Reasonable Doubt podcast Adam Carolla and Mark Geragos interview JZ

[L.T. Young]

While I expect we would agree nearly 100% on the underlying premises, I -personally - just feel that there is no harm in hearing what JZ has to say (since I - personally - couldn't care less what conclusions some lazy, mouth-breathing cretin might reach)....and I do regularly find some value in some of his discussions (granted, sometimes - when he really gets off-track - those discussions can be not worth much.......but, I think, when you actually listen to what he has to say - without predetermining its "worthiness" based on the speaker - there is good stuff in there - if one is willing to THINK and EVALUATE as one listens. Which, back to your point, means that - even if you, personally, might extract something worthwhile from his "discussions" - only a very small minority are going to get anything of value )

Anyway, my guess is that 95% of the folks who get uppity wrt JZ do NOT think it through to the degree that you do......but are just knee-jerk parroting what they are "supposed to" say.
[/QUOTE]

Is anyone holding a gun to your head, and forcing you to agree with all (or any) of his "conclusions"?

If not......what's the problem?

You're the definition of a Joebot. Anything negative to your position is worth raging over endlessly, but when someone starts pointing out obvious faults (you can't counter) of a person in your camp it's "who cares?".

Ziegler is dangerous. He's talking out his ass about things he doesn't even make an effort to understand. When it involves potential future victims it matters.

He does interview after interview defending the behavior of a sexual predator. How do you not get this? There are people that really think his "logic" is accurate and he knows what he's talking about (when it comes to CSA).

Wake up, he's mentally ill. It wasn't until he had alienated everyone except Dottie and Jerry he became a champion of Sandusky's innocence.

It doesn't seem the least bit odd he tanked on a national stage and then comes to the conclusion Jerry is innocent, which allowed him to be included in a major interview with Dottie?

BTW, he is doing far more damage to Paterno than you're aware of. Every single time he plugs his website while talking exclusively about Sandusky the Paterno name is mentioned. He's turned Joe into a footnote in the story of Jerry Sandusky.

But you keep defending him, and insulting his detractors, because he talks about Joe's innocence. Nevermind the stupidity and flawed arguments it's accompanied by. That couldn't possibly undermine your goal, right?

 

[StinkStankStunk]

LMAO

Classic

I can't imagine a more flat-out-wrong, stupid, off-topic, illogical, or ignorant response than the one you just wrote

Exhibit A of the "Dumbed-Down to the point of being incapable of having a coherent, congruent thought" Generation

It would take a map, a compass, and a three day trek - - to walk any of your babble back into the same time zone with a coherent discussion of the topic at hand

If there was ANYTHING in your rambling, "insult to Darwinism" post - that was even close to being germane and on topic - I might be tempted to discuss it

Alas, as it is:

Bless your heart



Anyway, thanks for the laugh.......Ciao

 

[L.T. Young]

LMAO

Classic

I can't imagine a more flat-out-wrong, stupid, off-topic, illogical, or ignorant response than the one you just wrote

Exhibit A of the "Dumbed-Down to the point of being incapable of having a coherent, congruent thought" Generation

It would take a map, a compass, and a three day trek - - to walk any of your babble back into the same time zone with a coherent discussion of the topic at hand

If there was ANYTHING in your rambling, "insult to Darwinism" post - that was even close to being germane and on topic - I might be tempted to discuss it

Alas, as it is:

Bless your heart



Anyway, thanks for the laugh.......Ciao

I apologize, this is all I intended to include from your other post:

"but, I think, when you actually listen to what he has to say - without predetermining its "worthiness" based on the speaker - there is good stuff in there - if one is willing to THINK and EVALUATE as one listens. Which, back to your point, means that - even if you, personally, might extract something worthwhile from his "discussions" - only a very small minority are going to get anything of value )"

It's Joebot logic. He mentions certain facts that don't get much play and for that you condone his continued involvement.


You asked me a question:

"Is anyone holding a gun to your head, and forcing you to agree with all (or any) of his "conclusions"?

If not......what's the problem?"

I answered it in detail. His conclusions are :

A. They are dangerous as they defend the actions of sexual predators every time he does an interview.

B. Are harmful to the goal of clearing Joe's name. The only reason he gets attention now is because he claims Sandusky is innocent. It's impossible to separate the two with him.

C. His conclusions aren't conclusions at all. He finds ways (flawed arguments) to support the idea Sandusky is innocent not the other way around.

This is why I called him a third rate journalist. I could post for hours exposing him and his ridiculous logic.

His abilities to interview a subject are woefully lacking. He research techniques are substandard, and he'll believe anything that fits his agenda.

These are all problems with his "conclusions" and why simply disagreeing with them isn't enough.

Lastly, if you can't see that his conversion is directly related to him having nowhere else to go with the story you haven't been paying attention.

There are so many others that are, and always have been, about the truth. They still work everyday to the goal of clearing Joe's name. You don't see them drawing attention to themselves at every opportunity. Those are the people that deserve support. Ziegler is pathological in his need to be the center of attention.

But feel to insult me some more.

 

[StinkStankStunk]

I apologize, this is all I intended to include from your other post:

"but, I think, when you actually listen to what he has to say - without predetermining its "worthiness" based on the speaker - there is good stuff in there - if one is willing to THINK and EVALUATE as one listens. Which, back to your point, means that - even if you, personally, might extract something worthwhile from his "discussions" - only a very small minority are going to get anything of value )"

It's Joebot logic. He mentions certain facts that don't get much play and for that you condone his continued involvement.


You asked me a question:

"Is anyone holding a gun to your head, and forcing you to agree with all (or any) of his "conclusions"?

If not......what's the problem?"

I answered it in detail. His conclusions are :

A. Dangerous as they defend the actions of sexual predators every time he does an interview.

B. Are harmful to the goal of clearing Joe's name. The only reason he gets attention now is because he claims Sandusky is innocent. It's impossible to separate the two with him.

C. His conclusions aren't conclusions at all. He finds ways (flawed arguments) to support the idea Sandusky is innocent not the other way around.

This is why I called him a third rate journalist. I could post for hours exposing him and his ridiculous logic.

His abilities to interview a subject are woefully lacking. He research techniques are substandard, and he'll believe anything that fits his agenda.

These are all problems with his "conclusions" and why simply disagreeing with them isn't enough.

Lastly, if you can't see that his conversion is directly related to him having nowhere else to go with the story you haven't been paying attention.

There so many others that are, and always have been, about the truth. They still work everyday to the goal of clearing Joe's name. You don't see them drawing attention to themselves at every opportunity. Those are the people that deserve support. Ziegler is pathological in his need to be the center of attention.

But feel to insult me some more.

You're doing fine all by yourself.

 

[Adlee73]

Which would be Shubin?

So Centre County.

I did send Zig's earlier statements about this fake accuser to the entire BoT, PSU Pres, some in Admin & the Office of General Counsel. I also copied our Attorney General & Auditor General.

I would hope that Zig releases relevant information to state authorities.

Yes, but unlike the other fake accusers this guy never cashed in. Zig did not initiate this plan he was called & asked about it & kept informed but played far less of an acting role in it than many think. Shubin got paid for his services so I can't see any DA rushing to spend tax payer dollars pursuing this. It's far more likely to do legal damage to the fake accuser than to Zig IMO.

 

[biacto]

Matt Sandusky is the biggest pile of crap alive.

 

[LaJolla Lion]

I apologize, this is all I intended to include from your other post:

"but, I think, when you actually listen to what he has to say - without predetermining its "worthiness" based on the speaker - there is good stuff in there - if one is willing to THINK and EVALUATE as one listens. Which, back to your point, means that - even if you, personally, might extract something worthwhile from his "discussions" - only a very small minority are going to get anything of value )"

It's Joebot logic. He mentions certain facts that don't get much play and for that you condone his continued involvement.


You asked me a question:

"Is anyone holding a gun to your head, and forcing you to agree with all (or any) of his "conclusions"?

If not......what's the problem?"

I answered it in detail. His conclusions are :

A. They are dangerous as they defend the actions of sexual predators every time he does an interview.

B. Are harmful to the goal of clearing Joe's name. The only reason he gets attention now is because he claims Sandusky is innocent. It's impossible to separate the two with him.

C. His conclusions aren't conclusions at all. He finds ways (flawed arguments) to support the idea Sandusky is innocent not the other way around.

This is why I called him a third rate journalist. I could post for hours exposing him and his ridiculous logic.

His abilities to interview a subject are woefully lacking. He research techniques are substandard, and he'll believe anything that fits his agenda.

These are all problems with his "conclusions" and why simply disagreeing with them isn't enough.

Lastly, if you can't see that his conversion is directly related to him having nowhere else to go with the story you haven't been paying attention.

There are so many others that are, and always have been, about the truth. They still work everyday to the goal of clearing Joe's name. You don't see them drawing attention to themselves at every opportunity. Those are the people that deserve support. Ziegler is pathological in his need to be the center of attention.

But feel to insult me some more.

Zig gives some people hope this was all a bad dream IMO. That is about all you need to know. The anger at the failed leadership is and should be real. They blew it every step of the way. The problem with Zig is he yells squirrel and his "followers" all look. The second he proclaimed JS's innocence is the day I kind of knew this was about him getting attention.

 

[wensilver]

Yes, but unlike the other fake accusers this guy never cashed in. Zig did not initiate this plan he was called & asked about it & kept informed but played far less of an acting role in it than many think. Shubin got paid for his services so I can't see any DA rushing to spend tax payer dollars pursuing this. It's far more likely to do legal damage to the fake accuser than to Zig IMO.

Wait - so Shubin DID collect money? Was Shubin AWARE this person was NOT a victim? Did Shubin ACTIVELY CONCEAL that knowledge and FALSELY present his client as a claimant harmed by Sandusky?

If so - then this is criminal. I would think the state D Board, PSU General Counsel and the Centre County DA's Office should be aware.

 

[coveydidnt]

Wait - so Shubin DID collect money? Was Shubin AWARE this person was NOT a victim? Did Shubin ACTIVELY CONCEAL that knowledge and FALSELY present his client as a claimant harmed by Sandusky?

If so - then this is criminal. I would think the state D Board, PSU General Counsel and the Centre County DA's Office should be aware.

As described so far it does not seem Shubin would have known. And he like any lawyer, is smart enough not to ask certain questions.

If JZs claims are true, the tapes apparently would reveal him asking something like "did any of this occurred at Penn state? We're there any Penn state witnesses? Did anyone at Penn state know about your relationship with Jerry? Did you ever interact with Joe?" And then, .... guidance "this is very important for your case, so try very hard to remember. Any settlement will be larger if there is a Penn state connection. So again, please try to remember... any connection no matter how small, is probably important."

 

[simons96]

Im listening now. Zig needs to just control his delivery. He gets hyper stimulated and the whole conversation just evolves into shouting/blurting stuff out. It's difficult for the public to listen, absorb and comprehend what he's saying.

IMO, I think the focus of the discussion should be focused on the corruption at the TSM and the Board's direct links to TSM. The root of the corruption is the relationship between state politicians, PSU board members and the conduit of that corruption is TSM. Penn State & the Penn State football program are offered up as fall guys to cover criminal behavior on the part of people who were directly connected to the prosecution.

There is long line of evidence that this script has been played out numerous times in recent PA history....Hershey Trust, Cash for Kids, Bonusgate etc, etc.

THAT is the message that we need to keep waving to the media & public.

BOOM.

there are people I love and trust who have differing opinions about Sandusky's guilt. and that is fine. (I blame the corrupt OAG for so muddying the trial with lying cops and manufactured victims)

but WITHOUT QUESTION, we know that Penn State acted appropriately and legally with the information they had. We also know Second Mile did not. even if they believed Sandusky was innocent, Second Mile had a LEGAL OBLIGATION to follow up on multiple allegations. The real story is why they didn't. and why they've escaped legal scrutiny.

 

[simons96]

One slight "tweak"; we know the football program and athletic department acted appropriately. We don't know if BoT members acted appropriately at ANY point during this crisis (prior to the GJP, after the GJP, Freeh, or processing/vetting of claims). I put forward that there is considerable evidence that they DIDN'T act appropriately. The question we want the media to focus on is WHY and WHY wasn't the TSM investigated?

yeah I meant the admins and coaches, not the scoundrels running the ship into the iceberg over and over

and many BoT members clearly lied about what they knew and when about Sandusky, and lied about their actions after the charges were brought, lied about communications with the NCAA, lied about just about everything.

but Paterno gets clicks to the morally bankrupt media

 

[Adlee73]

Wait - so Shubin DID collect money? Was Shubin AWARE this person was NOT a victim? Did Shubin ACTIVELY CONCEAL that knowledge and FALSELY present his client as a claimant harmed by Sandusky?

If so - then this is criminal. I would think the state D Board, PSU General Counsel and the Centre County DA's Office should be aware.

No. Shubin did however coerce him to change elements of his story to increase chances of a payout. Probably something along the lines of "Are you sure X & Z didn't happen as well because if that were the case we'd be more likely to get a bigger settlement".

 

[StinkStankStunk]

There is long line of evidence that this script has been played out numerous times in recent PA history....Hershey Trust, Cash for Kids, Bonusgate etc, etc.

THAT is the message that we need to keep waving to the media & public.

Just MHO - but getting into that stuff, Hershey/CforC/BonusGate (could also add in Porngate and the whole KK saga) - is just way to much for 99.9% of the current Twitter/Sound Bite Generation

They simply tune out if asked to think that much


IMO - at the most - if one sticks to:

1 - The genesis of the issues wrt Penn State: The BOT Cabal of Scoundrels

And

2 - The actual responsible party: The 2nd Mile Leaders

And the ties between the two of them

Then, maybe, you can get the "public" to pay attention


I've said, for a long time, that our attempts to "cure cancer".......ie getting into all the CSA, political corruption, etc etc ........hurts our cause more than it helps it

People get lost - and then rather than THINK - they write it all off as "too much"......and write off the messenger as some kind of "conspiracy theorist"

Just MHO

 

[coveydidnt]

Exhibit #1 - Adam Carolla spent the last 5 minutes ripping on Joe Paterno at the end of today's podcast, just 2 weeks after the Ziggster was on. In short, Zig's appearance made less than no impact on Adam and he still finds it a rich source for comedy. Now tell me how Zig helps the cause in any way?

 

[L.T. Young]

Exhibit #1 - Adam Carolla spent the last 5 minutes ripping on Joe Paterno at the end of today's podcast, just 2 weeks after the Ziggster was on. In short, Zig's appearance made less than no impact on Adam and he still finds it a rich source for comedy. Now tell me how Zig helps the cause in any way?

He helps his cause, get attention by any means necessary.

 

[john4psu]

Didn't smoke or didn't share?

But did you inhale?