Posted on 10/25/2012 8:06:35 AM PDT by Justaham
So speculate,wildly if you’d like as to what may be in his testimony? We already do know why he was called and that was to give his expert opinion concerning the value of stock in a company.
In what way can this be used to harm him? What he offered was an opinion and opinions are not right or wrong when it involves the value of something. One mans junk is another mans treasure.
If Romney believed the stock over valued at $2.25 then it is very possible he made a large profit by selling the shares short. This is not only legal, it’s good business.
Wrong. If the testimony is released it is what it is and would not be open for speculation by the media.
Were it kept sealed, THEN the media could pine about what he said. But it is not and they cannot.
Maybe she sold the stock to Romney, or to Bain. And she’s saying Romney lied to her as to the value.
What I don’t understand is why the transcript being released is not the same as lifting the gag order. What good is a gag order if you can read the entire proceeding?
This hasn’t worked so time for the “sex scandal”...
Now that HuffPost has gone “mainstream”, does anyone know their proper use rules and what would result in a banning there?
This ex wife is a big participant over there. It would be nice to be able to confront her directly. I know that wouldn’t fly on DU, which bans for even the slightest hint of non conformity with the progressive line.
At the time, Staples was not public. It's very difficult to short a non-public stock, unless you find someone stupid enough to participate.
It is likely Romney had insider shares and he sold them to another insider. Or because he thought them over valued he convinced other share holders to sell him their shares on the cheap and then held them.
Saying and proving or for this wacko having credibility would prove impossible.
The testimony.released pertains only to Romney’s testimony regarding the share value. The gag order concerns.her ability.to discuss publically her personal feelings about the divorce. Anything.she would have to say would be impossible prove and based on her history of wackiness she would not be credible.
See Roberts viv 0bamacare.
Yep, so true...
When Obozo was elected, even knowing he would be putting some judges on the Supreme Court, I thought we would survive this nightmare for four years because the Supremes were our last bastion against tyranny...
BOY, was I wrong!
(Thank God I didn’t know it at the time or hari kiri would’ve happened here.)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.