Judge puts Allred in her place

I guess it begs the question, what is Romney hiding?

Let's say he lied under oath about the value of Staples to reduce the settlement his friend had to pay his ex-wife.

How is that any different than Clinton lying about getting a blow job from Monica Lewinsky so he wouldn't have to pay a settlement to Paula Jones?
 
I guess it begs the question, what is Romney hiding?

Let's say he lied under oath about the value of Staples to reduce the settlement his friend had to pay his ex-wife.

How is that any different than Clinton lying about getting a blow job from Monica Lewinsky so he wouldn't have to pay a settlement to Paula Jones?

The woman's 'settlement' was paid in shares of stock. If the dumb bitch hadn't sold them almost immediately she would've made over $9 MILLION.

Romney testified that he was so unsure of the success of Staples that he didn't even exercise all of his stock options.

Allred is fishing, WITHOUT bait.

Not going to be very successful, IMHO.
 
The question is not how much money Sullivan got but was is a fair valuation and did Romney intentionally try to screw Ms. Sullivan out of as much money as possible. I find it interesting that in that same year, 1991, Staples bought the Officeland franchise, 23 stores. It would seem that Staples wasn't doing too badly to make that kind of hostile take over.

Well she certainly thinks she's been screwed over by the world. Did you read the whole article?

By the way, I should point out that the actual divorce was 1987 I believe, and in 1991 is when she dragged her husband back into court and that's when Romney testified as to the value of the stock.

And think about it, why now? Why come after Romney now? If she felt she'd been screwed by him earlier, trust me she would have had him in court. She loved lawyers and litigation so much she spent her fortune on them.

She's been posting at huffpo, major Obama supporter, could make a double play out of this by "shaming" her husband and the Governor. She's psycho.

This really has nothing to do with Romney's testimony you see. Gloria wanted the gag order lifted so they could parade around and smear both her husband and Romney. All before the election.

Surely you know how Allred works?

Romney had no problem with his testimony being released. It's the Judge who would not lift the gag order.
 
I guess it begs the question, what is Romney hiding?

Let's say he lied under oath about the value of Staples to reduce the settlement his friend had to pay his ex-wife.

How is that any different than Clinton lying about getting a blow job from Monica Lewinsky so he wouldn't have to pay a settlement to Paula Jones?

Romney wanted his testimony to be released. Nothing to hide whatsoever.

It's her husband who was fighting to maintain the gag order and whatever else. This bitch has been at him for 25 years. Obviously a very bitter divorce.

Woman scorned. By the way she got a fortune in the settlement. I put it up earlier.

Millions. Cry me a freaking river. She blew it all. Oh boo hoo.

The Boston Herald has reported that under her divorce agreement Sullivan was given the couple's $700,000 Boston mansion including the $100,000 furnishings inside, $32,000 a year alimony and $24,000 a year in child support after she was given custody of their son Mac, now 28.

She was given nearly 500,000 shares in Staples which were valued at $2.25 each, meaning they were worth some $1.1m. Sullivan sold half her stock but two years later they soared to $19 a share when the company went public.

Had she held onto them she would have been worth $9.5m.

As it was she walked away with around $5m but the majority of this went on the legal fees which reached $3m. She sued her divorce lawyer, who has now died.


Maureen Sullivan: The furious 'firecracker' ex-wife of Staples founder gunning to bring Romney down | Mail Online
 
Last edited:
And every body think about it. Why now? All of a sudden out of the blue the ex wife has been posting at Huffpo, and she's an ardent Obama supporter and now she wants the gag order lifted after all these years and tag teams with the wicked bitch from the west who just happened to meet with Obama 2 weeks ago before she launched her "October surprise"?

And does anyone remember Obama's signature move against Jack Ryan in 2004? Where he got Ryan's divorce records unsealed and Ryan withdrew from the race and lo and behold Obama became a Senator?

Is this not deja vu?
 
I don't understand why he would lie about it under oath...he was asked to give the value of the stocks at that time, he gave the answer. And i would think that they wouldn't go by JUST his testimony, but it would be very simple to find out what it was by other means too.

If Romney was the x-husbands friend...i doubt very much that she would let the courts accept his answer without checking other sources!

And it definatly isn't Romneys fault that 2 yrs later the value jumped so high. There's no way he would know that! So I don't believe there's anything that they can honestly get him on.

Nope....Allred and her monkey have NO case at all against Romney.

I'm kind of amazed at the crazy OLD stuff you libs are coming up with! Can't you find ANYTHING in the last 10 years at least?? And no...the tax thing can't be used. He did nothing illegal. Obama has to find all the little things that Mitt may have done 20 or more yrs ago and blow it all out of proportion because he can't run on his own merits. He spreads hate to all his sheep, and they suck it right up.
 
I guess it begs the question, what is Romney hiding?

Let's say he lied under oath about the value of Staples to reduce the settlement his friend had to pay his ex-wife.

How is that any different than Clinton lying about getting a blow job from Monica Lewinsky so he wouldn't have to pay a settlement to Paula Jones?

The woman's 'settlement' was paid in shares of stock. If the dumb bitch hadn't sold them almost immediately she would've made over $9 MILLION.

Romney testified that he was so unsure of the success of Staples that he didn't even exercise all of his stock options.

Allred is fishing, WITHOUT bait.

Not going to be very successful, IMHO.

so her argument is, she believed Romney was telling the truth that the shares were worthless, and when she got ripped off, screw her?

Hmmmmm....

Really?

Again, what if Romney knew the shares were worth something? And he lied to screw her over?

Isn't that just as bad as Clinton lying about a blow job and by RIght Wing Logic a disqualifier?
 
I guess it begs the question, what is Romney hiding?

Let's say he lied under oath about the value of Staples to reduce the settlement his friend had to pay his ex-wife.

How is that any different than Clinton lying about getting a blow job from Monica Lewinsky so he wouldn't have to pay a settlement to Paula Jones?

Romney wanted his testimony to be released. Nothing to hide whatsoever.

It's her husband who was fighting to maintain the gag order and whatever else. This bitch has been at him for 25 years. Obviously a very bitter divorce.

Woman scorned. By the way she got a fortune in the settlement. I put it up earlier.

Millions. Cry me a freaking river. She blew it all. Oh boo hoo.

Well, I can kind of understand her bitterness... if these two guys lied to her to cheat her out of her share of the proceeds.

If Romney said, "the shares are worthless" and she bailed, you can kind of understand her position?
 
I guess it begs the question, what is Romney hiding?

Let's say he lied under oath about the value of Staples to reduce the settlement his friend had to pay his ex-wife.

How is that any different than Clinton lying about getting a blow job from Monica Lewinsky so he wouldn't have to pay a settlement to Paula Jones?

The woman's 'settlement' was paid in shares of stock. If the dumb bitch hadn't sold them almost immediately she would've made over $9 MILLION.

Romney testified that he was so unsure of the success of Staples that he didn't even exercise all of his stock options.

Allred is fishing, WITHOUT bait.

Not going to be very successful, IMHO.

so her argument is, she believed Romney was telling the truth that the shares were worthless, and when she got ripped off, screw her?

Hmmmmm....

Really?

Again, what if Romney knew the shares were worth something? And he lied to screw her over?

Isn't that just as bad as Clinton lying about a blow job and by RIght Wing Logic a disqualifier?

Pay attention, Joe.

At the time the shares were valued at $2.25. 2 years later the company went public and the shares rose to $19.

But greedy, dumb bitch had already sold her half a million shares.
 
So Alred asked for an expedited decision and the judge said no

Has nothing to do with the guilt or innocence of Romney
 
So Alred asked for an expedited decision and the judge said no

Has nothing to do with the guilt or innocence of Romney




She was asking not only to release the documents but also to lift the gag order on the individual parties involved... The judge denied the request to lift the gag order but allowed the documents to become public.
 
OK, my math is a little slow here. There is a way to find out exactly how much Staples was valued at in 1988. In that year Staples raised $32 million in venture capital. There would have to be a valuation on the company by the investors. All I have to do is find out how many shares there were in 1988, multiply that by $2.25, and see if that valuation would warrant a $32 million funding round. In an initial funding round investors are looking for a 10x mulitple in 5 to 7 years. This was a C round so a much lower multiple would be expected. I am not sure if I can find the actual filing papers but if I can it would save me some long division. If anyone has any links I would appreciate the help. :D

Try this...

History of Staples, Inc. – FundingUniverse

Thanks. That's where I got the 1988 investment from. That also has, I think that's where I saw it, that Staples had $40 million in revenue that year. There are formulas for valuation on revenue but without other numbers they're SWAGs. They were still not turning a profit which is not unusual. I tried the SEC website but it only goes back a few years. I found one site where there was a quote from the judge about the C round so the judge had to know about the investment so why that number was not just used without question I don't know. The Boston Globe, who has the testimony would know the particulars on that.
 
Pay attention, Joe.

At the time the shares were valued at $2.25. 2 years later the company went public and the shares rose to $19.

But greedy, dumb bitch had already sold her half a million shares.

So Romney might have been involved in insider trading?

You really think these guys don't know which way their stock is going to trend?

What if he advised that the stocks were going to stay flat when he knew they were going to go up.

Again, that's where we get into the potential perjury thingee...
 
As soon as we hear ALLRED is involved in anything we know it's a lie....that woman shouldn't be allowed a law degree, she's an embarrassment!! So glad the Judge did this. Not because she may have done anything to Romney with whatever she has, but because she's a dirty lawyer.

Whatz up with her face?? I swear she looks like she's 1/2 rat and 1/2 weasel.

You're a typically shallow Republican shill, criticizing people for their appearance.

Got anything to say about Mary Matalin and Liz Cheney? :lol:

Sure, like you as swipes didn't make fun of rush limbaugh's appearance.
 
Pay attention, Joe.

At the time the shares were valued at $2.25. 2 years later the company went public and the shares rose to $19.

But greedy, dumb bitch had already sold her half a million shares.

So Romney might have been involved in insider trading?

You really think these guys don't know which way their stock is going to trend?

What if he advised that the stocks were going to stay flat when he knew they were going to go up.

Again, that's where we get into the potential perjury thingee...

Say what?? Insider trading? Where the fuck did THAT come from?

Romney didn't even exercise all his options for Staples stock because there was inherent downside risk.

You're desperately flailing around in the hopes of finding something, ANYTHING, that you can smear the man with, and you're FAILING, Joe.
 
Pay attention, Joe.

At the time the shares were valued at $2.25. 2 years later the company went public and the shares rose to $19.

But greedy, dumb bitch had already sold her half a million shares.

So Romney might have been involved in insider trading?

You really think these guys don't know which way their stock is going to trend?

What if he advised that the stocks were going to stay flat when he knew they were going to go up.

Again, that's where we get into the potential perjury thingee...

Say what?? Insider trading? Where the fuck did THAT come from?

Romney didn't even exercise all his options for Staples stock because there was inherent downside risk.

You're desperately flailing around in the hopes of finding something, ANYTHING, that you can smear the man with, and you're FAILING, Joe.

The man smears himself just by existing.

Oh, it turns out that there was some shennanigans going on, the woman was given a "special" class of stock that wasn't worth as much as the regular stock.

Under a plan approved by Romney and other board members in 1988, Maureen Sullivan Stemberg was given 500,000 shares of Staples common stock, then awarded a special "D" class of stock in exchange for those shares. She sold about half of the shares only to learn that those sold holdings would have been valued higher in a 1989 public offering of Staples stock.

In testimony Romney said he backed the deal to give Stemberg's wife a special class of stock "as a favor to Tom. It was something that was done in my opinion, it was initiated as a favor. Tom needed to have a settlement with his wife so that was the genesis of it." But Romney insisted the board's decision was made "in the best interests of the company's shareholders."
 
So Romney might have been involved in insider trading?

You really think these guys don't know which way their stock is going to trend?

What if he advised that the stocks were going to stay flat when he knew they were going to go up.

Again, that's where we get into the potential perjury thingee...

Say what?? Insider trading? Where the fuck did THAT come from?

Romney didn't even exercise all his options for Staples stock because there was inherent downside risk.

You're desperately flailing around in the hopes of finding something, ANYTHING, that you can smear the man with, and you're FAILING, Joe.

The man smears himself just by existing.

Oh, it turns out that there was some shennanigans going on, the woman was given a "special" class of stock that wasn't worth as much as the regular stock.

Under a plan approved by Romney and other board members in 1988, Maureen Sullivan Stemberg was given 500,000 shares of Staples common stock, then awarded a special "D" class of stock in exchange for those shares. She sold about half of the shares only to learn that those sold holdings would have been valued higher in a 1989 public offering of Staples stock.

In testimony Romney said he backed the deal to give Stemberg's wife a special class of stock "as a favor to Tom. It was something that was done in my opinion, it was initiated as a favor. Tom needed to have a settlement with his wife so that was the genesis of it." But Romney insisted the board's decision was made "in the best interests of the company's shareholders."

Nowhere does your quote say the stock was valued less than common, Joe.

It says what I said, the dumb bitch sold too soon.
 
Say what?? Insider trading? Where the fuck did THAT come from?

Romney didn't even exercise all his options for Staples stock because there was inherent downside risk.

You're desperately flailing around in the hopes of finding something, ANYTHING, that you can smear the man with, and you're FAILING, Joe.

The man smears himself just by existing.

Oh, it turns out that there was some shennanigans going on, the woman was given a "special" class of stock that wasn't worth as much as the regular stock.

Under a plan approved by Romney and other board members in 1988, Maureen Sullivan Stemberg was given 500,000 shares of Staples common stock, then awarded a special "D" class of stock in exchange for those shares. She sold about half of the shares only to learn that those sold holdings would have been valued higher in a 1989 public offering of Staples stock.

In testimony Romney said he backed the deal to give Stemberg's wife a special class of stock "as a favor to Tom. It was something that was done in my opinion, it was initiated as a favor. Tom needed to have a settlement with his wife so that was the genesis of it." But Romney insisted the board's decision was made "in the best interests of the company's shareholders."

Nowhere does your quote say the stock was valued less than common, Joe.

It says what I said, the dumb bitch sold too soon.

But did she sell too soon because Romney lied on the stand about the value of her stock?

That's the point here.
 
The man smears himself just by existing.

Oh, it turns out that there was some shennanigans going on, the woman was given a "special" class of stock that wasn't worth as much as the regular stock.

Nowhere does your quote say the stock was valued less than common, Joe.

It says what I said, the dumb bitch sold too soon.

But did she sell too soon because Romney lied on the stand about the value of her stock?

That's the point here.

Please point out to me where Romney testified AT ALL about the value of the stock.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top