CR, when is the last time Freeh produced an investigative report that was not discredited? And your still going to hang your hat on his reputation and expect to have some credibility?
As the Paterno, Spanier and Alum Trustees cases grind forward,
- Thread starter demlion
- Start date
CR, when is the last time Freeh produced an investigative report that was not discredited? And your still going to hang your hat on his reputation and expect to have some credibility?
I see CR still hasn't figured out how to use the quote function on the new board. No harm done, it makes it easy to skip right on by his posts.
Cruising Route 66
Well-Known Member
My guess is that another four years from now you'll still be trumpeting the same old message. Maybe you can lead another coffee clutch on the lawn at Old Main in 2020 to keep the troop's spirits up. Better yet make it an annual thing. LOL!
By court order, the trustees are precluded from revealing anything to the public and information needed for all the other cases will likely be tied up in protracted litigation, limited in scope for the particular case, and possibly sealed by the courts.
And just so you know, I'm never going away. Never!
Cruising Route 66
Well-Known Member
As in everything in life, there will always be those on the adversarial side of the argument that will try to discredit the other side. .
"I shall return." vs. "What Indians, I don't see any Indians"
"I have not yet begun to fight." "Icebergs? This Ship is unsinkable."
"Give me liberty or give me death." "I'm never going away! Never!"
Good to hear, who would be able to replace 17,000 posts with little or no credibility?
"I have not yet begun to fight." "Icebergs? This Ship is unsinkable."
"Give me liberty or give me death." "I'm never going away! Never!"
Good to hear, who would be able to replace 17,000 posts with little or no credibility?
You say that as if you think that is a good thing. I guess you do think that.
It is comforting to know that your 100% track record at being not just morally and ethically wrong....but also being 100% wrong with your prognostications.....remains intact.
CR, my guess is that four years from now (and well beyond) you'll still be in denial about your corrupt cronies. I'm glad to hear that you're never going away. Your comical posts are always good for a laugh. And you do make this board "a better place just by showing up". (To borrow your own words.)
DemLion...I don't know what I want more...for the truth to come out, or not have to listen to that moron's drivel anymore
No need to pick. Youre gonna get the first and the second right after that!
You probably believed Freeh when he said that Richard Jewell bombed the Atlanta Olympics and that Wen Ho Lee (a Taiwanese) was a spy for the PRC.
Why would your friends need to keep things tied up in "protracted litigation" if they didn't have something to hide?
Like you said, "if it walks like a duck..."
same Louie that went to the same church as the worst spy in US history and never knew???
BAHAHAHAHAHAHA!! if that is the guy CR is hanging his hat on, I have to laugh
BAHAHAHAHAHAHA!! if that is the guy CR is hanging his hat on, I have to laugh
Not just the usual suspects on here, but I know Paul Suhey was rumor mongering and telling the "dissident alumni" that they'd move forward if they really wanted what's best for JVP and PSU.
he's like the drunk who hangs out at the cool bar, and everyone dismisses his idiotic ramblings, but he still thinks he is the coolest, smartest person in the place.
Q: When did they flip the script to condemn Curley, Schultz and Spanier in the Freeh Report?
I bet the timing lines up perfectly with "the Paterno hook."
The BOT, Louis Freeh, OAG and NCAA exchanged the emails above:
If it's true that the initial versions of the Freeh Report did not condemn PSU administrators or Joe, then what triggered the change? Who stepped in to flip the script and why?
I bet the timing lines up perfectly with "the Paterno hook."
The BOT, Louis Freeh, OAG and NCAA exchanged the emails above:
- The emails about the "the Paterno hook" suggest a change in narrative (ie, Freeh Report flipped the script).
- Frazier's endorsement of the "lessons to be learned from excessive respect for 'icons' (Coach Paterno and Penn State football)" reinforces the narrative they're going for.
If it's true that the initial versions of the Freeh Report did not condemn PSU administrators or Joe, then what triggered the change? Who stepped in to flip the script and why?
- Our trustees needed to be validated in their decision to fire/shame/scapegoat/curb-stomp JVP.
- The NCAA (and Big Ten) were salivating at the chance to drop Thor's hammer on PSU.
- Louis Freeh was auditioning for future contracts from the NCAA (emails show him soliciting work).
- Governor Tom Corbett wanted to blast Graham Spanier to the moon after losing every budget battle.
- Frank Fina and the OAG gambled their careers on charges against Curley, Schultz, Spanier (and JS).
- Old guard trustees held sick, personal vendettas against Joe Paterno. Ten years ago or so, the Surma family sent a mass email to all former Lettermen promising to humilate Joe before he checked out.
- Penn State trustees enjoyed indemnity protections, but Second Mile directors were completely vulnerable.
Q: When did they flip the script to condemn Curley, Schultz and Spanier in the Freeh Report?
I bet the timing lines up perfectly with "the Paterno hook."
The BOT, Louis Freeh, OAG and NCAA exchanged the emails above:
- The emails about the "the Paterno hook" suggest a change in narrative (ie, Freeh Report flipped the script).
- Frazier's endorsement of the "lessons to be learned from excessive respect for 'icons' (Coach Paterno and Penn State football)" reinforces the narrative they're going for.
If it's true that the initial versions of the Freeh Report did not condemn PSU administrators or Joe, then what triggered the change? Who stepped in to flip the script and why?
All these parties shared the same mutual interest in taking a scorched-earth approach to Penn State. You'd figure the fix was in from Day 1 on the Freeh Report. Despite their best efforts, sounds like they couldn't come up with anything on JVP/PSU until someone decided to use two or three emails to blow up the whole damn university in front of a live, nationally televised audience. Is it possible that the Freeh Report could've been published without implicating C/S/S/P? Or was there someone pulling the strings behind the scenes to ensure a predetermined outcome.
- Our trustees needed to be validated in their decision to fire/shame/scapegoat/curb-stomp JVP.
- The NCAA (and Big Ten) were salivating at the chance to drop Thor's hammer on PSU.
- Louis Freeh was auditioning for future contracts from the NCAA (emails show him soliciting work).
- Governor Tom Corbett wanted to blast Graham Spanier to the moon after losing every budget battle.
- Frank Fina and the OAG gambled their careers on charges against Curley, Schultz, Spanier (and JS).
- Old guard trustees held sick, personal vendettas against Joe Paterno. Ten years ago or so, the Surma family sent a mass email to all former Lettermen promising to humilate Joe before he checked out.
- Penn State trustees enjoyed indemnity protections, but Second Mile directors were completely vulnerable.
What utter, shameless, shit.
A "hook" in journalist terms is the thing that gets someone to click or read a story. I don't know why you think that it suggests anything about a script being "flipped."
Q: When did they flip the script to condemn Curley, Schultz and Spanier in the Freeh Report?
I bet the timing lines up perfectly with "the Paterno hook."
The BOT, Louis Freeh, OAG and NCAA exchanged the emails above:
- The emails about the "the Paterno hook" suggest a change in narrative (ie, Freeh Report flipped the script).
- Frazier's endorsement of the "lessons to be learned from excessive respect for 'icons' (Coach Paterno and Penn State football)" reinforces the narrative they're going for.
If it's true that the initial versions of the Freeh Report did not condemn PSU administrators or Joe, then what triggered the change? Who stepped in to flip the script and why?
All these parties shared the same mutual interest in taking a scorched-earth approach to Penn State. You'd figure the fix was in from Day 1 on the Freeh Report. Despite their best efforts, sounds like they couldn't come up with anything on JVP/PSU until someone decided to use two or three emails to blow up the whole damn university in front of a live, nationally televised audience. Is it possible that the Freeh Report could've been published without implicating C/S/S/P? Or was there someone pulling the strings behind the scenes to ensure a predetermined outcome.
- Our trustees needed to be validated in their decision to fire/shame/scapegoat/curb-stomp JVP.
- The NCAA (and Big Ten) were salivating at the chance to drop Thor's hammer on PSU.
- Louis Freeh was auditioning for future contracts from the NCAA (emails show him soliciting work).
- Governor Tom Corbett wanted to blast Graham Spanier to the moon after losing every budget battle.
- Frank Fina and the OAG gambled their careers on charges against Curley, Schultz, Spanier (and JS).
- Old guard trustees held sick, personal vendettas against Joe Paterno. Ten years ago or so, the Surma family sent a mass email to all former Lettermen promising to humilate Joe before he checked out.
- Penn State trustees enjoyed indemnity protections, but Second Mile directors were completely vulnerable.
Soooo.....in February the Freeh lawyers email says they were supposedly wrapping up the Freeh report by Spring. Then in June Tomalis is emailing Freeh people about the "Paterno hook" in the paper and they were happy it was being picked up by the media.
It would be interesting to see how this fits in with the alleged changing of the Freeh report from not blaming CSS/ Paterno to blaming CSS/ Paterno.
I'd like to see more context but it does seem like Tomalis was celebrating with a Freeh lawyer that they got the media by the 'Paterno hook'. I imagine the Paterno lawyers have subpoenaed Tomalis' emails.
Oh yeah- and so much for the promise of an independent review that the BoT members wouldn't see until we all did.
Seems to me that you've missed a few details, but the big one is that Judges often unseal records when it is in the public interest.
Just ask Bill Cosby.
The June 12th email is in anticipation of stories coming out on the PSU emails implicating JVP.
Of course, the phony email was the one that was used to show that Joe was the ONLY intervening factor to stopping the 2001 report.
There are more evidence problems in the Conspiracy of Silence case than you can shake a stick at....and some of them involve subornation of perjury.
This happened...
§ 4952. Intimidation of witnesses or victims.
(a) Offense defined.--A person commits an offense if, with the intent to or with the knowledge that his conduct will obstruct, impede, impair, prevent or interfere with the administration of criminal justice, he intimidates or attempts to intimidate any witness or victim to:
(1) Refrain from informing or reporting to any law enforcement officer, prosecuting official or judge concerning any information, document or thing relating to the commission of a crime.
(2) Give any false or misleading information or testimony relating to the commission of any crime to any law enforcement officer, prosecuting official or judge.
(3) Withhold any testimony, information, document or thing relating to the commission of a crime from any law enforcement officer, prosecuting official or judge.
(4) Give any false or misleading information or testimony or refrain from giving any testimony, information, document or thing, relating to the commission of a crime, to an attorney representing a criminal defendant.
(5) Elude, evade or ignore any request to appear or legal process summoning him to appear to testify or supply evidence.
(6) Absent himself from any proceeding or investigation to which he has been legally summoned.
(b) Grading.--
(1) The offense is a felony of the degree indicated in paragraphs (2) through (4) if:
(i) The actor employs force, violence or deception, or threatens to employ force or violence, upon the witness or victim or, with the requisite intent or knowledge upon any other person.
(ii) The actor offers any pecuniary or other benefit to the witness or victim or, with the requisite intent or knowledge, to any other person.
(iii) The actor's conduct is in furtherance of a conspiracy to intimidate a witness or victim.
(iv) The actor accepts, agrees or solicits another to accept any pecuniary or other benefit to intimidate a witness or victim.
(v) The actor has suffered any prior conviction for any violation of this section or any predecessor law hereto, or has been convicted, under any Federal statute or statute of any other state, of an act which would be a violation of this section if committed in this State.
(2) The offense is a felony of the first degree if a felony of the first degree or murder in the first or second degree was charged in the case in which the actor sought to influence or intimidate a witness or victim as specified in this subsection.
(3) The offense is a felony of the second degree if a felony of the second degree is the most serious offense charged in the case in which the actor sought to influence or intimidate a witness or victim as specified in this subsection.
(4) The offense is a felony of the third degree in any other case in which the actor sought to influence or intimidate a witness or victim as specified in this subsection.
(5) Otherwise the offense is a misdemeanor of the second degree.
(Dec. 10, 2001, P.L.855, No.90, eff. 60 days)
Last edited:
Q: When did they flip the script to condemn Curley, Schultz and Spanier in the Freeh Report?
I bet the timing lines up perfectly with "the Paterno hook."
The BOT, Louis Freeh, OAG and NCAA exchanged the emails above:
- The emails about the "the Paterno hook" suggest a change in narrative (ie, Freeh Report flipped the script).
- Frazier's endorsement of the "lessons to be learned from excessive respect for 'icons' (Coach Paterno and Penn State football)" reinforces the narrative they're going for.
If it's true that the initial versions of the Freeh Report did not condemn PSU administrators or Joe, then what triggered the change? Who stepped in to flip the script and why?
All these parties shared the same mutual interest in taking a scorched-earth approach to Penn State. You'd figure the fix was in from Day 1 on the Freeh Report. Despite their best efforts, sounds like they couldn't come up with anything on JVP/PSU until someone decided to use two or three emails to blow up the whole damn university in front of a live, nationally televised audience. Is it possible that the Freeh Report could've been published without implicating C/S/S/P? Or was there someone pulling the strings behind the scenes to ensure a predetermined outcome.
- Our trustees needed to be validated in their decision to fire/shame/scapegoat/curb-stomp JVP.
- The NCAA (and Big Ten) were salivating at the chance to drop Thor's hammer on PSU.
- Louis Freeh was auditioning for future contracts from the NCAA (emails show him soliciting work).
- Governor Tom Corbett wanted to blast Graham Spanier to the moon after losing every budget battle.
- Frank Fina and the OAG gambled their careers on charges against Curley, Schultz, Spanier (and JS).
- Old guard trustees held sick, personal vendettas against Joe Paterno. Ten years ago or so, the Surma family sent a mass email to all former Lettermen promising to humilate Joe before he checked out.
- Penn State trustees enjoyed indemnity protections, but Second Mile directors were completely vulnerable.
Makes alot more sense if you realize they needed several "hooks" for each possible outcome in the Sandusky trial. If Sandusky gets acquitted they exonerate everyone, if Victim 6 & Victim 8 verdicts are not guilty then they lose the "football culture" narrative, if all the Victim 2 verdicts are not guilty they exonerate Joe & the administrators. The OAG leaks the emails on 6/11/12 (most likely in a last ditch effort to get one of the 3 administrators to flip) and PSU is eager to see the reaction it gets. More details of the emails are leaked right after the trial so they can be sure the public's eager to buy the Paterno hook which they know is weak.
Last edited:
I'm pretty sure they just can't reveal who said what, But they may be able to reveal the what. The big thing that they can definitely reveal is the what that's not even there!
CR
But what if someone who actually has experience doing these types of investigations (neither Freeh nor anyone at FSS had conducted an internal investigation of this nature at an educational institution), reviews Freeh's notes and records, and concludes that Freeh's report was flawed at its core? Let's assume for a moment that the BOT had nothing to do with it but that Freeh himself has ulterior motives and, essentially, pulled the wool over the eyes of the BOT. What if that was the outcome after review?
For example what if it turns out Freeh was using people on his team to proposition the NCAA for ongoing work during the Penn State investigation? What if it turns out that part of the story Freeh to get Pepper to buy his firm was to create this NCAA investigations arm? What if it turns out Freeh was back channeling info to the NCAA the entire time?
And as for his character, what if it turns out that Freeh manufactured a fraudulent computer failure in advance of his press conference so that people could not read the report before he spoke on it at his press conference. Wait that was already confirmed. Scratch that.
Open your eyes. Even giving the BOT at the time the benefit of the doubt, you cannot possibly be this dumb not to see what was happening.
CR-66--you said:
"My guess is that another four years from now you'll still be trumpeting the same old message. Maybe you can lead another coffee clutch on the lawn at Old Main in 2020 to keep the troop's spirits up. Better yet make it an annual thing. LOL!
By court order, the trustees are precluded from revealing anything to the public and information needed for all the other cases will likely be tied up in protracted litigation, limited in scope for the particular case, and possibly sealed by the courts.
And just so you know, I'm never going away. Never!"
As you are no doubt aware, my prediction is that a) we will eventually know all the things you say we will not know, and b) in that event you will disappear from this discussion like the proverbial fart in a windstorm.
Let's focus our attention on the second part, about how you will never go away. Seems there is a simple way to ensure that you come back here for your comeuppance when the truth is known. Certainly Tom McA and others know or could easily find your identity. Everyone knows my identity--hell, my name is at the bottom of every post I make.
So all you have to do is give Tom Mc A permission to reveal your identity here if you disappear for, let's say, 30 days when the truth becomes known. That way you can run but you cannot hide, and of course if you are never going away then your identity remains a secret. Sort of like having McA hold the money in a bet.
Deal? I, of all people, will understand if you do not want to make this deal, since that will be driven by the same fear that I predict will make you vanish when we find out how wrong you were.
Be sure to answer right here so everyone can see it with the same prominence as they can see your prediction quoted above.
"My guess is that another four years from now you'll still be trumpeting the same old message. Maybe you can lead another coffee clutch on the lawn at Old Main in 2020 to keep the troop's spirits up. Better yet make it an annual thing. LOL!
By court order, the trustees are precluded from revealing anything to the public and information needed for all the other cases will likely be tied up in protracted litigation, limited in scope for the particular case, and possibly sealed by the courts.
And just so you know, I'm never going away. Never!"
As you are no doubt aware, my prediction is that a) we will eventually know all the things you say we will not know, and b) in that event you will disappear from this discussion like the proverbial fart in a windstorm.
Let's focus our attention on the second part, about how you will never go away. Seems there is a simple way to ensure that you come back here for your comeuppance when the truth is known. Certainly Tom McA and others know or could easily find your identity. Everyone knows my identity--hell, my name is at the bottom of every post I make.
So all you have to do is give Tom Mc A permission to reveal your identity here if you disappear for, let's say, 30 days when the truth becomes known. That way you can run but you cannot hide, and of course if you are never going away then your identity remains a secret. Sort of like having McA hold the money in a bet.
Deal? I, of all people, will understand if you do not want to make this deal, since that will be driven by the same fear that I predict will make you vanish when we find out how wrong you were.
Be sure to answer right here so everyone can see it with the same prominence as they can see your prediction quoted above.
Wait a second here! Tomalis was emailing the Freeh team that the Philly Inq. Picked up the "Paterno hook"???? WTF?!?!?! That's not your smoking gun but somewhere in that chain of events Wick will definitely find that smoking gun. So basically they came up with the Paterno hook for this story, leaked it to the philly, and are emailing each other that they took the bait? oh my!!! I hope when wick gets Ron on the stand that it is streamed live so I can watch that questioning under oath!!!!!
Then I look forward to seeing you here at the end. I too am never going away.
His smarminess and lack of reason made me nuts so I've had CR66 on ignore for quite awhile now. The above is a great example of each. In paragraph #1 the smarm is obvious. I doubt anyone will be trumping the same old message four years from now since the matter SHOULD be moved along. Then again, four and a half years ago who would have thought nothing would have changed since 2011??
Paragraph #2 shows his stupendous lack of reason. He acts like everything being hidden away from prying eyes is a good thing. As has been asked literally thousands of times, what are they trying do hide?? All the promises of transparency and openness were obvious attempts to get people to "move on". It was a big joke had at the expense of alumni and friends of the university.
And there's one final thing which has been discussed and which I'm sure someone here can shed light on. Even though the trustees aren't permitted to reveal anything to the public, what happens if they discover criminal conduct on the part of the OG and/or their cronies??
CR will never agree to Dem's proposal. He, like everyone else from the BOT in this mess, is far too big of a coward to accept any responsibility for this disaster.
No worries. I'm sure we'll all have rock-solid evidence of who he/she is eventually. And we shall trumpet it loud and wide.
No worries. I'm sure we'll all have rock-solid evidence of who he/she is eventually. And we shall trumpet it loud and wide.
The "Paterno hook" is the line that someone (likely Freeh's team) inserted into the email that says "and talking it over with Joe yesterday --" The email is the first one you see in the post below and the line in underlined in green.
http://notpsu.blogspot.com/2015/05/ericksons-notebook-reveals-evidence-of.html
ALSO NOTE: This blog contains the email exchange in which Erickson dupes Dunham about fearing more violations will be uncovered.
Erickson truly was a real Piece Of....Work. His name is going to come off that building, but maybe we Alums could ask Centre County to name the jail after him.
Last edited:
Cruising Route 66
Well-Known Member
In his recent ruling, Judge Howsare already established the precedent for keeping the records out of the public domain. Clearly he doesn't feel it's in the public's interest to release the information and especially when it involves private party litigation and is subject to ACP.
You seem to ignore Aoshiro's claim that : "A "hook" in journalist terms is the thing that gets someone to click or read a story", which is not at all close to the meaning you are ascribing to it. Maybe Aoshiro is mistaken, but if not your conclusion does not logically follow.
Note that the story in the Philly.com reference contains no reference to any action taken by Joe which you feel was inserted into a prior email. He is only referenced as having lost his job along with Spanier. Joe is not being "hooked" to the decision not to go to outside authorities which appears to be your reading of the meaning of the Tomalis email.
Similar threads
