General Discussion

WinkyDink

(51,311 posts)

127. During the trial, though, Romney and Bain actually felt the value was GREAT, for they were taking

Reply to Laura PourMeADrink (Reply #114)

Thu Oct 25, 2012, 11:54 AM

Oct 2012

Staples public.

This deal MADE ROMNEY.

"A year after the settlement, Staples went public, and its stock value soared to $19 a share. Bain Capital turned a $2.5 million investment into a $13 million profit. Romney’s decision to back the firm helped cement his reputation as a savvy investor.

The Romney campaign referred questions about the case to Jones.

Sullivan Stemberg declined to comment for this story. She went to court Wednesday accompanied by celebrity lawyer Gloria Allred, who said the public deserves to know what a presidential candidate said in a court case.

In the divorce settlement, Sullivan Stemberg received 500,000 shares in the company, but missed out on the major profits enjoyed by her husband, Bain and other investors. She cashed in her shares before the company went public."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/election-2012/wp/2012/10/25/staples-value-may-be-issue-in-romneys-testimony/

But her husband KNEW it was going public, because ROMNEY MADE THE DEAL. IMO!

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

155 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Wrongney Testimony Unsealed & Gloria Says: Boston Globe Double Crossed Me [View all] Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2012 OP

What exactly is this supposed to show....? nt barnabas63 Oct 2012 #1

What do you mean by "this"? The video? The documents? WinkyDink Oct 2012 #4

the documents...yes barnabas63 Oct 2012 #43

Romney, to help his buddy Stemberg pay less to his ex-wife, PERJURED himself about the value of WinkyDink Oct 2012 #72

Judge will decide today to unseal the documents or not n/t riverwalker Oct 2012 #11

This isn't gonna come out less than 2 weeks before the election. It just won't. mucifer Oct 2012 #2

So what are Allred and Boston Globe up to if its a forgone conclusion that nothing will be released? DCBob Oct 2012 #3

I smell a fitzmas. mucifer Oct 2012 #5

I smell Republican Family Divorce Values Berlum Oct 2012 #9

So Allred and the Globe have been duped? DCBob Oct 2012 #21

Romney and his distain for women, covering up for his buddies, more of his war on women. crunch60 Oct 2012 #150

Oh, brother. It is NOT "a forgone conclusion...." Allred is NOT bringing the case; the B.Globe is. WinkyDink Oct 2012 #6

Globe says there are "juicy" details about Romney. What makes me pause though Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2012 #10

They can try that line... jmowreader Oct 2012 #13

Romney is not fighting it but Stemberg is.. DCBob Oct 2012 #24

Ah....so that's the catch. Romney "Nothing to Hide", with Stemberg his firewall Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2012 #26

That's because he's an arrogant SOB Thrill Oct 2012 #34

Maybe. Maybe Not. Jeff In Milwaukee Oct 2012 #41

Oh, yes it is. The Boston Globe is not under any gag order. nt LaydeeBug Oct 2012 #85

Hope we see more examples of how Romney lies. Lint Head Oct 2012 #7

If the Boston Globe has gone to court and a party to the proceedings is in favor ... Zen Democrat Oct 2012 #8

Geez...Not very prompt in Boston are they. :>) Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2012 #12

if you Tweet or post on Facebook riverwalker Oct 2012 #14

#perjury......thanks rw Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2012 #18

Done! ProudProgressiveNow Oct 2012 #93

rMoney has a lawyer in the courtroom krawhitham Oct 2012 #15

the audio is hard to hear n/t riverwalker Oct 2012 #16

WTF - Mid December? Did I hear that right? Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2012 #17

Wow, is it normal to cover this type of proceeding live like this? nc4bo Oct 2012 #19

TMZ does so on most Gloria Allred cases krawhitham Oct 2012 #20

Thanks krawhitham. nm nc4bo Oct 2012 #22

How many involve A CANDIDATE FOR PRESIDENT? WinkyDink Oct 2012 #30

True dat. I am grateful there are DUers watching and reporting, the language of the legal system nc4bo Oct 2012 #45

Why is their side wanting this expedited? They have got something planned Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2012 #23

Romney attorney has no objection to release of testimony. n/t godai Oct 2012 #25

Sounds like the rMoney testimony will be released krawhitham Oct 2012 #27

Romney was not a party to the actual divorce. A gag order about HIM is RIDICULOUS AND POLITICAL. WinkyDink Oct 2012 #32

Questioning whether further confidentiality applies to the ex-wife. Alred objects Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2012 #28

interesting stuff riverwalker Oct 2012 #29

Globe didn't ask for gag order release? Only for transcript released. Gloria objects - but Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2012 #37

Gloria read the pertinent words, and the Globe lawyer AND the judge are denying the words exist! WinkyDink Oct 2012 #42

quit grandstanding Gloria krawhitham Oct 2012 #31

No, she is not. The judge is saying clearly that the Allred motion is not before her. Judge is WRONG WinkyDink Oct 2012 #36

The judge seems unsympathetic to Ms. Stemberg. WinkyDink Oct 2012 #33

I agree Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2012 #38

Allred wants OK for ex-wife to talk about ROMNEY. godai Oct 2012 #35

wtf - Boston Globe - not seeking lift of confidentiality. Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2012 #39

The judge is trying to get the Globe lawyer to agree with HER, as opposed to the GLOBE'S OWN REQUEST WinkyDink Oct 2012 #40

Judge is saying, "No time. Come back with a separate request. You're not relevant today." WinkyDink Oct 2012 #44

Wonder what would happen if the ex-wife just sad screw it, I'm talking - throw me in jail Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2012 #46

Allred wants ex-wife to be able to speak about Romney and his interactions with the ex-wife. godai Oct 2012 #47

Exactly. Since when do divorce proceeding involve gag-orders about a THIRD party? POLITICAL GAG. WinkyDink Oct 2012 #48

exactly....they don't want the ex in campaign commercials. But, why isn't the Globe backing this? Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2012 #54

The $64,000 Question. WinkyDink Oct 2012 #56

we lost on this one..she won't allow the confidentiality lifted on wife Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2012 #49

Allred will probably quickly file a separate motion regarding lifting the gag order. godai Oct 2012 #52

yes...but won't they object? Only need one objection? Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2012 #57

The judge would decide if gag order should be lifted. Seems could take a long time to decide. n/t godai Oct 2012 #61

Ha! Gloria just snarked on the judge's harping on "No time! No time!" WinkyDink Oct 2012 #50

the transcripts WILL be released to The Globe riverwalker Oct 2012 #51

She needs to write a roman a' clef. WinkyDink Oct 2012 #53

The judge is railroading Allred. EnviroBat Oct 2012 #55

Agreed. WinkyDink Oct 2012 #58

What is this contract that Allred and judge are referring to? nc4bo Oct 2012 #59

Yes. WinkyDink Oct 2012 #62

Gag order that ex-wife agreed to. n/t godai Oct 2012 #67

BECAUSE SHE WAS BAMBOOZLED because of Romney's LIES. WinkyDink Oct 2012 #73

Seems that something happened between Romney/ex-wife. I don't know what. n/t godai Oct 2012 #78

there were two things at issue riverwalker Oct 2012 #97

SEC rule 18 what was that? riverwalker Oct 2012 #64

Yup like I said earlier, this won't come out 2 weeks before the election. mucifer Oct 2012 #60

it will be out today, I bet. Wife can't speak to it, is all. Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2012 #66

She can't speak but I am sure there will be 3rd parties who will be more than happy to pick nc4bo Oct 2012 #74

"Sucks to be him right now"---or at any time! :-) WinkyDink Oct 2012 #77

maybe it's worse for him - to have everyone hypothesizing on it - instead of the ex? Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2012 #80

Excellent! DCBob Oct 2012 #96

I am starting to really dislike this judge. Sure she's not Ann coulter's sister? Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2012 #63

Shallow Comment Warning: I hate the judge's teen-age hairstyle. WinkyDink Oct 2012 #65

LOL. Great minds think alike. (and so do we) :>) Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2012 #68

Parties can disseminate to other press, besides Globe Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2012 #69

Looks like it's released. nt ProudProgressiveNow Oct 2012 #70

Gloria is preparing some choice words about THIS hearing, which is why she specifically asked about WinkyDink Oct 2012 #71

I get the impression Gloria asking too much - by that I mean, some things. you just do and Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2012 #75

"Act first; apologize later." ;-) WinkyDink Oct 2012 #79

Exactly. I learned this a long time ago Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2012 #91

Probably major penalty for ex-wife if she violates gag order. godai Oct 2012 #87

Mrs. Stenberg may have a gag order riverwalker Oct 2012 #76

True, but only she knows what Romney might have said to her, or what her ex told her about Romney. WinkyDink Oct 2012 #81

what if I had a gag order riverwalker Oct 2012 #90

So the damaging stuff isn't in his testimony, it's here-say from someone with an axe to grind? hughee99 Oct 2012 #140

"with an axe to grind"? How about "with something about Romney that Americans should know"? WinkyDink Oct 2012 #148

If the bad stuff about Romney is actually IN the testimony, than that's one thing, hughee99 Oct 2012 #149

Yep...this is coming out today, and Mitt will look very bad by continuing to try to keep.... OldDem2012 Oct 2012 #82

Romney's lawyer didn't need to do this, when the judge did it for him. WinkyDink Oct 2012 #84

The original gag order came from Mitt's lawyer acting on Mitt's instructions... OldDem2012 Oct 2012 #92

That's why I don't get it. Romney chose to not release his taxes. Why not dodge this too? Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2012 #98

Because he knows his taxes would hurt him much more than justiceischeap Oct 2012 #100

This maneuver allows Mitt to say he has no objection to the gag order being lifted.... OldDem2012 Oct 2012 #109

but...don't see a word yet on MSNBC. This better not be one of those subjects that only our MSNBC Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2012 #116

Thats what I was thinking too kydo Oct 2012 #95

why isnt MSNBC covering this? no mention. Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2012 #99

Get to the FAX machine Gloria ! Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2012 #83

+1 ProudProgressiveNow Oct 2012 #86

Timetable? End of today, first thing tomorrow a.m.? nc4bo Oct 2012 #89

It appears to me GDoyle Oct 2012 #88

But....wouldn't the Globe profit greatly by having her side to supplement the transcript? They are Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2012 #94

Would the Globe benefit from having the theatrics stretch out for the longest time possible? nc4bo Oct 2012 #101

The speculation in this case will be damaging to Mitt no matter how he tries to spin it. nt. OldDem2012 Oct 2012 #105

Bottom line, I hope, is that the Ex made $X on the Staples Stock, and Bain made $X times 1,000 - Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2012 #115

Me too. Wish i understood more about gag orders. If it's specifically about speaking on the Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2012 #107

Romney lawyer talking now !!! Happy ...thrilled - this is out. Romney had NOTHING to do Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2012 #108

We all knew he would attempt to put a positive spin on this.... OldDem2012 Oct 2012 #112

the key is the amount of time between when he valued the stock and the time the case was closed Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2012 #114

During the trial, though, Romney and Bain actually felt the value was GREAT, for they were taking WinkyDink Oct 2012 #127

I want to see more of the timing of events on this. Guess it's out there to find. Wonder Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2012 #137

lot's of disparate dates Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2012 #141

I don't think so GDoyle Oct 2012 #142

No, it didn't work, but the fact that the Globe and other media are now free to.... OldDem2012 Oct 2012 #102

Yes indeed.. the speculation will be rampant. DCBob Oct 2012 #103

What did Mitt know and when did he know it. LOL!! nt. OldDem2012 Oct 2012 #106

his lawyer saying his testimony just a primer on valuating stock. Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2012 #111

Yeah, chuckle, chuckle. Except Mitt's actions belied his sworn words. WinkyDink Oct 2012 #123

Without seeing the text of the gag orders and the motion onenote Oct 2012 #113

Romney must've done something else besides lie. Like threaten ("Accept this, or you'll get WinkyDink Oct 2012 #104

do you still have feed on? Romney lawyer talked - see my upthread - Think Gloria coming on next Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2012 #110

Gloria out now. Someone is yelling "Go Romney" !! Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2012 #117

Gloria - transcribing for you Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2012 #118

She's scooping the BG by FAXing to other newspapers. Hee! WinkyDink Oct 2012 #121

Probably the same jerk who goes to PGA tournies to yell, "IN THE HOLE!" :-) WinkyDink Oct 2012 #122

Gloria ia making it CLEAR that the BG BACKED DOWN from its prior TWO-PRONGED request which INCLUDED WinkyDink Oct 2012 #119

So, even if she does refile a motion to lift gag, representing her client, does Mr Stemberg still Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2012 #125

Gloria: My indication was that Boston Globe was NOT going to backtrack on Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2012 #120

Hell hath no fury like a barracuda attorney scorned. Sheepshank Oct 2012 #124

You just made me think of something. Maybe the Globe knew Stemberg would object on the gag Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2012 #126

No need for redundancy. :-) WinkyDink Oct 2012 #131

What's her problem, it's been turned over to Boston Globe Hutzpa Oct 2012 #128

Could be better this way? Let the transcripts speak for themselves. Barack_America Oct 2012 #129

I agree--the testimony is what's potentially important, not for this TwilightGardener Oct 2012 #130

Bwahaha! AS IF you have any idea of what she might be able to reveal about Romney! She' s not WinkyDink Oct 2012 #132

Er..OK. I don't, and I assume you don't either. But I still think it's better TwilightGardener Oct 2012 #134

You saw the BG lawyer back down; there will be no "investigative journalism." WinkyDink Oct 2012 #135

I thought the Stemberg guy was also under the gag order? Anyway, TwilightGardener Oct 2012 #136

"but I'm not even sure this should be used as an election issue anyway" Hutzpa Oct 2012 #133

That's certainly what Team Romney would like us to believe. WinkyDink Oct 2012 #138

I think if the ex-wife went on a media blitz saying I got x per share and romney got x times a Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2012 #143

In a way she cannot say a word about what went on Hutzpa Oct 2012 #144

The "juicy bits" are what Ms. Stemberg can SAY, not what is in the to-be-seen transcripts. WinkyDink Oct 2012 #146

Globe can print it Hutzpa Oct 2012 #152

She is properly and ethically repping HER CLIENT obamanut2012 Oct 2012 #139

You are confusing two distinct issues. WinkyDink Oct 2012 #147

I got half way through this post and my eyelids started drooping tavernier Oct 2012 #145

LOL.... ProudProgressiveNow Oct 2012 #151

yep...just for us hyper-analytical types. But frustrating as hell. It's not the lying here though Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2012 #153

My understanding is that the gag order pertains only to the divorce proceedings SickOfTheOnePct Oct 2012 #154

Interesting. So disappointed that there is nothing at all about this on the news. Perhaps, Laura PourMeADrink Oct 2012 #155