mannc Posted October 16, 2017 Share Posted October 16, 2017 (edited) it was individual business decisions made by private citizens owning said business. not rocket science. You have absolutely no idea whether or not this is true. Edited October 16, 2017 by mannc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Brown Posted October 16, 2017 Share Posted October 16, 2017 Other than Hillary Clinton, I'm having a hard time thinking of another person who is less deserving of sympathy than this self-serving jerk-off. btw, I'll be filing suit tomorrow against Facebook, Apple and Google for keeping me out of their finance departments. Harvey Weinstein, Bill Cosby, OJ Simpson, Cartman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoyBatty is alive Posted October 16, 2017 Share Posted October 16, 2017 This being slightly off topic, there's an obvious question as to legitimizing the methods with which certain lawsuits are established, no doubt. Their existence, however, remains a net benefit. In my personal opinion. As much as I hate lawyers and I deal with them far too often that would be an interesting debate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mannc Posted October 16, 2017 Share Posted October 16, 2017 As I stated prior, there is absolutely no way CK had his first amendment rights infringed, zip zero zilch. Did anyone stop him from kneeling? Answer is a simple no. And has has been beat to death already why he isnt on a team is not relevant, the only relevance is if teams colluded. CK has first amendment rights do and and say what he wants...there is no right to get a job in the NFL..Well, if the President of the United States orchestrated a campaign to prevent owners from hiring him because of his expression of his political views, then yes, he has had his First Amendment rights infringed. That's one of the allegations in the grievance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boatdrinks Posted October 16, 2017 Share Posted October 16, 2017 Well, if the President of the United States orchestrated a campaign to prevent owners from hiring him because of his expression of his political views, then yes, he has had his First Amendment rights infringed. That's one of the allegations in the grievance. It's obviously a load of bunk. Look at the reaction the league had to Trumps tweets. They are on opposite sides of this and always have been. A few Twitter posts is not preventing anyone from hiring CK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoBills808 Posted October 16, 2017 Share Posted October 16, 2017 As much as I hate lawyers and I deal with them far too often that would be an interesting debate. Yeh, I've had it many times. Lotta lawyers in my family. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoyBatty is alive Posted October 16, 2017 Share Posted October 16, 2017 Well, if the President of the United States orchestrated a campaign to prevent owners from hiring him because of his expression of his political views, then yes, he has had his First Amendment rights infringed. That's one of the allegations in the grievance. 1) As I already stated, read some lawsuits and the wild things alleged 2) As stated above there is no such thing as a right to have a job in the NFL Believe what you want but this lawsuit, besides the media blowing it wildly out of proportion has zero merit unless the NFL really did collude. Gonna be really tough to prove since the Ravens wanted to sign him until Cap "sweetheart" compared the owner to a slave owner, Now please dont come back and tell me the Ravens violated Cap's girlfriends first amendment rights because they didnt sign him. Actually that lawsuit would have as much merit as does Cap, as in zero. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted October 16, 2017 Share Posted October 16, 2017 (edited) Harvey Weinstein, Bill Cosby, OJ Simpson, Cartman Interestingly, during the game last night, Al Michaels made a comment that the Giants were coming off a worse week than Weinstein. By the third quarter, NBC had him apologizing. Edited October 16, 2017 by LABillzFan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoyBatty is alive Posted October 16, 2017 Share Posted October 16, 2017 Interestingly, during the game last night, Al Michaels made a comment that the Giants were coming off a worse week than Weinstein. By the third quarter, NBC had him apologizing. One of the reasons Trump got elected is people are feed up with the PC police. I understand why he apologized but that was a totally innocent joke. So with that joke were any of his victims "traumatized" by what he said, did his joke trivialize Weinsteins actions? Ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Brown Posted October 16, 2017 Share Posted October 16, 2017 Interestingly, during the game last night, Al Michaels made a comment that the Giants were coming off a worse week than Weinstein. By the third quarter, NBC had him apologizing. Welcome to 2017. Comics have warned us that political correctness will ruin comedy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mannc Posted October 16, 2017 Share Posted October 16, 2017 1) As I already stated, read some lawsuits and the wild things alleged 2) As stated above there is no such thing as a right to have a job in the NFL Believe what you want but this lawsuit, besides the media blowing it wildly out of proportion has zero merit unless the NFL really did collude. Gonna be really tough to prove since the Ravens wanted to sign him until Cap "sweetheart" compared the owner to a slave owner, Now please dont come back and tell me the Ravens violated Cap's girlfriends first amendment rights because they didnt sign him. Actually that lawsuit would have as much merit as does Cap, as in zero. Roy, you truly have no idea whether the owners colluded, so you don't have a clue whether Kaep's grievance has merit. I'll admit, I don't either, but the idea that the owners did collude is not as improbable as many seem to think. They do have a history of it.., Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boatdrinks Posted October 16, 2017 Share Posted October 16, 2017 One of the reasons Trump got elected is people are feed up with the PC police. I understand why he apologized but that was a totally innocent joke. So with that joke were any of his victims "traumatized" by what he said, did his joke trivialize Weinsteins actions? Ridiculous. So true. I laughed when he made the joke. I guess I'm terrible in the libtard universe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted October 16, 2017 Share Posted October 16, 2017 (edited) Wrong. This topic is covered above. Kaepernick is alleging that the owners have colluded against him "in retaliation for [his] leadership and advocacy for equality and social justice ...". He also alleges that the owners "have retaliated against [him] in response to coercion and calculated coordination from the Executive Branch of the United States government." I suspect he may try to show that this alleged state action directly brings the First Amendment into play. Interesting...Your error is where you place the emphasis - it should be on whether or not there was collusion, not why. It would be as if you were accused of embezzling money to finance your strip club tab. The emphasis is on whether you embezzled money, not your proposed motive. Similarly, it doesn't matter if the reason he's out of work is due to his "stance" if there was no collusion, and if there was collusion it still doesn't matter if it was related to his "stance". And the 1st amendment issue is !@#$ing stupid. Edited October 16, 2017 by Rob's House Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsfan_34 Posted October 16, 2017 Share Posted October 16, 2017 He will lose- it is simple, he is a crappy quarterback and no one wants him. Plus, his head dont fit in a helmet anymore due to da fro- too much a liability 😂 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted October 16, 2017 Share Posted October 16, 2017 I'm looking to try some Italian style roasts this week. Any ideas? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hapless Bills Fan Posted October 16, 2017 Share Posted October 16, 2017 don't get so full of yourself, this will probably be merged with the ongoing PPP thread this is football related. Green Bay may be looking for a QB but this law suit might block Kaepernick's ability to talk to GB If Green Bay calls and says "make your suit go away and we'll bring you in" can that happen? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoyBatty is alive Posted October 16, 2017 Share Posted October 16, 2017 Roy, you truly have no idea whether the owners colluded, so you don't have a clue whether Kaep's grievance has merit. I'll admit, I don't either, but the idea that the owners did collude is not as improbable as many seem to think. They do have a history of it I never wrote that i did, here is my quote, " has zero merit unless the NFL really did collude.", note the term unless. But common sense suggests to me they most likely didnt collude. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted October 16, 2017 Share Posted October 16, 2017 If Green Bay calls and says "make your suit go away and we'll bring you in" can that happen? yes, it could. But they never would. And this is not about filing against the NFL it is about his image As Tom said. He wins either way, either it proves he is a victim or be becomes another victim of the justice system Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mannc Posted October 16, 2017 Share Posted October 16, 2017 I never wrote that i did, here is my quote, " has zero merit unless the NFL really did collude.", note the term unless. But common sense suggests to me they most likely didnt collude.In your last sentence, which you omit here, you say there is "zero" merit to Kaep's grievance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nucci Posted October 16, 2017 Share Posted October 16, 2017 He will lose- it is simple, he is a crappy quarterback and no one wants him. Plus, his head dont fit in a helmet anymore due to da fro- too much a liability still better than many playing now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts