Author Topic: Gloria Allred = OWNED  (Read 472 times)

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41759
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Gloria Allred = OWNED
« on: October 25, 2012, 03:30:07 PM »
http://washingtonexaminer.com/romney-didnt-load-up-on-staples-stock-devastating-allreds-case/article/2511728


Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney not only thought Bain Capital-backed Staples stock was a risky investment, he never exercised all of his options to buy it, according to new testimony that is devastating to Obama backer and celebrity attorney Gloria Allred's bid to use a 1987 divorce and subsequent appeals to torpedo Romney's campaign.

A source familiar with the case provided Secrets with testimony from the appeals case in which Romney revealed that he didn't buy all the Staples stock he could because he didn't see it as a sure thing.
 
At issue is the 1987-1988 divorce of Staples founder Tom Stemberg and Maureen Sullivan Stemberg. The ex-wife believes that during the initial divorce settlement, the value of Stemberg's Staples stock was undervalued and her take was cut as a result. Sources said that the former Mrs. Stemberg believes that Romney schemed to devalue the price of Staples stock to help her husband.
 
Despite earlier reports, Romney, then a leader at Bain, a major Staples investor, did not testify in the first divorce case - as there was no actual divorce trial. He did testify during one of Stemberg's efforts to re-litigate the divorce settlement in later years.
 
In October 1991, Romney was called to testify about the valuation placed on Staples in 1987 during the original divorce settlement. At the end of three days of testimony Romney was asked about his own opportunity to buy up Staples stock before the IPO. He was asked if he had purchased the full amount he was allowed to buy - essentially "maxing out" on buying up Staples stock pre-IPO.
 
Romney said he didn't because while he still believed that there was a chance that the company could take off, there was also a chance that the company could fail.
 
A source familiar with the case told Secrets, "This disproves the Allred allegation completely. He put his money where his mouth was."
 
Earlier Thursday, a Massachusetts court ruled that Romney's testimony can be released but the judge did not lift the gag order on Maureen Sullivan Stemberg, which would have allowed her to discuss what transpired during the divorce proceedings.
 
Below is the transcript provided to Secrets. In the questioning, the "Q" is attorney Bernard Dwork, Stemberg's attorney, and the "A" is Romney.
 
Q: "Thank you. Now, you say that before making the investment in Staples round C you read the statement 'Additionally, this is planned to be Staples final equity offering prior to a public offering of mid 1989.' And you say that you did not - Strike that. You say you read that statement. Let me ask you this, sir. Did you, therefore, as a result of that subscribe to the full amount to which you were entitled to subscribe?"
 
A: "I did not."
 
Q: "And why was that, sir?"
 
A: "Because while I believed that there was a realistic probability that we would achieve that outcome, there was also a realistic probability that we would either lose our money or we would achieve something less than that. And my personal assessment and that of my partners was that the risk that we would not achieve the plan was high enough that we should not subscribe to our full amount."
 
Q: "And you did not subscribe to the full amount?"
 
A: "We did not subscribe to the full amount."



Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41012
  • one dwells in nirvana
Re: Gloria Allred = OWNED
« Reply #1 on: October 25, 2012, 03:35:03 PM »
She looks about as dumb as you did a couple of days ago when you speculated on Obamas "divorce" and then counting down the minutes to Trumps ridiculous announcement......all while supposedly working at the new job you started on Monday

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41759
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Gloria Allred = OWNED
« Reply #2 on: October 25, 2012, 03:36:37 PM »
She looks about as dumb as you did a couple of days ago when you speculated on Obamas "divorce" and then counting down the minutes to Trumps ridiculous announcement......all while supposedly working at the new job you started on Monday

I didnt start a new job.  I moved my office to a new location.  i still work for myself. 

Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41012
  • one dwells in nirvana
Re: Gloria Allred = OWNED
« Reply #3 on: October 25, 2012, 03:38:00 PM »
I didnt start a new job.  I moved my office to a new location.  i still work for myself. 

did you ever get your phone hooked up?


Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41759
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Gloria Allred = OWNED
« Reply #4 on: October 25, 2012, 03:41:49 PM »
did you ever get your phone hooked up?



Yeah - but its taking a week or so for the new carrier Verizon to transfer the lines from cablevision for the phone and fax.   So they created two dummy lines that we transferred the cabelvision numbers to in the mean time.  Its a real pain in the ass.   

magikusar

  • Time Out
  • Getbig IV
  • *
  • Posts: 2830
  • Team Ayn Rand
Re: Gloria Allred = OWNED
« Reply #5 on: October 25, 2012, 03:48:15 PM »
http://washingtonexaminer.com/romney-didnt-load-up-on-staples-stock-devastating-allreds-case/article/2511728


Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney not only thought Bain Capital-backed Staples stock was a risky investment, he never exercised all of his options to buy it, according to new testimony that is devastating to Obama backer and celebrity attorney Gloria Allred's bid to use a 1987 divorce and subsequent appeals to torpedo Romney's campaign.

A source familiar with the case provided Secrets with testimony from the appeals case in which Romney revealed that he didn't buy all the Staples stock he could because he didn't see it as a sure thing.
 
At issue is the 1987-1988 divorce of Staples founder Tom Stemberg and Maureen Sullivan Stemberg. The ex-wife believes that during the initial divorce settlement, the value of Stemberg's Staples stock was undervalued and her take was cut as a result. Sources said that the former Mrs. Stemberg believes that Romney schemed to devalue the price of Staples stock to help her husband.
 
Despite earlier reports, Romney, then a leader at Bain, a major Staples investor, did not testify in the first divorce case - as there was no actual divorce trial. He did testify during one of Stemberg's efforts to re-litigate the divorce settlement in later years.
 
In October 1991, Romney was called to testify about the valuation placed on Staples in 1987 during the original divorce settlement. At the end of three days of testimony Romney was asked about his own opportunity to buy up Staples stock before the IPO. He was asked if he had purchased the full amount he was allowed to buy - essentially "maxing out" on buying up Staples stock pre-IPO.
 
Romney said he didn't because while he still believed that there was a chance that the company could take off, there was also a chance that the company could fail.
 
A source familiar with the case told Secrets, "This disproves the Allred allegation completely. He put his money where his mouth was."
 
Earlier Thursday, a Massachusetts court ruled that Romney's testimony can be released but the judge did not lift the gag order on Maureen Sullivan Stemberg, which would have allowed her to discuss what transpired during the divorce proceedings.
 
Below is the transcript provided to Secrets. In the questioning, the "Q" is attorney Bernard Dwork, Stemberg's attorney, and the "A" is Romney.
 
Q: "Thank you. Now, you say that before making the investment in Staples round C you read the statement 'Additionally, this is planned to be Staples final equity offering prior to a public offering of mid 1989.' And you say that you did not - Strike that. You say you read that statement. Let me ask you this, sir. Did you, therefore, as a result of that subscribe to the full amount to which you were entitled to subscribe?"
 
A: "I did not."
 
Q: "And why was that, sir?"
 
A: "Because while I believed that there was a realistic probability that we would achieve that outcome, there was also a realistic probability that we would either lose our money or we would achieve something less than that. And my personal assessment and that of my partners was that the risk that we would not achieve the plan was high enough that we should not subscribe to our full amount."
 
Q: "And you did not subscribe to the full amount?"
 
A: "We did not subscribe to the full amount."




allred is such a tool
she is poster for why we should tax law firms and eliminate percentage payemnts and rol them all back to advertized fees they can compete on

all government cronies are lawyers
replace them all with logic software
they move money un earned and thus lower production cause inflation
scum

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 66458
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: Gloria Allred = OWNED
« Reply #6 on: October 25, 2012, 05:58:04 PM »
http://washingtonexaminer.com/romney-didnt-load-up-on-staples-stock-devastating-allreds-case/article/2511728


Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney not only thought Bain Capital-backed Staples stock was a risky investment, he never exercised all of his options to buy it, according to new testimony that is devastating to Obama backer and celebrity attorney Gloria Allred's bid to use a 1987 divorce and subsequent appeals to torpedo Romney's campaign.

A source familiar with the case provided Secrets with testimony from the appeals case in which Romney revealed that he didn't buy all the Staples stock he could because he didn't see it as a sure thing.
 
At issue is the 1987-1988 divorce of Staples founder Tom Stemberg and Maureen Sullivan Stemberg. The ex-wife believes that during the initial divorce settlement, the value of Stemberg's Staples stock was undervalued and her take was cut as a result. Sources said that the former Mrs. Stemberg believes that Romney schemed to devalue the price of Staples stock to help her husband.
 
Despite earlier reports, Romney, then a leader at Bain, a major Staples investor, did not testify in the first divorce case - as there was no actual divorce trial. He did testify during one of Stemberg's efforts to re-litigate the divorce settlement in later years.
 
In October 1991, Romney was called to testify about the valuation placed on Staples in 1987 during the original divorce settlement. At the end of three days of testimony Romney was asked about his own opportunity to buy up Staples stock before the IPO. He was asked if he had purchased the full amount he was allowed to buy - essentially "maxing out" on buying up Staples stock pre-IPO.
 
Romney said he didn't because while he still believed that there was a chance that the company could take off, there was also a chance that the company could fail.
 
A source familiar with the case told Secrets, "This disproves the Allred allegation completely. He put his money where his mouth was."
 
Earlier Thursday, a Massachusetts court ruled that Romney's testimony can be released but the judge did not lift the gag order on Maureen Sullivan Stemberg, which would have allowed her to discuss what transpired during the divorce proceedings.
 
Below is the transcript provided to Secrets. In the questioning, the "Q" is attorney Bernard Dwork, Stemberg's attorney, and the "A" is Romney.
 
Q: "Thank you. Now, you say that before making the investment in Staples round C you read the statement 'Additionally, this is planned to be Staples final equity offering prior to a public offering of mid 1989.' And you say that you did not - Strike that. You say you read that statement. Let me ask you this, sir. Did you, therefore, as a result of that subscribe to the full amount to which you were entitled to subscribe?"
 
A: "I did not."
 
Q: "And why was that, sir?"
 
A: "Because while I believed that there was a realistic probability that we would achieve that outcome, there was also a realistic probability that we would either lose our money or we would achieve something less than that. And my personal assessment and that of my partners was that the risk that we would not achieve the plan was high enough that we should not subscribe to our full amount."
 
Q: "And you did not subscribe to the full amount?"
 
A: "We did not subscribe to the full amount."




Good.