Yeah, well then why say anything? Posts like his have been a dime a dozen on this board since day one of this mess. Frankly, I no longer believe any of them. At this point, it's nothing more than BS. After so much time if there were indeed some surprises/disappointments at least something would have come out. And please, spare me the drivel about the wheels of justice turning ever so slowly. It no longer matters what the truth is. There will be no justice because Penn State's reputation has been cemented for eternity. Way to go BOT, and the same goes for those unwilling to speak up.
FC: Judge gives NCAA permission to file new response in Paterno lawsuit(updated w/ new NCAA filing)
- Thread starter LundyPSU
- Start date
So, you're saying the interviewees all signed oral confidentiality agreements and those signed oral agreements are all kept in a lawyer's office somewhere in Philadelphia. Am I understanding that correctly?
Misder, I think you know plenty. I wish all would share and we see how all claims compare.
I am not calling anyone a liar. But there seems to be so much BS, I am not sure anyone would recognize the truth if it eventually comes out
how the f**k do you sign an oral agreement?? LOL. on second thought, I don't want to know!!!
CR signs his like this:how the f**k do you sign an oral agreement?? LOL. on second thought, I don't want to know!!!
how the f**k do you sign an oral agreement?? LOL. on second thought, I don't want to know!!!
I think you missed the irony, and now that you've spoiled it we'll never hear CR's enlightened response.
CR signs his like this:
BOOM! drop the mic, Carnes just got PWNED!!!
There were no confidentiality agreements with those interviewed.
Period...End of story
Period...End of story
"This private citizen might be so mad that he considers taking legal action against you and BWI."
Hmmmmm, interesting...threatening to take legal action against another poster and BWI is exactly what you did to me a few years ago when I openly schooled you and you got so mad you became unhinged. Now you are ascribing that sort of behavior to someone you say isn't you, nor do you know him. Got it. Is your next step to challenge bjf to a duel at a game like you did with me? You won't even agree to meet him even though he begs. You couldn't help it and outed yourself and now you want to try to walk it back. LMAO at you!
Where have I heard THAT said before.
Everyone who claims to be "in the know" tells us there is more information that needs to be made available.
Well, I have a question - why ISN'T that information being made public? If its going to hurt the JoeBots and their arguments, it would have already been released. So, its something that MUST destroy the current narrative - otherwise it would have already been made public instead of being kept secret, and there wouldn't be such legal maneuvering to keep the truth hidden.
Mr. Fenchak is going to get sued because he disparaged someone on the Internet and posted pictures of the individual available on the Internet? Duh. This happens on the Internet countless times involving countless people every day.
Also, jim carnes claims to have "memorialized" Mr. Fenchak's posts and the pictures he posted. That sounds creepy on the part of carnes.
Oops. I attacked jim carnes on the Internet. I guess I am going to get sued. Duh.
400 interviews. Not necessarily interviewees.
Could've been 399 interviews with Vicky, Surma and Kenny for all we know - each one interviewed 100 different times. But of course, we don't know, because the source material is kept locked up behind closed doors.
There's a well known Michigan troll who has been "archiving" posts since 1999 for "Law Enforcement" and the "Southern Defense League" to use against other posters.
are we talking actual irony, or Alanis Morrisette "irony"?
The most ironic part of that entire song is that Alanis wrote a whole song about Irony, and none of the examples she gave were ironic.
Once again, I just wanted to reiterate - I have Jimmy and MichNitt on ignore, but this has easily been one of the most entertaining threads in a long time. Especially since I don't have to give myself a concussion and simultaneously damage my desk by reading Jim's asinine logic. Oh wait, did I say logic? I meant lies.
I reread your post. You're right, I did. Mea culpas.
Joined:
May 29, 2001
Messages:
16,938
Likes Received:
45
almost 17K posts and less than 50 likes. only a relentless douchebag would keep posting with those numbers.
Oh, you're back to this again? Since you ignored my response in the other thread, please tell me who the coaches (plural, meaning more than one) were who the NCAA referred to as having ignored Sandusky. For reference, again, "some" is an indefinite pronoun and can be singular or plural, depending on what it's referring to. Therefore, since "coaches" is plural, some is also plural.
Have you ever seen Jim Carnes and Mr. Hankey in the same room? Things that make you go hhhhmmm?
How likely is it that 2 different posters post the exact same BS? I know they're 2 different clowns, so one is either stealing from the other or they are collaborating.
This semantic discussion on the meaning of the word "some" again????
If I have 10 cookies, and I eat 1 cookie, I have eaten some of the cookies.
Similarly, if there were 10 Penn State football coaches, and 1 of the football coaches was directly implicated, some of the Penn State football coaches were directly implicated.
"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."--I. Montoya
not according to the definition above. If you have eaten only 1 cookie, you should say, I've eaten a cookie. If you ate 2 or more cookies, you could say I have eaten some cookies.
What if I have eaten less than one cookie? Two-thirds of a cookie?
Isn't that a case of eating "some" of the 10 cookies? So "some" covers numbers less than 1, AND greater than 1, but not the number 1 itself?
Seriously, I hope Jay has a better argument than a Bill-Clinton-esque argument about the word "some." Because that doesn't seem to be a winning argument.
no, then you would say, 'I have eaten some of a cookie' . Because cookie is plural, some means more than 1 in that case.
You did see where the lady got out of her parking tickets because the statue cited lacked a comma when listing the vehicles that could be ticketed.
Yep, I saw that article.
I don't think that case is relevant here because that's a matter where exact wording is relevant. The "letter of the law" is the "letter of the law", as it is. In this case, Jay needs to prove that people --- people who are not "slaves" to exact definitions of a word and have the ability think in shades of gray --- took the wording in the Consent Decree and began to think that "Jay misbehaved as regards Sandusky!"
Working against Jay is the fact that the majority of our 2011 assistant coaches are currently working in the football field. E.g., many people did not take the wording in the Consent Decree and think "Coach Johnson/Vanderlinden/Bradley/et cetera misbehaved as regards Sandusky."
Correct because "cookies" is plural. Mich-nitwit thinks that if he quotes improper diction enough times it somehow makes it proper - go figure??? When you couple some with "coaches" (the plural of coach), it absolutely means more than one. However, in this case, I think the statement reads "coaches and administrators" which could be fulfilled by at least one of each I believe.
let's face it, of all of the coaches currently employed at other institutions, none are at the same level as they were at PSU, with the possible exception of Bradley. ( is DC at UCLA at the same level as DC of PSU??? If Jim Mora gets sick, would they turn to TB to take over as PSU did with TB?) LJ made a lateral move, Vandy down, Buggs down, Kenney down, Jay no job, MM no job.. So why is it these guys cant get jobs?? Because they are not qualified or because of the stink of the JS saga??
I think some of your claims above are a bit of a stretch (Tom Bradley, Larry Johnson and the unnamed-thus-far John Thomas have definitely been at equal-level jobs post-PSU), but fine, I'll play along. I'll speculate that jobs that Jay was considered for prior to July 2012, he is no longer being considered for.
Now let's take a look at Jay's lawsuit. Let's look specifically at this quote: Before the execution of the consent decree, Jay Paterno was a top candidate for open head coaching positions at comparable universities."
The challenge to Jay --- name those schools. Name what schools, prior to July 2012, where Jay Paterno was a "top candidate for an open head coaching position."
If you read the NCAA's court-filing earlier this week, the NCAA called Jay out themselves on this specific claim (reference paragraph 147 in the link at the very beginning of this thread).
OK Jay --- you were once a top candidate for open head coaching positions, and now the likes of UConn, BC, James Madison and Colorado won't even interview you? Go prove that. Go prove that you were "a coach in demand" in the pre-July 2012 era.
Last edited:
well I guess Jay has to subpoena those schools and ask them, all one of them has to say is, 'we considered Jay, but due to things at PSU we crossed him off our list'. Or heck even if they him and haw about it, 'well nothing really specific, but well you know at that time...' Game over. That's all I'd need.
Correct and it can be argued that this was the NCAA's intent by painting with such a broad brush - if it was not their intent why carpet bomb the whole staff by painting with such a broad brush? Here is the kicker in this regard, the very investigators & prosecutors who investigated the case (e.g., the Pennsylvania OAG & SWIGJ) say NO MEMBER OF PSU FOOTBALL's 2011 COACHING STAFF WAS INVOLVED IN THE WRONGDOING RELATED (e.g., INDICTMENTS) FREEH REFERS TO IN HIS REPORT!!!
The NCAA is the party that choose to make the FALSE & DEFAMATORY statement and apply it with a broad brush to PSU's entire staff when the DIAMETRIC OPPOSITE was the case - no one on PSU's staff in November 2011 was involved in the WRONGDOING associated with the SWIGJ & Indictments outlined by the Pennsylvania OAG that the NCAA via Freeh has used to "tar & feather" PSU, its Football Program and the coaching staff with & showing utter disregard for the irresponsible collateral damage they were causing to innocent parties (e.g., creating more victims of JS, not less). Again, the NCAA choose to irresponsibily paint with a broad brush to cause as much nuclear waste as they could, so now they must be held accountable for their irresponsible actions.
Last edited:
