|
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend Bookmark this thread |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) |
funkybutt (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-16-04 09:26 AM Original message |
5 months for Martha! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
lectrobyte (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-16-04 09:27 AM Response to Original message |
1. seems pretty harsh, all things considered. Ken Lay better get |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
funkybutt (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-16-04 09:32 AM Response to Reply #1 |
2. no shit |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
frankly_fedup2 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-16-04 09:46 AM Response to Reply #1 |
14. Surely you jest?? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Kathy in Cambridge (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-16-04 10:16 AM Response to Reply #14 |
23. She was NOT convicted for insider trading |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Warpy (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-16-04 09:35 AM Response to Original message |
3. She was never convicted of a real crime |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
GiovanniC (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-16-04 09:36 AM Response to Original message |
4. Thank God They've Cleaned the Scum Off the Streets |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
AP (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-16-04 09:37 AM Response to Reply #4 |
6. She most definitely was convicted of a real crime. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Snellius (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-16-04 09:39 AM Response to Reply #6 |
9. She wasn't convicted of a "financial crime" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
AP (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-16-04 09:42 AM Response to Reply #9 |
11. She lied to cover up a crime. She rolled the dice. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
GiovanniC (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-16-04 09:40 AM Response to Reply #6 |
10. They Couldn't Convict Her On the Insider Trading Charges |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
AP (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-16-04 09:45 AM Response to Reply #10 |
13. They could have tried. The statute doesn't totally preclude what she did. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
GiovanniC (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-16-04 09:54 AM Response to Reply #13 |
16. A Couple Things |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
AP (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-16-04 10:05 AM Response to Reply #16 |
19. Yeah, a poor guy robs you because he's starving. Martha because she can. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
GiovanniC (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-16-04 10:07 AM Response to Reply #19 |
20. The Crime She Was Convicted Of Was Saying She's Innocent |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
AP (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-16-04 10:12 AM Response to Reply #20 |
21. Wrong. The crime of which she was convicted was trying to mislead |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
GiovanniC (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-16-04 10:21 AM Response to Reply #21 |
25. If You Have Proof That Martha Stewart Engaged In Illegal Insider Trading |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
AP (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-16-04 10:32 AM Response to Reply #25 |
27. Do you know how silly that sounds? That's the equivalent of saying |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
AP (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-16-04 10:19 AM Response to Reply #20 |
24. Read this, by Scott Turow |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Warpy (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-16-04 09:55 AM Response to Reply #6 |
17. check out what she was convicted of |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
AP (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-16-04 10:14 AM Response to Reply #17 |
22. She wasn't charged with 100s of crimes. That doesn't mean she's innocent |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
AP (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-16-04 10:25 AM Response to Reply #17 |
26. That inside trading laws didn't CLEARLY cover MS, suggests laws are a joke |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LittleApple81 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-16-04 09:36 AM Response to Original message |
5. You know, I am VERY SORRY for her. She did WRONG but compared |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
underpants (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-16-04 09:38 AM Response to Reply #5 |
7. $298,00 on the sale-cost$260,000= profit of $38,000 |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
underpants (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-16-04 09:38 AM Response to Reply #7 |
8. Almost forgot-she wasn't charged with the sale of the stocks |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LittleApple81 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-16-04 09:44 AM Response to Reply #8 |
12. Lying? I thought that was a RW value...wait, she is not a RW person.n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
indigobusiness (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-16-04 09:46 AM Response to Original message |
15. They should've hung by her thumbs |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Walt Starr (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-16-04 09:58 AM Response to Original message |
18. Martha was framed on trumped up charges |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
AP (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri Jul-16-04 10:38 AM Response to Reply #18 |
28. No she wasn't. The government offered her a deal. She didn't take it |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) | Sat May 04th 2024, 05:35 AM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate
About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.
© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC