Spygate Hearings: Another Roger Hits Capitol Hill
Tomorrow, NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell will sit in front of a group of politicians and defend his actions.
Unlike Roger Clemens, Goodell will be armed with credible responses and perhaps some leverage.
The proceedings will be every bit as gripping, I assure you.
Now, I know as well as anyone that this "Spygate" situation is a serious matter, and many think Goodell has apparently handled it to best of his ability and jurisdiction.
But has he? Did he do the right thing by destroying what is now being considered "evidence"?
That remains to be seen. Being a corporate executive myself, I can't see how he's going to skate around the issue and be absolved in this matter.
I understand that he did not want the "evidence," which is in the form of videotape, to covertly be leaked to the public, so he had it destroyed. This is understandable in today's burgeoning internet/video culture.
But was he legally right in doing this?
That's not the case if the videotapes were destroyed in an effort to sweep the matter under the rug to erase the league from its complicity.
This is troubling, but it is also going to be difficult to prove.
The Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee is Sen. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, originally questioned Goodell on the investigation of the tapes and the decision to destroy them. Yes, that Arlen Specter. The author of the Warren Report's "single-bullet" theory.
My suggestion to Goodell is when Sen. Specter asks him a question about how deep the spying goes in the NFL, he should respond by saying "I'll tell you, but only if you tell me who really shot John F. Kennedy."
As far as Goodell's punishment of the New England Patriots, I feel he has been more than generous.
First of all, he should have suspended Bill Belichick, not fined him. Second, he should have taken the team's highest draft pick (number seven overall) not their own first-rounder (number 31).
Good luck, Commissioner. Good luck in defending the cloak and dagger antics of Bill Belichick.
This is one Patriot Act that congress will not be so kind to.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?