Mitty lies under oath?

[rubato]

http://www.boston.com/politicalintellig ... story.html

"...
Mitt Romney vouched for low price on Staples stock that traded 10 times higher a year later
E-mail | Print | Comments (153) 10/25/2012 6:23 PM


By Callum Borchers, Globe Correspondent

CANTON, Mass. — Mitt Romney testified under oath in 1991 that the ex-wife of Staples founder Tom Stemberg got a fair deal in the couple’s 1988 divorce, even though the company shares Maureen Sullivan Stemberg received were valued at a tenth of Staples’ stock price on the day of its initial public offering only a year later.

At the time the Stembergs split, Romney suggested, there was little indication that Staples’ value would soon skyrocket.

Romney’s testimony in a post-divorce lawsuit brought in 1990 by Sullivan Stemberg was unsealed on Thursday in Norfolk Probate and Family Court at the Globe’s request. Sullivan Stemberg sued unsuccessfully to amend the couple’s financial agreement after Staples went public in 1989 and closed its first day of trading at $22.50 per share, 10 times the value she had received.

Stemberg left his wife in February 1987, and the divorce was finalized in July 1988. Before the official split, the couple negotiated an agreement in which Sullivan Stemberg got 500,000 shares of Staples stock, which Stemberg valued at $2.25 per share.

Sullivan Stemberg also kept the couple’s Dedham home, worth $690,000 at the time, and in February 1988 sold 175,000 shares of Staples stock at $2.25 per share to pay off the mortgage. She sold another 80,000 shares two months later, at $2.48 per share.

Raise your voiceRaise Your Voice
Click to contact candidates or elected officials about this issue. “In my opinion, that’s a good price to sell the securities at,” Romney, now the Republican nominee for president, testified in June 1991.

But on April 28, 1989, barely a year after Sullivan Stemberg sold more than half of her shares on the premise that they were worth less than $2.50 apiece, the company made its initial public offering at $19 per share and ended its first day at $22.50. ... "


yrs,
rubato

[MajGenl.Meade]

“In my opinion, that’s a good price to sell the securities at”

This is outrageous. Unacceptable. No candidate for President should get a way with it.

He should have said "In my opinion that's a good price at which to sell the securities"

On the less relevant and important issue, the fact that he said "in my opinion" means that he cannot be validly accused of lying unless there is clear evidence that such was not his opinion.

So let's see.... the poor starving abandoned woman sold half her 500,000 shares at $2.50 each (the price then current)
and gained $625,000 and then, after the company was increased in value under new management, was able to sell the other half one year later at $22.50 (if she so desired) yielding $5,625,000 to her diminished coffers. Awful. Should be a law

Meade