Califan007 The Constipated

Krishnanoorthi's chart did a good job of driving home the redacted names and lack of transparency on the Washington report...that was how it should be done.

Krishnanoorthi asked the wrong question..."You don't have any evidence that it did not happen" is not really a valid question. But I will say the dude is building a valid case for kicking Snyder to the curb, though...

1 minute ago, 86 Snyder said:

I feel like if Connelly had 30 more seconds the next thing out of his mouth would have been “why don’t you just redact the names”

Should have been out of his mouth during the first 30 seconds.

Connolly just got ****-slapped by the chairwoman lol...

Anyway, he brought up a good point about many of the victims wanting the report released so confidentiality shouldn't really be much of an issue. Where he missed was in not asking Goodell if he could release the report and still maintain the anonymity of the victims.

4 minutes ago, FLSkinz83 said:

Goodell looks like he'd rather be awake for a colonoscopy than be testifying right now.

To be fair he always looks like that.

Aaaand this went off the rails again with Jordan's asinine line of questions. Right now Snyder's gotta be happy he's not there.

Finally this hearing is being conducted like a hearing...important questions and allowing full answers instead of partisan grandstanding. I feel like I'm actually getting info now.

She also thanked Goodell for his "support of this legislation"...he never supported the legislation. She had asked Goodell if he supported the goals of the legislation, not the legislation itself. Right now there is no legislation for Goodell to support. But she worded it in a way that can be brought up later as "The NFL commissioner supports this legislation" whenever the legislation is finally written.

Oh geez...this chairwoman is ****ing things up. She's not doing a good job, at all. Asking Goodell what he will do to make sure Snyder shows up for the hearing was asinine and never should have been asked. Plus her cutting Goodell off constantly is not a good look. This really isn't going to go well if this keeps going.

6 minutes ago, Inigo Montoya said:

Who said this? I don't care about people's political parties... this sounds insane

It was...hell, don't remember her name lol...Foxx? Was that it? Anyway, she was saying that the committee should be concerned with how Americans can afford to get to work while also saying they should not be concerned with the environment they have to work in.

This is gonna be a dumpster fire...

This woman's comments are bordering on self-ownage, She basically said "Americans are worried about gas prices and how they are going to get to work. They are not worried about being bullied, sexually harassed and fired for not ****ing their superiors after they get there."

Krishnamoorthi (sp?) was a really good counterpoint to Comer...

Aaaand Comer is why Snyder said "thanks but no thanks" to showing up today. He's gonna have defenders on that panel arguing on his behalf in all sorts of ways. And something tells me Goodell will be, too.

Was that document agreement between Snyder and the NFL really a secret document? I thought that was pretty much public knowledge for at least several months...

I don't think the videos created of the cheerleaders would have been effected by a law that requires their consent for the usage of their images. They would have made them anyway...perhaps more secretly, maybe. But still would have happened. It's on the NFL and the owners to do something to combat that type of behavior.

Anyone who watches the Jan 6 hearings and still thinks the election was stolen and that Trump was justified in his actions is either evil or stupid. There are no other options.

You can go to trial and release the video evidence that proves you’re innocent…

…or you could give her $1.6 million dollars.

22 minutes ago, Cooleyfan1993 said:

Ah. The story my old man was threatening to sue the Washington post over during the weekend if they wrote this story. Yeah, funny thing is, the Washington post doesn’t even know the true facts. They only publish half of the details of that investigation but fail to report that video evidence even confirmed no sexual assault even happened. 

they even fail to mention the woman even got a text from her husband saying he was close to bankruptcy and they needed some way to come up with the money. 

 

Washington Post isn’t going to enjoy this lawsuit 😁 

why did they settle for $1.6M?…I mean, video evidence proving her allegations are not true would seem to make that option unnecessary.

Here we go...

7 minutes ago, 86 Snyder said:

.

I take it this means you understand my post now lol...

11 minutes ago, 86 Snyder said:

Hold up…so Bowers testified today that he believes the Constitution is divinely inspired.  Is…is that a thing lots of Republicans believe and I’ve just been totally unaware of?

Hold up...so, did you get lost on your way to posting this? lol...

The wild part is, there was even more outrageous stuff that these women went through that wasn't touched on in the hearing....their whole story is heartbreaking and irritating.

I wonder what Trump's gonna say about this woman and her mother (especially her mother)...because if he still paints her as part of some grand election fraud scheme that could backfire massively. And if he doesn't, his silence on her will be seen as admitting he was wrong about her.

A mint...a ****ing mint.