Hogs Haven: The Details of Dan Snyder's Complaint Against Washington City Paper

[MassSkinsFan]

That's a really interesting read. So, where the writer went wrong was in saying Snyder not only had knowledge of the forgeries, but did them himself.

McKenna wote that Dan "got caught forging names as a telemarketer with Snyder Communications."

Two facts are presumably incorrect - do you think he ever performed work as a telemarketer? did he actually forge anything himself?

But, did his organization get caught doing these things? Yes. Was he in charge when they occurred? Yes.

So, it happened on his watch and he's responsible, but that does not make him a forger.

It looks to me like McKenna went too far. Yeah I understand he's using satire (in the same paragraph he says Dan "went all Agent Orange on federally protected lands" which is hyperbole) but he also flat out says Snyder forged names.

The rest of the suit, including the racist part, seems weak to me. But this might have teeth.

[elkabong82]

Whats the big deal? Look she is married to the redskins owner, so when she goes out it makes news. The sentence he used is not false if she indeed say that. This is what happens when you live in the public spotlight. There has been much worse said about other famous individuals that then don't go and sue a newspaper over it. Even if the writer is a hack to begin with Danny needs to take the high road.

The setnece is false when you claim that pumping up Snyder was her purpose for being there, which it clearly wasn't.

Plus, his wife has nothing to do with him as an owner. His wife isn't going around promoting him. It was a cheap shot by McKenna. Just because others do it to doesn't excuse it.

If you are critical of Snyder as an owner, and there are plenty of rasons for that, stick to criticizing Dan Snyder.

---------- Post added February-3rd-2011 at 04:20 PM ----------

What exactly was said that was bad at all. McKenna said she went on TV to speak well of her husband. That she dared say:

Oh no... oh my god no. How could she.

It's been explained to you several times now.

"His wife, Tanya Snyder, is out selling the transformation, too. Last week she went on local TV to tell an interviewer that he is now surrounded by "better people," and that he's "grown and he's evolved."

What really happened: his wife was on tv promoting a health cause and speaking to kids. At the end of the tv spot, she is asked by a reporter about Dan Snyder, so she gives her opinion.

Now what part of that justifies saying that she went on TV to pump up Dan? None of it. That wasn't the reason for her being there at all. And the claim that she is out selling Snyder's transformation indicates it was more than just 1 time, yet there is no sch evidence.

Do you see the problem now?

[Destino]

It's been explained to you several times now.

"His wife, Tanya Snyder, is out selling the transformation, too. Last week she went on local TV to tell an interviewer that he is now surrounded by "better people," and that he's "grown and he's evolved."

Like I said before, where is the insult there? He's saying she went on TV and spoke well of her husband. What am I supposed to be enraged about here?

Now what part of that justifies saying that she went on TV to pump up Dan? None of it. That wasn't the reason for her being there at all. And the claim that she is out selling Snyder's transformation indicates it was more than just 1 time, yet there is no sch evidence.

Do you see the problem now?

Yup. I see that she was on TV for charity and is now accused of speaking well of her husband.

Still not feeling the fury though.

[leaf]

Like I said before, where is the insult there? He's saying she went on TV and spoke well of her husband. What am I supposed to be enraged about here?

Yup. I see that she was on TV for charity and is now accused of speaking well of her husband.

Still not feeling the fury though.

Snyder's wife did not go on tv to "tell an interviewer that he is now surrounded by "better people," and that he's "grown and he's evolved."

If someone misrepresented my wife's intentions, I'd have a problem with it.

[slaga]

Like I said before, where is the insult there? He's saying she went on TV and spoke well of her husband. What am I supposed to be enraged about here?

Yup. I see that she was on TV for charity and is now accused of speaking well of her husband.

Still not feeling the fury though.

That's not what McKenna said. McKenna said "His wife, Tanya Snyder, is out selling the (Dan's) transformation too. Last week she went on local TV to tell an interviewer that he is now surrounded by 'better people' and that he's 'grown and evolved.'" The purpose of the interview was cancer awareness, not promoting Dan in any way. The interviewer asked her about Dan and she responded. McKenna belittled the actual purpose of the interview to fit his agenda.

[Destino]

Snyder's wife did not go on tv to "tell an interviewer that he is now surrounded by "better people," and that he's "grown and he's evolved."

If someone misrepresented my wife's intentions, I'd have a problem with it.

Maybe you're thinner skinned than I am. If someone accused my wife of doing something wrong that she didn't I'd be upset. If someone said my wife went on TV to compliment me, i'd brush some dirt off my shoulder. :cool:

---------- Post added February-3rd-2011 at 10:08 PM ----------

That's not what McKenna said. McKenna said "His wife, Tanya Snyder, is out selling the (Dan's) transformation too. Last week she went on local TV to tell an interviewer that he is now surrounded by 'better people' and that he's 'grown and evolved.'" The purpose of the interview was cancer awareness, not promoting Dan in any way. The interviewer asked her about Dan and she responded. McKenna belittled the actual purpose of the interview to fit his agenda.

So this entire drama would be fixed if he had inserted the words "for charity" and changed "to" and "tell" to "and" and "told"

"His wife, Tanya Snyder, is out selling the (Dan's) transformation too. Last week she went on local TV for charity and told an interviewer that he is now surrounded by 'better people' and that he's 'grown and evolved.'"

I still don't understand the rage because I find nothing wrong with going on TV to compliment your husband. She hasn't been accused of doing anything that is remotely bad or negative IMO. Just wasn't given credit for WHY she was on TV. Seems minor.

[slaga]

If someone said my wife went on TV to compliment me, i'd brush some dirt off my shoulder. :cool:

She did not do that.

She went on TV for a purpose, something she is a survivor from, something completely unrelated to Dan and the Redskins, something she is very passionate about. Mckenna twisted the event into something completely different to fit his agenda.

[Bootleg]

That's not what McKenna said. McKenna said "His wife, Tanya Snyder, is out selling the (Dan's) transformation too. Last week she went on local TV to tell an interviewer that he is now surrounded by 'better people' and that he's 'grown and evolved.'" The purpose of the interview was cancer awareness, not promoting Dan in any way. The interviewer asked her about Dan and she responded. McKenna belittled the actual purpose of the interview to fit his agenda.

The purpose of the interview was not cancer awareness.

Looks like Snyder's henchmen belittled the actual purpoose of the interview to fit his agenda.

[NattyBo]

So this entire drama would be fixed if he had inserted the words "for charity" and changed "to" and "tell" to "and" and "told"

Nah - they'd find another straw to grasp at.

[Destino]

She did not do that.

She went on TV for a purpose, something she is a survivor from, something completely unrelated to Dan and the Redskins, something she is very passionate about. Mckenna twisted the event into something completely different.

She did go on TV, take a question about her husband, and compliment him. She did that and no one is disputing it. The cause of this little molehill turned mountain is that the REASON she was on TV was unrelated to the question and in fact was a charitable cause. I get that and again, seems minor. Had they misquoted her and accused her of wrong doing I'd see the point in all of us bashing eachother over the head over this. Being that she stands accused of something I see as POSITIVE, going on tv to compliment her husband, I don't see the big deal.

[leaf]

Maybe you're thinner skinned than I am. If someone accused my wife of doing something wrong that she didn't I'd be upset. If someone said my wife went on TV to compliment me, i'd brush some dirt off my shoulder. :cool:

---------- Post added February-3rd-2011 at 10:08 PM ----------

So this entire drama would be fixed if he had inserted the words "for charity" and changed "to" and "tell" to "and" and "told"

"His wife, Tanya Snyder, is out selling the (Dan's) transformation too. Last week she went on local TV for charity and told an interviewer that he is now surrounded by 'better people' and that he's 'grown and evolved.'"

I think ur being a little disingenuous. Changing a few words isnt a trivial matter especially in the eyes of the law.

The difference between a murder charge and manslaughter is one word.

[Destino]

The purpose of the interview was not cancer awareness.

Looks like Snyder's henchmen belittled the actual purpoose of the interview to fit his agenda.

Wow damn... you're right.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/dcsportsbog/2010/11/tanya_snyder_redskins_owner_ha.html

I took it for granted that the interview was entirely about charity and that it was just a single off topic question. It wasn't about cancer and it wasn't entirely about charity at all. Watch it yourselves people. The topics were: NFL Play 60. Her modeling of NFL gear. AND DAN SNYDER. A very large portion of the interview was about Dan Snyder. They even talked about criticism and how he reacts to it.

See for yourself.

---------- Post added February-3rd-2011 at 10:24 PM ----------

I think ur being a little disingenuous. Changing a few words isnt a trivial matter especially in the eyes of the law.

The difference between a murder charge and manslaughter is one word.

watch the video.

[NattyBo]

Well, there goes that strawman then. Really looking forward to when Hogs Haven posts their conversation with the Florida lawyer who filed the suit against Snyder.

[leaf]

Wow damn... you're right.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/dcsportsbog/2010/11/tanya_snyder_redskins_owner_ha.html

I took it for granted that the interview was entirely about charity and that it was just a single off topic question. It wasn't about cancer and it wasn't entirely about charity at all. Watch it yourselves people. The topics were: NFL Play 60. Her modeling of NFL gear. AND DAN SNYDER. A very large portion of the interview was about Dan Snyder. They even talked about criticism and how he reacts to it.

See for yourself.

---------- Post added February-3rd-2011 at 10:24 PM ----------

watch the video.

Just did, and my opinion hasnt changed.

20 second sound bit discussing his job performance as owner in 11min video (the rest was just personal stuff that gets asked of all celebs). If rehabbing Dan's job performance image as owner of the redskins was the real motive she did an awful job.

[Destino]

Just did, and my opinion hasnt changed.

20 second sound bit discussing his job performance as owner in 11min video (the rest was just personal stuff that gets asked of all celebs). If rehabbing Dan was the real motive she did an awful job.

Now who is being disingenuous? 20 seconds my ass.

The video is 11:54 long. The charity questions ended at 3:40. The Dan Snyder questions start at 6:50 and go to the end about Dan Snyder.

That interview sure as hell was not entirely about charity. It wasn't even MOSTLY about charity. It had three obvious question themes. Charity, her modeling/commercials for the NFL, Dan Snyder. Particularly Dan Snyder's increased public exposure.

[elkabong82]

Like I said before, where is the insult there? He's saying she went on TV and spoke well of her husband. What am I supposed to be enraged about here?

Yup. I see that she was on TV for charity and is now accused of speaking well of her husband.

Still not feeling the fury though.

That's not exactly what he said. Look, I've explained it clear as day that the statement tries to assert her purpose for being there was to pump Dan up, and the implication is there that she is out doing so on a regular basis.

The video itself shows her listed as the 5k spokeswoman, and out of 11 minutes there's a small segment where they ask her about Snyder. Now I expect them to ask her about Snyder, being she is his wife, but that is not the reason she is there. "Last week she went on local tv to tell an interviewer that he is now surrounded by better people..." From that you'd think she went on solely because she wanted to pump up Snyder, when really her whole purpose there was about health (again, she is referred to as 5k spokeswoman."

So it's not that she was accused of speaking well for her husband, again, her purpose for being on there was health related, she was there as the 5k spokeswoman, NOT as a mouthpiece for Dan Snyder's public image.

---------- Post added February-3rd-2011 at 05:52 PM ----------

The purpose of the interview was not cancer awareness.

Looks like Snyder's henchmen belittled the actual purpoose of the interview to fit his agenda.

he's the only one that said she was on there for cancer issues, everyone else said health issues. He might have just inferred that the health issues were cancer because she is a recent survivor.

But hey don't let that stop you from disparaging the other side of the argument instead of legitmately trying toiscuss the issues. Snyder doesn't have any henchman on here, so why don't you treat fellow Redskins fans with a differing opinion with a little respect instead of just dismissing them as henchman. Or I could call you a McKenna henchman and then we get into labeling and the conversation goes nowhere, awesome.

Same with you NattyBo. The people who think Snyder is right have given a bunch of reasons why, the only refutation of such being that "it's an opinion" or an outright refusal that McKenna should be held accountable for his words and a refusal that in some cases he's blaming the wrong persn.

And really, was it even necessary to bring the man's wife into a criticism about his ownership? No.

Nobody in here is claiming Snyder has been a good owner, they aren't ignoring your side of the argument, we've been addressing it, you all should do the same.

---------- Post added February-3rd-2011 at 05:56 PM ----------

Now who is being disingenuous? 20 seconds my ass.

The video is 11:54 long. The charity questions ended at 3:40. The Dan Snyder questions start at 6:50 and go to the end about Dan Snyder.

That interview sure as hell was not entirely about charity. It wasn't even MOSTLY about charity. It had three obvious question themes. Charity, her modeling/commercials for the NFL, Dan Snyder. Particularly Dan Snyder's increased public exposure.

From the Steinberg article with Tanya Snyder's video:

"To help promote the latter event, she went on TBD's Sports Talk with Julie Parker and Alex Parker this week, and after they talked about the Play 60 and apparel stuff, they started talking football."

Even they assert her purpose for being there was to promote kids health, NOT to pump up Snyder. Was she? Yes. Does that mean McKenna is justified in claiming that pumping up Dan Snyder was her purpose (and he lists no other purpose leading one to believe pumping up Dan is the only reason she was there) for being there? No. McKenna also implies that she is out continually promoting Dan Snyder, which is also blatantly false and disparages the real cuases for which she is working with the NFL.

[Destino]

The video itself shows her listed as the 5k spokeswoman, and out of 11 minutes there's a small segment where they ask her about Snyder. Now I expect them to ask her about Snyder, being she is his wife, but that is not the reason she is there. "Last week she went on local tv to tell an interviewer that he is now surrounded by better people..." From that you'd think she went on solely because she wanted to pump up Snyder, when really her whole purpose there was about health (again, she is referred to as 5k spokeswoman."

So it's not that she was accused of speaking well for her husband, again, her purpose for being on there was health related, she was there as the 5k spokeswoman, NOT as a mouthpiece for Dan Snyder's public image.

This is BS that doesn't match up with the video at all. The majority of the interview wasn't about charity. In fact there was as much specifically about Dan Snyder as charity in terms of time. The question that has launched this entire debate was only the first of a theme that followed it.

Also Tony Wyllie on the radio said: "and when you make fun of your wife having breast cancer or being a national spokesperson for breast cancer, that crosses the line in my eyes." Still haven't seen anything backing that up.

[elkabong82]

This is BS that doesn't match up with the video at all. The majority of the interview wasn't about charity. In fact there was as much specifically about Dan Snyder as charity in terms of time. The question that has launched this entire debate was only the first of a theme that followed it.

There's no way you read my entire post and got this response out in 1 minute.

Again, even Steinberg says her purpose for being there was to promote kids health. McKenna's claim tries to make it seem like she was there only to pump up Dan and that she's been out promoting Dan in other outlets as well. We're talking about the purpose here, not how much time was spent on each thing. Please re-read my post and take the time to address the points of my argument before dismissing it rudely as "BS", it should take you more than 1 minute.

[Bootleg]

he's the only one that said she was on there for cancer issues, everyone else said health issues. He might have just inferred that the health issues were cancer because she is a recent survivor.

But hey don't let that stop you from disparaging the other side of the argument instead of legitmately trying toiscuss the issues. Snyder doesn't have any henchman on here, so why don't you treat fellow Redskins fans with a differing opinion with a little respect instead of just dismissing them as henchman. Or I could call you a McKenna henchman and then we get into labeling and the conversation goes nowhere, awesome.

I wasn't referring to any one on this board as a henchman, I was referring directly to Snyder's subordinates who went on radio claiming that she was spreading cancer awareness.

But don't let that stop you from, you know, whatever.

[Destino]

There's no way you read my entire post and got this response out in 1 minute.

Again, even Steinberg says her purpose for being there was to promote kids health. McKenna's claim tries to make it seem like she was there only to pump up Dan and that she's been out promoting Dan in other outlets as well. We're talking about the purpose here, not how much time was spent on each thing. Please re-read my post and take the time to address the points of my argument before dismissing it rudely as "BS", it should take you more than 1 minute.

I did read your entire post. I just think the actual video casts the situation in a new light. The interview was CLEARLY about more than just charity. If I were to describe the interview I wouldn't have said that it was about charity or Dan Snyder. I would have said it was about her. The topics were her charity work, her more public presence and commercials, her husband, and her family life in general. This is certainly not how it's been characterized up until this point by those furious over this supposed insult.

[elkabong82]

I wasn't referring to any one on this board as a henchman, I was referring directly to Snyder's subordinates who went on radio claiming that she was spreading cancer awareness.

But don't let that stop you from, you know, whatever.

Then that's my fault for misunderstanding you. To be fair what I thought you were saying could have been construed from your post.

I don't recall his representatives saying that she was spreading cancer awreness though, can you link to where they said that specifically, because I thought they had just said she was on promoting health awareness.

---------- Post added February-3rd-2011 at 06:18 PM ----------

I did read your entire post. I just think the actual video casts the situation in a new light. The interview was CLEARLY about more than just charity. If I were to describe the interview I wouldn't have said that it was about charity or Dan Snyder. I would have said it was about her. The topics were her charity work, her more public presence and commercials, her husband, and her family life in general. This is certainly not how it's been characterized up until this point by those furious over this supposed insult.

I think the video does obviously prove McKenna was correct that she was saying positive things about Snyder on there. But the key point in all this is purpose. She was referred to in her name at the bottom of the screen as the 5k spokeswoman, she was introduced as being on there to discuss kids health, and even Steinberg, who we know is no fan of Snyder's, said her purpose for being there was prmoting kids health.

McKenna tries to make the case she was only on there to pump up Dan and that she's doing that on a frequent basis. Would you say that assertion is correct? Was she there just to promote Dan? I think we both know she wasn't.

Plus, I'll ask again, was it even necessary to bring her up when criticizing Dan Snyder as the Redskins owner? I say no, and I say it's a low blow not only to bring her up when she is irrelavant to Dan the owner, and that it's classless to try and imply that she was there and is out and about on a pro-dan campaign.

[DRSmith]

http://www.myfloridalegal.com/newsrel.nsf/newsreleases/939A11BD0EA5CAB485256A390047D9C9

Fact- telecommunications company and its former marketing agent will pay $3.1 million to settle allegations that they switched consumers to the company's long-distance telephone services without permission, Attorney General Bob Butterworth announced today.

Under the Snyder/Verizon agreement, Snyder Direct Services, the division of Snyder Communications which marketed GTE’s long-distance in Florida, will shut down and forever cease all operations in Florida. Snyder Communications has in turn agreed to suspend all in-person solicitations of long-distance customers for 10 years.

No one said **** about Tanya and her money grubbing ass. Is not like he included her in the alphabet or added her in with G for Gold Digger. As in Tanya Snyder would never have looked at (let alone slept with) Danny Snyder if he didn't have the cash.

I doubt he himself was forging things

Do you know for a fact that the two of them do not love each other and her interest in him is only due to money?

Seems to me you are either bitter or jealous

[1972FAN]

It doesn't matter what anybody thinks here. I dont know Synder, his wife or have a desire to meet them. I do know the court will decide because he as well as anybody else is afforded that right under the Republic we live in. I care about the Redskins not the Reporter or Synder. More important things going on in the world then this "Globe"and "Inqiurer" material.

[Destino]

Plus, I'll ask again, was it even necessary to bring her up when criticizing Dan Snyder as the Redskins owner? I

Of course not, McKenna is a dbag which is obvious to anyone that read his article. The biggest crime in all this is that his career is going to improve from this debacle.

[elkabong82]

It doesn't matter what anybody thinks here. I dont know Synder, his wife or have a desire to meet them. I do know the court will decide because he as well as anybody else is afforded that right under the Republic we live in. I care about the Redskins not the Reporter or Synder. More important things going on in the world then this "Globe"and "Inqiurer" material.

You're right and thanks for the reminder. After a couple replies to people I am going to stop discussing this. I should have stopped after last night, football is more important.