Rodgers sets Record Straight on Sandy Hook; no Mention of VP Rumors

[bicketybam]

Just now, Pac said:

Why is this hard to grasp?

They knew it would come in handy one day!

[TBJ]

56 minutes ago, Pac said:

I'm guessing that's because nothing was fabricated.

I'm guessing you drink soy milk.

[oatmeal]

Rodgers don’t care about the jets

[83Kelly2Allen18]

20 minutes ago, Warfish said:

Seems reasonable that it was in relation to the RFK comments about meeting with Rodgers to potentially be his VP.

The criteria/threshold for reporting about a pro athletes personal views is, generally/often, quite different that that for reporting on a political candidates or potential candidates views.

But you'd have to ask CNN, I can only speculate, as the timing seems rather clear cut, relationship-wise.

There is a long, looooooong history of the sports media/media holding back embarrassing information on pro athletes.  Seems it's done less these days, but it's still done.

The intention in and of itself to smear someone after any demarcation of a controversial issue speaks volumes. Why? Because there's just as much controversial information with other sports figures /politicians/ policy that has a media blackout. 

What information is being allowed or disseminated sheds light on what is actually true or at least probably true. Or it could be true but the intentions of the information are not scrupulous 

 

 

[Jdeet]

6 minutes ago, bonkertons said:

Based on all the other wacky sh*t he throws out there, I tend to believe this happened but he understands how bad of a look it is.  As long as he's saying the right things now though and there is no record of him saying this in the past, he's good as far as I'm concerned.  Hopefully we can move on from this.

What someone might believe or have believed, is simply irrelevant. What someone says or does, is another thing. Aaron has said some dumb stuff. For this situation, there is only proof of his actual audio, confirming the event actually happened. Period. End of story. Move on. 

[Pac]

3 minutes ago, TBJ said:

I'm guessing you drink soy milk.

I'm guessing you let a demented con man hypnotize you into believing stuff is rigged. 

[Warfish]

3 minutes ago, TBJ said:

I'm guessing you drink soy milk.

I drink almond milk. 

Why, do you think that means something if people drink non-dairy milk substitutes?

[bonkertons]

Just now, Jdeet said:

What someone might believe or have believed, is simply irrelevant. What someone says or does, is another thing. Aaron has said some dumb stuff. For this situation, there is only proof of his actual audio, confirming the event actually happened. Period. End of story. Move on. 

It's not irrelevant.  I'll probably always look at him a bit differently, because I'll always wonder if he actually said this sh*t.  But as far as "actual consequences" yes, you're right.  "Might"s and "maybe"s don't mean sh*t.

[83Kelly2Allen18]

12 minutes ago, Dunnie said:

CNN used to be a reliable unbiased source ... The good ole days.

Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk


 

Lol

[Ruby2]

36 minutes ago, 83Kelly2Allen18 said:

Regardless of if it's true, what was the intention in releasing it ? And why so many years later...?

They (wrongly) think that enough dems will consider RFK to sink Biden, so he must be killed, as well as anyone linked to him.

It is gross.

[bicketybam]

1 minute ago, Pac said:

I'm guessing you let a demented con man hypnotize you into believing stuff is rigged. 

Here we go!

[LionelRichie]

57 minutes ago, Warfish said:

CNN claimed two independent sources, their own reporter and someone they supposedly were protecting from harassment (which tbf seemed an odd thing to say in the article).

Since it's a he said/she said/they said situation, almost assuredly not recorded, I doubt they'll be much lingering in either direction.  CNN presumably did their due diligence via multiple independent sources (typical media stuff) and Rodgers issued his vapid "nuh uh" statement.

In the absence of anything additional, yeah, I'd say neither party is likely to see any ramifications.  If you loved Rodgers yesterday, you probably still love him today.  If you didn't trust CNN yesterday, you likely still don't today.  And vice versa, of course.

lol.   far left network and PR arm of democrat establishment runs decade old attack piece with no receipts (unnamed source) against unlikely but possible independent VP candidate.   yeah, aaron is full of sh*t on this one...lol.   stay tuned for next week when aaron is tied to the russians.

[RutgersJetFan]

Setting the record straight my ass. Jones literally lost a billion dollar lawsuit over this. The consequences of him saying anything other than an outright denial true or not are, quite literally, as costly as they come. 

[CrazyCarl40]

So, Rodgers has spoken about dozens of other conspiracy theories at length but we’re to believe this one is a bridge too far? We already know the man is a liar. I wish we never traded for this distraction. Tyrod Taylor is my QB1. 

[bonkertons]

9 minutes ago, TBJ said:

I'm guessing you drink soy milk.

Lol my guy with the Dr. Doom avatar calling other people soy.  You love to see it.

[BroadwayRay]

1 hour ago, JetPotato said:

I'm guessing the CNN reporter that fabricated this story will go relatively unscathed from this. If anything, gained more name recognition.

Yeah, I'm sure she made it all up. After all, Aaron Rodgers would never believe in a hair-brained conspiracy like that.

[LionelRichie]

1 hour ago, Pac said:

I'm guessing that's because nothing was fabricated.

quick use of the old google and here is AR in back in 2012: https://x.com/ClayTravis/status/1768322942826385481?s=20

[Matt39]

6 minutes ago, LionelRichie said:

lol.   far left network and PR arm of democrat establishment runs decade old attack piece with no receipts (unnamed source) against unlikely but possible independent VP candidate.   yeah, aaron is full of sh*t on this one...lol.   stay tuned for next week when aaron is tied to the russians.

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/01/07/media/cnn-settles-lawsuit-viral-video/index.html

[Corn]

17 minutes ago, Doggin94it said:

Nah, they weren't sitting on anything. "Football player says something stupid" isn't a story. "Potential VP candidate does" is.

What. You can be the vice president or president and say something stupid or lie through your teeth.

You must not follow politics at all.

[TBJ]

8 minutes ago, Warfish said:

I drink almond milk. 

Why, do you think that means something if people drink non-dairy milk substitutes?

No.

Beware of glyphosate though.

[TBJ]

10 minutes ago, Pac said:

I'm guessing you let a demented con man hypnotize you into believing stuff is rigged. 

Yeah I'm hypnotized, nothing is rigged!

[Warfish]

2 minutes ago, 83Kelly2Allen18 said:

The intention in and of itself to smear someone after any demarcation of a controversial issue speaks volumes.

It's not a 'smear' if it's true.  

Not sure what you mean by "after any demarcation of a controversial issue" in this context:  A belief than Sandy Hook was a false flag government operation where no one was killed and was all done by 'crisis actors' in an State-driven effort to take away conservatives guns remains, to this day, a pretty controversial position to take I'd say.

2 minutes ago, 83Kelly2Allen18 said:

Why? Because there's just as much controversial information with other sports figures /politicians/ policy that has a media blackout.

For example? 

And how would you know in the first place, if there is a "media blackout"?

2 minutes ago, 83Kelly2Allen18 said:

What information is being allowed or disseminated sheds light on what is actually true or at least probably true. Or it could be true but the intentions of the information are not scrupulous 

The intentions of the editorial decisions of any given media company/entity are (and should) always up for interpretation and marketplace decision making by media consumers.  

Media company competition in the capitalist marketplace helps serve the goal of avoiding single-source/unified protectionism/blackouts in the media, as while one entity may theoretically avoid a story for political or corporate reasons, there is generally no reason a competing corporation or otherwise differently aligned media entity would also go along with hiding that same info.

i.e. I think Doggin has this right.  When he was 'just a quirky weird football player' it just doesn't rise to big story worth the effort.  As a possible VP it does. 

But even if it was 100% a conscious smear attempt, that's only relevant if the underlying claim is false.  The claimed statement is what matters here, not the timing of it's release, if the underlying statement was in fact made.  Whining about 'timing' is just a deflection attempt to try not to have to address the statement itself.

[TBJ]

6 minutes ago, bonkertons said:

Lol my guy with the Dr. Doom avatar calling other people soy.  You love to see it.

You're welcome bonkers.

[RJIII]

He never said it didn't happen, rather the government was behind. Wouldn't shock me if true.

[KRL]

 

[bicketybam]

3 minutes ago, Warfish said:

It's not a 'smear' if it's true.  

Not sure what you mean by "after any demarcation of a controversial issue" in this context:  A belief than Sandy Hook was a false flag government operation where no one was killed and was all done by 'crisis actors' in an State-driven effort to take away conservatives guns remains, to this day, a pretty controversial position to take I'd say.

For example? 

And how would you know in the first place, if there is a "media blackout"?

The intentions of the editorial decisions of any given media company/entity are (and should) always up for interpretation and marketplace decision making by media consumers.  

Media company competition in the capitalist marketplace helps serve the goal of avoiding single-source/unified protectionism/blackouts in the media, as while one entity may theoretically avoid a story for political or corporate reasons, there is generally no reason a competing corporation or otherwise differently aligned media entity would also go along with hiding that same info.

i.e. I think Doggin has this right.  When he was 'just a quirky weird football player' it just doesn't rise to big story worth the effort.  As a possible VP it does. 

But even if it was 100% a conscious smear attempt, that's only relevant if the underlying claim is false.  The claimed statement is what matters here, not the timing of it's release, if the underlying statement was in fact made.  Whining about 'timing' is just a deflection attempt to try not to have to address the statement itself.

Rodgers addressed it. Now it's up to you to decide who you believe. 

[Matt39]

3 minutes ago, Warfish said:

It's not a 'smear' if it's true.  

Not sure what you mean by "after any demarcation of a controversial issue" in this context:  A belief than Sandy Hook was a false flag government operation where no one was killed and was all done by 'crisis actors' in an State-driven effort to take away conservatives guns remains, to this day, a pretty controversial position to take I'd say.

For example? 

And how would you know in the first place, if there is a "media blackout"?

The intentions of the editorial decisions of any given media company/entity are (and should) always up for interpretation and marketplace decision making by media consumers.  

Media company competition in the capitalist marketplace helps serve the goal of avoiding single-source/unified protectionism/blackouts in the media, as while one entity may theoretically avoid a story for political or corporate reasons, there is generally no reason a competing corporation or otherwise differently aligned media entity would also go along with hiding that same info.

i.e. I think Doggin has this right.  When he was 'just a quirky weird football player' it just doesn't rise to big story worth the effort.  As a possible VP it does. 

But even if it was 100% a conscious smear attempt, that's only relevant if the underlying claim is false.  The claimed statement is what matters here, not the timing of it's release, if the underlying statement was in fact made.  Whining about 'timing' is just a deflection attempt to try not to have to address the statement itself.

If you can’t prove it (audio) it’s a smear. Not complex.

[bicketybam]

Just now, KRL said:

 

That was before he was indoctrinated! 

[nj meadowlands]

21 minutes ago, TBJ said:

I'm guessing you drink soy milk.

Woah that's a good one bro

[JetPotato]

5 minutes ago, BroadwayRay said:

Yeah, I'm sure she made it all up. After all, Aaron Rodgers would never believe in a hair-brained conspiracy like that.

It's quite obvious to anyone with no agenda that it was made up.

He's publicly on record saying the opposite of these claims. The day after a political rumor surfaces about him, a political news tabloid with a long history of fabrications publishes a story about something someone supposedly heard at a party 11 years ago.

Tell me more about how Rodgers' hair-brained conspiracies are worse than your hair-brained conspiracies though.

[jeremy2020]

It's a shame that this stuff is being posted by the board. It's bad enough when rando attention seeker does it. Didn't think this stuff would happen here.

[BroadwayRay]

Just now, JetPotato said:

It's quite obvious to anyone with no agenda that it was made up.

He's publicly on record saying the opposite of these claims. The day after a political rumor surfaces about him, a political news tabloid with a long history of fabrications publishes a story about something someone supposedly heard at a party 11 years ago.

Tell me more about how Rodgers' hair-brained conspiracies are worse than your hair-brained conspiracies though.

I'd say it's quite obvious to anyone who believes what they want to believe that it's all made up.

[bonkertons]

7 minutes ago, TBJ said:

Yeah I'm hypnotized, nothing is rigged!

Just curious, do you agree with Rodgers' comments today?

[Matt39]

2 minutes ago, BroadwayRay said:

I'd say it's quite obvious to anyone who believes what they want to believe that it's all made up.

CNN made up the entire thing with the Covington kid and got sued and settled for like 8 figures 

[MR.GANGGREEN28]

This shouldn’t be a thread. It legitimately makes me want to get off JN for the day.