt sold the horse.


Why would the buyer not use a vet they trusted for the pre purchase exam?


This whole thing is very very shady, but it doesnt seem to have anything to do with Mr. Romney.

The vet should lose their practice.

based on the nyt article, several questions come to mind.
one, why would anyone shell out six figures on a horse when you're told there is an issue with the ankle up front?
why would you keep said horse over a year before raising a stink?
why would anyone suggest mitt was at fault, when his wife was removed from the suit and he wasn't even named in it to begin with?

more than anything, this seems an incredibly convoluted attempt to besmirch a candidate. surely there are enough bona fide bones to pick without making this reach-and it is quite a reach.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

you should put a Mrs. in front of the Romney part because you make it seem like Mitt sold the horse.

Naw. Mitt just got Ann's name taken off the complaint at the settlement, and used the deduction on his tax return.

The owner's legal agent was fully complicit in this fraud. The Romneys knew the horse was lame. The Romney's knew the horse couldn't do upper level dressage any more. The Romney's sold the lame horse for $125,000 as an upper level dressage horse, after it was drugged to go sound.

Why would the buyer not use a vet they trusted for the pre purchase exam?

When you fly in to look at horses, you have to use local vets for the intial stuff (blood draw, rads, etc). The vet screwed her, and yes, he should be held responsible for his gross ethical breech he participated in - with the owner's agent.

The buyer did the wise and common thing, and had a second opinion back home. Good thing,too, as it caught the fraud.

This whole thing is very very shady, but it doesnt seem to have anything to do with Mr. Romney.

Except he writes the checks. I'll guess that $125,000 profit on the lame horse Ann couldn't ride any longer helped offset the farm business deduction losses (like that $77,000), to make one of those 2 out of 7 years profitable on Mitt's tax return. So he can continue to claim the horses as a business, rather than an unprofitable hobby.

[Antitrust32]

maybe Ann used her husbands money to buy the horse, but it was Ann's horse, not Mitts. It even says in the report that the insurance policy for the horse was in Ann's name.

this just doesnt have anything to do with Mitt himself.

The vet? Yes.

Like I said, no different than Obama's cousin raping somebody and blaming Obama for it.

[Antitrust32]

you should be outraged that there are people like Dr. Doug in your profession. Unfortunately, he's not the only shady character in that business.

I dont see where the outrage for Mitt comes from, except you dont want him to be the next President. (I dont want him to be either)

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

you should be outraged that there are people like Dr. Doug in your profession. Unfortunately, he's not the only shady character in that business.

I most certainly am outraged. I grew up riding in the era and location of George and Si Jayne. Shady is familiar to me in the horse business. I've bought and sold horses my own horses. Buyer beware 100% of the time.

I dont see where the outrage for Mitt comes from, except you dont want him to be the next President. (I dont want him to be either)

My outrage with the Mittens and Ann show over this has zero to do with Mitt's political views and job aspirations.

Mitt is the man who writes the checks, owns the land, barn, the farm business, takes it on his tax return, wife doesn't work, he's sole breadwinner, he rides his own trail horse at times, although he's not as horsey as Ann.

Owner's agent here was a disaster, colluding with the vet. That means the owner - Ann Romney, if you will - colluded to defraud.

Her name was taken off the suit in the settlement, but they forgot about the document statement from the expert witness tearing her story to shreds. So dang - Mitt is running for President, and the press still dug up this story - even though they settled out of court in exchange for removing Ann's name from the court records to try and hide the lawsuit - because the trainer got named to the Olympic team and Romney can't mix with mortals well.

This happened a couple years ago - but the Romney's still employ this trainer? This known cheater?

I cannot make any scenario whatsoever where any rational person - Mitt - could know they have a horse that could not be shown for 2 1/2 years because he is lame and done, knows he has ringbone, has paid multiple vet bills on this $125,000K horse that can't work (including insurance policies) - and suddenly the horse is sold as sound for $125,000 for a job it can no longer do?

And they don't think that's weird?

This has nothing to do with Romney's politics, but everything to do with the morals and business ethics of a man who wants to run this country. This isn't Mitt's first case of "money before living creatures".