Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Daily Mail)   Surpriiiiiiiiiiiise   (dailymail.co.uk) divider line 125
    More: Interesting, California GOP, October Surprise, Mitt Romney, Gloria Allred, Massachusetts, Matt Drudge, family courts, wedding photography  
•       •       •

7851 clicks; posted to Politics » on 24 Oct 2012 at 10:23 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



125 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-10-24 03:07:37 AM  
I'm not sure what this will accomplish but it will be interesting.
 
2012-10-24 04:00:02 AM  
FFS, go crawl back under your rock, Gloria.
 
2012-10-24 04:36:51 AM  
The October surprise should be that the election was brought forward from November to October 25th. The entire country would rejoice that they no longer have to deal with this tedium.
 
2012-10-24 06:56:26 AM  

Lionel Mandrake: FFS, go crawl back under your rock, Gloria.


THIS!

(you'renothelping.jpg)
 
2012-10-24 08:03:57 AM  
Why would anyone care if Romney testified in someone else's divorce? I don't see how it would make a difference unless he said he was banging boys in the DR with Rush and the father while doing blow. Somehow I don't thing that scenario is in these documents.
 
2012-10-24 08:14:45 AM  
attention whore want attention? shocking.

she and Donald trump should get married and have little attention whore babies.
 
2012-10-24 08:50:29 AM  
I can't see how Romney's testimony about Tom Stemberg's qualities as a father would be damaging to Romney. Unless he slipped in there, "Tom Stemberg is a good father. I can say for certain that Mr. Stemberg doesn't posess any of those qualities I possess, namely, I'm an unctuous, soulless mirror of whatever the voters want."
 
2012-10-24 09:54:37 AM  
I guess I'm a little curious about WHY Mitt Romney would even need to testify at his partners divorce trial...
 
2012-10-24 10:03:59 AM  

NowhereMon: I guess I'm a little curious about WHY Mitt Romney would even need to testify at his partners divorce trial...


maybe he cheated on an with the other dude's wife.
 
2012-10-24 10:28:37 AM  
A 2005 Boston Globe article reported that Maureen received nearly 500,000 shares of Staples stock in the divorce, but sold half before the company went public, missing out on a huge windfall.
And while another Globe article the following year described her as living an comfortable lifestyle, she demanded that her ex-husband pay her more money.


Her bitterness is palpable.
 
2012-10-24 10:28:39 AM  
If Gloria Allred is involved you know it's full of shiat.
 
2012-10-24 10:28:43 AM  
I detest Romney and look forward to pissing on the grave of his political career, but Gloria Allred is not a sympathetic figure. She has a well-deserved reputation as an attention whore. She may very well be an excellent attorney for her individual clients but I don't see her moving very many people from the R column to the D column no matter what she has to offer.
 
2012-10-24 10:29:17 AM  
A pissed off X? I have a few of those. Show me something legit... besides Gloria doing her attention whoring deal
 
2012-10-24 10:29:28 AM  

dr_blasto: Why would anyone care if Romney testified in someone else's divorce? I don't see how it would make a difference unless he said he was banging boys in the DR with Rush and the father while doing blow. Somehow I don't thing that scenario is in these documents.


Mental image aside, this would change zeeero votes.

Republicans know Romney is a piece of shiat. They. Just. Don't. Care.
 
2012-10-24 10:29:41 AM  

ManateeGag: attention whore want attention? shocking.

she and Donald trump should get married and have little attention whore babies.


Trump's already got attention whore babies.

img.poptower.com
 
2012-10-24 10:30:00 AM  

hillbillypharmacist: I can't see how Romney's testimony about Tom Stemberg's qualities as a father would be damaging to Romney. Unless he slipped in there, "Tom Stemberg is a good father. I can say for certain that Mr. Stemberg doesn't posess any of those qualities I possess, namely, I'm an unctuous, soulless mirror of whatever the voters want."


I'm the biological father of one of his sons and Tom treats him like his own. He is a great dad.
 
2012-10-24 10:31:08 AM  

NowhereMon: I guess I'm a little curious about WHY Mitt Romney would even need to testify at his partners divorce trial...


I'm not. and I don't care if Obama once thought about divorce.

It's a stupid ploy and should not be paid attention to.
 
2012-10-24 10:31:42 AM  

Lionel Mandrake: FFS, go crawl back under your rock, Gloria.


But yet IOKIYAR? Ya lie down with dogs, ya get fleas.

This is politics, not a beauty contest.
 
2012-10-24 10:32:23 AM  

dr_blasto: Why would anyone care if Romney testified in someone else's divorce? I don't see how it would make a difference unless he said he was banging boys in the DR with Rush and the father while doing blow. Somehow I don't thing that scenario is in these documents.


That'd be a below the waterline hit, or with Romney admitting some adultery/drug use in the past 10 years. Obama would still need to actually campaign then.

A kid out of wedlock? Obama should spend the last few days of the campaign calling the Oval Office interior decorators.

A potential cannonball requiring damage control might be if Romney said something untrue, or if Romney threatened the ex-wife somehow (and that charge were substantiated and not just an allegation by ex-wife.)

Until we see those papers revealed, it's Trumpian sound and fury, signifying nothing.
 
2012-10-24 10:34:35 AM  

gshepnyc: I detest Romney and look forward to pissing on the grave of his political career, but Gloria Allred is not a sympathetic figure. She has a well-deserved reputation as an attention whore. She may very well be an excellent attorney for her individual clients but I don't see her moving very many people from the R column to the D column no matter what she has to offer.


Hell, I'd be willing to vote for Romney is he vowed to send her to the Moon for a 1000 years.
 
2012-10-24 10:35:12 AM  
Hell, I didn't know Mitt had been married before? Or did I misunderstand that crazy poorly written article?
 
2012-10-24 10:35:19 AM  
I personally believe that the election is in a dead heat.

That said, Obama's surrogates seem to be pretty scared if they have to pretend that a 25 year old court case where he stood up for his friend is somehow damaging or even relevant.

This smells of desperation.
 
2012-10-24 10:36:21 AM  
Alldred

Unfortunate typo.
 
2012-10-24 10:36:36 AM  
Is it just me or do the heads seem to be not connected to or proportional to their bodies?

i.dailymail.co.uk
 
2012-10-24 10:36:52 AM  

Leeds: I personally believe that the election is in a dead heat.

That said, Obama's surrogates seem to be pretty scared if they have to pretend that a 25 year old court case where he stood up for his friend is somehow damaging or even relevant.

This smells of desperation.


What does Trump smell like to you?
 
2012-10-24 10:36:58 AM  

Leeds: I personally believe that the election is in a dead heat.

That said, Obama's surrogates seem to be pretty scared if they have to pretend that a 25 year old court case where he stood up for his friend is somehow damaging or even relevant.

This smells of desperation.


Eh? most of us don't think this will matter. Obama's still got Romney beat on all the issues, and his record is solid. It's only a horse race because the media has been fawning over romney since October started.
 
2012-10-24 10:37:08 AM  
meh. Anything hyped up this much can't be that good.

I picture Allred and Trump in a bar exchanging stories about why nobody gave them any attention.
 
2012-10-24 10:37:13 AM  

NowhereMon: I guess I'm a little curious about WHY Mitt Romney would even need to testify at his partners divorce trial...


Testify about his partner's assets, aka the value of his share of the company. Nothing unusual about that
 
2012-10-24 10:37:15 AM  
Angry ex-wife of one of Mitt's friends has bad things to say about Mitt and her ex. This is important!

/not really
 
2012-10-24 10:37:32 AM  

LarryDan43: hillbillypharmacist: I can't see how Romney's testimony about Tom Stemberg's qualities as a father would be damaging to Romney. Unless he slipped in there, "Tom Stemberg is a good father. I can say for certain that Mr. Stemberg doesn't posess any of those qualities I possess, namely, I'm an unctuous, soulless mirror of whatever the voters want."

I'm the biological father of one of his sons and Tom treats him like his own. He is a great dad.


Seriously? I'm Larry Bird's uncle's wife's sister's nephew. I kid but, you know, how are we to know you're legit?

/ also, while I fully support the President, I find this entire thing and GA deplorable. This isn't the Governor's tax returns we're talking about, this is a VERY personal matters to which he appears tangentially involved at best.
 
2012-10-24 10:37:51 AM  
Has anyone seen Donald Trump and Gloria Alred in the same place at the same time?

I think the toupee is there to distract us, so we won't notice they're the same person. Like Superman with his glasses.
 
2012-10-24 10:37:53 AM  
(BTW, the worst case sins, if they even exist, for Romney would probably already be out in the wild and potentially subject to .

These divorce papers -- I'm not sure if anything of use is going to be there.
 
2012-10-24 10:38:32 AM  
It's a Rick-Roll. Sure of it.
 
2012-10-24 10:39:31 AM  

The Jami Turman Fan Club: Has anyone seen Donald Trump and Gloria Alred in the same place at the same time?

I think the toupee is there to distract us, so we won't notice they're the same person. Like Superman with his glasses.


if they are indeed different people, they should get married and then beat each other to death.
 
2012-10-24 10:39:45 AM  

TheGogmagog: Is it just me or do the heads seem to be not connected to or proportional to their bodies?

[i.dailymail.co.uk image 634x731]


it does look like a bad shop
 
2012-10-24 10:40:36 AM  
Well, this is a pathetic attempt at relevance by both Allred and this bitter ex.
 
2012-10-24 10:41:52 AM  

Leeds: hat said, Obama's surrogates seem to be pretty scared if they have to pretend that a 25 year old court case where he stood up for his friend is somehow damaging or even relevant.

This smells of desperation.


In what world have you seen people pretty scared to pretend this matters? Is the Obama from Clint Eastwood's chair shaking in his boots?
 
2012-10-24 10:42:18 AM  
More waste of time to balance out Trump and his attention whore tactics.
 
2012-10-24 10:43:25 AM  

skullkrusher: The Jami Turman Fan Club: Has anyone seen Donald Trump and Gloria Alred in the same place at the same time?

I think the toupee is there to distract us, so we won't notice they're the same person. Like Superman with his glasses.

if they are indeed different people, they should get married and then beat each other to death.


Does the idea of Donald Trump's bald head make you want to....do things?
 
2012-10-24 10:45:15 AM  
fta: Close friend: Tom Stemberg, who founded the company in 1986, is a staunch reporter of Romney

[quizzicaldog]

Oh, it's Daily Fail, never mind.

Queen Ann?

Do tell!

/Hey, even a dweller of the deep forests likes to hear a little gossip from time to time.
 
2012-10-24 10:45:23 AM  

kregh99: meh. Anything hyped up this much can't be that good.

I picture Allred and Trump in a bar exchanging stories about why nobody gave them any attention.


Pretty much this. The only way this will be a story is if Romney did something illegal that is substantiated in the court documents/evidence or if Romney used the Mormon church to somehow screw this woman in the divorce. I seriously doubt that either one of these things occurred.

The same goes for Trump's "Obama divorce papers." Unless POTUS kicked the crap out of Michelle, whatever happened between them was 12 years ago, and they made it through it. Most Americans will shrug their shoulders because who hasn't thought about leaving their spouse at one point in time?
 
2012-10-24 10:46:18 AM  

NateGrey: skullkrusher: The Jami Turman Fan Club: Has anyone seen Donald Trump and Gloria Alred in the same place at the same time?

I think the toupee is there to distract us, so we won't notice they're the same person. Like Superman with his glasses.

if they are indeed different people, they should get married and then beat each other to death.

Does the idea of Donald Trump's bald head make you want to....do things?


And the award for least amusing non sequitor goes to you!
 
2012-10-24 10:46:41 AM  
If everything Romney's said and done so far won't convince people not to vote for him, nothing will.
 
2012-10-24 10:47:13 AM  

devilEther: TheGogmagog: Is it just me or do the heads seem to be not connected to or proportional to their bodies?

[i.dailymail.co.uk image 634x731]

it does look like a bad shop


It was taken with a wider angle lense, this is common with news photographers as they don't need to focus the camera while on the move.
 
2012-10-24 10:47:49 AM  

Leeds: I personally believe that the election is in a dead heat.

That said, Obama's surrogates seem to be pretty scared if they have to pretend that a 25 year old court case where he stood up for his friend is somehow damaging or even relevant.

This smells of desperation.


It smells of something. I'm going with irrelevance.
 
2012-10-24 10:47:52 AM  
I am not seeing anything in that article that reflects poorly on RMoney. Allred did get Met Whitman's husband to self immolate, he made baseless claims accusing a former domestic worker of stealing mail (an actual crime) completely torpedoing the domestic worker's prospects for finding work ever again. Allred has already gamed this out to achieve her goals in this case. The question is: What is she playing at? Most likely it is money for her client and herself. My guess is that presently sealed testimony RMoney gave revealed that he is a dirt bad on cross and Allred will make the Ex pay through the nose to make sure that it remains sealed.
 
2012-10-24 10:48:41 AM  
Everybody already knows Romney is a morally bankrupt, disgusting sack of greedy dog shiat, so how is anything he said back then going to change anyone's mind?

It couldn't be any worse than things he's already said publicly, then denied, then said again, then said the opposite, then got offended when you brought it up again.
 
2012-10-24 10:48:43 AM  
Sounds like a crazy person still fighting a battle she lost 20 years ago, and I'm sure she believes whatever it is is devastating. I wouldn't put much stock in it.
 
2012-10-24 10:49:16 AM  
Oh ffs.
 
2012-10-24 10:49:22 AM  
 
2012-10-24 10:49:59 AM  
People that are going to vote for Romney already don't care.
 
2012-10-24 10:50:02 AM  

Leeds: Obama's surrogates


0/10

You almost got me there.

/Not really
 
2012-10-24 10:51:12 AM  

guilt by association: So what's the deal with this?


Those people just wanna tell you how they're feeling, because they've gotta make you understand.
 
2012-10-24 10:51:44 AM  

guilt by association: So what's the deal with this?


Exposed as a Rick-Roll by some industrius Farkers.
 
2012-10-24 10:51:45 AM  

HotWingConspiracy: Sounds like a crazy person still fighting a battle she lost 20 years ago, and I'm sure she believes whatever it is is devastating. I wouldn't put much stock in it.


I would not either, she sounds quite bitter, but Allred sees dollar signs here and Allred is quite adept at what she does.
 
2012-10-24 10:52:55 AM  

HotWingConspiracy: Sounds like a crazy person still fighting a battle she lost 20 years ago, and I'm sure she believes whatever it is is devastating. I wouldn't put much stock in it.


Either that, or she's in it for her own personal gain, hoping to wing this into some form of income. Apparently she thinks she's broke.
 
2012-10-24 10:52:57 AM  

Waxing_Chewbacca: guilt by association: So what's the deal with this?

Exposed as a Rick-Roll by some industrius Farkers.


And here I was, thinking they'd never make me cry.
 
2012-10-24 10:53:02 AM  

Nurglitch: Leeds: I personally believe that the election is in a dead heat.

That said, Obama's surrogates seem to be pretty scared if they have to pretend that a 25 year old court case where he stood up for his friend is somehow damaging or even relevant.

This smells of desperation.

It smells of something. I'm going with irrelevance.


popcultureplaypen.files.wordpress.com

"It tastes like nothing. It has no discernible properties of any kind."
 
2012-10-24 10:55:33 AM  
So when Trump announcing his BS?
 
2012-10-24 10:56:00 AM  

Satanic_Hamster: If Gloria Allred is involved you know it's full of shiat.


About as much as Donald Trump.

These things have a tendency to backfire. At this point there's precious few people whose votes are going to flip because of this, if there's even anything behind it. AFAIC she should just shut up.

It's just as likely that Romney's base would start grunting and fling poo in agreement.
 
2012-10-24 10:56:14 AM  

NowhereMon: I guess I'm a little curious about WHY Mitt Romney would even need to testify at his partners divorce trial...


I would guess it has something to do with evaluating the partnership assets in some way - determining fair market value, perhaps - for purposes of distributing them between the parties to the dissolution.
 
2012-10-24 10:58:05 AM  

Leeds: I personally believe that the election is in a dead heat.

That said, Obama's surrogates seem to be pretty scared if they have to pretend that a 25 year old court case where he stood up for his friend is somehow damaging or even relevant.

This smells of desperation.


Sorry, she is no Obama surrogate. Try again.
 
2012-10-24 10:58:59 AM  
He could have lied about the worth of the company, only thing I could think of that would hurt him.
 
2012-10-24 11:01:52 AM  
'This is a decades-old divorce case in which Mitt Romney provided testimony as to the value of a company,' he said. 'He has no objection to letting the public see that testimony.'

Well, all right then.
 
2012-10-24 11:02:01 AM  
Unless Mitt's testimony starts with something like "I met him in Thailand when we were both banging 13-year old hookers" I can't see how anything in there would matter.

Eh, maybe if they could prove that he knowingly gave her bad financial advice. Be tough to prove and that would be stretching it.
 
2012-10-24 11:02:40 AM  

TheGogmagog: Is it just me or do the heads seem to be not connected to or proportional to their bodies?

[i.dailymail.co.uk image 634x731]


Photographer is taller than both of them, they're walking and have a nice forward lean. So due to the lean their head is in front of their body and closer to the camera. And it appears to be a slightly wider angle than what is generally called for, hence the head to toe shot. Call it the news version of the myspace pic.
 
2012-10-24 11:04:35 AM  

Lionel Mandrake: FFS, go crawl back under your rock, Gloria.


Amen. I clicked the link, saw her name, and clicked right the hell back out.
 
2012-10-24 11:05:52 AM  
From TMZ (yuck):

Multiple sources connected with the divorce tell TMZ ... during Tom's uber nasty divorce case with ex-wife Maureen, Mitt Romney gave a deposition and testified during the trial that Staples was worth virtually nothing. Romney testified that the company was worth very little and Tom was a dreamer and "the dream continues."

Romney characterized the Staples stock as "overvalued," adding, "I didn't place a great deal of credibility in the forecast of the company's future."

Partly as a result of Romney's testimony, Maureen got relatively little in the divorce, but we're told just weeks after the divorce ended, Romney and Tom went to Goldman Sachs and cashed in THEIR stock for a fortune. Short story -- Romney allegedly lied to help his friend and screw the friend's wife over.


If he lied under oath, that's a HUGE deal. At least, that's what we've been told since Clinton's impeachment.

But I guess it depends on what the meaning of "is" is.
 
2012-10-24 11:06:05 AM  

Girl From The North Country: Leeds: I personally believe that the election is in a dead heat.

That said, Obama's surrogates seem to be pretty scared if they have to pretend that a 25 year old court case where he stood up for his friend is somehow damaging or even relevant.

This smells of desperation.

Sorry, she is no Obama surrogate. Try again.


The term "surrogate" is meant to imply that she isn't directly tied to the campaign.

If you would like to suggest that Gloria Alred is not a surrogate for the Obama team and is instead an Obama team insider then make your case. Otherwise please try to pay closer attention to the thread so you don't make this mistake again.
 
2012-10-24 11:07:22 AM  

ManateeGag: attention whore want attention? shocking.

she and Donald trump should get married and have little attention whore babies.


Dear God! Why would you suggest such a thing? Do you want the earth to collapse into a black hole of narcissism?
 
2012-10-24 11:11:07 AM  
Here's a theory: Stemberg is doing this because she needs money, right?

Suppose she's being paid gonzo bux to file this suit by ... Donald Trump.

Trump's about to release some embarrassing BS, like unused divorce papers from 2000, that will make him look like a sleazy human being. The campaigns will treat him as radioactive, the news networks will shun this gossip-rag debasement of the political process, and he will be ignored. Unless there is someone on the left taking the low road too, so "they're both equally bad."
 
2012-10-24 11:12:50 AM  

Leeds: Girl From The North Country: Leeds: I personally believe that the election is in a dead heat.

That said, Obama's surrogates seem to be pretty scared if they have to pretend that a 25 year old court case where he stood up for his friend is somehow damaging or even relevant.

This smells of desperation.

Sorry, she is no Obama surrogate. Try again.

The term "surrogate" is meant to imply that she isn't directly tied to the campaign.

If you would like to suggest that Gloria Alred is not a surrogate for the Obama team and is instead an Obama team insider then make your case. Otherwise please try to pay closer attention to the thread so you don't make this mistake again.


Nope, I am sticking with it. She is no more an Obama surrogate than I am. A surrogate is someone who is working at the behest of the campaign, and she is off on her own.
 
2012-10-24 11:17:10 AM  
More of the same Romney is a rich out of touch guy. Not exactly a revelation.
 
2012-10-24 11:17:16 AM  
Somehow Gloria is still relevant?
 
2012-10-24 11:17:49 AM  

rufus-t-firefly: From TMZ (yuck):

Multiple sources connected with the divorce tell TMZ ... during Tom's uber nasty divorce case with ex-wife Maureen, Mitt Romney gave a deposition and testified during the trial that Staples was worth virtually nothing. Romney testified that the company was worth very little and Tom was a dreamer and "the dream continues."

Romney characterized the Staples stock as "overvalued," adding, "I didn't place a great deal of credibility in the forecast of the company's future."

Partly as a result of Romney's testimony, Maureen got relatively little in the divorce, but we're told just weeks after the divorce ended, Romney and Tom went to Goldman Sachs and cashed in THEIR stock for a fortune. Short story -- Romney allegedly lied to help his friend and screw the friend's wife over.


If you don't think that the company is going to be doing well in the future, wouldn't it make sense to cash in the stock? Making a 'fortune' off of this is not really representative of the companies future value, it may be that they just had a boatload of stock.

In any case, too much missing information from this blurb to really say what is going on here.
 
2012-10-24 11:19:20 AM  

Leeds: Girl From The North Country: Leeds: I personally believe that the election is in a dead heat.

That said, Obama's surrogates seem to be pretty scared if they have to pretend that a 25 year old court case where he stood up for his friend is somehow damaging or even relevant.

This smells of desperation.

Sorry, she is no Obama surrogate. Try again.

The term "surrogate" is meant to imply that she isn't directly tied to the campaign.

If you would like to suggest that Gloria Alred is not a surrogate for the Obama team and is instead an Obama team insider then make your case. Otherwise please try to pay closer attention to the thread so you don't make this mistake again.


You're 20 lbs of fail in a 5 lb box.

surrogate: "a substitute, esp. a person deputizing for another in a specific role or office"
When politicos use the term surrogate it's always a person tied directly to the campaign. Romney doesn't care about this, Obama doesn't care about this, I don't think anyone cares about this. So how is Allred a surrogate in any political interpretation of the word?
 
2012-10-24 11:20:16 AM  

gshepnyc: I detest Romney and look forward to pissing on the grave of his political career, but Gloria Allred is not a sympathetic figure. She has a well-deserved reputation as an attention whore. She may very well be an excellent attorney for her individual clients but I don't see her moving very many people from the R column to the D column no matter what she has to offer.


THIS^. Gloria Allred does a lot of good work (domestic violence and abuse related) but it is overshadowed by her tactics. That's too bad.
 
2012-10-24 11:23:27 AM  
Staples?

Well that was sleazy.
 
2012-10-24 11:24:31 AM  
Nobody takes Gloria Allred serious anymore. She seems to do more harm than good.
 
2012-10-24 11:24:32 AM  

Xcott: Here's a theory: Stemberg is doing this because she needs money, right?

Suppose she's being paid gonzo bux to file this suit by ... Donald Trump.

Trump's about to release some embarrassing BS, like unused divorce papers from 2000, that will make him look like a sleazy human being. The campaigns will treat him as radioactive, the news networks will shun this gossip-rag debasement of the political process, and he will be ignored. Unless there is someone on the left taking the low road too, so "they're both equally bad."


That doesn't make sense. If Trump was afraid of it being radioactive to his brand, he could just not do it. In fact, as CEO, he'd have a fiscal responsbility to not appear sleazy. Not only that, but if he had something so volatile on Mitt, he would've used it in the primaries, not waited until now.
 
2012-10-24 11:27:02 AM  

NowhereMon: I guess I'm a little curious about WHY Mitt Romney would even need to testify at his partners divorce trial...


He testified that the stock they owned was worthless to screw the wife out of her share and then sold it for millions 2 months later. Other than that, its all good
 
2012-10-24 11:29:38 AM  
gifs.gifbin.com
 
2012-10-24 11:34:21 AM  

rufus-t-firefly: If he lied under oath, that's a HUGE deal. At least, that's what we've been told since Clinton's impeachment.


Except in this case the allegedly false testimony would actually be material and relevant to a matter in controversy.
 
2012-10-24 11:35:49 AM  
Link TMZ has more details: it: it looks like they are accusing Mitt of purjering himself about the his buddies financial status in ored to screw over his wife. Does it have legs? Who knows?
 
2012-10-24 11:36:32 AM  
THE COURT: Let's get started. Please Identify yourself for the record.

MITT ROMNEY: Good morning your honor. My name is Willard Mitt Romney, president of Bain capital. I am a serial abortionist.

LAWYER: We...didn't ask about that.

MR: You didn't ask about my dozen underage wives either.

L: I...you...never mind. What is your relationship to Tom Stemberg?

MR: We met through our mutual work at Staples Inc. Soon we were in love and we plan to be married as soon as those useless bureaucrats in Massachusetts legalize it.

L: I had no idea. That also isn't what we wanted to talk...wait, aren't you the governor of Massachusetts?

MR: That's how I know what useless motherfarkers they are. I realized government work is easy money and I'm just sucking up all I can. Just (witness makes graphic slurping noises) like a hooker in front of a pile of blow. Or hell, me in front of a pile of blow. You're a lawyer. Do you have any blow on you?

L: No. Look, just tell me a little about Tom Stemberg. As a father and a husband.

MR: Well he pegged me good on a regular basis so I'm sure he did the same with the missus. His kids turned out really well. Obedient, bright eyed kids he adopted from China with very clever hands.

L: Mr. Stemberg's children are not adopted.

MR: Well I thought he sold them to me cheap. You really had me going Tom! I thought I got your kids for a song!

L: Let's move on to the business side of things. Can you give us an approximation of the value of Mr. Stemberg's holdings in Staples Inc.?

MR: Value? Listen champ. I don't deal in value. I'm basically the most legitimate con man you can be. Value is what I say it is. All of my business experience is basically getting clients drunk enough, or finding enough dirt on them, to get them to sign bad deals. I prey on value. I don't actually understand it.

L: So you can't really tell us anything useful about Mr. Stemberg then?

MR: Nope. Hey, do you want to hear about the horrifying secret blood rituals of my church?

L: No. Thank you for your time.
 
2012-10-24 11:40:11 AM  

Jacobin: He testified that the stock they owned was worthless to screw the wife out of her share


From other sources, it said that she recieved 500,000 shares of company stock. It sounds like they did not force here to sell it at any given time. Sounds like she sold it at the wrong time herself.

If her compensation was in company stock and they were downplaying the value of the company, it would seem to help here get additional shares of company stock.. I am not sure how that screwed her. Especially since the value has climbed over time.
 
2012-10-24 11:41:07 AM  
odinsposse:

Romney was so much more civil and likeable back then. He should really consider getting back on cocaine.
 
2012-10-24 11:43:36 AM  
HeadLever:
From other sources, it said that she recieved 500,000 shares of company stock. It sounds like they did not force here to sell it at any given time. Sounds like she sold it at the wrong time herself.

If her compensation was in company stock and they were downplaying the value of the company, it would seem to help here get additional shares of company stock.. I am not sure how that screwed her. Especially since the value has climbed over time.
Romney described the shares as "overvalued", which would have the opposite effect in both cases. She would have received fewer shares for a given face value and would be eager to dump the stock quickly for fear of immediate losses.

Sounds like a real dick move on Romney's part.
 
2012-10-24 11:47:13 AM  

NowhereMon: Link TMZ has more details: it: it looks like they are accusing Mitt of purjering himself about the his buddies financial status in ored to screw over his wife. Does it have legs? Who knows?


The problem here is that the "liberal media" may paint this as an Obama campaign dirty trick. This isn't going to change the mind of anyone who doesn't already think that vulture capitalists are slimeballs. We already know that Romney likes to undervalue stocks - remember the $100 million IRA?

I wish both Trump and Allred would just STFU.
 
2012-10-24 11:53:30 AM  

NowhereMon: it looks like they are accusing Mitt of purjering himself about the his buddies financial status in ored to screw over his wife.


I don't see how they are coming to that conclusion. It appears that she was given 500K shares of stock while downplaying the value. Seems to me that would drive up the number of shares she would be awarded by the Court. When the value of the company shot upward, that would seem to be a good thing from her persepective, correct? Not sure how this really harmed her other than she sold many of them off before the price shot upward.
 
2012-10-24 11:56:08 AM  

HeadLever: NowhereMon: it looks like they are accusing Mitt of purjering himself about the his buddies financial status in ored to screw over his wife.

I don't see how they are coming to that conclusion. It appears that she was given 500K shares of stock while downplaying the value. Seems to me that would drive up the number of shares she would be awarded by the Court. When the value of the company shot upward, that would seem to be a good thing from her persepective, correct? Not sure how this really harmed her other than she sold many of them off before the price shot upward.


Perhaps she sold many them off too early because she was told lies about the shares being worthless.
 
2012-10-24 11:59:05 AM  
Q: Why don't cannibals eat divorced women?

A: They're too bitter!
 
2012-10-24 11:59:28 AM  
I don't care if they found a live boy or a dead girl in Romney's bed. Gloria Allred's involvement immediately negates any interest for me.
 
2012-10-24 11:59:46 AM  

dr_blasto: Why would anyone care if Romney testified in someone else's divorce? I don't see how it would make a difference unless he said he was banging boys in the DR with Rush and the father while doing blow. Somehow I don't thing that scenario is in these documents.


Me sentiment as well.
 
2012-10-24 12:00:21 PM  
Me = My
 
2012-10-24 12:01:14 PM  

Two Dogs Farking: Romney described the shares as "overvalued", which would have the opposite effect in both cases.


Not sure how you are coming to that conclusion. I see how it can push the value of said stock down in the short term, but that would tend to give the Court more of a incentive to issue her more stock to make up for that lack in value, correct?

I can also see how that might push her to sell quicker than she otherwise would. However, as nasty of a divorce as it was, I would think that it be prudent to get an independent second opinion before cashing in 250K shares of any stock. Of course I imagine that lawyer bills were also piling up, so this may have forced her hand some.
 
2012-10-24 12:02:28 PM  

TheGogmagog: Is it just me or do the heads seem to be not connected to or proportional to their bodies?

[i.dailymail.co.uk image 634x731]


I think it's the angle. It seems like that photo was taken from about 2-3 stair steps up.
 
2012-10-24 12:04:48 PM  
Oh, and Gloria Allred should get together with Donald Trump and make little attention whore babies on some island far, far away from civilization.
 
2012-10-24 12:05:18 PM  

starsrift: That doesn't make sense. If Trump was afraid of it being radioactive to his brand, he could just not do it. In fact, as CEO, he'd have a fiscal responsbility to not appear sleazy. Not only that, but if he had something so volatile on Mitt, he would've used it in the primaries, not waited until now.


I think you're missing the point. The point is that the Allred revelation won't be volatile for Mitt, it will be something nobody cares about except this neurotic ex-wife who thinks it's "devastating" because she's been obsessing over it for years.

But it will still count as an effort to drag Mitt into the gutter over some personal BS, which Trump and the media can point to, which will give his own gutter BS more currency.

Also:

In fact, as CEO, he'd have a fiscal responsbility to not appear sleazy.

It's not fair to say something like this if people might be drinking coffee. So he didn't "investigate" the president's birth certificate, because he had a fiscal responsibility to not appear like a nutbag attention whore?

"Nutbag attention whore" is part of Donald Trump's brand. If anything, he has a fiscal responsibility to be Donald Trump, because that's why he gets his own TV show and ends up in the news every other week.
 
2012-10-24 12:05:18 PM  

bootman:
Perhaps she sold many them off too early because she was told lies about the shares being worthless.


Not sure that I would be following this path until I got a second, independent opinion. Something tells me that she was likely not beliving most of what the other side was telling the court in the first place. Why should she belive this?
 
2012-10-24 12:09:31 PM  
"Mitt Romney Lied" is NOT a surprise. Sorry Gloria.
 
2012-10-24 12:10:15 PM  
Got my hair cut and the barber, a Greek guy in his 70's, wanted to talk politics. He said he'd cut both Romney's and Obama's hair (this is Harvard Square after all). I asked who was the better tipper and he said Romney by a little bit, but Romney was already a businessman at the time and Obama was just a poor student. I asked who he was voting for and he said Obama. Why? Romney keeps bringing up Greece as a bad example: "If the country keeps up this way, we'll end up like Greece." Romney said that at least three times during the debate, so Romney doesn't like Greeks. I therefore predict a landslide Greek, Portuguese and Spanish vote for Obama.

Afterwards I gave him a tip and said "I hope that was a better tip than Romney gave you."
 
2012-10-24 12:10:19 PM  
Uh... I cannot imagine anything in decades old character testimony in a divorce case that would be "shocking" or "Juicy." The press is salivating at it, but the Romney campaign is fine with the court releasing the records.

Which tells me that Romney's testimony is boring and irrelevant, and only outrages this crazy divorced woman who is obsessing over how much she hates him for supporting her husband during their divorce.
 
2012-10-24 12:11:27 PM  

HeadLever: From other sources, it said that she recieved 500,000 shares of company stock.



It's possible she received a cash equivalent to what she was told those 500,000 shares were worth, and it turned out Romney and her ex lied about how much the company was worth. That's what pissed-off the Winklevoss twins with their Facebook settlement -- they settled for a sum of money that they were told was a certain % of what FB was worth, and then found out later that FB lied about the value of their company.

Romney and his buddy selling shares around the same time could mean two things -- either they were bailing-out, or they were "selling high" because the prices were good.
 
2012-10-24 12:12:33 PM  

HeadLever: bootman:
Perhaps she sold many them off too early because she was told lies about the shares being worthless.

Not sure that I would be following this path until I got a second, independent opinion. Something tells me that she was likely not beliving most of what the other side was telling the court in the first place. Why should she belive this?


From the little I have read of her statements I am pretty sure that she is not a rational level headed person. In my book that makes misleading her all the more underhanded.
 
2012-10-24 12:15:56 PM  
Judging from all the anti-Allred sentiment on this thread, I take it there are still a lot of Herman Cain supporters dragging around a ton of butthurt.

That said, any "revelations" contained in the sealed testimony will most likely have the effect of preaching to the choir. Since the subject of the testimony is Stemberg, not Romney, it is unlikely that there will be anything as explosively damaging to the candidate as in the Cain or Weiner cases.

Most Republicans simply assume that the wife in any divorce case is a gold-digging, hysterical harpy willing to carry a grudge for decades, anyway. (Which in this case might actually be true--why else would she have willingly married an asshole like Stemberg in the first place?)
 
2012-10-24 12:17:23 PM  
I give this a resounding "Meh."
 
2012-10-24 12:18:33 PM  
I would also point out that Allred hasn't pulled a Trump and announced to the world that this will be an "October Surprise" moment. The press has assigned that title to it on their own. It's possible that this is just an opportunistic lawyer and client taking advantage of the situation to shake-down one of Romney's old buddies. Try this three weeks from now, and it wouldn't work.
 
2012-10-24 12:19:03 PM  

shower_in_my_socks: It's possible she received a cash equivalent to what she was told those 500,000 shares were worth, and it turned out Romney and her ex lied about how much the company was worth.


Not from the info in TFA : A 2005 Boston Globe article reported that Maureen received nearly 500,000 shares of Staples stock in the divorce, but sold half before the company went public, missing out on a huge windfall.

Seems to me like obtaining 500K shares of stock in a company that is being downvalued and later becomes what it is today would end up being a great thing. Of course, I am sure that selling your hand short does not help the bitterness at all.
 
2012-10-24 12:24:05 PM  
Are you being intentionally obtuse or just dense, HeadLever? Romney said the stock was OVERVALUED, so she sold lots of it pre-IPO and got screwed out of a lot of the gains as a direct result of Mitt's statement.

Is it really that difficult to understand?
 
2012-10-24 12:25:21 PM  

bootman:
From the little I have read of her statements I am pretty sure that she is not a rational level headed person. In my book that makes misleading her all the more underhanded.


I won't argue with that. A divorce can bring out the arsehole in the nicest of people. I can't even imagine the amount of poo that was flung during a divorce of this magnitude. Misleading and underhanded tactics were surely employed by both sides.

Probably the only thing that all sides could agree on during these proceedings is that several lawyers got rich.
 
2012-10-24 12:29:00 PM  
I keep picturing Romney on the stand testifying, but he keeps looking to his attorney, or whomever, for an indication of what he should say....a la about 15 episodes of Law and Order.

Not a stretch at all.

"As long as I have known him, he has been a terribl....(looks to lawyer who is shaking his head)....y nice guy!
 
2012-10-24 12:31:27 PM  

Two Dogs Farking: so she sold lots of it pre-IPO


What makes you think that she would belive a cohort of her ex-husband during a divorce of this magnitude? I would tend to think that I would not belive a word that come from the other side until I did my own research.

If you want to belive everything you are told in this type of setting, go ahead. Just don't attempt to garner any sympathy when it ends up biting you in the arse.
 
2012-10-24 12:39:07 PM  

HeadLever: What makes you think that she would belive a cohort of her ex-husband during a divorce of this magnitude?



Yeah, but the point of this is that the CEO of Bain testified under oath that the company was worth X. That was, I'm sure, the whole point of him being in court. If he lied under oath to screw over his friend's ex, then that's A) illegal, and B) pretty shiatty, but C) probably not changing any voters' minds. In the words of Sam Wang at the Princeton Election Consortium, "the cake is largely baked."
 
2012-10-24 12:44:38 PM  
If Romney lied under oath about the value of the company before it went public then that is perjury.
 
2012-10-24 12:47:27 PM  
Yes, this is the basket in which all of Obama's eggs should be placed. This womam seems like the kind of person the average person can relate to on a personal level... Granted, I realize Chicago is just warming up, but hell, this is weak...Very weak.
 
2012-10-24 12:57:01 PM  

shower_in_my_socks: If he lied under oath to screw over his friend's ex,


While you may have a point on the 'lied' part, we will likely find out more about this. However, I don't really see how this 'screws' over the ex. In fact, if she would have played her cards right with this stock, she could have sold this stake for about $24 million.
 
2012-10-24 01:18:37 PM  

Snarky Acronym: If Romney lied under oath about the value of the company before it went public then that is perjury.


Actus Reus - easily proven.

However, given Romney's ability to contradict himself within minutes, Atticus Finch himself, would be hard pressed to prove Mens Rea
 
2012-10-24 04:20:53 PM  

JusticeandIndependence: NowhereMon: I guess I'm a little curious about WHY Mitt Romney would even need to testify at his partners divorce trial...

I'm not. and I don't care if Obama once thought about divorce.

It's a stupid ploy and should not be paid attention to.


The voice of reason.

It's so depressing to see both sides of the aisle so easily distracted by such plainly contrived distractions when the nation looks like it's edging closer and closer to economic meltdown.
 
2012-10-24 06:18:55 PM  
Romney testifies Staples is severely overvalued at $2.00 a share, to influence the court, that meant his ex-wife received a poor divorce settlement, after the settlement Staples goes public for $19.00 a share
 
2012-10-24 06:21:50 PM  
His bitter ex-wife Maureen Stemberg claims this testimony affected how much she got from the settlement.

FTFTFA
(Jesus Christ, I know it's only the Daily Fail, but you do have editors, right?) 
 
2012-10-24 06:59:15 PM  

aug3: that meant his ex-wife received a poor divorce settlement,


Why? She got 500K shares of stock as part of the settlement. If she whould have kept it, she could have cashed in on that $19.00 per share. Or even the nearly $50 per share that it was selling for back in the mid 2000s. As far as I can tell, they did not force her to sell it when she did.
 
2012-10-24 09:30:24 PM  

HeadLever: aug3: that meant his ex-wife received a poor divorce settlement,

Why? She got 500K shares of stock as part of the settlement. If she whould have kept it, she could have cashed in on that $19.00 per share. Or even the nearly $50 per share that it was selling for back in the mid 2000s. As far as I can tell, they did not force her to sell it when she did.


When a stock is referred to as "overvalued," smart investors know it's time to dump that crap stock pronto. You don't hold onto overvalued stock just because "it might be valuable someday." There are various calculations you can do to see if a stock is genuinely over or under valued, so it'll be interesting to see if they bring some finance experts to crunch the Staples numbers from around that time.
 
2012-10-25 01:09:15 AM  

WordyGrrl: When a stock is referred to as "overvalued," smart investors know it's time to dump that crap stock pronto.


When a stock is referred to 'overvalued' by you husband during the couse of a nasty divorce, you typically get a second opinion. Especially a divorce of this magnitude.
 
2012-10-26 07:09:09 AM  

HeadLever: WordyGrrl: When a stock is referred to as "overvalued," smart investors know it's time to dump that crap stock pronto.

When a stock is referred to 'overvalued' by you husband during the couse of a nasty divorce, you typically get a second opinion. Especially a divorce of this magnitude.


If Staples was still privately held and in that pre-IPO phase, a second opinion might have been hard to get. Not impossible, but you the rules are different than when it is 100% privately held.

Unless someone comes up with an email or letter in which Romney goes "Ha! Ha! I reep off angry biatch of my friend's ex-wife. Staples ees really $19 a share, but I say eet eez $2 a share. Ha! Ha!" or the like this does nothing but make liberals hate Romney more and conservatives give a big "so what?"

If in the next 1.5 weeks we do get hard evidence that Romney knowingly misstated the value of the company to screw over his friend's ex, this is a shot at or right above the waterline for Romney. And that, being the slight underdog, is something he really doesn't need.
 
Displayed 125 of 125 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report