ADVERTISEMENT

FC: ESPN takes on Penn State once again

Was Esbach honest?
Yes
Was Fina honest?
Not in the case of his transgression but that doesn't mean every single thing he did was wrong or dishonest.
Was Leiter honest?
Who is that?
Was Baldwin honest?
Yes, although over her head. CSS played her while they lied and covered up.
These are simple yes/no questions which I'm sure you can answer.

Maybe Leiter is your "friend who worked the case". He's shown to be a trustworthy individual.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bourbon n blues
Can you or your investigator friend answer this question? Because no one who touts the cover-up conspiracy has been even close to being able to.
No need to go to his friend I can answer that
Dranov testified that nothing Mike told him justified going to the police.
But he didn't tell Dranov the same things he told Joe and CSS because he was freaked out. Read Dranov's testimony from Sandusky's trial and Joe's testimony from the GJ and his interaction with Sassano
Having said that, how can one reasonably expect anyone at Penn State to do so?
Because CSS and Joe had more information
Do you think Mike told Joe, Gary, and Tim something different than what he told his dad and Dranov?
Yes and the testimony shows that.
Please explain how this fits into your conspiracy theory.
Not a conspiracy theory but under oath testimony.
Conrad questioned Dranov about his status as a mandated reporter of suspected child abuse because he is a physician. Dranov said because of what McQueary described and because he was not a witness to it, the incident was not a mandated report.
Also because under the law at that time the child was not a patient of Dranov's
Asked if he thought it was “bad enough” to call police or child welfare agencies that night, Dranov said no.
See above. Testimony is your guide here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bourbon n blues
Pretty funnny.......at the end of the clip an ad pops up for an interview by.....not with but by......Ray Lewis.......a guy involved in a double murder in Atlanta. So they hired a guy that was an accessory to murder while pontificating about Penn State.
So what about the info in the clip? Ad are irrelevant. is that why you can't let go?
 
  • Like
Reactions: bourbon n blues
Another case of Hanlon's razor.

"Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by stupidity"
 
  • Like
Reactions: PSU2UNC
I have told you what you need to do. I can't prove a negative.
All you have to do is show ONE inconsistency in anything I've said that would show I am not a scientist. That would disprove it. You cannot do that because I am exactly who I say I am (as everyone else on this thread realizes...actually you realize it too, you just refuse to admit you are wrong).
Against an anonymous internet poster? LOL But yeah I guess a guy who lives in his mommies basement would think that. SMFH
Then stop being anonymous. You criticize me for being anonymous and then hide behind your own anonymity.
Liar you've never risked your life for anything. Stolen Valor

I will not STFU and you are a liar
Incorrect on all counts. How many ostriches did you **** this weekend?
 
I've been very specific but you refuse because you are a fraud and a coward
Incorrect. Please be careful when ****ing ostriches. Even if it is a sick ostrich, it is at least a 2 man job. Maybe your buddy Bourbon will help.
Listen to yourself and how sick you are. "Win" what? What a fool. I'm having fun with you.
How is that sick? You the sick one; spending all your time on another team's message board where you aren't welcome. You have a weird, sick version of "fun." I'm enjoying making you look stupid, but I wouldn't characterize it as "fun."
😂

You are a liar

Liar

Many times
Incorrect. Do you prefer male or female ostriches?
 
But he didn't tell Dranov the same things he told Joe and CSS because he was freaked out. Read Dranov's testimony from Sandusky's trial and Joe's testimony from the GJ and his interaction with Sassano
But Mike has said that he told Joe a watered down version of what he saw. So how watered down must the version he told to his dad and Dranov have been????

Your explanation makes no sense, and we are all dumber for having read it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PSU2UNC
Not enough to make the difference you imagine
Pure speculation on your part. I think we could quickly disprove this with a poll.
Why don't you ask her?
I don't know her. Do you? If so, feel free to ask her and let me know. But her career has gone in the crapper and she didn't even try to write a book to capitalize on her Pulitzer. That's unheard of.
Nothing close to a Pulitzer.
To be clear, a Pulitzer for local reporting, that was erroneously awarded to a fraud journalist.
You have made claims about yourself and not proven it. You therefore are a liar.
This isn't the definition of a liar. I don't really have to prove anything to you. I am who I say I am. You can try to prove I'm not, but the onus is on you to disprove that. Having said that, I have provided you with plenty of personal details (and five documents) that prove I am who I say I am. You will just never admit you are wrong about this because you are a hypocrite and a loser.
You are obsessed with me personally and even your JoeBot buddies can see that.
LOL. Not even a little bit. If you chose to go away, I will never give you another thought. But when you keep spewing your nonsense here, including personal attacks against me, I will continue to put you in your place.
"Public opinion would never have let a jury acquit regardless of the facts." is what you said. And they did acquit him of that charge. You were wrong even though the GJ said he did it. Man up!
Clearly I mean acquit complete, you dullard.
Like a moth to a flame. You aren't beating me down either. I'm making you dance Liar
My mental pummeling of you has your in concussion protocol.
Enjoy playing League of Legends in mommies basement "drbigbeef"! LOL
I have no idea what League of Legends is, but I'll assume it is some sort of game. As I said, I don't play video games.
 
I have proven @PSU2UNC and @AvgUser wrong multiple times a
You've proven me wrong zero times. Your only responses are "They were guilty because a jury found them guilty" or "Overblown." You have zero facts and zero ability to synthesize existing facts into anything coherent. All you can do is parrot the Freeh report and the jury findings, both of which have been thoroughly debunked.
 
Frank Fina. Wasn't he the guy that praised Joe's actions (or lack thereof) in the Penn State Child Sex Abuse scandal?

So, is Fina honest or not? If he isn't, as is claimed by many here, then ALL his statements are false, right? So he lied when he spoke about Joe. Can't have it both ways.
I don't want it both ways. I'm not making it both ways. I couldn't care less what Fina said about Paterno one way or the other.

There is no evidence that Paterno committed a crime or covered up anything. If you think there is, please share.
 
What amazes me is how the fantasy persists . If there was solid evidence to exonerate these guys or Joe it would be out there.
There isn’t any.
It is out there and has been shown by multiple investigative reporters. It's all been discussed here. The problem is that no media outlet will touch this story because it is unpopular.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: NoBareFeet
So what about the info in the clip? Ad are irrelevant. is that why you can't let go?
It shows they have no morals at that network and posture for ratings. So why trust anything they say?

As for the info, it was mostly personal beliefs and much has been disputed often. Personally, Joe followed protocols and notified his superiors. Said from the first month it was the administration that screwed up. When notified by the AD they should have contacted campus security.....who should have turned it over to an agency with proper expertise in pedophelia.

And it is very strange that of all the charges that Sandusky faced he was acquitted on the charges of the night that McCreary witnessed. So what he witnessed wasn’t a crime.

As for Sandusky, I don’t know if he is guilty because the investigation and trial was a complete FUBAR. He deserves a retrial but that would be detrimental to the university to have to go through all this again. But there should be one so society can see the truth and those responsible for f’ing it up are removed from the system and proper reforms are in place to protect future innocents. If a proper trial is held and Sandusky is found guilty he should die in prison.
 
There's no need to explain that, cases don't hinge on something like that. It means nothing to the big picture. What Dranov thinks doesn't matter. What matters did Mike make a credible report and if so, why didn't they do anything? That has been proven multiple times in a court of law.
Try being less pathetic.
Court of law got it wrong. Mike never made a credible to report to his father/Dranov, Paterno or C/S.
 
Bring me something of substance not your pathetic butthurt.
You know who the lairs were? The guys on trial. The sex offender and those who covered for him.
This is a non-answer because you cannot explain away the tremendous corruption within the OAG and police.
 
The latest Supreme Court ruling means that Jerry will never get an appeal heard at the Federal level.

It's all over.
It's only over for people who only care about the outcomes in court. For those of us who care about the truth, there are still plenty of opportunities to get the truth into the public eye.
 
Do you remember when JJ was exposed on bwi. I believe it was in the run-up to the Curley, Schultz and Spanier trial. He allegedly had privy information on the case. At the outset of the discussions he was anonymous. He was unmasked and I believe he stopped posting after his cover was blown.

JJ was a regular on pennlive, but also posted on cdt and other outlets. Has anybody heard of JJ lately?
IIRC he also had zero "insider information" on the case. JJ was just a hater.
 
  • Like
Reactions: francofan
I would agree except no one was hiding a pedophile.
Yes they were but now he is safely in jail. Those who enabled him went to jail as well or were fired and disgraced. As leaders of the organization it bears that shame as well.
 
But you DON'T have a Pulitzer, correct? So where do you get off criticizing the other (quite successful) writers?
Same place you do criticizing Ganim who has one of the MOST prestigious awards in journalism.
 
All you have to do is show ONE inconsistency in anything I've said that would show I am not a scientist. That would disprove it.
You postings and obsession with making me believe you show just that. You are a fraud.
You cannot do that because I am exactly who I say I am (as everyone else on this thread realizes...actually you realize it too, you just refuse to admit you are wrong).
You are a liar and a hypocrite about not admitting wrong.
Then stop being anonymous. You criticize me for being anonymous and then hide behind your own anonymity.
I'm not the one making claims about myself and just expecting others to believe it because I said so. Prove your claim or be called a liar.
Incorrect on all counts. How many ostriches did you **** this weekend?
You are a liar. Quit smoking dope and hallucinating about ostriches.
 
Incorrect. Please be careful when ****ing ostriches. Even if it is a sick ostrich, it is at least a 2 man job. Maybe your buddy Bourbon will help.
Smoking dope makes you stupid. But I repeat myself
How is that sick? You the sick one; spending all your time on another team's message board where you aren't welcome. You have a weird, sick version of "fun." I'm enjoying making you look stupid, but I wouldn't characterize it as "fun."
You are obessesed with me and that is sick. Plus it shows the true fraud you are claiming to be a scientist.
Incorrect. Do you prefer male or female ostriches?
I guess you are a stoned liar.
 
But Mike has said that he told Joe a watered down version of what he saw. So how watered down must the version he told to his dad and Dranov have been????
But Joe testified that MM told him what he saw was sexually inappropriate. Plenty enough to call the cops. Joe didn't
Your explanation makes no sense, and we are all dumber for having read it.
The explanation is valid. You just don't like it and you are dumber for believing otherwise.
 
Baldwin is the one who gave a glowing report to Snedden about the integiry and trustworthiness of Spanier.
That was before she realized they were playing her. Recently in the news, prison guard in Alabama was a sterling employee until she took off with her boyfriend inmate. Like CSS she fooled a lot of folks.
 
Had it been some derelict off the street instead of the second most beloved figure in State College then he might have done that.

Paterno's testimony corroborates that.

I suspect you would have too given his relative power position in the organization as in low man on the totem pole.

Yeah, let's blame the low man again and ignore the iconic paragon of virtue who was told of CSA and then participated in the decision not to report Sandusky.
Such bullshit. Sandusky had already retired for two years by the then, so enough with the low man on the totem pole rhetoric. Any man with a a moral compass whatsoever, would have stopped the rape/molestation of a child if they encountered it directly, especially when a much older man was allegedly doing it in view in a shower where MM was the only one capable of stopping it. And his testimony of what he saw, or thought he saw changed, so enough with the nonsense that he clearly witnessed child rape
 
Pure speculation on your part. I think we could quickly disprove this with a poll.
And on yours and a poll would not prove such unless the jurors admitted to it. They have not.
I don't know her. Do you? If so, feel free to ask her and let me know. But her career has gone in the crapper and she didn't even try to write a book to capitalize on her Pulitzer. That's unheard of.
She has an award you'll never had. She's more successful than you.
To be clear, a Pulitzer for local reporting, that was erroneously awarded to a fraud journalist.
Like the hack Ciprano? Where do you get off criticizing her? DO you have a Pulitzer? LOL no, just a "mythical congressional medal" LOLOLOLOL
This isn't the definition of a liar.
Yes it is
I don't really have to prove anything to you.
SO why do you keep trying and even getting creepy about it insisting we meet in person?
I am who I say I am.
Liar
You can try to prove I'm not, but the onus is on you to disprove that.
Can't prove a negative and especially from an anonymous poseur.
Having said that, I have provided you with plenty of personal details (and five documents) that prove I am who I say I am.
All photo shopped or otherwise faked
You will just never admit you are wrong about this because you are a hypocrite and a loser.
Right back at you Super Chief
LOL. Not even a little bit. If you chose to go away, I will never give you another thought. But when you keep spewing your nonsense here, including personal attacks against me, I will continue to put you in your place.
You are quite obessesed and you aren't putting me anywhere except in your sick mind. I will continue to Truthbomb you though and keep you in your place. That is a conspiracy nut.
Clearly I mean acquit complete, you dullard.
You cretin. You were wrong again.
My mental pummeling of you has your in concussion protocol.
Hardly, but I am living in your head rent free.
I have no idea what League of Legends is, but I'll assume it is some sort of game. As I said, I don't play video games.
You know and you play it "Drbigbeef" LOLOLOLOLOL
 
Nothing was covered up in 1998. But if there was a cover up, the only cover up would have been by SC PD (and the OAG), NOT PSU.
OAG was not involved in 1998. Local DA. Also, the report of Sandusky's pedophilia was give to the PENN STATE UNIVERSITY Police. You know, the one Gary Schultz ran?
 
  • Like
Reactions: bourbon n blues
It shows they have no morals at that network and posture for ratings. So why trust anything they say?

As for the info, it was mostly personal beliefs and much has been disputed often. Personally, Joe followed protocols and notified his superiors. Said from the first month it was the administration that screwed up. When notified by the AD they should have contacted campus security.....who should have turned it over to an agency with proper expertise in pedophelia.

And it is very strange that of all the charges that Sandusky faced he was acquitted on the charges of the night that McCreary witnessed. So what he witnessed wasn’t a crime.

As for Sandusky, I don’t know if he is guilty because the investigation and trial was a complete FUBAR. He deserves a retrial but that would be detrimental to the university to have to go through all this again. But there should be one so society can see the truth and those responsible for f’ing it up are removed from the system and proper reforms are in place to protect future innocents. If a proper trial is held and Sandusky is found guilty he should die in prison.
There’s a lot wrong in here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WHCANole
You've proven me wrong zero times.
I proved you wrong when you said the sanctions were all rescinded and when your idiot circle jerk partner @AvgUser said the entire OAG was corrupt but could only provide ONE incident so I proven him wrong as well.
Your only responses are "They were guilty because a jury found them guilty" or "Overblown."
You're only response is "The Jury got it wrong" even though FOUR INDEPENDENT Juries weighed in and convicted/indicted.
You have zero facts and zero ability to synthesize existing facts into anything coherent.
You have only conspiracy theories you parrot from that moron Ziegler who is a laughingstock of journalism like Alex Jones.
All you can do is parrot the Freeh report and the jury findings, both of which have been thoroughly debunked.
Freeh has never been debunked by ANY credible source.
 
I don't want it both ways. I'm not making it both ways. I couldn't care less what Fina said about Paterno one way or the other.
Yes you do. You'll use his comments when they suit you. Hypocrite.
There is no evidence that Paterno committed a crime or covered up anything. If you think there is, please share.
Joe lied to the GJ about knowing of 1998. Perjury.
 
It is out there and has been shown by multiple investigative reporters. It's all been discussed here. The problem is that no media outlet will touch this story because it is unpopular.
It's put out there by hacks who either are Penn State cultists or paid mercenaries or nuts trying to get attention. It gets no real media notice because it is BS conspiracy theories.
 
It shows they have no morals at that network and posture for ratings. So why trust anything they say?
Not really. You are painting with too large a brush.
As for the info, it was mostly personal beliefs and much has been disputed often. Personally, Joe followed protocols and notified his superiors.
But participated in the decision not to report Sandusky and lied about knowing of 1998.
Said from the first month it was the administration that screwed up. When notified by the AD they should have contacted campus security.....who should have turned it over to an agency with proper expertise in pedophelia.
So you agree with the consequences CSS faced?
And it is very strange that of all the charges that Sandusky faced he was acquitted on the charges of the night that McCreary witnessed. So what he witnessed wasn’t a crime.
That's not true. He was convicted of four charges (felony) on Victim 2.
As for Sandusky, I don’t know if he is guilty because the investigation and trial was a complete FUBAR. He deserves a retrial but that would be detrimental to the university to have to go through all this again. But there should be one so society can see the truth and those responsible for f’ing it up are removed from the system and proper reforms are in place to protect future innocents. If a proper trial is held and Sandusky is found guilty he should die in prison.
Don't worry, he will die in prison unless they release him to hospice.
 
This is a non-answer because you cannot explain away the tremendous corruption within the OAG and police.
You have a non-answer because you cannot prove that corruption you speak of within the OAG and Police other than ONE incident.
 
It's only over for people who only care about the outcomes in court. For those of us who care about the truth, there are still plenty of opportunities to get the truth into the public eye.
Just like Area 51 an JFK. But only nuts will believe it. But that's all you have now isn't it?
 
ADVERTISEMENT