Mean Purple
Active Member
rubbin' is racin'. or is it rape? better ask Briles.Did you put him in the wall?
rubbin' is racin'. or is it rape? better ask Briles.Did you put him in the wall?
I may be doing the same.It makes me puke to read those.
Aside from I-35 being a complete hell hole, my retinas are burned just driving through Waco every time. I'm going to start using the back roads from now on.
Who is the person asking the questions? I want to shake his/her hand.Ventures over to BF and they actually had some damming evidence against Garland:
This is pretty astonishing testimony from Garland about his lies to the Texas Senate Higher Education Committee:
Q: Well, you told the Texas Senate that everyone culpable for these failures were no longer at Baylor. Do you recall that?
A: I do recall that.
Q: So how do you know that to be true, if you don't know who the senior leadership is that were the ones that did not provide the institutional support or proper engagement? How do you know that to be true, what you told the Texas Senate?
A: Well, I may have been misled, but I understood that personnel decisions were evaluated, and those persons were removed.
Q: Who told you that?
A: Well, just simply the fact that people were removed. No one told me specifically.
Q: Well, so you told the Senate everyone was gone, but you may have been misled. Is that what you're saying?
A: I may have been mistaken or misled.
Q: By who?
A: I believe that is correct.
Q: Who told you everybody culpable is gone?
A: No -- no one told me.
Q: You just assumed that?
A: I just assumed it.
More testimony where Garland admits to making public statements that he has no factual basis to make.
Q: You've made the statement that what Baylor did in this investigation was unprecedented. Do you know that to be true?
A: I do not know that to be true.
Q: So why did you say that?
A: I -- I was not fully aware of what happened elsewhere. I did believe that what Baylor had done in the exhaustive recommendations, 105, were very significant and also publishing these as a measure of transparency.
Garland is being asked whether he tried to find out who the administrators were who discouraged victims from making sexual assault complaints as stated in the BOR Findings of Fact. He says this:
Q. As President of Baylor University, are you interested in finding out who the other administrators were who directly discouraged rape victims from reporting their assaults?
A. I only know of one case where that --
Q. Are you interested in determining who the other people are?
A. I don't know how to determine who those are.
Q. How about asking someone a question, "Who is it?"
A. I --
Q. Is that -- is that too much for you to do?
MS. BROWN: Objection, form.
BY MR. DUNNAM:
Q. Is that too much for you to do?
A. You know, my -- I just don't know who it could be, and I don't -- and I've had other responsibilities
than looking and reinvestigating the investigation.
Q. Are you deliberately making the decision not to ask that question? Have you made a deliberate decision not to say "Who's the other --" that's a conscious decision you've made, right?
A. I've not -- I've not been concerned about this issue.
Q. All right. And have you thought about it?
A. No, I've not.
Q. Well, can you think about it right now? Do you think it's a good thing for you to find out?
A. I'm leaving the office of President; so it will not be under my responsibility to find out.
What a piece of [ Finebaum ].Ventures over to BF and they actually had some damming evidence against Garland:
This is pretty astonishing testimony from Garland about his lies to the Texas Senate Higher Education Committee:
Q: Well, you told the Texas Senate that everyone culpable for these failures were no longer at Baylor. Do you recall that?
A: I do recall that.
Q: So how do you know that to be true, if you don't know who the senior leadership is that were the ones that did not provide the institutional support or proper engagement? How do you know that to be true, what you told the Texas Senate?
A: Well, I may have been misled, but I understood that personnel decisions were evaluated, and those persons were removed.
Q: Who told you that?
A: Well, just simply the fact that people were removed. No one told me specifically.
Q: Well, so you told the Senate everyone was gone, but you may have been misled. Is that what you're saying?
A: I may have been mistaken or misled.
Q: By who?
A: I believe that is correct.
Q: Who told you everybody culpable is gone?
A: No -- no one told me.
Q: You just assumed that?
A: I just assumed it.
More testimony where Garland admits to making public statements that he has no factual basis to make.
Q: You've made the statement that what Baylor did in this investigation was unprecedented. Do you know that to be true?
A: I do not know that to be true.
Q: So why did you say that?
A: I -- I was not fully aware of what happened elsewhere. I did believe that what Baylor had done in the exhaustive recommendations, 105, were very significant and also publishing these as a measure of transparency.
Garland is being asked whether he tried to find out who the administrators were who discouraged victims from making sexual assault complaints as stated in the BOR Findings of Fact. He says this:
Q. As President of Baylor University, are you interested in finding out who the other administrators were who directly discouraged rape victims from reporting their assaults?
A. I only know of one case where that --
Q. Are you interested in determining who the other people are?
A. I don't know how to determine who those are.
Q. How about asking someone a question, "Who is it?"
A. I --
Q. Is that -- is that too much for you to do?
MS. BROWN: Objection, form.
BY MR. DUNNAM:
Q. Is that too much for you to do?
A. You know, my -- I just don't know who it could be, and I don't -- and I've had other responsibilities
than looking and reinvestigating the investigation.
Q. Are you deliberately making the decision not to ask that question? Have you made a deliberate decision not to say "Who's the other --" that's a conscious decision you've made, right?
A. I've not -- I've not been concerned about this issue.
Q. All right. And have you thought about it?
A. No, I've not.
Q. Well, can you think about it right now? Do you think it's a good thing for you to find out?
A. I'm leaving the office of President; so it will not be under my responsibility to find out.
Who is the person asking the questions? I want to shake his/her hand.
Didn't let him off the hook
Who is the person asking the questions? I want to shake his/her hand.
Didn't let him off the hook
It's what a real lawyer sounds like asking probative questions. we get ruined by our terrible reporters that don't know how to intelligently question someone. All gotcha [ deposit from a bull that looks like Art Briles ].Who is the person asking the questions? I want to shake his/her hand.
Didn't let him off the hook
Liked for "scallywags."
Ventures over to BF and they actually had some damming evidence against Garland:
This is pretty astonishing testimony from Garland about his lies to the Texas Senate Higher Education Committee:
Q: Well, you told the Texas Senate that everyone culpable for these failures were no longer at Baylor. Do you recall that?
A: I do recall that.
Q: So how do you know that to be true, if you don't know who the senior leadership is that were the ones that did not provide the institutional support or proper engagement? How do you know that to be true, what you told the Texas Senate?
A: Well, I may have been misled, but I understood that personnel decisions were evaluated, and those persons were removed.
Q: Who told you that?
A: Well, just simply the fact that people were removed. No one told me specifically.
Q: Well, so you told the Senate everyone was gone, but you may have been misled. Is that what you're saying?
A: I may have been mistaken or misled.
Q: By who?
A: I believe that is correct.
Q: Who told you everybody culpable is gone?
A: No -- no one told me.
Q: You just assumed that?
A: I just assumed it.
More testimony where Garland admits to making public statements that he has no factual basis to make.
Q: You've made the statement that what Baylor did in this investigation was unprecedented. Do you know that to be true?
A: I do not know that to be true.
Q: So why did you say that?
A: I -- I was not fully aware of what happened elsewhere. I did believe that what Baylor had done in the exhaustive recommendations, 105, were very significant and also publishing these as a measure of transparency.
Garland is being asked whether he tried to find out who the administrators were who discouraged victims from making sexual assault complaints as stated in the BOR Findings of Fact. He says this:
Q. As President of Baylor University, are you interested in finding out who the other administrators were who directly discouraged rape victims from reporting their assaults?
A. I only know of one case where that --
Q. Are you interested in determining who the other people are?
A. I don't know how to determine who those are.
Q. How about asking someone a question, "Who is it?"
A. I --
Q. Is that -- is that too much for you to do?
MS. BROWN: Objection, form.
BY MR. DUNNAM:
Q. Is that too much for you to do?
A. You know, my -- I just don't know who it could be, and I don't -- and I've had other responsibilities
than looking and reinvestigating the investigation.
Q. Are you deliberately making the decision not to ask that question? Have you made a deliberate decision not to say "Who's the other --" that's a conscious decision you've made, right?
A. I've not -- I've not been concerned about this issue.
Q. All right. And have you thought about it?
A. No, I've not.
Q. Well, can you think about it right now? Do you think it's a good thing for you to find out?
A. I'm leaving the office of President; so it will not be under my responsibility to find out.
No means no has been around for a while, the bigger issue facing men on college campuses these days is knowing when yes means yes, and not some tepid approval that will later turn into a regret and an allegation of sexual assault.
Redundant.Baylor is trash.
The issue of women making false claims always gets way overblown, imo. I think far more actual rapes go unreported than there are false claims. And then there is the issue of true claims that end up with no charges being filed or not enough evidence to convict. These are MUCH larger issues than false rape claims.
False claims do exist, and I don't mean to minimize them because women who are proven to have made false claims should be punished. I just roll my eyes a little any and every time it's brought because it's a very convenient excuse for anyone who doesn't want to be made uncomfortable by the unfortunate truth that these things are going unpunished far too often for a variety of reasons.