(04-30-2014 12:20 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  Nice try at changing the subject...

Sorry. Same subject, opposite argument.

(04-30-2014 12:18 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(04-30-2014 12:13 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(04-30-2014 11:57 AM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(04-30-2014 11:47 AM)gdunn Wrote:  

(04-30-2014 11:05 AM)UofMemphis Wrote:  After reading his post several times...he never used the words legal or illegal...so whats your point?

People want the man banned from the NBA... Is what he said right? No, but there was nothing illegal about it. The NBA can't strip him of ownership of his team nor can they ban him. Also if his sweet lil thing recorded him in the state of California without his knowledge, she's in deeper sh*t than he is.

Quote:The people who are attempting to defend this man speaks volumes about their true feelings about race relations in this country.

I'm not defending him for what he said, I'm looking at it from a legal aspect. The people who want to strip this man of everything he owns for a boneheaded comment, need to back up and think about all the comments they've ever made. Did the guy say something stupid, yep. No denying it, but to strip him of his team, that's not legal. If that's the case every politician that's said something remotely racist should be removed from office and banned from running in the any election, same goes for any movie star, athlete, teacher, or poster on a message board.

banning someone from the NBA or forcing sale of a franchise is covered by NBA bylaws...not the penal code...the NBA is within their rights to ban him and ask the board of governors to strip him of his franchise.

He asked her to record him...her title was as his "archivist"

If that's the case, well then they're within their rights, but only if it's written out.

Secondly, this is the first I've heard he asked her to record him.

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me...z30OHYhwsv

OH.. A He said, She said thing.

(04-30-2014 12:22 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(04-30-2014 12:18 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(04-30-2014 12:13 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(04-30-2014 11:57 AM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(04-30-2014 11:47 AM)gdunn Wrote:  People want the man banned from the NBA... Is what he said right? No, but there was nothing illegal about it. The NBA can't strip him of ownership of his team nor can they ban him. Also if his sweet lil thing recorded him in the state of California without his knowledge, she's in deeper sh*t than he is.

I'm not defending him for what he said, I'm looking at it from a legal aspect. The people who want to strip this man of everything he owns for a boneheaded comment, need to back up and think about all the comments they've ever made. Did the guy say something stupid, yep. No denying it, but to strip him of his team, that's not legal. If that's the case every politician that's said something remotely racist should be removed from office and banned from running in the any election, same goes for any movie star, athlete, teacher, or poster on a message board.

banning someone from the NBA or forcing sale of a franchise is covered by NBA bylaws...not the penal code...the NBA is within their rights to ban him and ask the board of governors to strip him of his franchise.

He asked her to record him...her title was as his "archivist"

If that's the case, well then they're within their rights, but only if it's written out.

Secondly, this is the first I've heard he asked her to record him.

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me...z30OHYhwsv

OH.. A He said, She said thing.

So you try and question the legality of her actions...then completely discount her side of the story?

Perhaps before you leap to defend someone...you should do a little research first.

What the NBA is doing is covered by their bylaws...and she says she's his legal employee who he asked to record him...pretty much kills your "Sterling the victim" position if you ask me.

(04-30-2014 11:07 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  The people who are attempting to defend this man speaks volumes about their true feelings about race relations in this country.

I won't defend him because I couldn't care less about him, but I will say that banning him for life and fining him 2.5 million dollars is overkill. Everybody has a right to their opinion and there isn't one single opinion out there that everyone is going to agree with at the same time. I think too many people were butthurt over this incident. Sterling didn't call anybody a derogatory name, just told his below average looking gold digger that he didn't want her hanging out with black guys at the game. He cared nothing about what she did with them outside of that, so calling him a racist is over the top as well.

I think the bigger story in this case is for anyone who still thinks they're fighting for civil rights. This is nothing more than something that they can twist and use to their advantage.

(04-30-2014 12:27 PM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  

(04-30-2014 11:07 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  The people who are attempting to defend this man speaks volumes about their true feelings about race relations in this country.

I won't defend him because I couldn't care less about him, but I will say that banning him for life and fining him 2.5 million dollars is overkill. Everybody has a right to their opinion and there isn't one single opinion out there that everyone is going to agree with at the same time. I think too many people were butthurt over this incident. Sterling didn't call anybody a derogatory name, just told his below average looking gold digger that he didn't want her hanging out with black guys at the game. He cared nothing about what she did with them outside of that, so calling him a racist is over the top as well.

I think the bigger story in this case is for anyone who still thinks they're fighting for civil rights. This is nothing more than something that they can twist and use to their advantage.

That's not your call since you're not the Commish, and you don't own a team...

He has the right to say whatever he likes...and the NBA has the right to enforce their rules...actions have consequences.

(04-30-2014 10:52 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  Did you guys hear about this?

According to the radio last night, the Golden State Warriors were going to boycott the playoffs if the NBA did not ban the owner for life.

Supposedly, they were going to allow the jump ball to go in the air and then walk off in protest.

That would have been awesome to watch.

That WOULD'VE been hilarious, especially if the NBA shut the playoffs down and ended the season...

If the NBA never played another game, that would affect my live 0%.

(04-30-2014 12:32 PM)EagleRockCafe Wrote:  If the NBA never played another game, that would affect my live 0%.

No one cares...

(04-30-2014 12:32 PM)EagleRockCafe Wrote:  If the NBA never played another game, that would affect my live 0%.

Exactly, I couldn't care less.

(04-30-2014 12:27 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(04-30-2014 12:22 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(04-30-2014 12:18 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(04-30-2014 12:13 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(04-30-2014 11:57 AM)UofMemphis Wrote:   banning someone from the NBA or forcing sale of a franchise is covered by NBA bylaws...not the penal code...the NBA is within their rights to ban him and ask the board of governors to strip him of his franchise.

He asked her to record him...her title was as his "archivist"

If that's the case, well then they're within their rights, but only if it's written out.

Secondly, this is the first I've heard he asked her to record him.

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me...z30OHYhwsv

OH.. A He said, She said thing.

So you try and question the legality of her actions...then completely discount her side of the story?

Perhaps before you leap to defend someone...you should do a little research first.

What the NBA is doing is covered by their bylaws...and she says she's his legal employee who he asked to record him...pretty much kills your "Sterling the victim" position if you ask me.

Well ok, this is coming from her lawyer, undoubtly if he asked her to record him and become his archiver, as you stated, there's a legally binding contract somewhere they signed. If not, then it becomes he said, she said. IF there's no legally binding contract they've both signed saying she's his archiver, there should be a legally binding contract where she says she's recording all his conversations. If not, well her word don't mean jack.

Maybe you should research what documentation does. If it's not documented, it never happened. Like these recordings, it's documented, so therefore he can't crawfish and say it never occurred, however, she's claiming she had the rights to do so, she has to provide documentation.

(04-30-2014 12:33 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(04-30-2014 12:32 PM)EagleRockCafe Wrote:  If the NBA never played another game, that would affect my live 0%.

Exactly, I couldn't care less.

Yet here you are...caring and stuff...

(04-30-2014 12:30 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(04-30-2014 12:27 PM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  

(04-30-2014 11:07 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  The people who are attempting to defend this man speaks volumes about their true feelings about race relations in this country.

I won't defend him because I couldn't care less about him, but I will say that banning him for life and fining him 2.5 million dollars is overkill. Everybody has a right to their opinion and there isn't one single opinion out there that everyone is going to agree with at the same time. I think too many people were butthurt over this incident. Sterling didn't call anybody a derogatory name, just told his below average looking gold digger that he didn't want her hanging out with black guys at the game. He cared nothing about what she did with them outside of that, so calling him a racist is over the top as well.

I think the bigger story in this case is for anyone who still thinks they're fighting for civil rights. This is nothing more than something that they can twist and use to their advantage.

That's not your call since you're not the Commish, and you don't own a team...

He has the right to say whatever he likes...and the NBA has the right to enforce their rules...actions have consequences.

Thanks for ruining my day. However, my opinion still firmly stands... Banning him for life and fining him 2.5 million dollars for telling his below average looking gold digger not to come to games with black guys IS STILL OVERKILL.

(04-30-2014 12:33 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(04-30-2014 12:27 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(04-30-2014 12:22 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(04-30-2014 12:18 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(04-30-2014 12:13 PM)gdunn Wrote:  If that's the case, well then they're within their rights, but only if it's written out.

Secondly, this is the first I've heard he asked her to record him.

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me...z30OHYhwsv

OH.. A He said, She said thing.

So you try and question the legality of her actions...then completely discount her side of the story?

Perhaps before you leap to defend someone...you should do a little research first.

What the NBA is doing is covered by their bylaws...and she says she's his legal employee who he asked to record him...pretty much kills your "Sterling the victim" position if you ask me.

Well ok, this is coming from her lawyer, undoubtly if he asked her to record him and become his archiver, as you stated, there's a legally binding contract somewhere they signed. If not, then it becomes he said, she said. IF there's no legally binding contract they've both signed saying she's his archiver, there should be a legally binding contract where she says she's recording all his conversations. If not, well her word don't mean jack.

Maybe you should research what documentation does. If it's not documented, it never happened. Like these recordings, it's documented, so therefore he can't crawfish and say it never occurred, however, she's claiming she had the rights to do so, she has to provide documentation.

Yet again, you ASSume their is no documentation...what right do YOU have to be privy to that documentation? why does she need to prove it to YOU?

She doesn't...

(04-30-2014 12:33 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(04-30-2014 12:33 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(04-30-2014 12:32 PM)EagleRockCafe Wrote:  If the NBA never played another game, that would affect my live 0%.

Exactly, I couldn't care less.

Yet here you are...caring and stuff...

This isn't a thread about the NBA never playing another game. I'm not sure I understand why HoD wouldn't be in this particular thread "caring and stuff."

(04-30-2014 12:38 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(04-30-2014 12:33 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(04-30-2014 12:27 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(04-30-2014 12:22 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(04-30-2014 12:18 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me...z30OHYhwsv

OH.. A He said, She said thing.

So you try and question the legality of her actions...then completely discount her side of the story?

Perhaps before you leap to defend someone...you should do a little research first.

What the NBA is doing is covered by their bylaws...and she says she's his legal employee who he asked to record him...pretty much kills your "Sterling the victim" position if you ask me.

Well ok, this is coming from her lawyer, undoubtly if he asked her to record him and become his archiver, as you stated, there's a legally binding contract somewhere they signed. If not, then it becomes he said, she said. IF there's no legally binding contract they've both signed saying she's his archiver, there should be a legally binding contract where she says she's recording all his conversations. If not, well her word don't mean jack.

Maybe you should research what documentation does. If it's not documented, it never happened. Like these recordings, it's documented, so therefore he can't crawfish and say it never occurred, however, she's claiming she had the rights to do so, she has to provide documentation.

Yet again, you ASSume their is no documentation...what right do YOU have to be privy to that documentation? why does she need to prove it to YOU?

She doesn't...

*shocker alert*

Some people would like to know if the whore that ruined this man's reputation is going to face charges for something illegal.

(04-30-2014 12:38 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(04-30-2014 12:33 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(04-30-2014 12:27 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(04-30-2014 12:22 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(04-30-2014 12:18 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me...z30OHYhwsv

OH.. A He said, She said thing.

So you try and question the legality of her actions...then completely discount her side of the story?

Perhaps before you leap to defend someone...you should do a little research first.

What the NBA is doing is covered by their bylaws...and she says she's his legal employee who he asked to record him...pretty much kills your "Sterling the victim" position if you ask me.

Well ok, this is coming from her lawyer, undoubtly if he asked her to record him and become his archiver, as you stated, there's a legally binding contract somewhere they signed. If not, then it becomes he said, she said. IF there's no legally binding contract they've both signed saying she's his archiver, there should be a legally binding contract where she says she's recording all his conversations. If not, well her word don't mean jack.

Maybe you should research what documentation does. If it's not documented, it never happened. Like these recordings, it's documented, so therefore he can't crawfish and say it never occurred, however, she's claiming she had the rights to do so, she has to provide documentation.

Yet again, you ASSume their is no documentation...what right do YOU have to be privy to that documentation? why does she need to prove it to YOU?

She doesn't...

So if she broke the law, it's fine? I don't give a rat's a$$ if she legally done it or not, I'll wake up in the morning and do the same thing I do every day. But from a legal stand point she might want to have something.

But then again, I forget UofM is blameless in anything. Perfection and all that sh*t. Never wrong.

(04-30-2014 12:40 PM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  

(04-30-2014 12:38 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(04-30-2014 12:33 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(04-30-2014 12:27 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(04-30-2014 12:22 PM)gdunn Wrote:  OH.. A He said, She said thing.

So you try and question the legality of her actions...then completely discount her side of the story?

Perhaps before you leap to defend someone...you should do a little research first.

What the NBA is doing is covered by their bylaws...and she says she's his legal employee who he asked to record him...pretty much kills your "Sterling the victim" position if you ask me.

Well ok, this is coming from her lawyer, undoubtly if he asked her to record him and become his archiver, as you stated, there's a legally binding contract somewhere they signed. If not, then it becomes he said, she said. IF there's no legally binding contract they've both signed saying she's his archiver, there should be a legally binding contract where she says she's recording all his conversations. If not, well her word don't mean jack.

Maybe you should research what documentation does. If it's not documented, it never happened. Like these recordings, it's documented, so therefore he can't crawfish and say it never occurred, however, she's claiming she had the rights to do so, she has to provide documentation.

Yet again, you ASSume their is no documentation...what right do YOU have to be privy to that documentation? why does she need to prove it to YOU?

She doesn't...

*shocker alert*

Some people would like to know if the whore that ruined this man's reputation is going to face charges for something illegal.

That's not your business...

If she had illegally recorded him the billionaire would sic his legal team on her, be in front of a camera declaring his innocence, and embracing his victimhood. (If you're into the unsubstantiated stuff)

The silence is deafening

(04-30-2014 12:33 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(04-30-2014 12:33 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(04-30-2014 12:32 PM)EagleRockCafe Wrote:  If the NBA never played another game, that would affect my live 0%.

Exactly, I couldn't care less.

Yet here you are...caring and stuff...

Reading comprehension isn't your strong suit, is it?

(04-30-2014 12:44 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(04-30-2014 12:40 PM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  

(04-30-2014 12:38 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(04-30-2014 12:33 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(04-30-2014 12:27 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  So you try and question the legality of her actions...then completely discount her side of the story?

Perhaps before you leap to defend someone...you should do a little research first.

What the NBA is doing is covered by their bylaws...and she says she's his legal employee who he asked to record him...pretty much kills your "Sterling the victim" position if you ask me.

Well ok, this is coming from her lawyer, undoubtly if he asked her to record him and become his archiver, as you stated, there's a legally binding contract somewhere they signed. If not, then it becomes he said, she said. IF there's no legally binding contract they've both signed saying she's his archiver, there should be a legally binding contract where she says she's recording all his conversations. If not, well her word don't mean jack.

Maybe you should research what documentation does. If it's not documented, it never happened. Like these recordings, it's documented, so therefore he can't crawfish and say it never occurred, however, she's claiming she had the rights to do so, she has to provide documentation.

Yet again, you ASSume their is no documentation...what right do YOU have to be privy to that documentation? why does she need to prove it to YOU?

She doesn't...

*shocker alert*

Some people would like to know if the whore that ruined this man's reputation is going to face charges for something illegal.

That's not your business...

If she had illegally recorded him the billionaire would sic his legal team on her, be in front of a camera declaring his innocence, and embracing his victimhood. (If you're into the unsubstantiated stuff)

The silence is deafening

Well I'm thinking he's not the one seeking the spotlight. And right now, it wouldn't matter if he did, the MSM will ignore it, because what's better than a racist 80 year old billionaire being stripped of something he owns?

What's this Clipper thing and what in tarnation is an nab? Or was that nab?

Really, who cares? I haven't watched an nab game in generations.