Mueller report released

RolandDeschain

Well-known member
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
33,138
Reaction score
973
Location
Kissimmee, FL
Sgt. Largent":1m772ly6 said:
RolandDeschain":1m772ly6 said:
I do believe Sgt. Largent is willfully ignoring the AP's refusal to receive extra information about a supposed cover-up.

Tells us a lot about him.

Thanks for making judgement calls on my character.

The AP is NEVER going to reveal sources, it's the cornerstone of their entire industry. That doesn't mean the reporters were lying, it means the AP is protecting their writers and reporters from revealing decades of gathering sources and information contacts.
I see that my judgement call was correct, because it has NOTHING to do with revealing sources. We are talking about the AP *DECLINING TO RECEIVE* the NFL's phone records when the NFL ***OFFERED*** them up.

The only reason to do this is because of something you knew you would find, or specifically not find, in them; likely leading to having to print a correction about previously published false assertions.

Seriously, what would you think if the AP had declined to receive Watergate records back in the day, or something? A press corps does not simply decline additional information. Not unless they know it'd hurt them in some capacity.

Nobody's talking about trying to get the AP to reveal a source.
 

Hawkfan77

Active member
Joined
Feb 27, 2011
Messages
3,280
Reaction score
0
pehawk":wf7vqisv said:
Even if it came out Goodell not only saw the tape, but invited friends over to watch it on a big screen with popcorn and recorded laughter, I wouldn't care.

I don't know why but the image of this made me laugh
 

Sgt. Largent

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 1, 2012
Messages
25,560
Reaction score
7,616
RolandDeschain":2i5zid6n said:
The only reason to do this is because of something you knew you would find, or specifically not find, in them; likely leading to having to print a correction about previously published false assertions.

In order to get to all this the AP would have to reveal the reporters who spoke to the law enforcement officials and anonymous "league sources." How can the AP give Mueller what he wants without specific names and sources?

You're the one jumping to conclusions about why the AP declined, even though the Katherine Carroll specifically said;

"The Mueller team did ask us for source material and other newsgathering information, but we declined. Everything that we report and confirm goes into our stories. We do not offer up reporters' notes and sources."

What do you think would happen to the league office sources or specific law enforcement officials if they got dragged through this? THAT'S why the freedom of press laws exist, to protect the truth from being compromised or bullied once revealed.
 

Sports Hernia

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
44,755
Reaction score
3,372
Location
The pit
RolandDeschain":gcbm4slj said:
Sports Hernia":gcbm4slj said:
Nice to see you are still sticking up for your boy! :)
At least you are consistant. 8)
*Consistent.

Also, I know you won't believe it, but he's really not my boy. I just think people should be vilified for things they deserve. God knows there's enough available on most major public figures to slap them around legitimately with.
Sorry, my spell check gave me 2 choices and I guessed wrong. 8)

Rog is no way a "victim", sorry.

As for the any further Rog discussion, let it go brother, it's just going to be a circular argument. 8)
 

kearly

New member
Joined
Mar 6, 2007
Messages
15,975
Reaction score
0
Mueller works for a firm that has had a working relationship with the NFL for a broadcasting deal, and also had worked for the Cowboys and Redskins. I don't really see how someone like that can honestly claim he's independent.

It also appears that the investigation didn't cover the law enforcement official who claimed to have sent a DVD of the footage to NFL headquaters and who provided a 12 second audio clip to the AP with a female member of the NFL office seeing and reacting to the video he sent. As others have suggested, it could just be that Mueller wasn't able to track this source down, but the fact that this crucial part of the investigation ultimately went uninvestigated makes its findings hollow.

I also think it's kind of insulting to our intelligence that the NFL very likely has the best and most expensive intelligence/investigation network among any privately owned industry in the world, and yet they want us to believe they wouldn't have seen the tape or that they were apathetic about acquiring it. They could probably tell you what Jameis Winston had for breakfast this morning.

I kind of think the tape outrage is misplaced and is mostly used as a tool by those who hate Goodell, but I honestly cannot remember any sports scandal that was more disingenuous and didn't result in a firing.

Goodell keeps his job, but this report doesn't help him either. He is far from exonerated in the court of public opinion. Owners were coming out to support him even before the findings. It is what it is.
 

DavidSeven

New member
Joined
Jan 18, 2013
Messages
5,742
Reaction score
0
That was the point of all the 1,000 phone calls that Mueller's group made and the subsequent offer to turn the records over to the AP. They were looking for the "law enforcement official" who claimed to send the league the DVD. They couldn't find him, and the AP declined to turn over their source, which is within their right. If you look at the details of the AP's original story, the "law enforcement official's" claims are pretty shaky. He claims he sent an unmarked package to the NFL league offices and attached a note asking to receive a call back on a disposable cell phone. He claims to have received a VM on that disposable from the league office. Mueller checked every phone call made from the league office on that day, and offered to give the AP access to the records. The AP declined. They also set up an anonymous tip line among other measures. What more could they have done?

As far as him not being truly "independent," he works for a major national law firm. This kind of work probably requires the sophistication of a major national law firm. I am guessing every major law firm in the country has done at least some work for either the NFL directly or one of its network partners. The number of firms in the country that could handle this type of investigation with any competence is probably pretty small. No matter who you pick to do it, there will be a way to discredit them if you want to look hard enough.

Mueller is a former FBI Director. Former US Marine. Purple heart and all that. If we can find a way to say this guy is dirty, then there is utterly no one else who would pass the test.
 

Sarlacc83

Active member
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
17,110
Reaction score
1
Location
Portland, OR
pehawk":39nug7np said:
Why are we requiring the NFL to police their employees and/or be a moral compass?

To be fair, that is how Goodell 'views' the NFL. He's always busting out that very same phrase when it comes to talking about his punishment policies. So it's definitely more than a little hypocritical, and it shows just how deep he's got himself into this by moralizing.
 

pehawk

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 23, 2007
Messages
24,216
Reaction score
1,738
Sarlacc83":36flo10i said:
pehawk":36flo10i said:
Why are we requiring the NFL to police their employees and/or be a moral compass?

To be fair, that is how Goodell 'views' the NFL. He's always busting out that very same phrase when it comes to talking about his punishment policies. So it's definitely more than a little hypocritical, and it shows just how deep he's got himself into this by moralizing.

I don't follow.
 

Sarlacc83

Active member
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
17,110
Reaction score
1
Location
Portland, OR
pehawk":eqjga761 said:
Sarlacc83":eqjga761 said:
pehawk":eqjga761 said:
Why are we requiring the NFL to police their employees and/or be a moral compass?

To be fair, that is how Goodell 'views' the NFL. He's always busting out that very same phrase when it comes to talking about his punishment policies. So it's definitely more than a little hypocritical, and it shows just how deep he's got himself into this by moralizing.

I don't follow.

Goodell talks about the league as a trendsetter for social norms; they are the nation's moral compass. In turn, his (now former) position as judge, jury, and executioner of player disclipine was good and proper. Yet, when it comes time to do it internally, even taking responsibility for his own actions, he shows that it's just a phrase to him, to be used when 'politically' expedient in advancing his agenda.

That make more sense? I think I assumed too much prior knowledge.
 

pehawk

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 23, 2007
Messages
24,216
Reaction score
1,738
Sarlacc83":2rwqates said:
pehawk":2rwqates said:
Sarlacc83":2rwqates said:
pehawk":2rwqates said:
Why are we requiring the NFL to police their employees and/or be a moral compass?

To be fair, that is how Goodell 'views' the NFL. He's always busting out that very same phrase when it comes to talking about his punishment policies. So it's definitely more than a little hypocritical, and it shows just how deep he's got himself into this by moralizing.

I don't follow.

Goodell talks about the league as a trendsetter for social norms; they are the nation's moral compass. In turn, his (now former) position as judge, jury, and executioner of player disclipine was good and proper. Yet, when it comes time to do it internally, even taking responsibility for his own actions, he shows that it's just a phrase to him, to be used when 'politically' expedient in advancing his agenda.

That make more sense? I think I assumed too much prior knowledge.

Yeah, now it makes more sense. What was wrongly assumed was your opinion on Goodell in general.
 

Hawk Finn

New member
Joined
Jul 11, 2009
Messages
1,368
Reaction score
0
"Mueller Report released"

Surprised a forum member hasn't proposed bringing it in for a tryout.
 
Top