Despite everything you hear about Hillary and her server, she broke no laws and the FBI is not investigating her-just the process. I'm sure there is just as much damning evidence against her as there was against her in Benghazi. Ok maybe that's a bad example.
"If Brady had accepted the findings of the Wells report, he would be contradicting his appeal testimony, under oath, in front of NFL commissioner Roger Goodell on June 23."
"Brady remains firm on his settlement terms: He will accept a fine, but no suspension, and he will not admit guilt in the matter, sources say."
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/22/us/new-benghazi-investigation-finds-no-fault-in-response.html
Now the NFL is stealing a page out of this GOP strategy by telling Tom Brady first that they simply refuse to negotiate his punishment. But now saying they won't unless he agrees that the Wells Report was right. You know the smoking gun that argued that 'It's more probable than not that he did something wrong in a general way.'
http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/13422433/nfl-settle-new-england-patriots-qb-tom-brady-accept-findings-ted-wells-report
The judge is more or less begging Goodell to relent and settle with Brady. This makes us think of when MLB lost to the players on free agency in arbitration. Peter Seitz had begged them to negotiate but like Goodell now, MLB's answer was 'My way or the highway.'
http://mlb.mlb.com/pa/info/history.jsp
What seems to be the case is that Goodell and the NFL are desperate not to have the Wells Report contradicted. It's all about saving face-which already means they deserve to lose as this is all they care about.
Brady has to basically admit to lying under oath in exchange for a deal? Sounds like a negotiation Darrell Issa could understand.
"Brady remains firm on his settlement terms: He will accept a fine, but no suspension, and he will not admit guilt in the matter, sources say."
While Brady has been found guilty by Stephen A. Smith et. al-they believe an innocent man doesn't need due process-the judge has said he sees no evidence of any Brady conspiracy on deflategate.
http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/football/roger-goodell-greeted-boos-deflategate-hearing-article-1.2323018
Turns out Smith is wrong: you do actually need direct evidence not just 'more probable than not he knew something about deflated footballs.'
No comments:
Post a Comment