Bagwell's latest. CR should be here any minute now.
- Thread starter lionlurker
- Start date
I would love to see a audio/video tape of Joe answering some of those questions. After seeing Joe so many times answer a question with a question, I'd love to see him answer what was asked of him, in context.
back in the day... most of us were positively thrilled that freeh was chosen. and that is precisely what they wanted. big name.. carte blanche... what it is, it is.
we thought he'd be independent and fair and we'd accept the outcome. they figured the same. and it damned near worked.
this one was bought and paid for long before the ink ever dried... we were had. and to this day we continue to fight the battle against that lie.
Cruising Route 66
Well-Known Member
Cruising Route 66
Well-Known Member
Attorney General Kathleen Kane's 16-month investigation into Corbett's handling of the Sandusky child sex abuse investigation found no evidence to support the allegations of political influence and slow-walking she suggested as a candidate probably existed.
Instead, the report from special investigator Geoff Moulton concluded there was "no direct evidence that electoral politics influenced any important decision made in the Sandusky investigation," and that "Attorney General Corbett never made any substantive decisions related to the conduct of the investigation."
Consequently your theory is DOA.
Actually, Freeh's dog and pony show was unnecessary and uncalled for under any circumstances. We know that Freeh was auditioning for future opportunities with the NCAA. The fact that his hot dogging had no substance or evidence other than what was culled from The Commonwealth OAG adds insult to injury. If you are a masochist and enjoyed the unwarranted damage his Fool endorsed virtuoso caused, I wouldn't be surprised. Your Ship of Fool friends allowed Louis to take center stage and with his fictional product, damage PSU and innocent individuals. They are despicable people and they are being exposed. I am anxiously awaiting the return of the secular saint to defend his report as he promised. Please arrange for him to fly.
Last edited:
Wrong again. The report denounced the unnecessary and inexplicable delays. Perhaps too many investigators were working with "one hand " on other matters?
Cruising, how much $$ kickback do you get for writing this $hit up?
No direct evidence? Wow. So, you mean these wealthy supporters of your boy Corbett failed to leave direct evidence lying around to prove that electoral politics was the reason that it took almost three years for Corbett and his successor to send a subpoena to the grooming charity on whose board the wealthy supporters sat, and that by the time they did the evidence was shredded? Got it. That sure is a shocker.
I wonder if this is how he always imagined his career would turn out while he was in law school? Paid message board troll.
Hopefully you are joking. If not, please don't waste your time. Just put these bottom feeders on your ignore list and "move on".
Hopefully you are joking. If not, please don't waste your time. Just put these bottom feeders on your ignore list and "move on".
not to hijack this thread, but this was a tip of the hat to Aaron Barr, who tracked down members of Anonymous using this tactic
Cruising Route 66
Well-Known Member
Second mile documents are irrelevant here. What is relevant are the reasons why certain decisions were made surrounding the investigation and Moulton found them to be well founded and lacking political purpose.
ahhh fuuuudge . . . I took Carnes off ignore and had to see him float a huge whopper of a lie about the Moulton report.
Moulton certainly did NOT find the decisions well founded in the Sandusky investigation, and made a huge point of saying while they found no direct evidence that these delays were politically motivated, they were at the least "inexplicable"
LINK
The report, compiled by former federal prosecutor Geoffrey Moulton, said there were “inexplicable delays in bringing a serial child molester to justice."
Attorney General Kathleen Kane, who released the report, has argued criminal charges should have been brought sooner and that Corbett failed to protect children for more than two years.
Two boys became new victims of Sandusky in 2009, months after the attorney general began to investigate, she said at a news conference. They were not among the 10 boys Sandusky stood trial for abusing, nor were they mentioned in the report. “There was a lack of urgency on the part of leadership,” she said.
keep spinning. keep polishing that turd. you'll still never stop it from stinking . . .
Moulton certainly did NOT find the decisions well founded in the Sandusky investigation, and made a huge point of saying while they found no direct evidence that these delays were politically motivated, they were at the least "inexplicable"
LINK
The report, compiled by former federal prosecutor Geoffrey Moulton, said there were “inexplicable delays in bringing a serial child molester to justice."
Attorney General Kathleen Kane, who released the report, has argued criminal charges should have been brought sooner and that Corbett failed to protect children for more than two years.
Two boys became new victims of Sandusky in 2009, months after the attorney general began to investigate, she said at a news conference. They were not among the 10 boys Sandusky stood trial for abusing, nor were they mentioned in the report. “There was a lack of urgency on the part of leadership,” she said.
keep spinning. keep polishing that turd. you'll still never stop it from stinking . . .
That is is just complete BS. Moulton found that there were inexplicable delays in the investigation.
There is no good reason for the OAG's failure to execute search warrants. Absolutely none.
The TSM docs might have shed some light on those issues, but they got shredded. Who ordered that? Maybe if we had the docs we would know. Ya can't say that a shredded doc is irrelevant because we do not know what it says. Its been shredded. Even a fool like you knows that is true.
All you have to do is read the engagement letter and compare it with Freeh's findings. The BOT's SITF directed him to FIND certain things AND include those in his report. To wit:
“The report will contain FSS’s findings concerning: i) failures that occurred in the reporting process; ii) the cause for those failures; iii) who had knowledge of the allegations of sexual abuse; and iv) how those allegations were handled by the Trustees, PSU administrators, coaches and other staff.”
The SITF was not hiring Freeh to conduct an investigation. The plain language of the engagement letter proves they hired him to write a report based on pre-determined conclusions.
All your post proves is that you are about two years behind the FACTS of the case because the engagement letter was released in March 2013.
Actually that's been explained to him many times before. He simply does not understand what a contract means and how a contractor operates. Maybe this can help.
rotflmao.. does not do justice to this. thank you. and worse.. pretty damned accurate depiction of what is going on here...
Similar threads
