A Massachusetts court has ruled that Mitt’s testimony in the divorce case of Staples’ co-founder Tom Stemberg and his first wife Maureen can be released.
It appears that Mitt testified about the value of Staples at that time, before it went public, and that he may have knowingly undervalued the company to help his friend Tom and hurt Maureen.
The judge refused the request to life the gag order on Maureen, so she will still not be allowed to talk about the case.
So there may be a legal issue of whether Mitt perjured himself by testifying that Staples’ value was less than what he really believed it to be.
Aside from a legal issue, is the political issue of whether Mitt will be perceived by women voters to have hurt a woman — a very ill woman with lupus — by causing her to get less than she deserved in her divorce settlement.
I know he didn’t find his wife Ann from a binder of women because he’s been with her since before puberty, but I’m sure the only thing he consults with her about on a daily basis is what plaid shirt to wear.
I don’t see a perjury issue here but definitely an obvious attempt to help a friend against his wife in an area of “expertise” that would enable him to wiggle around the issue of the true worth of Staples stock. After all, it was all very speculative at the time, and only he and a few others would know its true worth. It would have been a no brainer for him to pull the wool over a judge’s eyes.
He’s been doing that to so many for so long, it’s second nature to him by now.