***Ray Rice---The Whole Video*** [Update: Ravens release Rice]

I am party said:

Does that new AP report seem fishy to anyone else? Anonymous law enforcement official? And then the female voice recording? I may be wrong, but it sounds to me like the AP may have been trolled. It wouldn't be the first time the media has fallen for a prank call.

Not defending Goodell, just saying Anonymous is no joke. Sounds like something they would do.

Until there's further confirmation I remain skeptical.

Click to expand...

I can tell you from direct experience that the Associated Press vets its information before release and is highly, highly reliable.

I am party said:

Does that new AP report seem fishy to anyone else? Anonymous law enforcement official? And then the female voice recording? I may be wrong, but it sounds to me like the AP may have been trolled. It wouldn't be the first the media has fallen for a prank call.

Click to expand...

It actually seems very suspicious to me too but I didn't want to say so because that would kick off a whole 'nother round of personal attacks and insults sent my way.

The thing that seems most fishy to me isn't the fact that an anonymous official did something he wasn't authorized to do. The thing that sounds most fishy to me is that when a corporation gets a video or something like that in the mail, the receptionist who signs for it doesn't exactly pop it into her DVD player and watch it. She passes it on to her superiors to let them decide what to do. So some front office receptionist confirming they got it and saying "it's terrible" seems strange.

Not saying it's impossible, just that that made me go hmmmmmmmmmmmmm

I am party said:

Does that new AP report seem fishy to anyone else? Anonymous law enforcement official? And then the female voice recording? I may be wrong, but it sounds to me like the AP may have been trolled. It wouldn't be the first time the media has fallen for a prank call.

Not defending Goodell, just saying Anonymous is no joke. Sounds like something they would do.

Until there's further confirmation I remain skeptical.

Click to expand...

Who cares! Down with that scumbag rat Goodell!

Tunescribe said:

I can tell you from direct experience that the Associated Press vets its information before release and is highly, highly reliable.

Click to expand...

Agreed Tune...the AP is a bit above the Reddit fray...if you will.

SB39, you're about as likable as your avatar. Stop being a bobo.

SB39 said:

Congress should stay the **** out of it, that is unless they want to investigate the incompetence going on in New Jersey that allowed Rice to do what he did and not be punished.

But fact is Rice had his day in court (figuratively speaking, I know it never actually went to trial) and the charges were dropped. AFAIK, the NFL is under no legal obligation to punish him in the slightest so, much like Spygate, Congress has no right getting involved into the inner workings of a private business.

Click to expand...

Sure it does, due to the NFL's anti-trust exemption Congress has every right to do exactly that. Although I would agree that Congress shouldn't commit resources to such a colossal waste of its time.

BradyFTW! said:

Sure they do. The anti-trust exemption gives them every right to do exactly that if they're so inclined, although I agree that that would be a colossal waste of resources.

Click to expand...

That's very weak. To drag the anti-trust exemption into this is ridiculously tenuous at the very best. Like I said, the NFL is under no legal obligation to do a damn thing as far as punishing Rice is concerned, so Congress has no business doing any sort of taxpayer money wasting investigation.

Sorry, but I don't think the NFL giving a guy a 2 game suspension when he really deserved 4 or 6 games deserves a congressional inquiry.

And congratulations on sounding exactly like the fans who wanted Congress to get involved in Spygate.

BradyFTW! said:

Sure it does, due to the NFL's anti-trust exemption Congress has every right to do exactly that. Although I would agree that Congress shouldn't commit resources to such a colossal waste of its time.

Click to expand...

Which is why Roger Goodell should step down today in disgrace.

SB39 said:

It actually seems very suspicious to me too but I didn't want to say so because that would kick off a whole 'nother round of personal attacks and insults sent my way.

The thing that seems most fishy to me isn't the fact that an anonymous official did something he wasn't authorized to do. The thing that sounds most fishy to me is that when a corporation gets a video or something like that in the mail, the receptionist who signs for it doesn't exactly pop it into her DVD player and watch it. She passes it on to her superiors to let them decide what to do. So some front office receptionist confirming they got it and saying "it's terrible" seems strange.

Not saying it's impossible, just that that made me go hmmmmmmmmmmmmm

Click to expand...

"The person played The Associated Press a 12-second voicemail from an NFL office number on April 9 confirming the video arrived. A female voice expresses thanks and says: "You're right. It's terrible.""

Nowhere it mentions 'receptionist'. You just assumed that because it was a female voice.

I am party said:

Does that new AP report seem fishy to anyone else? Anonymous law enforcement official? And then the female voice recording? I may be wrong, but it sounds to me like the AP may have been trolled. It wouldn't be the first time the media has fallen for a prank call.

Not defending Goodell, just saying Anonymous is no joke. Sounds like something they would do.

Until there's further confirmation I remain skeptical.

Click to expand...

AP vets its sources about as thoroughly as anyone does. I would be shocked if it released this story without thoroughly vetting it.

The far more plausible explanation, IMO, is that this law enforcement official was pissed off that, after helping the NFL to investigate the Rice incident, the league's now throwing them under the bus. Leaking this information to the Associated Press not only sets the record straight, but is also the ultimate '**** you' to the league office.

SB39 said:

Congress should stay the **** out of it, that is unless they want to investigate the incompetence going on in New Jersey that allowed Rice to do what he did and not be punished.

Click to expand...

I'm really not sure why anyone would think congress should stay out of a highly publicized political issue where the public is already weighing in of its own accord. Ray Rice and Roger "dodger" Goodell make the big bucks in part because they are public figures. This subjects them to the same public arena of any celebrity or public figure.

SB39 said:

But fact is Rice had his day in court (figuratively speaking, I know it never actually went to trial) and the charges were dropped. AFAIK, the NFL is under no legal obligation to punish him in the slightest so, much like Spygate, Congress has no right getting involved into the inner workings of a private business.

Click to expand...

First and foremost, those speaking out have the right to free speech as citizens of the United States. They do not forfeit these right when accepted into congressional office. If they have an opinion, they have the right to voice it. If the press finds it worthy of air time or print, they will publish it using their right to free press.

Additionally, congress absolutely has a say in the inner workings of any private business. That is a good portion of what they spend their time on. If they find they need to write up legislation to better deal with business people who attempt to hide domestic abuses or publicly blame and shame the victim, they would be within their rights to do so. Take a look at the tobacco industry if you think them powerless in this arena. Alternatively, the FCC.

ATippett56 said:

Which is why Roger Goodell should step down today in disgrace.

Click to expand...

I don't expect Goodell to voluntarily step down. If he had any principles at all, he wouldn't be in this position in the first place. I absolutely expect the owners to force him out--which will probably come in the form of "voluntary" resignation--and if that doesn't happen I'll be tremendously disappointed in them.

This is one of the parts of the report that just doesn't smell right:


Seriously? Does this anonymous law enforcement official really think that said NFL executive won't eventually be identified anyway? Does he honestly think he himself won't be eventually identified? With a story this big, in this day and age of information everywhere, all the time? Really?

SB39 said:

That's very weak. To drag the anti-trust exemption into this is ridiculously tenuous at the very best. Like I said, the NFL is under no legal obligation to do a damn thing as far as punishing Rice is concerned, so Congress has no business doing any sort of taxpayer money wasting investigation.

Sorry, but I don't think the NFL giving a guy a 2 game suspension when he really deserved 4 or 6 games deserves a congressional inquiry.

And congratulations on sounding exactly like the fans who wanted Congress to get involved in Spygate.

Click to expand...

In the post that you quoted, I outright said that Congress shouldn't get involved. It was a couple of sentences long, it's kinda amazing that you managed to miss that.

Anway, the fact that you managed to construe that as "sounding exactly like the fans who wanted Congress to get involved in Spygate." just outright proves that you're too stupid to participate in this (or any other) discussion.

Go back under whatever bridge you crawled out from.

SVN said:

"The person played The Associated Press a 12-second voicemail from an NFL office number on April 9 confirming the video arrived. A female voice expresses thanks and says: "You're right. It's terrible.""

Nowhere it mentions 'receptionist'. You just assumed that because it was a female voice.

Click to expand...

No I assumed it was a receptionist because it was someone from the NFL office confirming a package was received and talking to someone on an outside line.

I recently had to send a very high ranking individual an important package for work. When I called to confirm he received it, I didn't talk to him directly, I talked to the receptionist at the building where it was sent and who also was the person who signed for it. And yes, it was a female.

BradyFTW! said:

AP vets its sources about as thoroughly as anyone does. I would be shocked if it released this story without thoroughly vetting it.

The far more plausible explanation, IMO, is that this law enforcement official was pissed off that, after helping the NFL to investigate the Rice incident, the league's now throwing them under the bus. Leaking this information to the Associated Press not only sets the record straight, but is also the ultimate '**** you' to the league office.

Click to expand...

If that's the case, good for law enforcement.

This now reads scandal, cover up, ......

It appears very possible that there will be no need for Congressional involvement if this latest report is correct. Goodell is going to go down and the ramifications for the Ravens' brass could be significant, as well. The idea that they thought they could actually get away with all of this is the absolute height of hubris. Schadenfreude is fun!

After Kraft, now the Giants co owner comes out and says Roger's job is not in jeopardy. wow... just wow ! Lets us see how fast owners change their tune now...

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...wner-says-roger-goodells-job-not-in-jeopardy/

Jackson 2 said:

It appears very possible that there will be no need for Congressional involvement if this latest report is correct. Goodell is going to go down and the ramifications for the Ravens' brass could be significant, as well. The idea that they thought they could actually get away with all of this is the absolute height of hubris. Schadenfreude is fun!

Click to expand...

But who first screams "I'm just a patsy"?

Haley said:

I'm really not sure why anyone would think congress should stay out of a highly publicized political issue where the public is already weighing in of its own accord.

Click to expand...

Uh gee maybe because no laws have been broken by the NFL? And the only guy who broke any laws got nothing more than dropped charges?

Haley said:

First and foremost, those speaking out have the right to free speech as citizens of the United States. They do not forfeit these right when accepted into congressional office. If they have an opinion, they have the right to voice it. If the press finds it worthy of air time or print, they will publish it using their right to free press.

Click to expand...

Absolutely. They can talk and talk until the cows come home and I couldn't care less. But it would be pretty idiotic if those same people use the power and authority of their public office to conduct an investigation into the NFL when they have done nothing wrong beyond giving a guy a 2 game suspension when they should have given him 4 or 6 games.

Haley said:

Additionally, congress absolutely has a say in the inner workings of any private business. That is a good portion of what they spend their time on. If they find they need to write up legislation to better deal with business people who attempt to hide domestic abuses or publicly blame and shame the victim, they would be within their rights to do so. Take a look at the tobacco industry if you think them powerless in this arena. Alternatively, the FCC.

Click to expand...

Tobacco: A product that has killed millions of people. The NFL: a company that gave a guy a 2 game suspension when they should have given him 6.

Yeah, that's a great analogy.