The facts in the CNN article refute what was in the original article. An article that is purposely ambiguous in an attempt create guilt by association.
According to the CNN article of October 2007, he divested himself of the assets that were exposed by, among other sources, the Boston Globe, in Feb, 2007. As rporter has pointed out, the Romney people
admitted to those assets. So please, Senator, describe which "facts" you are referring to that have been "refuted".
"Guilt by association" is when a candidate like John Edwards discovers as a result of someone else's investigative work that a company he once worked for and in which he has heavily invested has subsequently engaged in unacceptable behavior, to whit: foreclosing on Hurricane Katrina victims. When said candidate then immediately and without equivocation divests of those holdings, then one can fairly say it is a case of "guilt by association".
On the other hand, we have a candidate who has been criticized for over a
decade, through
two election campaigns about practices
he instituted, policies
he established, and investments
he advised, who only relinquished his holdings when he
finally sought the Presidential nomination. That is not "guilt by association". Rather, it is "innocence by disassociation".
