Skip to comments.
Martha Stewart comes back to Kmart ads before trial
USA Today ^
| 10/16/2003
| Theresa Howard
Posted on 10/16/2003 8:23:12 AM PDT by presidio9
Edited on 04/13/2004 1:41:16 AM PDT by Jim Robinson.
[history]
NEW YORK
(Excerpt) Read more at usatoday.com ...
TOPICS: Business/Economy; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Front Page News; Miscellaneous
KEYWORDS: agoodthing; kmart; marthastewart; omnimedia; worldseries
1
posted on
10/16/2003 8:23:13 AM PDT
by
presidio9
To: presidio9
I hear Martha's voice on ads on the radio and I just cringe. There is NO way I'm gonna buy anything she has to offer.
To: presidio9
WalMart costumer jewelry acessorizes wonderfully with prison jumpsuits. This is a good thing.
3
posted on
10/16/2003 8:38:47 AM PDT
by
.cnI redruM
(The September 11th attacks were clearly Clinton's most consequential legacy. - Rich Lowry)
To: NotJustAnotherPrettyFace
That is your right, and I am with you on it. And I can't stand her politics. But this woman is the victim of a nasty political hit that she does not deserve. The charges against her are farsical.
4
posted on
10/16/2003 8:39:24 AM PDT
by
presidio9
(Countdown to 27 World Championships...)
To: presidio9; NotJustAnotherPrettyFace
In three ads, Stewart promotes her Everyday line, a Kmart exclusive and still among its best sellers. Martha's products are of very good quality. There are others who should be in jail before her. She's at the bottom of my list.
To: presidio9
From what nI understand, there is fairly clear evidence she is guilty of insider trading. Is this not true?
To: presidio9
I must disagree with you about Martha Stewart. In addition to being a stockbroker, she was on the board of the New York Stock Exchange. She knew what the rules are better than anyone (or should have anyway).
When those who are charged with maintaining the rules of integrity of the markets are found to have violated them, they must be held to the highest standard, else the taint of scandal will cause loss of confidence in our capital system.
To: Fierce Allegiance
From what nI understand, there is fairly clear evidence she is guilty of insider trading. Is this not true? Nope. There is circumstantial evidence.
But that's irrelevant. She is not being charged with insider trading. She is being charged with securities fraud, because after the SEC leaked the fact that she was connected to Waskel, they had to pin something on her. They claim that when she went on record saying that she was innocent she was delibrately trying to bolster the share price of her own stock, Martha Stewart Omnimedia. The whole thing is a joke, and she will most likely get off. Who doesn't proclaim their innocence in such a situation? Even if she was trying to protect the shares of MSO in her own mind, how do you proove it?
I don't like Martha's politics, and I am no fan of her products, but this whole trial stinks to high Heaven, and it sets a dangerous precedent for the already mysterious powers of the SEC.
8
posted on
10/16/2003 8:59:24 AM PDT
by
presidio9
(Countdown to 27 World Championships...)
To: NotJustAnotherPrettyFace
Poor, poor Martha. I'm just curious what innovative ways she will come up with to decorate and entertain in her cell!
To: presidio9
I am no fan of her products. IMO, her products are good. Check them out sometime.
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson