Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: WTF? Alan Grayson's estranged wife is getting food stamps [View all]SidDithers
(44,228 posts)251. Bookmarking...
For the next time "Grayson" comes to DU looking for campaign donations.
Sid
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
613 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Sorry, but I updated the post before I saw your response. I found out she eventually
valerief
Oct 2014
#8
Some guy named Carson. I forget his first name. She was married to Grayson for years
valerief
Oct 2014
#35
Which in effect means she was never married to Grayson and is the basis for his claims now
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#107
I don't know what if anything he's giving her. I think he might want his kids.
valerief
Oct 2014
#196
Agree in general. I won't take anything from her at face value after the abuse lie
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#227
You're going to leave the kids with someone who conveniently lied for years that she was already
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#57
There is an article in the Orlando Sentinel that explains it all. She lied and she knew she lied.
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#68
And will be very easy for the courts to verify and thus highly likely that they are correct.
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#109
Grayson made his fortune wholesaling international long-distance service
Sen. Walter Sobchak
Oct 2014
#158
Actually he made much of his money doing what Dems cheered him for, going after
sabrina 1
Nov 2014
#590
If she gave up the kids she is giving up the only leverage she has when it comes to a divorce.
dilby
Oct 2014
#28
If she was still married when she and Grayson "Married" then she and Grayson were never married.
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#58
Are you sure it isn't just a case of his lawyers finding a t not crossed on her first divorce?
kcr
Oct 2014
#60
Apparently not since she then went back and got a divorce from her first husband.
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#61
Here is the article in the Orlando Sentinel that explains it. She lied and she knew she lied.
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#67
And it refers to court documents he provided that are easy for the court to look up.
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#71
You are clearly on the wife's side. There is no evidence supporting her and plenty supporting him.nt
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#74
I'm on anyone's side if their spouse is trying to screw them over on a technecality
kcr
Oct 2014
#75
A technicality? Lying about being married and getting married again? Wow...
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#84
If he can leave his family in such deplorable conditions, then I don't believe him about anything
kcr
Oct 2014
#86
To quote you,but reversing the gender, "That is HER story" & you are buying it hook line and sinker
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#88
It may be about the gender to you. It isn't to me. Go ahead and reverse the genders. I don't care.
kcr
Oct 2014
#89
This time. I withheld judgement initially with the abuse allegations. Then we found out she lied.
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#105
Then you remember it wrong. She lied, she got caught, she dropped the allegation. nt
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#114
That allegation comes from someone who we know has lied in accusations against him several times and
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#104
You want her to profit from the lies and fraud? And you claim to be impartial?
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#123
Now you are just spinning for the sake of spinning. You are wrong. Admit it. nt
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#127
And lied and committed fraud to enable that relationship of 29 years. The time makes it worse not
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#134
That's the point of fraud and deception. To deceive. You make my point. nt
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#141
Are you the type that says things like "Marriage is just another form of prostitution?"
kcr
Oct 2014
#131
Nope, I won't let you hijack the discussion down a meaningless tangent. nt
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#145
Again, now you are just spinning for the sake of spinning. Admit you are wrong and move on. nt
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#135
You are arguing in favor of a woman who subjected her children to this horrible lie. nt
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#147
She says her former husband filed those 1994 papers, without her involvement. She also says he
tblue37
Oct 2014
#148
You forgot several important things. The primary one being we know she is a liar from the abuse
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#231
ROFLMAO, exactly. The nonsense put forth by those trying to justify Lolita's actions is
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#545
people have believed they were divorced and remarried only to discover the state they
DeadEyeDyck
Nov 2014
#584
Your attempt to claim you aren't biased is what is bullshit. And its obvious. nt
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#85
most men wont cotton to a father allowing children to be in mold infested house while sittin on mils
seabeyond
Oct 2014
#171
more nasty shit. he is letting the kids sit in the filth as punishment to the wife. MOST PARENTS,
seabeyond
Oct 2014
#186
Very well and succinctly put. Add the lie on the abuse allegation, and you see the kind of person
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#335
Kudos to Rove and the Koch's, they really hate Alan because he tells the truth, surprised
randys1
Oct 2014
#388
That's my point. There are multiple possibilities. We don't know what that filing means.
kcr
Oct 2014
#514
Yeah her whole motivation was to have 5 kids from this guy so she can get everything he had.
dilby
Oct 2014
#155
Well, the tactic seems to be working with you. You forgive every lie and scummy act by her
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#264
She was the primary caregiver to those young kids. it would be to their benefit
pnwmom
Oct 2014
#501
Yup, they throw the ex and their own children into poverty. The lawyers and judges let them do it.
Dont call me Shirley
Oct 2014
#80
If Lolita Grayson is the standard by which you want women judged, that's your call.
lumberjack_jeff
Oct 2014
#176
That may be best for the children. Kids raised in poverty have a difficult childhood,
Dont call me Shirley
Oct 2014
#240
Domestic violence doesn't affect the kids? Did you seriously just say that?
lumberjack_jeff
Nov 2014
#612
hold out on being a decent guy to get what you want? nah. shouldnt work that way.
seabeyond
Oct 2014
#30
The rational mind would direct that particular query to Grayson himself, yes?
LanternWaste
Oct 2014
#55
I am sure she is working on it. Resume is a little bleak though kind of looks like:
dilby
Oct 2014
#511
If there's no annulment she'll get Social Security just by being Grayson's spouse for ten years.
ancianita
Oct 2014
#525
There isn't going to be alimony because there is no marriage to dissolve. She was already married.
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#106
No, it won't. There is no legalized multiple marriage in Florida. It's a done deal.
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#119
Yes, because we should just automatically believe everything Grayson's laywer says as fact
kcr
Oct 2014
#128
You're argument is so desperate as to be pathetic. This will be very easy for the court to verify.nt
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#138
Well, aside from the now multiple lies she has told affecting him and the kids...
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#232
No, no faith in Grayson is required. We have her abuse lie on video, her divorce case we can look up
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#236
Yes, it does. And she and her attorney know it, thats why they immediately dropped the request
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#239
You choose to believe his lawyers and the scummy tactics. Whatever floats your boat.
kcr
Oct 2014
#241
LOL, "don't believe your lying eyes, believe me!" No, sorry. All evidence is with Alan Grayson here
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#242
See my #245 below in response to your other post. What you assert is ridiculous
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#247
FWIW.. I don't think you sound "desperate" at all. I've enjoyed reading what you and dilby have
Cha
Oct 2014
#222
Of course she does Cha. Their attempts to explain the bigamy away require magical thinking.
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#252
You are the one ignoring the fact that marriages happen when divorces weren't final
kcr
Oct 2014
#299
Nope, I never did that. I object to your magical thinking for the events after that. nt
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#303
Nope, I never once said that. I said that her actions afterward shows that she knew. nt
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#310
I'm very happy to stand on what I wrote in #302 to let people see how insane your argument is. nt
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#323
I'm very happy to stand on what I wrote in #302 to let people see how insane your argument is. nt
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#325
She has no right to be in that house. She needs to get out or pay rent. nt
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#120
Wow. Women who have been homemakers and child rearers for years have no rights.
LawDeeDah
Oct 2014
#122
So now you compare all women to this woman who lied and committed bigamy and subjected
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#124
Two reasons. #1 As I just said to you, she subjected her children and Grayson to the consequences of
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#130
Did Grayson know of her divorce in 1994? If so, why didn't he re-marry her?
snappyturtle
Oct 2014
#289
Call me crazy, but most people don't think in terms of their eventual divorce. They just don't.
kcr
Oct 2014
#292
I'm not saying that. I think he well knew of the divorce....so he perpetuated the
snappyturtle
Oct 2014
#300
Nor do I mention stay-at-home parents. Do you get any exercise at all but jumping to conclusions?
PDJane
Oct 2014
#520
Yep, we're supposed to believe that constitutes being a deadbeat dad and justifies hating Grayson
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#338
Its an angry, bitter divorce. I quoted her line that she just "wants to live nice" --
IdaBriggs
Oct 2014
#418
He is paying child support. What is she doing with that, she should be buying food for
sabrina 1
Oct 2014
#191
You betcha she is using the timing...wisely...it could be her only leverage. nt
snappyturtle
Oct 2014
#294
Whether true or not, my estimation of Mr. & Mrs. Grayson continues to plummet. I'll admit...
Tarheel_Dem
Oct 2014
#5
I've heard about his blue wall of "Donate Now" links. I don't click on his posts for that reason.
Tarheel_Dem
Oct 2014
#47
Well, so far, each time she has tried to allege bad behavior, it turns out she was the one
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#101
It's a mess, and if nothing else, someone should be setting example for the kids.
Tarheel_Dem
Oct 2014
#115
"but this looks like bullshit to me" Then why spread it around 4 days before the midterms?
FSogol
Oct 2014
#6
Early voting in Fl. Hopefully he's already locked it up. But really disappointed he's not taking
Fla Dem
Oct 2014
#15
Maybe one day you'll find some "news" that hurts the GOP and post it right before the election.
FSogol
Oct 2014
#46
Before anyone kneejerk rushes to defend Grayson, know that we don't have the whole story.
chrisa
Oct 2014
#23
The one thing that is not in dispute is that she lied about being married and got married again to
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#59
Sure it does. It shows she lied like she lied when she said she was being abused. She is a liar.
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#97
Everytime wrongdoing has been alleged on his part, it has been proved false. Not only that
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#102
Oh, and by the way all, we all already know this person lied about Grayson abusing her.
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#63
LOL. Right, seeing her hitting him, that was just love pats. She dropped the DV charge after the
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#70
You can see jumpy, edited video that shows her shoving him away after the edited part
kcr
Oct 2014
#72
You're probably right. They're trying to pretend they are oh so impartial. Yeah right!
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#87
Didn't he lose a huge boodle of money in some suspicious sounding investment couple years ago?
LawDeeDah
Oct 2014
#94
24k with no expenses and crying poverty? 24k + living expenses and you are trying to cry deadbeat?
TheKentuckian
Oct 2014
#528
Yep, $36K/yr, no living expenses, lied about being abused, lied about not being married, committed
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#96
I hope he gets sympathy votes over having to extricate himself from this fraud. Yep, I do.
ancianita
Oct 2014
#111
Male privilege. When it just burns one to no end that a woman just might prevail n/t
kcr
Oct 2014
#181
why do you automatically assume she is a "good mom", maybe she was a lazy angry fool?
snooper2
Oct 2014
#269
Came back to say that his FB page has become nasty with heavy trolling. Any DU help?
ancianita
Oct 2014
#161
Sorry I am busy posting nasty comments about this dead beat on his facebook page.
dilby
Oct 2014
#163
Liberal ideas don't include lying about abuse and bigamy and putting your family through that.
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#234
Divorced twice, child with the first, gladly paying to put that child through private college.
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#307
sorry, dilby seems like a decent person that takes his responsibilties seriously
LawDeeDah
Oct 2014
#198
In past three decades, every time I thought I knew what was going on in a friend/colleague divorce,
hlthe2b
Oct 2014
#224
How refreshing. You usually only crawl out of your self imposed (but not unappreciated) exile to....
Hassin Bin Sober
Oct 2014
#360
Seriously. The timing of this mess plays right into fair weather Dems agendas.
ancianita
Oct 2014
#368
Lots of people disagree with Grayson's actions here,Hass. Your "crawl out of your self-imposed..
Cha
Oct 2014
#560
Mess indeed. But there are some seriously stupid comments under this OP.
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
Oct 2014
#230
Yep, that is a lie you cannot get past, although some here are trying real hard.
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#237
As I keep telling you, your narrative doesn't work because she hid it. Here's proof...
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#245
Yes, it is evidence considering the other factors. They both went down the road of divorce knowing
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#258
No, I mean now. According to you, they know their marriage isnt valid but they went down the road of
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#260
No, according to you she told him she was still married to her first husband in 1993/1994
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#274
And that means their marriage was never valid and both know that so why are they filing for divorce?
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#281
Right, everything about this smacks of good faith from both sides. Yeah, thats the ticket.
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#284
No, it doesn't. Your narrative requires magical thinking at every step. It doesn't work. nt
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#288
No, I never take things on faith. Her own actions prove the deception. You can't get around that. nt
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#296
A good faith marriage? First I ever heard of any such concept and suddenly it is a base requirement
TheKentuckian
Oct 2014
#562
I've taken the liberty of showing your posts to the brick wall next to me.
lumberjack_jeff
Oct 2014
#421
They shouldnt be receiving a free lunch. Her filing is or at least should be fraudulent along with
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#467
It is very infrequent. And it is completely rare to lie about it with your new partner.
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#262
The evidence of the lie is there in her efforts to proceed with a divorce where no marriage exists.
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#266
For one reason. Because he didn't know, and she hoped to get a big divorce settlement.
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#276
Nope, in 94 she hoped nothing would ever go wrong and her lie would never be discovered. nt
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#278
I already explained. She filed for divorce from Grayson because she thought no one would find out
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#282
It would make even more sense to do nothing at all if she wanted no one to find out
kcr
Oct 2014
#285
No, it points to deception in the original marriage and deception now to try to get money. nt
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#287
No, it is completely impossible given the chain of events. I'll take you through it again.
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#302
Yes, they are completely insane. Just from an Occam's razor perspective, its obvious that
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#318
I'm very happy to stand on what I wrote in #302 to let people see how insane your argument is. nt
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#322
AFAIK, his lawyer must proceed with the case, using the facts of the case. Neither
Nay
Oct 2014
#393
I don't think he has to sue her for all the money back and claim he doesn't owe child support
kcr
Oct 2014
#397
I agree, and that's why I have tentatively declared him a jerk. Maintain the stupid
Nay
Oct 2014
#401
Nope, not a mind reader. The chain of events only supports one conclusion. See my #302. nt
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#328
And even if you believe that, which I can live with, there was no marriage here because of her lie
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#334
No, there hasn't been common law in Florida since 1968 so even that doesnt work.
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#339
That makes it worse, don't you understand that? Allowing that lie to go on for 29 years and
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#341
Your husband wouldn't do that? Wouldn't pay support? Why are you with him?
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#344
She is getting $3000 a month and leaving the kids in mold and rot. What is she doing with the money?
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#348
I saw $595/kid posted elsewhere. And yes, if he is paying for the place where she lives, its support
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#350
That's nice. He is still paying support and does not deserve to be called a deadbeat dad.
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#355
She doesn't have to live there. There are great apartments in the area for $600/month.
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#356
SHE is letting the place deteriorate. He is paying her $600/child and she has no housing expenses
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#378
How does that not go both ways? How come the working parent's choice is never a factor for some?
kcr
Oct 2014
#336
And of course, when you committed fraud to enter the relationship to begin with...
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#357
And he is paying $600/mo per child and $10,000 per month to house them. Thats plenty...
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#366
$12500 a month is underpaying? No, I don't think so. Not even a nice try. nt
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#372
LOL, yeah, you go with trying to convince DUers that paying $12500 a month makes you deadbeat
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#376
Yep, please tell DUers that she is suffering on $12500 a month. Please proceed. nt
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#380
No, you keep going. Tell the DUers here making minimum wage and not much more that she is suffering
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#386
You think people making minimum wage will think much of dads who leave their kids in moldy buildings
kcr
Oct 2014
#389
You think people who make minimum wage will think $12500 in support puts her in "poor me" conditions
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#420
Hyuck, hyuck, Support is exactly how a court would see it. Hyuck, hyuck. nt
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#430
A marriage is over. But there are divorce laws. Are you suggesting they should be abolished?
kcr
Oct 2014
#411
You keep saying things I agree with, then turning them on their head.
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
Oct 2014
#434
he is campaigning and living in wa. she is at home raising the kids. sure, she could work and be a
seabeyond
Oct 2014
#439
give her half of the reported 17 million or whatever, and she can then take care of herself.
seabeyond
Oct 2014
#435
yes. when i was married i owned own home, to last forever, income i could live on and
seabeyond
Oct 2014
#466
lawyer cheap tricks. shady lawyer. everyone sees it. do not tie yourself to that and not expect
seabeyond
Oct 2014
#473
Nope, she willfully entered into a marriage already married and then tried to hide it. Here is
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#474
By agreeing to a divorce, both partners are 'tossing the other aside'.
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
Oct 2014
#410
50/50 give her her money. are you saying a couple should not split assets 50/50? nt
seabeyond
Oct 2014
#445
Again, you say something that sounds like something I could agree with, but you don't mean it.
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
Oct 2014
#449
Because I don't see it as 'you' (the non-SAHP) as being the one causing the pickle.
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
Oct 2014
#515
Alimoney is based on what a person makes. So if one is destitue themselves they won't pay.
kcr
Oct 2014
#518
correct. and this is when a different story is told. as a matter of fact, he will probably have to
seabeyond
Oct 2014
#458
yes. absolutely. i would be throwing all that stuff in. sure. but. right now, until divorce,
seabeyond
Oct 2014
#469
That's like saying someone isn't dead until declared so. They are not married. A dead person is
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#548
grayson chose this cause it makes her cash poor, and takes away any option for herself, to get
seabeyond
Oct 2014
#456
Grayson chose this because they are not married and she lied and committed bigamy
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#472
I see, so if someone already married marries one of your kids, you will blame your kid.
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#478
You really ought to see what you are defending before you level accusations. nt
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#248
I am glad it is out in the open too, because the outcome is obvious. Alan is in the right. nt
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#256
Sid, regardless of what any of us think of Grayson, he is going to be vindicated 100% here.
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#254
He is supporting them with $600 per month each. Plus paying $10K/mo for their housing.
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#275
Yes, either he is paying that much per child PLUS all the other expenses or he isnt, and if he is
randys1
Oct 2014
#396
One thing I always say. Each situation should be investigated on its own for its merits.
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#359
Since he is the one running/holding public office, I would think he would want his actions to be
Tuesday Afternoon
Oct 2014
#384
I think he is completely above being suspect and no one should have any questions.
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#404
Her actions do not concern me. Not my business. She is not seeking office. However, since HE is
Tuesday Afternoon
Oct 2014
#407
Please, there are folks that believe all kinds of crazy things. The fact that...
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#408
I can tell you exactly what you should do, and you can try to tell me what to do, as long as
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#415
I am only asking questions, Steven. Tell me again. I love it when you lord over me, my master.
Tuesday Afternoon
Oct 2014
#416
Tell me how Seaworld has nothing whatsoever to do with Alan's character referral, snookums.
Tuesday Afternoon
Oct 2014
#419
i am bothered that this has been allowed to become his very playground on possibly screwin his
seabeyond
Oct 2014
#395
It must be hard to be his poor soon-to-be-ex-wife with BROKEN FINGERS that can't dial a phone
IdaBriggs
Oct 2014
#413
He is not living there. She is and KNOWS there is mold. If you can't fix it yourself --
IdaBriggs
Oct 2014
#491
So you support slumlords who do not perform the necessary repairs on buildings they own.
dilby
Oct 2014
#499
Excellent point. You would think she would have an estimate to show us. It doesnt cost anything to
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#432
Actually taking the history of someone's actions into account allows you to do that, yes. nt
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#441
I'm in the construction business. If I had a dollar for every time someone threw "mold"around as a .
Hassin Bin Sober
Nov 2014
#574
Was she asked to show an estimate? If not, it might not have occured to her to whip one out.
kcr
Oct 2014
#442
Damned right. We need Democrats, period. This is exactly the wrong time to withdraw DU support!
ancianita
Oct 2014
#477
Bad apple? You presume standards that used to be off the table, now put front and center by cowards
ancianita
Oct 2014
#510
I've contacted the Florida Attorney General's office to find out if they plan to prosecute Lolita
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#483
Good luck with that Republican's 'timely response.' I wonder if Nejame has contacted her, as well.
ancianita
Oct 2014
#484
"Christmas present." What a trifling interpretation toward someone who has made the best case
ancianita
Oct 2014
#517
Best case? I and others disagree. You can have your opinion tho, that is quite fine.
LawDeeDah
Oct 2014
#535
I've said it to dilby and I'll say it to you. Support your fellow Democrats and stop falling for
ancianita
Oct 2014
#540
I've actually gotten a couple of nice PMs from DUers thanking me for taking the time to go through
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#546
A joke about it is relevant. To ask if he's speaking for another DU'er who's more than capable
ancianita
Oct 2014
#573
Nope, but I've reached out to his folks. He was on my show last year around this time if you recall.
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#569
They are. DU history is also that Democrats support their candidates near voting time.
ancianita
Oct 2014
#567
By the same logic, are you implying we have Republican employees in this thread?
IdaBriggs
Nov 2014
#582
This might be the first time I've ever seen someone post over 100 times in a single thread...
cherokeeprogressive
Nov 2014
#585
he is not giving her 10k a month. he is giving her 2k a month. how much for a place 6 people
seabeyond
Nov 2014
#591
i do not know about hte house, the shape it is in, what is required, if she can hire,
seabeyond
Nov 2014
#607