Wrongney Testimony Unsealed & Gloria Says: Boston Globe Double Crossed Me

[Laura PourMeADrink]

Last edited Thu Oct 25, 2012, 11:54 AM - Edit history (3)

Starting now...

http://www.tmz.com/2012/10/25/mitt-romney-divorce-testimony/

[barnabas63]

1. What exactly is this supposed to show....? nt

[WinkyDink]

4. What do you mean by "this"? The video? The documents?

[barnabas63]

43. the documents...yes

Sorry, just not up on this story.

[WinkyDink]

72. Romney, to help his buddy Stemberg pay less to his ex-wife, PERJURED himself about the value of

Staples stock, EVEN AS he, for Bain Capital, was going to, the very next week, take Staples PUBLIC.

One does not do that with a value-less fledgling company.

[riverwalker]

11. Judge will decide today to unseal the documents or not n/t

[mucifer]

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

[DCBob]

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

Why would she and the Globe waste their time?

[mucifer]

5. I smell a fitzmas.

[Berlum]

9. I smell Republican Family Divorce Values

[DCBob]

21. So Allred and the Globe have been duped?

I find that hard to believe.

[crunch60]

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

Mitt Romney Perjury: Republican Candidate Allegedly Lied Under Oath To Help Staples Founder Tom Stemberg

Mitt Romney allegedly committed perjury when he lied under oath in order to help his friend, Staples founder Tom Stemberg, in his divorce hearing, according to TMZ. Romney's remarks will soon be unsealed, as Tom Stemberg's ex-wife has agreed to unseal the documents in the divorce case.

TMZ reported that a confidential source told them that during the trial, Mitt Romney testified that the Staples stock was worth "virtually nothing," and called Tom a "dreamer." He characterized Staple's stock as "overvalued," and said, "I didn't place a great deal of credibility in the forecast of the company's future."

Like Us on Facebook

As a result of his testimony, TMZ reports that Maureen, Stemberg's ex-wife, received very little in the divorce. However, a short time after the hearing, Romney and Stemberg allegedly sold their Staples stock for a bundle of cash - meaning the stock was not worthless, and Romney would have lied under oath.

If true, this could be a huge blow for Romney's presidential campaign, and it comes on the heels of Trump's Obama announcement that promised to do the same for Obama's candidacy.

http://www.idigitaltimes.com/articles/12148/20121024/mitt-romney-perjury-republican-candidate-allegedly-lied.htm

[WinkyDink]

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

There are DU threads and/or Google results with info.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

10. Globe says there are "juicy" details about Romney. What makes me pause though

is that Romney is not fighting release (so far anyway). It means they have a prepared response ready. And, I bet it's "A big supporter of Obama, in a last ditch effort to smear me. Divorce is a sad, sad thing. And the reality is that they get very very messy." blah blah blah

If he took a chance with his refusal to release taxes (refusal better than release)....why, at this late date, wouldn't he do the same with this?

On the other hand, if it can persuade 10,000 women, it's a good thing

[jmowreader]

13. They can try that line...

Problem with that is, the Last Republican Standing in Mass is the publisher of the Boston Globe.

[DCBob]

24. Romney is not fighting it but Stemberg is..

It only takes one upheld objection to keep it sealed.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

26. Ah....so that's the catch. Romney "Nothing to Hide", with Stemberg his firewall

[Thrill]

34. That's because he's an arrogant SOB

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

41. Maybe. Maybe Not.

If the judge lifts the gag order, than the -ex is free to discuss the details of the case right now, even if the transcripts remain sealed (temporarily). A nice 60 Minutes interview could do further damage.

[LaydeeBug]

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

[Lint Head]

7. Hope we see more examples of how Romney lies.

[Zen Democrat]

8. If the Boston Globe has gone to court and a party to the proceedings is in favor ...

wouldn't it be too political to be kept under wraps? Whatever it is, it's something that actually happened, and not a rumor.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

12. Geez...Not very prompt in Boston are they. :>)

[riverwalker]

14. if you Tweet or post on Facebook

about the case be sure to use the word Perjury with Romney. Romney= Perjury. Make the name Romney synonymous with Lying.
Make the assholes sweat about this. I'm going to squeeze out every drop.
Hey, even if it only gains the disgruntled rich ex-wives votes, I'll take it.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

18. #perjury......thanks rw

[ProudProgressiveNow]

93. Done!

TMZ reporting Romney committed perjury during Staples founder’s divorce case http://bluemassgroup.com/2012/10/tmz-reporting-romney-committed-perjury-during-staples-founders-divorce-case/ … via @bluemassgroup #perjury

[krawhitham]

15. rMoney has a lawyer in the courtroom

[riverwalker]

16. the audio is hard to hear n/t

[Laura PourMeADrink]

17. WTF - Mid December? Did I hear that right?

[nc4bo]

19. Wow, is it normal to cover this type of proceeding live like this?

[krawhitham]

20. TMZ does so on most Gloria Allred cases

[nc4bo]

22. Thanks krawhitham. nm

[WinkyDink]

30. How many involve A CANDIDATE FOR PRESIDENT?

[nc4bo]

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

is a bit too complicated for me to fully comprehend as is alot of the back and forth between all parties and that judge.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

23. Why is their side wanting this expedited? They have got something planned

Bet Staples is worried about blowback to their brand/sales?

[godai]

25. Romney attorney has no objection to release of testimony. n/t

[krawhitham]

27. Sounds like the rMoney testimony will be released

All 4 lawyers have no objections to rMoney testimony being released

It is down to Gloria's issues with the confidentiality order

[WinkyDink]

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

[Laura PourMeADrink]

28. Questioning whether further confidentiality applies to the ex-wife. Alred objects

Most stringent gag order she has ever seen. Wants her client to be able to speak - 1st amendment, put it all in context. Stemberg spoke at Convention about Romney....why can't she?

[riverwalker]

29. interesting stuff

the Globe lawyer asking to life gag order

[Laura PourMeADrink]

37. Globe didn't ask for gag order release? Only for transcript released. Gloria objects - but

judge saying there is no request to modify. Says ex-wife can request lifting (separate order).

Gloria says Globe DOES ask to lift order. Judge says Globe is not asking to lift gag - but that they were not aware - and are not seeking any further order

[WinkyDink]

42. Gloria read the pertinent words, and the Globe lawyer AND the judge are denying the words exist!

[krawhitham]

31. quit grandstanding Gloria

You about to get what you want, don't piss off the Judge

[WinkyDink]

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

Gloria just READ her the Globe's request, and the judge is denying the Globe's own words!

[WinkyDink]

33. The judge seems unsympathetic to Ms. Stemberg.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

38. I agree

[godai]

35. Allred wants OK for ex-wife to talk about ROMNEY.

Judge is limiting subject of hearing to Romney transcript.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

39. wtf - Boston Globe - not seeking lift of confidentiality.

[WinkyDink]

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

[WinkyDink]

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

[Laura PourMeADrink]

46. Wonder what would happen if the ex-wife just sad screw it, I'm talking - throw me in jail

[godai]

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

That's Allred's 'bombshell' but lifting the gag order on the ex-wife is not the subject of the current hearing. Something happened between the ex-wife and Romney.

[WinkyDink]

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

[Laura PourMeADrink]

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

why didn't Alred insure this was included?

[WinkyDink]

56. The $64,000 Question.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

49. we lost on this one..she won't allow the confidentiality lifted on wife

[godai]

52. Allred will probably quickly file a separate motion regarding lifting the gag order.

Romney attorney will probably delay a decision on that, if there is something they don't want the ex-wife talking about.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

57. yes...but won't they object? Only need one objection?

[godai]

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

[WinkyDink]

50. Ha! Gloria just snarked on the judge's harping on "No time! No time!"

[riverwalker]

51. the transcripts WILL be released to The Globe

but Mrs. Stenberg still bound by gag order to talk about it. Lifting that will be a separate hearing.

[WinkyDink]

53. She needs to write a roman a' clef.

[EnviroBat]

55. The judge is railroading Allred.

This is complete bullshit.

[WinkyDink]

58. Agreed.

[nc4bo]

59. What is this contract that Allred and judge are referring to?

Sorry, I'm ignorant.......is that the gag order?

Thanks for deciphering.

[WinkyDink]

62. Yes.

[godai]

67. Gag order that ex-wife agreed to. n/t

[WinkyDink]

73. BECAUSE SHE WAS BAMBOOZLED because of Romney's LIES.

[godai]

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

[riverwalker]

97. there were two things at issue

the transcripts of the divorce with Romney's testimony, and the confidentiality agreement ("the contract" or Gag order) Mrs. Sternberg signed 18 years ago about the divorce.

[riverwalker]

64. SEC rule 18 what was that?

[mucifer]

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

People with power won't let it.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

66. it will be out today, I bet. Wife can't speak to it, is all.

[nc4bo]

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

the bones clean and information will get out. Ex-wife can always go rogue.

Still, if I were Romney, I wouldn't be too amused that any of this is occurring 12 days before a GE. Sucks to be him right now, is my take on it.

[WinkyDink]

77. "Sucks to be him right now"---or at any time! :-)

[Laura PourMeADrink]

80. maybe it's worse for him - to have everyone hypothesizing on it - instead of the ex?

[DCBob]

96. Excellent!

This cant be good for the Romney campaign. The media will be all over this for days.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

63. I am starting to really dislike this judge. Sure she's not Ann coulter's sister?

[WinkyDink]

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

[Laura PourMeADrink]

68. LOL. Great minds think alike. (and so do we) :>)

[Laura PourMeADrink]

69. Parties can disseminate to other press, besides Globe

[ProudProgressiveNow]

70. Looks like it's released. nt

[WinkyDink]

71. Gloria is preparing some choice words about THIS hearing, which is why she specifically asked about

her being able to comment to the media.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

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

deal with consequences later. Like no one would have thought about this, objecting to it, unless Gloria brought it up

[WinkyDink]

79. "Act first; apologize later." ;-)

[Laura PourMeADrink]

91. Exactly. I learned this a long time ago

doing work with banking regulation laws written by lawyers in congress. If they didn't address a subject, it meant that they didn't think of it. And when you sought further guidance, it didn't always come down the way you wanted it.

[godai]

87. Probably major penalty for ex-wife if she violates gag order.

She received some benefit as the price for agreeing to the gag order. She could lose that. Maybe jail time.

[riverwalker]

76. Mrs. Stenberg may have a gag order

but we sure as hell don't. Neither does the Boston Globe.

[WinkyDink]

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

Well, besides the men, and they're not talking. Heh.

[riverwalker]

90. what if I had a gag order

dated lets say 2001, but in 1999 I told a friend about something, before there was a gag order, and that person told the press I told them this in 1999, is that a violation? Isn't there ways around a gag order to get out information (legally, of course ).

[hughee99]

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

If that's what this story ends up amounting to, it's a complete non-factor in the election.

[WinkyDink]

148. "with an axe to grind"? How about "with something about Romney that Americans should know"?

[hughee99]

149. If the bad stuff about Romney is actually IN the testimony, than that's one thing,

but if unsealing the testimony's only purpose was to provide a platform for her to say what she heard her husband say about Rmoney, or what she heard Rmoney say himself in a private conversation, then it's EASY for most people to dismiss as someone "with an axe to grind", and without any proof, seeking revenge.

So far, I haven't seen anything damaging to Rmoney other than speculation about what might happen next.

[OldDem2012]

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

....GA's client from talking.

[WinkyDink]

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

[OldDem2012]

92. The original gag order came from Mitt's lawyer acting on Mitt's instructions...

...most people understand that relationship and who is actually giving the orders.

The fact that the judge allowed the Globe and other media to publish the transcripts will be damaging to Mitt...the speculation about why he's involved in this case is a growing problem.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

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

completely

[justiceischeap]

100. Because he knows his taxes would hurt him much more than

perjury... 'cause he's been lying his whole 6 yr campaign and gotten this far.

[OldDem2012]

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

...while all the time he's hiding behind Stemberg who wants to keep the gag order in place. Mitt is trying very hard to look like he has nothing to hide so that he can spin this in a positive way.

When the Globe and other media outlets get finished with all of their speculation over the next 24-48 hours, Mitt will still sustain damage to some degree. But, he really doesn't need any more damage because the good ship Mitt is already taking on more water than they can pump out.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

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

nightly line-up talks about.

[kydo]

95. Thats what I was thinking too

I mean without context I guess we could be left to come to our own conclusions...

So like I'm reading and I see ...

Officer of the Court: State your name for the record.

rMoney: Well yesterday my name was willard but that sounds like a rat. so I changed my name to mitt. But that sounds to feline. Maybe since I am under oath I should give you me real name if my lawyers don't have any legal issues with it. I'll get back to you in 2 months. And I did not have sex with that 14 year old girl my pal Warren Jeffs sent Ann did.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

99. why isnt MSNBC covering this? no mention.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

83. Get to the FAX machine Gloria !

[ProudProgressiveNow]

86. +1

[nc4bo]

89. Timetable? End of today, first thing tomorrow a.m.?

Would really have liked to hear what the ex-wife had to say though.

[GDoyle]

88. It appears to me

as a lawyer that what happened was this....The Globe filed a Motion to unseal Romney's testimony and served all parties......the wife jumped on that and said GREAT! Then hired Gloria Allred and said "I want to be able to talk too"....something the Globe didn't give a shit about.

The Judge basically said The Globe gets what they want (nobody objected) but the wife wanting to be ungagged isn't the subject of the motion. She was just trying to piggyback on it.

Allred and The Globe WERE NOT working together. Never were, as everyone assumed. The wife just used this as an opportunity to try to be ungagged. It didn't work.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

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

the ones who said there was "juicy Romney" contents.

[nc4bo]

101. Would the Globe benefit from having the theatrics stretch out for the longest time possible?

I'm sure Ms. Allred will be filing the necessary paperwork asap. The Globe got what it wanted now and there will be money made now but later on, after the gag is lifted they can have a continuation of the entire story.

I'm really curious as to what in the he** when on behind the scenes. What actually happened between Romney and ex-wife.

[OldDem2012]

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

[Laura PourMeADrink]

115. Bottom line, I hope, is that the Ex made $X on the Staples Stock, and Bain made $X times 1,000 -

What is clear is that there is NO WAY in hell Bain went into it knowing it would be worth very little. What we really need to see released is Bain's pro forma on Staples

[Laura PourMeADrink]

107. Me too. Wish i understood more about gag orders. If it's specifically about speaking on the

divorce itself or anything in the testimony? Or, can she comment on other aspects of Romney interactions - that were never mentioned in divorce?

Seems like she could skate around a bit. I mean, 1st amendment, like Gloria said. Stemberg got to talk about Romney, why can't she, as a US citizen?

[Laura PourMeADrink]

108. Romney lawyer talking now !!! Happy ...thrilled - this is out. Romney had NOTHING to do

with this. Primer on how to value a company at it's early stages !!!

[OldDem2012]

112. We all knew he would attempt to put a positive spin on this....

...but let's see how that spin looks when the media starts cranking up this afternoon.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

114. the key is the amount of time between when he valued the stock and the time the case was closed

BUT - he wouldn't have had any idea when it would be finalized. Hell, they probably delayed it so widen the window.
She should have had her attorney add a stipulation on value at time of final divorce date (or adjustments each year thereafter)

[WinkyDink]

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

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!

[Laura PourMeADrink]

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

why she cashed out so soon. Maybe Romney told her to. Wouldn't that be golden !!

[Laura PourMeADrink]

141. lot's of disparate dates

Here's the sequence:
1986 Bain Invests in Staples to get started
1987-2005 Divorce Proceedings
1991 Romney Testifies
2005 Ms Stemberg receives 500,000 shares ?



NOTES

1986 investment to help start Staples Inc., after founder Thomas G. Stemberg convinced Romney of the market size for office supplies and Romney convinced others; Bain Capital eventually reaped a nearly sevenfold return on its investment, and Romney sat on the Staples board of directors for over a decade.[56][71][78]

Maureen Stemberg reportedly received nearly 500,000 Staples shares as part of the divorce settlement in 2005

The Stembergs’ divorce battle, which began in 1987 and continued for more than a decade, featured accusations of late-night calls to the police and child mistreatment (and subsequent defamation suits). But Mr. Romney’s testimony carries no such drama, according to his lawyer.

“This is a decades-old divorce case in which Mitt Romney provided testimony as to the value of a company,” the lawyer, Robert Jones, said. “He has no objection to letting the public see that testimony.”

Bain Capital was an early investor in Staples when Mr. Romney was at the helm, and the company made its first public offering in 1989. Ms. Stemberg later accused Mr. Stemberg of withholding knowledge of these plans, thus reducing her settlement, but a probate judge rejected her suit in 1994.

The Boston Globe to lift a gag order on Romney's 1991 testimony in the divorce case.

Read more: http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/335473#ixzz2AKX3uYJ9

[GDoyle]

142. I don't think so

She's been trying to do this for years...talk to the press. Maybe that's why the gag order is in place to begin with. She's been blogging, trying to get the press interested, acting like a lot of people act after a divorce for a long time. Her side IS known.

What isn't know is the exact testimony under oath of Romney. That isn't a he said/she said like her version. Its the official record. In a messy divorce, I'm sure that is all the Globe is really interested in....what is fact.

[OldDem2012]

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

....publish the transcripts with their varied interpretations of what it all means will cause even more speculation as to why Mitt is continuing to push his gag order on Ms. Stemberg. People will be asking what could she possibly know that Mitt doesn't want to come out before Election Day?

[DCBob]

103. Yes indeed.. the speculation will be rampant.

Love it!

[OldDem2012]

106. What did Mitt know and when did he know it. LOL!! nt.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

111. his lawyer saying his testimony just a primer on valuating stock.

[WinkyDink]

123. Yeah, chuckle, chuckle. Except Mitt's actions belied his sworn words.

[onenote]

113. Without seeing the text of the gag orders and the motion

most of what is going on in this thread is mere speculation. I will note that GDoyle's analysis, while also speculative, sounds like a likely explanation.

[WinkyDink]

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

nothing!&quot , falsely promise ("You'll be taken care of, health-wise&quot , or flirt ("Call me, maybe!&quot .

Because the LIES are in the transcripts.

It is the something else that the ex-wife wishes to speak about and which Romney wants to remain unmentioned.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

110. do you still have feed on? Romney lawyer talked - see my upthread - Think Gloria coming on next

[Laura PourMeADrink]

117. Gloria out now. Someone is yelling "Go Romney" !!

[Laura PourMeADrink]

118. Gloria - transcribing for you

Globe asking to un-impound records and to lift confidentiality

After reviewing transcripts she provided, (exwife) Court had distroyed originals.

Every party agreed that transcripts could be released - to Globe and other parties as well

Now, second part of motion - to modify confidentiality order to include Ms Stemberg - to comment on Romney's involvement

Unfair - why is she the only one in world who can not speak

What happened in court - Suddenly (only Boston Globe can explain) Globe decided not to pursue second part

Double cross

I was led to believe they would pursue second part.

They decided not to pursue and it was their motion - the court could not comment/decide

So, that is what happened

Now, I argued it should be decided - but respect court's opinion - since BG withdrew and it was their motion

The court was inclined to decide on lifting, and I indicated i will pursue relief for my client

Anyone who wants the transcripts - they will be released

But, they don't mean much unless my client can speak to them

I can talk about hearing - that's extent


Reporter: why can't you understand testimony without client's impact.
Gloria: you would report in a different way without her input. Stemberg can speak about Romney almost like his BFF, why can't she.

Reporter: If we knew, would we think Mr Romney was dishonest?
Gloria: Can't comment

Mr Stemberg not willing to allow Ms. Stemberg to speak


Reporter: Why bring this up - so long ago?
G: People need to know about Romney's character and involvement.


G: I have never been elevated or lowered by Democratic party involvement. Has nothing to do with Dem Party. No one told me to do this. My client contacted me. I represent them as an individual. I have represented both Dems and Reps. Remember Weiner?
No assistance whatsoever from Dems.

Reporter: When try to lift gag order?

G: Will provide copies today to everyone who wants - working on right now. We gave notice, to seek relief, to lift gag - it would appear Stemberg will oppose. ASAP will try.

[WinkyDink]

121. She's scooping the BG by FAXing to other newspapers. Hee!

[WinkyDink]

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

[WinkyDink]

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

lifting the gag order.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

125. So, even if she does refile a motion to lift gag, representing her client, does Mr Stemberg still

have to agree to lift? This is where they got us - he can delay the decision until after election.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

120. Gloria: My indication was that Boston Globe was NOT going to backtrack on

second part (gag lift). My expectation, which I had a basis, that they were pursuing both.

Clearly, the transcripts were most important to them.

Had I known, maybe I could have done something. Could have filed myself. But their's looked like
it fit our needs.

Now, we will try, and don't know if there is time - or if we will be in time (before election)

Going to PDF today

[Sheepshank]

124. Hell hath no fury like a barracuda attorney scorned.

Boston Globe had better watch it's back!

[Laura PourMeADrink]

126. You just made me think of something. Maybe the Globe knew Stemberg would object on the gag

order lift. But, not on the impound lift. So, better something, than nothing? Never mind - they could have ruled on them separately.

[WinkyDink]

131. No need for redundancy. :-)

[Hutzpa]

128. What's her problem, it's been turned over to Boston Globe

she needs to chill, but I'm not so sure about this move though.

[Barack_America]

129. Could be better this way? Let the transcripts speak for themselves.

Both Alred and the ex-wife are very partisan and pro-Obama. Very easy to dismiss/spin what they would say. But Romney's own words under oath? Not so much.

Obviously there is the question of how quickly the transcripts can be delivered to the Globe, but I'm not even sure this should be used as an election issue anyway.

[TwilightGardener]

130. I agree--the testimony is what's potentially important, not for this

woman to become famous as a scorned ex-wife out for revenge (which is how she would inevitably be portrayed). The human beings behind the story are messy, imperfect, and open to attack--even if they're in the right.

[WinkyDink]

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

"scorned," and she's not "out for revenge." THIS ISN'T ABOUT HER EX-HUSBAND.

This is about MITT ROMNEY, POTENTIAL PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. There was NO REASON to seek to speak of him prior to this election year.

THAT is about whom Ms. Stemberg wishes to but is precluded from speaking.

THAT is why Team Romney had no objections to mere trial transcripts, and why they WILL fight the gag order.

Indeed, perhaps Team Romney has already "gotten to" the Boston Globe, whose lawyer blind-sided Gloria Allred in court this morning, causing both a delay in her legal actions and also a judge's ruling that the ex-wife's motion was NOT PERTINENT to this morning's procedure...

How conveeenient for Mitt Romney.

[TwilightGardener]

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

for this to be an investigative-journalism matter about Mittens, rather than centering on someone's personality and motives in a divorce case.

[WinkyDink]

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

Again, Ms. Stemberg might have more, perhaps significantly more, to reveal about Romney "than centering on someone's personality and motives in a divorce case."

DON'T YOU FIND IT STRANGE THAT ROMNEY IS THE SUBJECT OF THE GAG ORDER, NOT MR. STEMBERG??

[TwilightGardener]

136. I thought the Stemberg guy was also under the gag order? Anyway,

I do think that she'd have some choice things to say about Mittens, but unless it's in the testimony or can otherwise be proven, I think it would be taken with a grain of salt--and then she'd be lambasted in the media. If the testimony has not previously been released, and can be examined and publicized, perhaps that's the best we're going to get.

[Hutzpa]

133. "but I'm not even sure this should be used as an election issue anyway"

agreed, at the point we are right about now I don't think it will make much of a difference if they release the information or not, folks already know the dude is a pathological liar. If they had done this earlier in the election maybe, now, not so much. This is of the same magnitude as Donald's toupee at this present moment.

[WinkyDink]

138. That's certainly what Team Romney would like us to believe.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

143. I think if the ex-wife went on a media blitz saying I got x per share and romney got x times a

zillion, it would be an issue.

without her, you may be right - like Gloria said - no one to interpret testimony and put it into context

they pretty much won this think . creepy, greedy bastard. I hate him even more now

[Hutzpa]

144. In a way she cannot say a word about what went on

between her and her husbands dealing, but since Boston Globe can see the transcript and can write about it maybe she can come to an amicable agreement with Boston Globe that will allow them to release all the juicy bits before election day. She can then go back to court to remove the gag order placed on Ms Stemberg.

[WinkyDink]

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

[Hutzpa]

152. Globe can print it

all she will have to do is confirm whether the event occur or not. Will answering Yes or No to a journalist or her Lawyer be seen as her breaking the gag order?

[obamanut2012]

139. She is properly and ethically repping HER CLIENT

Which is what she is legally and ethically supposed to do.

[WinkyDink]

147. You are confusing two distinct issues.

[tavernier]

145. I got half way through this post and my eyelids started drooping

Will people (other than legal eagles) really care about this stuff? I'm not being facetious; I just can't see that it will change any minds either way. Now, if he had been named as a third party, that would perk up some ears.

News flash... romney lies.

[ProudProgressiveNow]

151. LOL....

[Laura PourMeADrink]

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

its the flagrant greed and disregard for the ex-wife's legal due.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

154. My understanding is that the gag order pertains only to the divorce proceedings

So if the ex-wife wants to make a commercial saying that Romney is dirtbag, she's free to do so. She just can't say he's a dirtbag because he helped screw me in a divorce case.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

155. Interesting. So disappointed that there is nothing at all about this on the news. Perhaps,

they all said, let's sit back and see how this plays out before we dive in.