cle23
-
Posts
1,307 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by cle23
-
-
48 minutes ago, Success said:
There comes a point where the sheer # of accusations reaches a critical mass.
I don't understand this ruling, at all.
Again, not saying the ruling is correct or anything, but Robinson is ruling on the 4 cases the NFL brought before her, not the 24 filed. She can't factor in something not brought up in the NFL's case.
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, YoloinOhio said:
Yet there is no precedent of this many cases. Not even close.
The NFL only presented 4 cases. Not 24. People keep throwing out 24, but the NFL chose to focus on 4, so the other 20 don't have relevance in the NFL's case.
I have no idea why they only focused on 4.
-
16 minutes ago, JoPoy88 said:
they did not really need to meet a high evidentiary standard. The league’s stance is “conduct detrimental to the league” can be punished. Watson’s conduct was confirmed by Robinson. They met the standard. Only question is the magnitude of harm to the league and, subsequent to that, the magnitude of punishment.
the guy is losing $345K. That’s a joke.
I can see a situation where the league leaves the suspension at 6, but imposes a larger fine. How that plays out, who knows.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Logic said:
Based on the recent posturing of the league and of Watson's camp, I had a feeling the reports of a suspension between four and eight games was true. Lo and behold, it is.
I cannot, for the life of me, understand how that judge was able to look at the preponderance of evidence of egregious sexual misconduct -- and in some cases, outright sexual assault -- and decide that six games was sufficient punishment.
I realize that it's not apples to apples, but as others have pointed out, the fact that gambling or smoking pot has gotten players suspended for an entire year, but ejaculating on strangers without their consent gets just a six game punishment, is beyond ridiculous.
Honestly, the worst part is the hypocrisy and moral ickiness of his continued employment: If he was a fringe player -- say, a special teams linebacker or a WR5 -- he'd likely never play in the NFL again. No one would employ him, regardless of league punishment. Instead, because he's a talented quarterback, a team was willing to give him $250 million, and the league is willing to say "her served his time" and move on from it. He'll probably be in ads and NFL promo spots within a few years, like none of this ever happened.
This whole thing was and is and will continue to be super gross. Watson isn't even remorseful, either. Dispicable.Because the NFL is only looking at 4 cases. That was the case they brought on. And apparently from their investigating there was not much evidence. Robinson can't look at the 24 cases as that was not what was presented.
Also, what evidence has been shown? I am not questioning that there is, but I honestly haven't seen anywhere that was presented other than the he said/she said. All I am saying is that if they can't show evidence, then it is hard to convict/punish someone for something that may or may not have happened. That is usually what makes these types of cases so hard. I am not saying it didn't happen as I have no idea, but without DNA evidence, witnesses, or something along those lines, it is extremely hard to prove. If there is no evidence of him "ejaculating on strangers" then it can't be used in consideration. If she has the clothing she was wearing with the DNA evidence, then by all means, use it.
Also, the league never said he "served his time." Robinson isn't the league. And as far as I can tell, last year wasn't used for the ruling in any way.
I have said this before several times. Watson sure seems to be a sexual deviant of some kind. How extreme he is, or how far he is willing to push the envelope, is unknown. If there is any evidence at all that he assaulted one of these women, he should be in jail and suspended. But so far, from what I have seen, there hasn't been any evidence presented. Doesn't mean there isn't, but in these types of cases, you can't just guess or assume. It's crazy tough on everyone to get this right.
-
3
-
-
-
40 minutes ago, Doc said:
Does this apply to many of the black people who have been shot by cops for doing something illegal and then ignoring commands by officers?
Each situation depends. A lot of them, white/black/brown/whatever, yes it does. A lot it doesn't.
32 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said:And yet every other officer on duty that day assessed the threat differently and choose not to discharge their weapons in that situation. So a trigger happy police officer who has a reported history of incidents shot and killed an unarmed person that posed no immediate danger. But no big deal, right?
Different situations. It was a barricaded door with quite a few protestors behind it. Behind the officer was Congress, in session. He gave a lawful command and she continued through a broken window, ignoring his drawn gun and orders to stop. There is no way to tell from his end if she was unarmed.
-
5 hours ago, All_Pro_Bills said:
There was only one person murdered and the shooter got away with it.
Yep, ignoring lawful commands from an officer while climbing through a broken window, into a restricted area with Congress meeting, all while having a gun pointed at you and ignoring the said commands, is about a simple as it gets.
If you're dumb enough to do that, you get what you get.
-
52 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:
That’s the debate society is going to have….but what the court said is that it it’s not up to the judicial branch to make these decisions. That’s not what the court does! So, you petition your state legislature to make adjustments to your state’s laws. It’s how the process works.
Exactly what ChiGoose said. The Supreme Court's job isn't to make laws, but it is to make sure the rights of the people are not infringed upon, and that includes from states and the populace. Majority rule is not how a republic works. That's how a pure democracy works, and that is also why we are not a pure democracy.
-
3 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:
Thanks! What you’re doing with your reply is EXACTLY what our elected officials should be doing right now. It’s what we pay them to do. While this is an emotional issue for sure, and will almost certainly never please everyone, I’m confident that the legislature can craft a bill that will please well in excess of 90% of the voters. Everyone needs to give them some time and space to do their jobs!
But they don't though. They are making the restrictions tighter, not helping girls like this. NC is trying to make abortion a death penalty offense. That's my issue. In that case, shouldn't they have left abortion legal and worked towards it from there rather than what they've done?
-
4 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:
So in your version of the world…just kill the child? This is yet another example of why this is a complex issue that needs to be fully debated in the legislative branch. Trust the Process.
If they let the abortion happen early, no issues. I do not agree with late term abortions, but I also don't agree with ruining a young girls life over something she had zero control over.
-
17 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said:
He should be tried, convicted, and imprisoned for life, or worse. But sympathetic Democratic "woke" DA's will let him out without bail to rape more women.
I agree the "father" should go to jail, but what is the plan for the raped other then? You going to raise the kid? You going to financially support her? So many people are "pro life" yet have no plan to help anyone once the life is here.
-
16 minutes ago, Westside said:
What do you mean there is no evidence? You didn’t see the ballot box stuffing videos? How many times are you allowed to vote? I thought only once?
How about the voting machines being turned off for several hours in key democratic states? Did you not see that either!?
Yeah, 81 million votes. What a joke you are for continuing spread false information just because it’s your party. Four years of russian hoaxes , lying over and over again. But now you’re telling the truth? GTFOH you marxist clown.
Ha. Yeah, my party? I didn't vote for Biden. Didn't vote for Hillary either. I did vote for Obama.
I love how anyone who doesn't step in line with Trump false narrative is a marxist clown. The 2 party system is the issue. People jumping in lockstep for literally no reason other than party is the issue.
-
28 minutes ago, Precision said:
Over 800,000 votes cast and there were zero proven cases, said the 70-year-old Secretary of State. You believe that, ZERO? How many votes do you think they checked? If the state police said there were zero speeding tickets issued in NH last weekend, you believe no one was speeding, ha ha ha!
Please, tell everyone the process by which NH checks for and enforces residency. There is no income tax like other states, so NH generally does not care about residency. Your post is really informative so I'm hoping you can explain that to me and the board.
I lose a lot of faith in Bill's office as well when 200 absentee ballots from Bedford were not even opened 1 year after election day.
https://whdh.com/news/ag-nearly-200-bedford-nh-absentee-ballots-uncounted-in-2020/
Zero issues with residency voting but they forgot to open 200 absentee ballots.
There may be. There has been zero evidence presented to say there was.
It's definitely possible, but when people all over claim fraud, and then have absolutely nothing to back it up other than "there could be" then it's bogus. Present evidence and I'll jump right on board.
-
1
-
1
-
-
Also, George Tanios was allegedly caught on tape spraying the chemical spray into Sicknick's face. That is assault, and possibly with a deadly weapon depending what the chemicals were. I think it was bear spray but I honestly don't know.
-
2 minutes ago, DRsGhost said:
I know he did. There are no blood tests to be done or observations to be made during autopsy to support conclusion: "the events of the day may have caused it."
Of course they could have. And I could have won the lottery yesterday if I played it.
It's speculation, nothing more, that can also be said about every single person who dies from natural causes.
Who is Roseanne Boyland?
So they medical profession who performed the autopsy isn't allowed to speculate as to what caused the death? It's not like he is blindly guessing. He is using past experience and years of training/expertise to form an educated opinion. His chance of being correct that the events led to his death are astronomically higher than your chances of winning the lottery.
Also, no one was charged. So what are you arguing?
For Roseanne Boyland, isn't it now your speculation as to what caused her death?
-
37 minutes ago, DRsGhost said:
So the medical examiner stated he died of natural causes and that there is no evidence that chemicals or injuries played a role in his death.
Then we get his and other pathologists speculation, that you take apparently as fact, despite the statement above that was made based on evidence from the autopsy.
Got it.
Let's pull that thread a bit more then. If Trumps request to deploy the National Guard had been signed off on, as required by law, by either Pelosi or Bowser then Sicknick and the other four are likely still alive.
Again, just saying she's a conservative doesn't prove she's lying although that seems to be the order of the day with the left.
When she said the only people who died at the Capitol on J6 were four Trump supporters that was a statement of fact.
Sicknick died the next day J7 from a stroke. He texted with his brother on the night of J6 and told him that he was fine although he had been sprayed.
Natural causes as described is that he he was not killed directly by protestors. He died of naturally occurring things in his body, but those naturally occurring things can be a result of the stress and things of the day.
Also, the medical examiner is the one who said the events of the day (the stress/anxiety/pressure) of the day likely contributed to his condition. So yes, I will take a licensed medical examiner's expert opinion on the matter over Julie Kelly's.
Everyone and their brother knows what Kelly is implying when she says only Trump supporters died, and that it needs investigated. Don't play dumb in that situation. Saying only Trump supporters died during the protest is a statement of fact. It's adding that it "needs investigated" that causes the disingenuous nature of her tweet.
-
1 hour ago, DRsGhost said:
It may have very well been her wishes, but it doesn't mean it was performed at her mother's request after she was murdered. The document shows that the DC medical examiner made the request.
Enough with the "murder" crap too. If you are in your home and I am coming into the broken door/window like Babbitt was, you wouldn't shoot? Because I would.
-
5 minutes ago, wnyguy said:
I think what he was saying is that no one other than the "armed insurrectionists" were killed on this Jan 6 "coup attempt". No law enforcement persons, no politicians, no innocent bystanders. No buildings were burned down, no one was kidnapped. All in all it was a very weak attempt to overthrow the government, wouldn't you say?
As far as Ashli Babbit's cremation, it should be very easy to confirm the facts in that regard. Do you think Julie Kelly just posted that willie-nillie to incite people?
That depends on what your opinion on Brian Sicknick is, but he is a law enforcement officer that died that day. He did not die from a direct attack, that is now proven, and was obviously incorrectly reported at the start. He was sprayed with chemicals, so he was assaulted. He died from 2 strokes, and the medical examiner said it was natural causes, but that can mean a lot of things:
The Chief Medical Examiner, Dr. Francisco J. Diaz, told the Washington Post that there was no evidence that Sicknick was injured or had an allergic reaction to chemical irritants. Due to privacy laws, he declined to say whether Sicknick had a preexisting medical condition. Diaz noted that Sicknick had engaged the rioters and said “all that transpired played a role in his condition.”[1]
According to CNN, some neurologists did not think that the strokes were natural. Stress and traumatic events can lead to a stroke. Based on media accounts, a forensic pathologist thought that Sicknick's manner of death could have been classified better as homicide, accident, or undetermined.[c][32]
If the Capitol J6 situation doesn't happen, Sicknick is likely still alive.
As far as Julie Kelly, yes, I think she posts anything and everything to try to "stick it" to the other side, and discredit them, even if it means she is being willfully misleading or straight up lying.
-
1
-
1
-
-
5 minutes ago, DRsGhost said:
Ask yourself why the medical examiner, who made the request, can't answer that simple question?
Probably because most medical examiner's don't answer questions on such things to random political websites that call in, especially when the investigation was still ongoing.
As for if they did it against he mother's wishes, how would they know her wishes without contacting the family?
-
8 minutes ago, DRsGhost said:
Was Brian Sicknick murdered by Trump supporters?
Did anyone other than Trump supporters die at the Capitol on J6?
How about official documents from the DC medical examiner?
Oh.
https://www.judicialwatch.org/just-the-news-babbitt/
The Washington D.C. Offices of the Chief Medical Examiner submitted a request to cremate Jan. 6 Capitol protester Ashli Babbitt two days after gaining custody of the body, according to documents obtained and released Tuesday by conservative watchdog Judicial Watch.
How many Biden supporters were storming the Capitol on J6? I went to a Thai restaurant and was shocked that none of the food was Mexican!
And again, from your own artcile:
Among the 1,160 pages of documents obtained by Judicial Watch is a Jan. 8 application to cremate Babbit’s body that is labeled "completed successfully."
However, neither Judicial Watch nor the medical examiner’s officer could confirm Tuesday whether the entry meant the application or the cremation was successful.
Oh.
-
5 minutes ago, DRsGhost said:
DC medical examiner requested her body be cremated according to official documents.
https://www.judicialwatch.org/just-the-news-babbitt/
The Washington D.C. Offices of the Chief Medical Examiner submitted a request to cremate Jan. 6 Capitol protester Ashli Babbitt two days after gaining custody of the body, according to documents obtained and released Tuesday by conservative watchdog Judicial Watch.
From your own article:
However, neither Judicial Watch nor the medical examiner’s officer could confirm Tuesday whether the entry meant the application or the cremation was successful.
So they are claiming she was cremated in 2 days, yet admit they don't know what the request actually meant. Her own mother said she was cremated according to her wishes.
-
13 minutes ago, DRsGhost said:
Attack the source. How predictable.
You know what Julie Kelly serves as? The other side of the story about J6 that's verboten by a corrupt one sided partisan committee.
That ALONE makes her reporting based on actual videos, court documents etc. worth paying attention to. Actual primary source evidence aren't "conspiracy theories" unless you want to use it as an excuse to ignore it.
We all know the official version of J6 events, the question is whether you and others choose to consider evidence from the other side, or just keep swallowing committee spoonfed propaganda.
So you took the first point and ignored the rest. And yes, when someone keeps using Kelly as the factual side of J6, and she is very clearly 100% full of crap, then yes, I will "attack the source." How is that any different than you claiming everyone and everything related to J6 is corrupt on the other side?
Look, I am all for looking at things from multiple points of view. Julie Kelly isn't that. She is literally the exact same thing you claim the committee is, just on the opposite side of the political spectrum. So constantly posting her crap and claiming it as fact doesn't help anything.
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, wnyguy said:
Did she claim something that is untrue?
Go to her Twitter, or her website. Yes, she claims all kinds of off the wall crap. One of Ghosts links says that Babbit's body was cremated within 2 days against her families' wishes. That is false as evidence of the quote from her mother.
-
12 hours ago, DRsGhost said:
For a committee in search of truth with such a slam dunk case, they seem to lie an awful lot about very basic facts....
I wonder why that is?
So because Julie Kelly claims something now, that makes her factual and everyone else is "lying about basic facts?"
Judge Sue Robinson recommends 6 game suspension for Watson; NFL will appeal
in The Stadium Wall
Posted
The independent judge is part of the process now as part of the CBA. It isn't going anywhere. Robinson was selected by the NFL and NFLPA.