PATRIOTS NEWS Tom Brady, NFLPA Granted 14-Day Extension To File Motion For Rehearing By Second Circuit Court

[PatsFanSince74]

Sorry if I don't have the authority to check their mattresses or back accounts. Judges and court rooms are paid off all the time.

Sorry you're a bit naive to that.

My evidence is that Kessler wasn't ever allowed to speak. That's my evidence. Goodell's appeal hearing was as much a railroading as Goodell framing Brady for this.

There are 22 Judges on the Court of Appeals for SDNY, all appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate. If any of them were being "paid off," there would be Federal Prosecutors all over their butts. I can't speak for other courts, but it's not happening at this level on this court.

Kessler had plenty of chances to speak. He came into the hearing thoroughly unprepared and threw up all over himself when challenged by Chin. He wasn't quick enough on his feet and, since he wasn't addressing the Judges questions, found himself being interrupted because they were pissed off. I've read the Transcript. Kessler had plenty of chances to speak, he just couldn't articulate answers to obvious questions for which he should have been prepared. That's why Olson is on the case.

People who know me would find it amusing that you are calling me naive in these matters, as do I.

 

[Huckleberry1]

Translation?

A lot of money is needed. Brady has it, as does the NFLPA.

Your move, Sheriff Goebbels.

Quantum has been posting on this throughout this entire issue and has been right on the money the entire time. You are basically spewing nonsense that was debunked long ago. Quantum and 74 have done an exceptional job of laying the legal groundwork out and delineating the real issues at hand, which are Bermans decision and whether Goodell is covered by the Garvey ruling or whether his actions were patently dishonest and unfair and not covered by the wide swath that is Garvey. Katzmann and Berman say Garvey doesn't cover Goodell and Chin and Parker say it does.

 

[JMC00]

Trying to fill this in MN that had nothing to do with this case was panicking IMO.

What? The league running to file this in NY before the NFLPA could file in MN was the panicking. Filing in Minnesota had been standard practice for the NFLPA for years..

 

[PatsFanSince74]

The NFL picked NY. Berman was a random draw from the "wheel of judges" the SDNY uses. We lucked out by pulling him. That's all I meant.

FWIW, Ginsberg went with the flow in the MLB v. Garvey decision.

Good point!!!
She voted with the majority to find that an Arbiter's decision should be upheld even if it based on inaccurate facts or misunderstandings of the CBA by the Arbiter (as unbelievable as it is, that's what she and her colleagues found). If our friend is looking to her as his Beacon of Hope, I think he's in for a disappointment.

 

[Rusty Griswold]

The NFL picked NY. Berman was a random draw from the "wheel of judges" the SDNY uses. We lucked out by pulling him. That's all I meant.

FWIW, Ginsberg went with the flow in the MLB v. Garvey decision.

Ok, my mistake. Yes, I am aware of the Garvey ruling. I honestly don't think this is anything like the court system has ever seen before.

In any previous sports related case, it was very difficult to prove collusion. It isn't here. It can be proven that Pash/Goodell colluded with Wells to formulate a fraudulent report.

If the report is what they're basing their judgement on, it needs to be focused in on court. Goodell had control of what he wanted to appeal, but he won't here if Brady is granted his own appeal.

Goodell is riding this wave currently, but won't be for long.

 

[Rusty Griswold]

Please see my comments in Bold above. I don't think you understand Justice Ginsberg's role in this. When it comes to a decision as to whether SCOTUS would hear an appeal, her's will be one of eight or nine votes.

I agree, but I honestly do not think it's that big of a hurdle in this particular situation, namely because two judges, Berman and Katzmann, in 2 separate hearings, are coming to the same conclusions.

Chin and Parker were in on the same hearing.

I like Brady's odds.

 

[Rusty Griswold]

What? The league running to file this in NY before the NFLPA could file in MN was the panicking. Filing in Minnesota had been standard practice for the NFLPA for years..

I think he mis-spoke. I think he meant the NFL panicking and rushing to file it in NY, not MN, is what he is saying.

 

[YOUGOTMOSSED]

Good point!!!
She voted with the majority to find that an Arbiter's decision should be upheld even if it based on inaccurate facts or misunderstandings of the CBA by the Arbiter (as unbelievable as it is, that's what she and her colleagues found). If our friend is looking to her as his Beacon of Hope, I think he's in for a disappointment.

Stevens was the only one who called "BS" on that decision and he's retired now.

Under Garvey, the arbitrator can get the facts wrong and he can misinterpret the CBA but he can't "dispense his own brand of industrial justice." Not clear what exactly this means and the court doesn't give much guidance, but I think it means you can't simply run a kangaroo court to get the results you want. I'm not sure what else it could possibly mean.

 

[Rusty Griswold]

Good point!!!
She voted with the majority to find that an Arbiter's decision should be upheld even if it based on inaccurate facts or misunderstandings of the CBA by the Arbiter (as unbelievable as it is, that's what she and her colleagues found). If our friend is looking to her as his Beacon of Hope, I think he's in for a disappointment.

I don't think collusion was able to be proved in that case, nor the Expos moving to Washington. Collusion is hard to prove, but the Wells Report, the emails back and forth between the Pats and Pash, with all of the lies in the Wells Report itself, makes this a VERY different situation than the Garvey case.

While an interesting note, I don't think it applies, even if a sports-related comparison.

I would imagine Ginsburg would be incensed that a fellow Columbia grad, Bob Kraft's employee, is being railroaded by a corrupt commissioner who has lied previously to other federal judges.

To me, both of these elements, bury any reference to Garvey, who may have been colluded against, but there was no hard evidence to prove it.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

I agree, but I honestly do not think it's that big of a hurdle in this particular situation, namely because two judges, Berman and Katzmann, in 2 separate hearings, are coming to the same conclusions.

Chin and Parker were in on the same hearing.

I like Brady's odds.

That's a fair comment. I do think he'll get the en banc hearing if for no other reason than that the Chief Judge dissented and the court may well defer to him. It would be nice if the hearing were granted sua sponte and Olson didn't even have to ask for it...one can always dream.

I continue to distinguish between Chin and Parker.
Parker is a political hack who was starstruck by Clement...he never would have spoken to Olson the way he spoke to Kessler.
I continue to believe that Chin's questions had an agenda, viz., to get Kessler to argue that Brady had been railroaded. He asked the question in a hostile manner, but that's how Appeals Judges talk...Chin's background is in Labor Law; his Mentor was the late Judith Vladeck, an icon of labor rights, whom I met on several occasions. As Sally Jenkins has observed, Kessler failed to take the opportunity that Chin presented to turn the argument against how the NFL behaved.

 

[Rusty Griswold]

Stevens was the only one who called "BS" on that decision and he's retired now.

Under Garvey, the arbitrator can get the facts wrong and he can misinterpret the CBA but he can't "dispense his own brand of industrial justice." Not clear what exactly this means and the court doesn't give much guidance, but I think it means you can't simply run a kangaroo court to get the results you want. I'm not sure what else it could possibly mean.

That is exactly what it means.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

Stevens was the only one who called "BS" on that decision and he's retired now.

Under Garvey, the arbitrator can get the facts wrong and he can misinterpret the CBA but he can't "dispense his own brand of industrial justice." Not clear what exactly this means and the court doesn't give much guidance, but I think it means you can't simply run a kangaroo court to get the results you want. I'm not sure what else it could possibly mean.

Read the Steelworkers case. Dispensing one's "own brand of Industrial Justice" is specifically defined as meaning that the Arbiter acts in a manner "inconsistent with the essence" of the CBA. So, I think Olson will try to show that Goodell behaved in a deceptive manner through a pattern of lies and deception, which run contrary to the spirit of the CBA.

And, yes, Stevens was one of a kind. I know several people who know him well, including one of his clerks from years ago. He is/was a giant!

 

[YOUGOTMOSSED]

There are 22 Judges on the Court of Appeals for SDNY, all appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate. If any of them were being "paid off," there would be Federal Prosecutors all over their butts. I can't speak for other courts, but it's not happening at this level on this court.

Kessler had plenty of chances to speak. He came into the hearing thoroughly unprepared and threw up all over himself when challenged by Chin. He wasn't quick enough on his feet and, since he wasn't addressing the Judges questions, found himself being interrupted because they were pissed off. I've read the Transcript. Kessler had plenty of chances to speak, he just couldn't articulate answers to obvious questions for which he should have been prepared. That's why Olson is on the case.

People who know me would find it amusing that you are calling me naive in these matters, as do I.

It's very debatable how good a job the Federal government does in policing itself for corruption (if Hillary is indicted, I'll eat my words on that).

In any event, I think you're being too hard on Kessler but I've discussed this at length before.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

I don't think collusion was able to be proved in that case, nor the Expos moving to Washington. Collusion is hard to prove, but the Wells Report, the emails back and forth between the Pats and Pash, with all of the lies in the Wells Report itself, makes this a VERY different situation than the Garvey case.

While an interesting note, I don't think it applies, even if a sports-related comparison.

I would imagine Ginsburg would be incensed that a fellow Columbia grad, Bob Kraft's employee, is being railroaded by a corrupt commissioner who has lied previously to other federal judges.

To me, both of these elements, bury any reference to Garvey, who may have been colluded against, but there was no hard evidence to prove it.

Well, we'll find out one way or the other if the case ever gets to SCOTUS. I doubt that Justice Ginsburg's Columbia ties to Kraft are that meaningful, since she got her Law Degree from the school and Kraft got his Bachelor's.

 

[YOUGOTMOSSED]

Read the Steelworkers case. Dispensing one's "own brand of Industrial Justice" is specifically defined as meaning that the Arbiter acts in a manner "inconsistent with the essence" of the CBA. So, I think Olson will try to show that Goodell behaved in a deceptive manner through a pattern of lies and deception, which run contrary to the spirit of the CBA.

And, yes, Stevens was one of a kind. I know several people who know him well, including one of his clerks from years ago. He is/was a giant!

I admit, I'm baffled as to how someone is allowed to misinterpret the CBA but can't act in a manner inconsistent with the essence of the CBA.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

It's very debatable how good a job the Federal government does in policing itself for corruption (if Hillary is indicted, I'll eat my words on that).

In any event, I think you're being too hard on Kessler but I've discussed this at length before.

Fair enough. But, it's a very small universe of Judges who are constantly in the public spotlight...they live in a fishbowl...
Let's not even get into an HRC discussion.

 

[Rusty Griswold]

That's a fair comment. I do think he'll get the en banc hearing if for no other reason than that the Chief Judge dissented and the court may well defer to him. It would be nice if the hearing were granted sua sponte and Olson didn't even have to ask for it...one can always dream.

I continue to distinguish between Chin and Parker.
Parker is a political hack who was starstruck by Clement...he never would have spoken to Olson the way he spoke to Kessler.
I continue to believe that Chin's questions had an agenda, viz., to get Kessler to argue that Brady had been railroaded. He asked the question in a hostile manner, but that's how Appeals Judges talk...Chin's background is in Labor Law; his Mentor was the late Judith Vladeck, an icon of labor rights, whom I met on several occasions. As Sally Jenkins has observed, Kessler failed to take the opportunity that Chin presented to turn the argument against how the NFL behaved.

I don't think Kessler failed. I think he was cut off and not able to speak or make a case. I like Sally Jenkins's analysis on all of this, but something smells badly with how Chin made the comment he did, when there is no evidence of any kind.

Very disturbing statement, IMO. It's almost like Chin never read the Wells Report. He obviously didn't.

Even the most ardent Pats hater can't claim there is direct evidence of Brady ordering a deflation scheme for home games or why he'd wake up that AFC TItle game Sunday and ask for it to be done.

Anyone who has ever thrown a football would not want it softer. If anything they'd want it harder. The more and more Goodell moves the narrative away from logic, the more he tries to get away with it.

You do realize this whole thing is about a premise by some moron in a basement claiming that NE doesn't fumble much at all because BB orders a deflation scheme behind brady's back after inispection, with Harbaugh and Co. knowing the balls would be under 12.5 by halftime, considering how much use they get, right?

The millisecond DQwell Jackson made that INT, it made Harbaugh/Pagano's plan into action and Goodell was able and willing to do this.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

I admit, I'm baffled as to how someone is allowed to misinterpret the CBA but can't act in a manner inconsistent with the essence of the CBA.

So am I.
In this case Goodell is given great leeway on his interpretation of "Notice."
Olson is a take no prisoners guy. If anyone can make the case for lies and deception to a bunch of appellate judges, it's him!

 

[PatsFanSince74]

I don't think Kessler failed. I think he was cut off and not able to speak or make a case. I like Sally Jenkins's analysis on all of this, but something smells badly with how Chin made the comment he did, when there is no evidence of any kind.

Very disturbing statement, IMO. It's almost like Chin never read the Wells Report. He obviously didn't.

Even the most ardent Pats hater can't claim there is direct evidence of Brady ordering a deflation scheme for home games or why he'd wake up that AFC TItle game Sunday and ask for it to be done.

Anyone who has ever thrown a football would not want it softer. If anything they'd want it harder. The more and more Goodell moves the narrative away from logic, the more he tries to get away with it.

You do realize this whole thing is about a premise by some moron in a basement claiming that NE doesn't fumble much at all because BB orders a deflation scheme behind brady's back after inispection, with Harbaugh and Co. knowing the balls would be under 12.5 by halftime, considering how much use they get, right?

The millisecond DQwell Jackson made that INT, it made Harbaugh/Pagano's plan into action and Goodell was able and willing to do this.

We'll have to agree to disagree on Kessler and Chin, but I agree with everything else you say.
The issue is how much can be conveyed by Olson as the truth without the ability to get these idiots under oath. Because, otherwise it can sound like a bunch of Pats fans in a bar...I'd agree with them, but it's hard to make that fly in open court.

 

[Huckleberry1]

So am I.
In this case Goodell is given great leeway on his interpretation of "Notice."
Olson is a take no prisoners guy. If anyone can make the case for lies and deception to a bunch of appellate judges, it's him!

Yep, My hopes lie with Olsen.