If Goodell committs perjury to coverup for his buddy Kraft and the Pats(cont.)+Poll!

[Zguy28]

Brady was 3 when Specter first became a Senator.

That in itself is part of the problem.:2cents:

[Thiebear]

Pt 1: There was a problem with video taping.

Pt 2: We asked them if they were cheating, they said no.

Pt 3: We didnt speak to all those involved.

Pt 4: We burned the evidence.

Pt 5: What the big deal . Well it should be investigated.

[Larry]

If they chreating were to be deemed true and rampant, they would be accused of, essentially, lying to the American public. Imagine if a news agency made up news articles; it is the same principle. They are putting out a product which only has value if it is true.

1) "Lying to the public" is illegal? I was under the impression that there wasn't a law against that.

2) And Congress is going to investigate it? (Pause (long one) for laughter.)

3) Last time I checked, the way laws got enforced is, the DoJ brings a defendant before a judge and presents a case.

It is complicated by the antitrust exemption type thing. Because they are given this special status by the broadcasting agreement, they now have not just a moral duty, but now a requirement to put together a fair and untampered product.

So it wouldn't be too much trouble for you to quote that part of the law, huh? The NFL exemption to the anti trust law can't be more than a few paragraphs, can it?

Think Congress has no business investigating sports? Most NFL teams play in publicly subsidized stadiums,

1) Not one dime of which came from the federal government.

2) And I'm willing to bet that not one lease includes a "Congress has the right to enforce the NFL's rules" clause.

(And 3) Now, I wouldn't mind an investigation as to how people can justify spending taxpayer money on this doodoo. But I'd say that's a matter for the DoJ, not Congress.)

and NFL games are aired over public airwaves controlled by federal licenses.

And which Congress also has no authority to regulate, other than by the process of passing legislation. And frankly, I'm willing to bet that Congress has not passed a single law regulating the use of video cameras at NFL games (other than, perhaps, forbiding fans from using them, because we wouldn't want the networks to lose their broadcast money.)

The licenses, among other things, prohibit any pre-arrangement or artifice in what is presented as live competition.

Which might be important, if there were evidence that the NFL were ordering teams to lose to the Pats.

(And I'm wondering when "wrestling" gets investigated by Congress. You know? I've heard that those things are faked!)

-----

1) As near as I can tell, no law's been broken, here. Just an obscure NFL rule.

2) Congress doesn't enforce laws, even if there had been one broken. The Executive and Judicial branches do.

[Thiebear]

Larry: As with the MLB the NFL has a non compete law in effect that keeps other teams from moving in and taking their business. Therefore, the congress has a say in how they do business.

Now I know you are skeptical of this Democratic Congress (as i am I'm sure). But we all have to abide by what they say. No matter the party you are currently in. And in so we should abide by the CIA don't burn tapes to cover your trail as i"m sure you'd agree with if you haven't already in another thread.

You haven't disdained the CIA tapes and then ignored the NFL tapes in the same breath have you?

[btfoom]

...

1) As near as I can tell, no law's been broken, here. Just an obscure NFL rule.

This thread (at least these 2 pages) started with the supposition that Goodell committs perjury (I assume while testifying in front of Congress) to coverup .....

That is the law that is being broken.

2) Congress doesn't enforce laws, even if there had been one broken. The Executive and Judicial branches do.

When Congress calls hearings, they are not enforcing any laws. They are simply conducting an inquiry (which, in many cases, have the same rules and consequences as a trial).

While I agree that Congress should be doing something 'better' with their time, the NFL really blew it on this one. Arlen wrote 3 separate times to Goodell and the Commish didn't respond to any of them.

The bigger issue, potentially being that NE taped the Rams in their walk-through, could have some legal rammifications as it would have given them a clear competetive advantage (you know, where folks could use that info to bet on the game). As before, lying in court/to Congress would be very bad as well.

[Larry]

Larry: As with the MLB the NFL has a non compete law in effect that keeps other teams from moving in and taking their business. Therefore, the congress has a say in how they do business.

Excuse me?.

The US Congress passed a law making arena football illegal?(and college. And High School. And the USFL. And . . . )

How come the NBA and baseball are allowed to play during football season? Does Tiger Woods know about this?

Could you point me in the direction of that law?

Now I know you are skeptical of this Democratic Congress (as i am I'm sure). But we all have to abide by what they say.

We all have to abide by the laws they pass. The Constitution grants them that power. (Meaning we have granted it to them.) Yet in this case, there seems to be an absence of the pesky things.

(Wow. Is it possible that we've discovered some thing, some where, in the US that Congress hasn't passed a law yet?)

And where did that word "Democratic" come from? (On second thought, please don't tell me.)

No matter the party you are currently in. And in so we should abide by the CIA don't burn tapes to cover your trail as i"m sure you'd agree with if you haven't already in another thread.

You haven't disdained the CIA tapes and then ignored the NFL tapes in the same breath have you?

Last I checked,

A) Congress does have the authority to oversee the federal government.

Destroying evidence of a crime is a crime. Let me know when you've got some evidence that Bellicheck was waterboarding defensive coordinators to get their signals out of them. Or when the NFL rule book rises to hold the same stature in our legal system as the Constitution.

C) I'm not certain, but I don't recall expressing an opinion on the CIA tapes. And I'm absolutely certain that I haven't discussed them in this thread, let alone "in the same breath".

(One possible explanation of why I haven't mentioned the CIA in this thread might be because it's completely irrelevant.)

[Larry]

This thread (at least these 2 pages) started with the supposition that Goodell committs perjury (I assume while testifying in front of Congress) to coverup .....

That is the law that is being broken.

And yet, not one person can figure out which law.

What the Patriots are accused of doing is precisely as illegal as anticipating the snap count.

But I don't see Congress questioning people under oath about being offsides.

And I don't see anything in the Constitution granting them that authority.

Please, someone, explain to me where this authority comes from.

[mojobo]

Larry: As with the MLB the NFL has a non compete law in effect that keeps other teams from moving in and taking their business. Therefore, the congress has a say in how they do business.

Now I know you are skeptical of this Democratic Congress (as i am I'm sure). But we all have to abide by what they say. No matter the party you are currently in. And in so we should abide by the CIA don't burn tapes to cover your trail as i"m sure you'd agree with if you haven't already in another thread.

What non compete law is in effect? Not saying your wrong its just I haven't heard of it and couldn't find anything on it with a 2 minute google search. Also not sure what someones political party have anything to do with this, Specter is a Republican and it is being investigated by both parties. This is about being upset that congress wants to impliment the NFL's policies for them. Even if the country was perfect and we didn't have anything as dire as we had now this is not any of congress' concern. The one who should be investigating and trying to find out whats going on is the media which it is.

[Larry]

(Maybe the media should get Fred Thompson to investigate it.)

[btfoom]

And yet, not one person can figure out which law.

What the Patriots are accused of doing is precisely as illegal as anticipating the snap count.

But I don't see Congress questioning people under oath about being offsides.

And I don't see anything in the Constitution granting them that authority.

Please, someone, explain to me where this authority comes from.

Again, this thread supposes Goodell committed Perjury (in front of Congress, I believe).

The law that covers this is:

Two federal statutes govern the crime of perjury in federal proceedings. Title 18 U.S.C.A. § 1621 codifies the common law of perjury and consists of the elements listed above. In 1970, the scope of section 1621 was expanded by the enactment of 18 U.S.C.A. § 1623. Section 1623 changes the definition of intent from willfully offering false testimony to merely having knowledge that the testimony is false. In addition it adds to the definition of perjury to include the witness's use of information, including any book, paper, document, record, recording, or other material she knows contains a false material declaration, and includes proceedings that are ancillary to any court, such as affidavits and depositions, and grand jury proceedings. Section 1623 also contains a retraction defense. If, during the proceeding in which the false statement was made, the person admits to the falsity of the statement before it is evident that the falsity has been or will be exposed, and as long as the falsity does not affect the proceeding substantially, prosecution will be barred under section 1623.

You're welcome.

[Capt Rich Fla]

1) Please explain what law you think the NFL broke.

2) Then, if you could, please explain to me what Congress' business it is.

Me, if I'm the NFL, I'd be tempted to announce that I'm forming a committee of NFL owners to investigate exactly how rampant airport mens-room sex in in Congress.

His simple statement, "we see the matter as closed and it's time to move forward."

I found that a very interesting statement at the time. Can you imagine the reprocutions if it went further than just signals? We'd see a backlash never before witnessed in sports. Think of the trophies. Think of the losers, draft picks, oh man this thing could have more arms than a squid.

Somebody better sweep it under the rug right now, cause if it gets out that the cpmm. knew things and hid them, ooooooooooooh.

[No_Pressure]

If Goodell lied to protect a cheater he doesn't deserve to be the commissioner, or even be a member of the NFL again. Belichick would need to be banned from coaching ever again in the NFL, and the Superbowl titles the Patriots won while cheating would have to be stripped, possibly awarded to the victims of the cheaters.

[jbooma]

Jaws even said they had people watch other practices and walk throughts etc...

People this has been a part of the game for sometime.

Now if Billecheat did not give Goodell everything he is a moron and will be suspended. Roger asked him for everything so I highly doubt he is hid anything. I understand why he destroyed everything, if anything else comes up he knows they lied.

[@DCGoldPants]

Why wouldn't you award those titles to the teams the Pats beat in the playoffs, or beat that kept others out of the playoffs? You can't assume that they other team would have won.

If you find they are covering something up, you act towards the future. You can't clean the past.

[The_cavalierman]

I agree with Marshall Faulk's assessment that not taking the game away from a cheater means he didn't get punished.

Belicheat should have been suspended for at least 8 games because his actions tarnished his franchise and the league.

What does it say to the athletes that a coach that cheats only gets his wallet tapped. This is the same guy expected to provide discipline for his team.

The punishment was not severe enough for the Pats.

[redwoody86]

1) As near as I can tell, no law's been broken, here. Just an obscure NFL rule.

2) Congress doesn't enforce laws, even if there had been one broken. The Executive and Judicial branches do.

From MMQBTE, reader submission:

"The NFL has a congressional antitrust exemption. That makes the NFL's business Congress' business. The antitrust exemption imposes on the NFL a sort of public trust. If teams [as opposed to individual players] are engaged in organized cheating and the league itself is doing nothing about it, it calls the credibility of the entire sport into question. The NFL is big business, and the Super Bowl is the biggest cultural event of the year. If the Pats cheated in 2002, and the league knows or willfully chooses not to know, then Congress might be protecting a tainted product from competition. In that case, it's more like professional wrestling than sports.

"While I have no interest in seeing the NFL fail, I agree with Sen. Specter that the league's destruction of the evidence is highly suspicious, and was handled in a way that does not provide the viewing, paying public with confidence that what we are watching on the field is the product of two teams matching skills and wits on a level playing field. If the league cannot guarantee to the public the integrity of the product, then Congress is justified in re-thinking the antitrust exemption. Anyway, that's just my two cents. Unfortunately I think we'll be hearing a lot more about this.''

[michael_33]

It's definately going to get interesting....You know how my predictions go?