EX-HUBBY SAW FALL COMING (Martha)

New York Post ^ | 3/08/04 | JOHN LEHMANN

[kattracks]

March 8, 2004 -- Martha Stewart's ex-husband, Andy Stewart, feared the princess of perfection's long-held habit of telling whoppers would one day trigger her downfall, a former business partner told The Post yesterday. Norma Collier, who was Martha Stewart's first business partner when they started a catering business in Connecticut in 1974, said yesterday that Stewart's self-made disaster was "very sad" - and almost inevitable.

[SC Swamp Fox]

I'm glad you'll feel safer walking down the street minus the threat of your being mugged by Martha Stewart and her posse.

I am glad that I can send my money to Wall street without the threat of it being jumped by Martha and her posse.

Business managers, owners and CEO's need to know that if they cross the line, their club memberships may not keep them out of a pumpkin colored jumpsuit.

[nopardons]

I'm glad you didn't take offense. I tend to be just a wee nutso about correct facts.

What EVERYONE needs to remember, is that in order to do business (though Bacanovic's little assistant did NOT have, when he sold her ImClone stocks; which IS a felony )RRs have to pass a VERY strenuous test. Martha couldn't get hired,on Wall Street, to save her life, by a reputable firm. SHE WORKED FOR A BUCKET SHOP/BOILER ROOM OPPERATION !

And whilst she was involved in insider trading, obstruction of justice,tampering with evidence and lying to the SEC, the FBI, the DOJ, and a Congressional Committee, she was ON THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE NYSE ! Why is THAT important? Because the BoD of the NYSE is in charge of overseeing that laws, rules, and regulations Are followed by the members of the NYSE!

[nopardons]

Yes, they REALLY are and O'Reily is dreadful.

[BurbankKarl]

The public affairs person for the Bureau of Prisons was on this morning, saying she will be wearing a denim shirt, and steel toed boots. Lights come on at 6am, and there are 12 shower stalls for 600 women...

She pretty much debunked the myth of a Club Fed. Creativity is frowned upon. She said she might be able to still do some business related stuff through letters, etc. But she would be assigned a job and would have to complete it first. Also, you were a number. She would have to lose the attitude quick.

Oh well.

[Howlin]

Or running over the neighbor's fence!

[thackney]

and said the stock has gone -back- up (i.e. recovered nicely) and will probably continue upwards.

Allowing for the state of the current market, it would not have been a bad share to buy and hold onto at 58$.

I want to be your broker; your standards are easy to meet. In the same time (Dec 27, 2001 to today's close):
-Dow Jones Industrials have risen 3.9%
-NASDAQ has risen 1.6%
-S&P 500 has risen 0.9%
-Imclone has fallen -19%

If you think 20% below average is a good return on stock, would you be interested in letting me manage your portfolio?

[nopardons]

That too! :-)

[Bonaparte]

" I think a detailed forensic analysis of all her trading history is in order."

Those records could only be obtained by subpoena arising either from further SEC litigation or from a private cause of action. My understanding is that a 5-year statute of limitations applies and so the litigant would presumably only seek such records in an effort to show a long-standing pattern of criminal securities trading behavior. But such a project looks practically insurmountable to me. RICO comes to mind, but that seems an equally far-fetched prospect. I have to reluctantly admit that she's going to skate on most of her past misbehavior.

[Dog Gone]

I'm glad you'll feel safer walking down the street minus the threat of your being mugged by Martha Stewart and her posse.

There are lots of white collar crimes where safety and physical security of the citizens are not threatened. Shall we not punish any of those criminals with jail time?

People will think twice before trading stocks on insider tips and lying to cover it up. That IS a good thing.

[BurbankKarl]

Bill Cosby and Rosie O Dumbell are both shills like her. I mean, look at what happened to Rosie's magazine deal!

[BurbankKarl]

Dear Martha,

My daughter's ex-boyfriend's broker called and said to get out of the stock. What should I do?



>>>The New York Times Syndicate, which distributes the "Ask Martha" column, has not decided what it will do with the column, New York Times spokesman Toby Usnik said.

[Carolinamom]

Frank Kostyra, Martha's brother, is on O'Reilly right now.

[nopardons]

Oh gee....................!LOL

Shall we now recap what her behavior hath wrought?

Viacom has canceled her shows.

Martha Stewart Living has been losing ads since this began.

K-Mart is thinking of suing her.

The SEC IS taking her to court,in a civil case, for insider trading.

The IRS is standing in the wings.

And now her column is kaput.

[nopardons]

Watching it now. hehehehehehehehehehe

[hosepipe]

[ Goodness...if they put people in jail for telling whoppers or breaking the laws.......where will we put all the Democrats? ]

or lawyers...

[CaliGirlGodHelpMe]

"What would you do?"

If you own a stock and get inside information that it will be tanking soon, you just have to take the hit. However, you could try to offset the effect on your portfolio, say, by buying another stock that will likely go up because there will be less competition from the one you own; or you could short futures or have a "put" option on the sector your stock is in. I think that would be legal, at least, you wouldn't go to jail for it.

[kcvl]

Mar. 7, 2004 12:00 AM


In the span of just two weeks, federal prosecutors have indicted two of the iconic figures in the corporate scandals that cascaded in the aftermath of the 1990s stock-market boom.

Last month, Jeffrey Skilling, the former chief executive of Enron Corp., was handcuffed and brought to court in Houston on charges of securities fraud. And then last week in New York, Bernard Ebbers, former chief executive of WorldCom Inc., was charged with his own versions of securities fraud.

"The fact that you bring criminal indictments against these two major CEOs, Skilling and Ebbers, will remind all executives tempted to stray from the strait and narrow that there are real consequences to their actions," he said.

http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/business/articles/0307corpcrime07.html

[billbears]

Apparently you think that she is to be forgivien because she is a woman and famous. That isn't how the law is supposed to work.

No I think the national government has something better to do with its time than prosecute Martha Stewart. Frankly I find it amazing that a President that champions 'conservatism' would allow the attack dogs loose on the stock market. But in our new version of 'conservatism' we can't let the businesses run loose now can we? Heaven forbid capitalism might break out. The market would have either corrected itself or the state of New York would have stepped in. No need for a federal prosecution.

I find it interesting that you, who have been on this forum for years ranting about how Bush is privileged and gets breaks, are suddenly supporting Martha Stewart.

Two things here. Martha Stewart isn't part of the national government. What she does with her money and her time is of no concern to me. However an elected official pandering to special interest groups, passing half trillion dollar medical plans, sending troops to root around in the desert for 'phantom' WMDs, and all the while opening our Southern border more everyday to criminals is a concern to me. Secondly I don't thing I ever 'ranted' that Bush 'is privileged and gets breaks'. Not being a conservative OTOH is another story

[billbears]

Good to see you standing by your moral principles and advocating situational ethics.

Good to see you standing by your party and supporting whatever it does. I wonder....would you advocate such a witchhunt if a Democrat was running the show?

[billbears]

But, coming from YOU, especially, what part of no force and fraud libertarianism, makes it okay to commit FRAUD now? :-)

What part of limitations of the national government do you not understand?

The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected. The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State. The operations of the federal government will be most extensive and important in times of war and danger; those of the State governments, in times of peace and security

Of course as you are always ready to point out it is not 1789 so why bother with the limitations in the d#mn document anyway?