Started By
Message
re: Huge difference between an FBI Target Letter and a Subpoena
Posted on 2/26/19 at 11:40 am to lsufball19
Posted on 2/26/19 at 11:40 am to lsufball19
what you are not understanding......
the FEDS have the wire tap where Wade is trying to buy a player. It doesn't matter if it's allowed into the proceedings or not. If the FEDS have it, the NCAA has it.
This will just put Wade on the stand and everything he says will be used against him by the NCAA. The FEDS are actually doing the NCAA's dirty work. Whether or not he did anything that will get him in hot water with the FEDS is irrelevant. The problem for Wade, and LSU, is it is obvious he was trying to buy at least one player and the NCAA will not take kindly to that.
the FEDS have the wire tap where Wade is trying to buy a player. It doesn't matter if it's allowed into the proceedings or not. If the FEDS have it, the NCAA has it.
This will just put Wade on the stand and everything he says will be used against him by the NCAA. The FEDS are actually doing the NCAA's dirty work. Whether or not he did anything that will get him in hot water with the FEDS is irrelevant. The problem for Wade, and LSU, is it is obvious he was trying to buy at least one player and the NCAA will not take kindly to that.
1
Posted on 2/26/19 at 12:01 pm to MrAUTigers
quote:
It doesn't matter if it's allowed into the proceedings or not.
actually, that does matter
quote:
If the FEDS have it, the NCAA has it.
The feds have not turned over anything to the NCAA actually. Emmert has said as much
quote:
The FEDS are actually doing the NCAA's dirty work.
The feds didn't subpoena him to testify
quote:
Whether or not he did anything that will get him in hot water with the FEDS is irrelevant.
quote:
The problem for Wade, and LSU, is it is obvious he was trying to buy at least one player and the NCAA will not take kindly to that.
You have a link to a transcript? Or are you just posturing?
This post was edited on 2/26/19 at 12:02 pm
Posted on 2/26/19 at 12:13 pm to lsufball19
quote:
You have a link to a transcript?
don't be stupid.
from one of your own sites...
quote:
The Wade and Townsend recordings were deemed inadmissible by U.S. District Court Judge Lewis A. Kaplan, but the transcripts were read aloud in the courtroom in Manhattan on Tuesday morning.
quote:
"So you said to me in Atlanta there was a 2019 kid I wanted to recruit, they can get him to LSU, you would have funded," Dawkins told Wade, according to Donnelly. "Would you want Balsa?"
"Oh, the big kid?" Wade asked.
"Yeah," Dawkins confirmed.
“OK. But there’s other (expletive) involved in it,” Wade said. “I have got to shut my door ... Here’s my thing: I can get you what you need, but it’s got to work.”
Koprivica tweeted on June 21, 2017 that he had received a scholarship offer from LSU.
LINK
in other words........the transcript may not have been allowed, but it has been read, and recorded, in a court of law.
This post was edited on 2/26/19 at 12:17 pm
Posted on 2/26/19 at 1:15 pm to MrAUTigers
quote:
.the transcript may not have been allowed, but it has been read, and recorded, in a court of law.
pretty vague transcript IMO, far from "obvious" as you put it. I know what has already been released. But when someone says it's obvious something happened, I would expect to see more than that.
Posted on 2/26/19 at 1:17 pm to ibldprplgld
quote:
Wow, you know the SeC Rant has become unhinged when BowlJackson is getting up votes.
I probably get more upvotes than downvotes overall
I'm as confused about it as you are most of the time
Posted on 2/26/19 at 1:21 pm to geauxtigahs87
quote:Stop trying to sarcastically spin the fact your coach is involved in a scheme to pay players.
Stop trying to spoil all the fun by explaining to them whats actually going on.
The FBI wouldn't even want to talk to him if he wasn't involved or knew about what was going on.
This post was edited on 2/26/19 at 1:25 pm
Posted on 2/26/19 at 1:24 pm to lsufball19
quote:
pretty vague transcript IMO, far from "obvious" as you put it. I know what has already been released. But when someone says it's obvious something happened, I would expect to see more than that.
You've stated multiple times that you said it was all inadmissible. You're being told it was read out loud in court and now you're back-peddling to fit your narrative.
The FBI almost certainly has more on this than has been provided to the public. I can't wait for April 22nd when you have to eat some crow, bud.
This post was edited on 2/26/19 at 1:29 pm
Posted on 2/26/19 at 1:26 pm to lsufball19
quote:
pretty vague transcript IMO, far from "obvious" as you put it. I know what has already been released. But when someone says it's obvious something happened, I would expect to see more than that.
unless it was another SEC school......then it would be clear as day to you.
Posted on 2/26/19 at 1:30 pm to MrAUTigers
quote:
then it would be clear as day to you
after seeing how the NCAA operates, if that's all they have, they have nothing that will amount to anything. If this trial is adjudicated and nothing more comes from Wade's testimony (if he even ends up testifying), then Wade can tell the NCAA neither money nor improper benefits were a part of that conversation and the NCAA will have nothing to stick to him. So sorry to disappoint. That vague conversation isn't going to be enough by itself. You know it, and I know it.
Posted on 2/26/19 at 1:32 pm to MrAUTigers
quote:
unless it was another SEC school......then it would be clear as day to you.
This guy has had his head buried in the sand like the rest of them since this report came out.
If it were another school, he would be doing the same thing I am doing -- but he's trying to grasp at straws to make an argument that just isn't there.
Typical armchair lawyer.
Posted on 2/26/19 at 1:34 pm to ForeverGator
quote:
You've stated multiple times that you said it was all inadmissible.
Well, it was, and may be this time too.
quote:
You're being told it was read out loud in court and now you're back-peddling to fit your narrative.
It was read outside the purview of the jury (i.e. it wasn't admitted). I don't have to fit anything into my narrative. I've simply recited facts about the previous trial and applied basic logic to potential outcomes in this current trial. Do you just like continuing to be wrong? It would really be a good idea for you to actually read about the cases rather than continuing to sling shite you clearly know nothing about.
Or maybe you can actually address any of the pointed questions you've been asked that require thinking and not calling everyone stupid, misstating facts, not understanding basic legal concepts, etc.
quote:
The FBI almost certainly has more on this than has been provided to the public.
If they had all this dirt on Wade, why on earth do yo think they chose not to pursue criminal charges with Wade when they did, in fact, charge and convict 3 other coaches. You have no answer to that and won't.
quote:
I can't wait for April 22nd when you have to eat some crow, bud.
likewise, pal
This post was edited on 2/26/19 at 1:35 pm
Posted on 2/26/19 at 1:35 pm to lsufball19
You sound just like an Ole Miss fan.
Posted on 2/26/19 at 1:36 pm to ForeverGator
quote:
Typical armchair lawyer.
as a matter of fact, I'm an actual lawyer, unlike yourself.
Posted on 2/26/19 at 1:36 pm to MrAUTigers
quote:
You sound just like an Ole Miss fan.
K
Posted on 2/26/19 at 1:38 pm to MrAUTigers
quote:Lmao solid retort, guy
You sound just like an Ole Miss fan
Posted on 2/26/19 at 1:41 pm to lsufball19
quote:
Or maybe you can actually address any of the pointed questions you've been asked that require thinking and not calling everyone stupid, misstating facts, not understanding basic legal concepts, etc.
Are you an attorney?
I've had pro se opponents say that I have no idea what I'm doing before, but the judge disagrees every time.
It's a great way to say you actually have no idea what you're talking about and just trying to scare the attorney away. It doesn't work that way.
You sound like this lady that one time said she didn't sign a settlement agreement and had no idea about it (the court forgot to upload it to the court website in their conversion of old documents) and since it couldn't be found on the court website, it shouldn't be enforced. I had a copy...
But please, continue to be that pro se idiot.
Posted on 2/26/19 at 1:41 pm to ForeverGator
quote:
Are you an attorney?
yes
Posted on 2/26/19 at 1:44 pm to lsufball19
quote:
Are you an attorney?
yes
Posted on 2/26/19 at 1:44 pm to ForeverGator
right back at you, pal
cool story, though. I'd love to hear all about your court battles with pro se litigants.
cool story, though. I'd love to hear all about your court battles with pro se litigants.
This post was edited on 2/26/19 at 1:47 pm
Posted on 2/26/19 at 1:47 pm to lsufball19
Louisiana must have an easy bar exam and a very low standard.
That JD from Southern University isn't helping you.
That JD from Southern University isn't helping you.
Page 5 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News