Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Politics
posted by janrinok on Sunday June 03 2018, @10:47PM   Printer-friendly
from the naughty-naughty dept.

The Center for American Progress reports

Last month, the NFL announced a new policy for its players during the national anthem: Players are permitted to stay in the locker room during the anthem, but if they go out onto the field during it, they must stand. If any of the players takes a knee, the team will be fined.

Soon afterwards, a Wall Street Journal report confirmed what most have long suspected: That President Donald Trump's public outrage about NFL players protesting police brutality and systemic racism during the national anthem at football games heavily influenced NFL owners to change the rule, and discouraged them from signing players who would protest.

It's all terrible news for those in favor of free speech and peaceful protest, and for those against white nationalism and police brutality.

However, Mark Geragos, the lawyer representing Kaepernick in his collusion lawsuit against the NFL, [...] believes [...] that Trump's direct influence over NFL owners on this issue violates federal law. U.S. Code 227 [which] says that members of Congress or the executive branch cannot "wrongfully influence a private entity's employment decision ... solely on the basis of partisan political affiliation".

A few revelations from the last couple of weeks strongly support Geragos' case here, and it's important to remember that Geragos knows much more about the case than we do--he has taken the depositions of more than a dozen NFL owners, while the public only knows about the depositions that have leaked.

[...] Of course, influencing the private hiring decisions of a company isn't the only part of U.S. Code [227] that needs to be proved; it would also have to be shown that Trump did it for partisan political purposes.

That sounds trickier to prove, but in this case, that's not necessarily true. First of all, Trump's comments were made at a political rally supporting an Alabama Republican candidate for US Senate--an expressly partisan environment. And according to the WSJ, Trump told Dallas Cowboys owner Jerry Jones in private conversations that the issue was a "winning" one for him.

Previous: NFL: New National Anthem Rule; NY Jets CEO: Break the Rule and I'll Pay the Fine


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Informative) by NotSanguine on Monday June 04 2018, @05:38PM (17 children)

    > First, "wrongfully" is nonsense. Americans -- all of them, not just Trump -- have a duty to oppose unpatriotic shit. He's in the right.

    Bullshit. They have a duty to uphold the Constitution. Try reading it once, it's quite a fine document.

    Thank you!

    Yes. Do read the constitution. Note that amendments to the constitution are incorporated into that document:
    The First Amendment:

    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

    Mr. Bierce, in his lexicographic tour de force [wikipedia.org] noted:

    “Patriotism, n. Combustible rubbish ready to the torch of any one ambitious to illuminate his name. In Dr. Johnson's famous dictionary patriotism is defined as the last resort of a scoundrel. With all due respect to an enlightened but inferior lexicographer I beg to submit it is the first.”

    --
    No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Informative=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Informative' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 04 2018, @05:45PM (16 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 04 2018, @05:45PM (#688459)

    He didn't make a law he gave his opinion.

    • (Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Monday June 04 2018, @06:02PM (15 children)

      He didn't make a law he gave his opinion.

      What are you blathering on about?

      A public official made statements that run counter to the highest law of the land, in the name of "patriotism."

      Calling him out on that is not just our right, it's the duty of all freedom-loving people.

      Don't shut up, as you're free to blather on to your heart's content. Just as I'm free to call out your idiocy.

      --
      No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 04 2018, @06:39PM (10 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 04 2018, @06:39PM (#688489)

        Right just like your opinion ( classless and crude as it was) was not a law he did not make a law. He gave his opinion on the disrespect of our country. Q

        • (Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 04 2018, @07:06PM (9 children)

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 04 2018, @07:06PM (#688514)

          Except his opinion is an attempt by a government official to limit the 1st amendment rights of a citizen specifically by having their employment terminated, and the comments were made at a political rally. It wasn't just an opinion, it was a direct call for action.

          You trump apologists are going to need some serious therapy once this house of cards falls down.

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 04 2018, @08:47PM (8 children)

            by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 04 2018, @08:47PM (#688561)

            Nobody had their employment terminated. Kapernick made the dumb choice to exercise free agency. He exercised himself out of a nice job.

            On March 3, 2017, Kaepernick officially opted out of his contract with the 49ers, an option as part of his restructured contract, therefore making him a free agent at the start of the 2017 league year.

            And then his idiot girlfriend screwed his chances of being picked up.

            In late July and early August 2017, the Baltimore Ravens were reportedly working to extend an offer to Kaepernick. According to former African American Ravens player Ray Lewis, the offer was terminated after Kaepernick's girlfriend Nessa Diab—who works as a radio host— posted an incendiary tweet that compared Ravens team owner Steve Bisciotti to a slave owner and player Ray Lewis to a slave.

            Football is a business. When your employees begin to affect the bottom line and offend your customers, you find new employees. For some reason, the lefty loonies seem to think that employees are unrestricted in their first amendment rights while on the clock when it suits them. The same ones seem to praise shit like James Damore getting fired by Google. Funny that they are too damn stupid to see the irony...

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 04 2018, @09:11PM (7 children)

              by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 04 2018, @09:11PM (#688572)

              Ah yes, the stupid conservative who thinks that privatizing everything is great and that Constitutional rights are somehow limited by employment. They are free to fire him if they can legally do so, but that doesn't make Trump's involvement any less illegal.

              Suck it up buttercup, your spine needs some hardening. Also, might want to do some squats to try and firm up your butthole after the decades of rape you've been so "happy" to receive.

              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 04 2018, @09:44PM (3 children)

                by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 04 2018, @09:44PM (#688598)

                If he's a buttercup you're sour cream for sure. You can't just impeach someone because you don't like him and what he does... We are a nation of laws. I yearn for the day when the REEEEEEing stops.

                • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 04 2018, @11:47PM (2 children)

                  by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 04 2018, @11:47PM (#688645)

                  Sure I jumped the shark with "but that doesn't make Trump's involvement any less illegal" but you imagining that I'm calling for impeachment just because I don't like him makes you the moron going REEEEEEEE. Irony is a bitch, guess that's why you get along with it so well.

                  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 05 2018, @01:34AM (1 child)

                    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 05 2018, @01:34AM (#688681)

                    Nevermind, you're a salty salty pretzel

                    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 05 2018, @04:13PM

                      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 05 2018, @04:13PM (#688907)

                      Ah yes, the superior intellectual who dispassionately stands back and points fingers while offering nothing of substance. Communication is often hard around sensitive issues, misunderstandings are very common, but it is sure a hell of a lot better than ignoring everything and hoping humanity suddenly morphs into perfectly reasonable people. Best of luck with your useless approach to criticism.

              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 05 2018, @12:02AM (2 children)

                by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 05 2018, @12:02AM (#688652)

                Ah yes, the stupid conservative who thinks that privatizing everything is great and that Constitutional rights are somehow limited by employment.

                Ah yes. The simple minded entitled millennial. If you think your first amendment rights aren't limited by employment, try going to work and calling your boss a fucking fascist asshole. I'll be you'll still be claiming he's violating your rights as he throws you out the door.

                • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 05 2018, @02:16PM (1 child)

                  by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 05 2018, @02:16PM (#688864)

                  Not what I said, keep practicing that reading comprehension.

                  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 05 2018, @06:27PM

                    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 05 2018, @06:27PM (#688982)

                    Read what I quoted from you. Yes it is exactly what you said.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 05 2018, @01:01AM (3 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 05 2018, @01:01AM (#688668)

        A public official made statements that run counter to the highest law of the land, in the name of "patriotism."

        Calling him out on that is not just our right, it's the duty of all freedom-loving people.

        Let me see if I get this straight. You think Trump should have no right to free speech because you disagree with him saying NFL players should have no right to free speech.

        • (Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Tuesday June 05 2018, @04:53AM (2 children)

          A public official made statements that run counter to the highest law of the land, in the name of "patriotism."

                  Calling him out on that is not just our right, it's the duty of all freedom-loving people.

          Let me see if I get this straight. You think Trump should have no right to free speech because you disagree with him saying NFL players should have no right to free speech.

          Hmmm...Where exactly did I say "Trump should have no right to free speech"?

          I said he should be called out for saying others shouldn't have free speech rights. Are you not fluent in English, or are you trying to twist my words to support your point of view, or are you just not so bright? Perhaps all three?

          Given that L'Orange took an oath to "preserve, protect and defend the constitution of the United States," it's interesting that he makes statements that run counter to that document.

          As such, those who love freedom and wish to preserve it, should take Trump to task by using the freedom of speech that jackass spat on.

          --
          No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
          • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 05 2018, @01:40PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 05 2018, @01:40PM (#688839)

            Given that L'Orange took an oath to "preserve, protect and defend the constitution of the United States," it's interesting that he makes statements that run counter to that document.

            I'm not the Constitutional scholar like you are. Can you show me where the President exercising his right to free speech with his personal opinions is "counter to that document" excluding the fact you just don't like what he has to say?

          • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 05 2018, @06:54PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 05 2018, @06:54PM (#688998)

            I can always count on a left leaning nutcase to respond to a honest conversation by trying to shut down the other party. While you espouse and defend the freedom of speech of those that conservatives find offensive, you mod me troll when I ask you to back up your Trump assertions with proof. You behave exactly the same way as the object of your irrational hatred and are too dense to see it.

            As such, those who love freedom and wish to preserve it, should take Trump to task by using the freedom of speech that jackass spat on.

            You seem to love freedom of speech only when it agrees with you. Your original statement:

            A public official made statements that run counter to the highest law of the land, in the name of "patriotism."

            is objectively wrong. It violated no principle of the Constitution. You just don't approve of the content. It is no more "counter to the highest law of the land" than me claiming NotSanguine should be deported to Guantanamo Bay. I hate to be the one to break it to you, but emotions are not facts.