martha stewart guilty

[tunaplanet 0]

Quote

Was it that whole "Martha's too smart to defraud the public over a measely 50 grand" thing?

I wasn't going to respond, but I have an issue with people misinforming others. She made a quarter of a million dollars, not 50K.

Granted, she is worth a couple hundred million, but it doesn't matter either way.

Forty-two

[b1jercat 0]

Ha Ha the eighty junk bond scams, can anyone say Jeb Bush.

blues

jerry

[WrongWay 0]

YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY!!!!!!

"Today on Martha Stewart, we're going to make a decorative shank out of a toothbrush, and some vivid curtains out of Duke's bedsheets, how exciting!"

Wrong Way
D #27371 Mal Manera Rodriguez Cajun Chicken Ø Hellfish #451
The wiser wolf prevails.

[rmsmith 1]

Quote

Quote

Small potatoes.

Don't tell that to her victims -- I hope she gets what the guidelines recommend, regardless of her clelebrity status.

And who were her victims? As I saw it, the Imclone founder was dumping his shares before letting his share holders in on the FDA news.

[JoeyRamone 0]

So Martha goes down for some "Stock" tips. OJ walks the golf course every day. What the hell is up with that?

[kallend 2,148]

Quote

So Martha goes down for some "Stock" tips. OJ walks the golf course every day. What the hell is up with that?

And Ken Lay still walks free too. But then, he's a big campaign contributor.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[koz2000 1]

Of course it wasn't only GWB
Ken Lay played golf with Bill Clinton. Clinton helped Ken Lay get a $3 billion power plant project in India for Enron. Four days before the deal went through, Enron gave $100,000 to the Democratic party.

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/1997/dom/970901/notebook.scoop.html

Doesn't matter who's living in the White House, they're all taking "contributions"

______________________________________________
- Does this small canopy make my balls look big? - J. Hayes -

[tunaplanet 0]

The funniest thing to me is how uninformed people are and how they make statements that are completely false and untrue (happens a lot on these boards).

For example, I did a poll about who thought she would be guilty/not guilty earlier. One of the posters, Gawain, responded with this quote...

Quote

Seeing as how the judge already threw out the most serious charge because the prosecution didn't build a case for the jury...She walks.

Guess we'll chalk that one up as another false statement.

Forty-two

[benny 0]

Quote

Quote

Was it that whole "Martha's too smart to defraud the public over a measely 50 grand" thing?

I wasn't going to respond, but I have an issue with people misinforming others. She made a quarter of a million dollars, not 50K.

Granted, she is worth a couple hundred million, but it doesn't matter either way.

OK, so she made $250k off the rotten deal. So let's see, meaning she basically stole 250 grand. If a black man stole a car worth 5 grand he'd do time, I think Martha should too.

Never go to a DZ strip show.

[tunaplanet 0]

Quote

If a black man stole a car worth 5 grand he'd do time, I think Martha should too.

Never said I disagreed. I agree she should do to prison like everyone else.

Forty-two

[benny 0]

Quote

Quote

If a black man stole a car worth 5 grand he'd do time, I think Martha should too.

Never said I disagreed. I agree she should do to prison like everyone else.

Sweet

Never go to a DZ strip show.

[skydyvr 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Small potatoes.

Don't tell that to her victims -- I hope she gets what the guidelines recommend, regardless of her clelebrity status.

And who were her victims? As I saw it, the Imclone founder was dumping his shares before letting his share holders in on the FDA news.

Is that a trick question?

. . =(_8^(1)

[rmsmith 1]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Small potatoes.

Don't tell that to her victims -- I hope she gets what the guidelines recommend, regardless of her clelebrity status.

And who were her victims? As I saw it, the Imclone founder was dumping his shares before letting his share holders in on the FDA news.

Is that a trick question?

No, it wasn't; who were her victims?

[AndyMan 7]

Her victims are the same people as if she were acting alone - everyone who traded in the stock without the benefit of insider information. Why is that complicated?

Giving or receiving insider information is not a crime. It's only when you act on that information that the crime takes place. Sam Waksdale (sp?)can legally give insider information without penalty. Its only when someone acts that is becomes criminal.

_Am

__

You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

[rmsmith 1]

Quote

Her victims are the same people as if she were acting alone - everyone who traded in the stock without the benefit of insider information.

She didn't set out to defraud anyone. She was simply protecting herself from the CEO of Imclone, who knew his company's stock was going to go into a freefall following the FDA's decision. The government should have simply handed her a fine, but bringing her to trial was a witch-hunt for a practice that is commonplace on Wall Street. The trial caused her company's share holders to lose their shirts as well. I recall Sen. Hillary Clinton doing very very well on a stock purchase and a well timed sale.

[AndyMan 7]

You're absolutely right she should have been handed a fine. That said, you simply can not be handed a fine without admitting responsibility. Stewart never admitted responsibility, in fact she denied her involvement all the way through, even in the face of mounting evidence against her. I have absolutely no doubt that had she quietly admitted everything up front she would have walked away relatively unscathed.

Some people say she was prosecuted because she was famous. To this, I say... They're probably right. Because she was a celebrity it offered the gov't an opportunity to send the message that lieing to prosecutors and securities regulators is not an option. Because of her celebrity, that message is loud and clear.

That said, I think its clear that Stewart is being dragged over the coals only because she consistently lied about her involvement.

_Am

__

You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

[benny 0]

Quote

Quote

Her victims are the same people as if she were acting alone - everyone who traded in the stock without the benefit of insider information.

She didn't set out to defraud anyone. She was simply protecting herself from the CEO of Imclone, who knew his company's stock was going to go into a freefall following the FDA's decision. The government should have simply handed her a fine, but bringing her to trial was a witch-hunt for a practice that is commonplace on Wall Street. The trial caused her company's share holders to lose their shirts as well. I recall Sen. Hillary Clinton doing very very well on a stock purchase and a well timed sale.

Well apparently she set out to defraud the government of the united states. My bet is if you or I did the same we'd see jail time. The penalties were increased in order to deter actions such as that being "commonplace on Wall Street". And, just WTF does Hillary Clinton have to do with the Martha trial?

Never go to a DZ strip show.

[sdgregory 0]

Quote

I heard stripes are in this season.....

Hope the bitch gets a taste of the pokey life.. Just give her 6 months.

Your attitude scares me. The juror who came out and said this is a victory for the little guy scares me too.


This attitude is destroying the American Dream. One talking head on CNN put it best. Martha Stewart IS the little guy. She came from humble poor beginnins and worked her ass off to get where she is. Initiative and hard work made her successful.

That is what a free market society is about. Anyone, from any background can find a niche, fill it and make a bloody fortune in the process. But when someone does and we haven't we think they owe us something. Bullshit.

In this country we worship success but we thrive on failure. Like a feeding frenzy we love to see the rich fall. It is not like we are talking about someone born into richness, never working a day in their life and then doing everything they can to break the backs of the working class to keep their riches.

And which of you, if faced with a big time financial loss, ending up with a little inside information, would not have doen the same? Please. I am not saying that she is innocent or guilty. She was found guilty, but for crying out loud, a victory for the little guy?

I say bullshit to this whole damn circus. I hope they let her off on the minimum. Otherwise the fuckos in the Enron type fiascoes better get life. Those are the real fucktards.

.02 cents and stepping off my soapbox. Who's turn is it?

[rmsmith 1]

Quote

And, just WTF does Hillary Clinton have to do with the Martha trial?

Both of these ladies enjoy making money the easy way, through stock manipulation deals; however, one was an insider. I also recall Pres. Clinton lied to investigators resulting in huge costs to the taxpayers.