Sterling Gets the hammer

[tinselwolverine]

And Hannity ....heh, Hannity takes story to point out this RACISM vs the Race Card that Dems always play.

How predictable

They gotta allow us to start taking odds on this kind of crap!!!

 

[TheVictors]

Hey Tinsel ....

The Valley Inn ...John Wooden Room

Solid prime rib!

 

[tinselwolverine]

Nah, just arm candy. No way he'd be cool with her sleeping with black dudes if he was hitting it too. Although if he was it might lend slight credibility to his vermin theory.

Kareem has a nice take on the story:

http://time.com/79590/donald-sterling-kareem-abdul-jabbar-racism/

I suppose if I were some 80 year old limp dicked impotent billionaire Jew I wouldn't want my porn star looking black/Mexican grifter arm candy advertising to the world that she loved taking the BBC either.

 

[byco42]

Better late then never although this should have been done years ago...

No one seemed to care, including us, apparently, until the media finally spoke up. But now that it's going to cost the NBA $$$$$$$$$$$ if it does not ban Sterling, he's banned, so the NBA can keep the $$$$$$$$$$$ stream flowing.

The NBA has lost its last thread of credibility in my opinion.

 

[tinselwolverine]

No one seemed to care, including us, apparently...

I didn't care, and I still don't.

 

[tinselwolverine]

No one seemed to care, including us, apparently, until the media finally spoke up. But now that it's going to cost the NBA $$$$$$$$$$$ if it does not ban Sterling, he's banned, so the NBA can keep the $$$$$$$$$$$ stream flowing.

The NBA has lost its last thread of credibility in my opinion.

Also, byco...the media has covered the old bastard's shenanigans the whole time...

So what's different about this?

It's about sex.

 

[byco42]

Also, byco...the media has covered the old bastard's shenanigans the whole time...

So what's different about this?

It's about sex.

Not with a fraction of this scrutiny.

 

[tinselwolverine]

Not with a fraction of this scrutiny.

Sex sells.

 

[Sbee]

Smart thing would be for sterling to donate some ridiculous sum of money to naacp or similar group. It's the only way to win the pr battle and preserve a decent legacy.

 

[tinselwolverine]

That's what I've been saying.

 

[Michchamp]

What took so long? This guy was a horrible owner and a known bigot in NBA circles for years. Only when his concubine records his words does the public express outrage. Otherwise the far more egregious things he did did not warrant a ban. I call BS on the NBA for being complicit in his bigotry until it became sensationalized by an audio recording.

See Bob's comment below.

Blame that gutless, lowlife coward David Stern for that. Thank god that asshole is gone, he has let this league I once loved go to complete horseshit.

I didn't know Stern was gone. I am glad though, and I agree with you. Allegedly Sterling had may similarly racist comments in Stern's presence before this.

Better late then never although this should have been done years ago...

Exactly. The media may not have covered it prior to the internet age anyway, or helped the NBA bury it, as they probably did for years before this. Thankfully, with the advent of the internet you see more diverse sports media reaching a nationwide audience and being able to sustain itself with ad networks... giving it more freedom to attack the leagues, instead of having to coddle them in order to gain access. Also this made it easier for consumers to threaten boycotts of advertisers... that really changed the game here.

 

[Michchamp]

...
Exactly. The media may not have covered it prior to the internet age anyway, or helped the NBA bury it, as they probably did for years before this. ...

I was right!

link.

how many more of these did they bury/kill going back to 1980? the media burying stories critical of the wealthy and powerful is more common than the yarn about them showing a "liberal bias."

 

[Michchamp]

Smart thing would be for sterling to donate some ridiculous sum of money to naacp or similar group. It's the only way to win the pr battle and preserve a decent legacy.

That was his M.O. ... I think after this went viral, no organization would take his money though.

Here's the SI article referenced in my last post:

How did Sterling stay in the game? One factor: He found that he could generate his own good publicity. In the profile, I wrote that for all his ruthlessness and narcissism, Sterling was routinely feted by groups as their Humanitarian of the Year. "Donald doesn't write checks unless he gets something in return," says his former press agent, Michael Selsman. "These aid organizations give him a chance to demonstrate to a skeptical community that he's a worthy man."​

Edit, and Byco, if anything I think this starts to restore the credibility of the NBA. We'll see if they continue down this path under Silver. Will probably take a few seasons to undo all the harm David Stern caused.

Ironically, this hurts the credibility NAACP though... they were on the take from his schemes. They come out of this looking worse. Tough to explain it away. Take the guy's money if you want, after all, Pecunia non olet but don't give him any awards for it. Of course, he wasn't donating without a quid pro quo, so it would've been a moot point anyway.

 

[zyxt9]

This entire thing is overdone.

A known bigot who owned the team for 30+ years. KNOWN bigot. Phone conversation which he supposedly admits to knowing was being recorded. The recording "leaked" mysteriously. The typical knee-jerk lynch mob mentality of the media and fans...who still attended the games afterward, thereby knowingly putting money in the guy's pocket while screaming at the top of their lungs about his bigotry (if you really want to make an impact, have a game in an empty arena, now THAT would have sent a message...and yes, I know the season ticket people already paid for their seats, but they don't have to spend money on the food and merchandise).

With any "normal" company (Hobby Lobby comes to mind) the owners can make equally or worse remarks and still be in business, the customers get to vote with their wallet. I know, I know, the NBA has an image to maintain...but come on, 30 YEARS this has been going on.

He's a racist, but the Constitution still allows him to voice his opinion and his customers and workers have the right to not buy his product or work for him. Levy a big fine, no issue with that. His comments hurt the NBA, kind of...by that I mean the NBA is getting tons of press out of this, and it isn't like the NBA has a (recent) tradition of being a quality product, so how much more damage could actually have been done when the NBA already sucks?

 

[zyxt9]

That was his M.O. ... I think after this went viral, no organization would take his money though.

Here's the SI article referenced in my last post:

How did Sterling stay in the game? One factor: He found that he could generate his own good publicity. In the profile, I wrote that for all his ruthlessness and narcissism, Sterling was routinely feted by groups as their Humanitarian of the Year. "Donald doesn't write checks unless he gets something in return," says his former press agent, Michael Selsman. "These aid organizations give him a chance to demonstrate to a skeptical community that he's a worthy man."​

Edit, and Byco, if anything I think this starts to restore the credibility of the NBA. We'll see if they continue down this path under Silver. Will probably take a few seasons to undo all the harm David Stern caused.

Ironically, this hurts the credibility NAACP though... they were on the take from his schemes. They come out of this looking worse. Tough to explain it away. Take the guy's money if you want, after all, Pecunia non olet but don't give him any awards for it. Of course, he wasn't donating without a quid pro quo, so it would've been a moot point anyway.

Well those organizations need to make money somehow, right? At the end of the day, he was actually just trying to help the NAACP by providing fodder and justification for their existence and helping them financially.

He's not actually racist, just created that image to help out the NAACP. At 81, he wanted to retire but was having a hard time finding a buyer, so they concocted this whole thing. It's a conspiracy, but makes as much sense as anything else!

 

[biggunsbob]

This entire thing is overdone.

A known bigot who owned the team for 30+ years. KNOWN bigot. Phone conversation which he supposedly admits to knowing was being recorded. The recording "leaked" mysteriously. The typical knee-jerk lynch mob mentality of the media and fans...who still attended the games afterward, thereby knowingly putting money in the guy's pocket while screaming at the top of their lungs about his bigotry (if you really want to make an impact, have a game in an empty arena, now THAT would have sent a message...and yes, I know the season ticket people already paid for their seats, but they don't have to spend money on the food and merchandise).

With any "normal" company (Hobby Lobby comes to mind) the owners can make equally or worse remarks and still be in business, the customers get to vote with their wallet. I know, I know, the NBA has an image to maintain...but come on, 30 YEARS this has been going on.

He's a racist, but the Constitution still allows him to voice his opinion and his customers and workers have the right to not buy his product or work for him. Levy a big fine, no issue with that. His comments hurt the NBA, kind of...by that I mean the NBA is getting tons of press out of this, and it isn't like the NBA has a (recent) tradition of being a quality product, so how much more damage could actually have been done when the NBA already sucks?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution codifies the freedom of speech as a constitutional right. The Amendment was adopted on December 15, 1791. The Amendment states:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Freedom of speech in the United States is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and by many state constitutions and state and federal laws. The freedom of speech is not absolute; the Supreme Court of the United States has recognized several categories of speech that are excluded from the freedom, and it has recognized that governments may enact reasonable time, place, or manner restrictions on speech.

Criticism of the government and advocacy of unpopular ideas that people may find distasteful or against public policy are almost always permitted. There are exceptions to these general protections, including the Miller test for obscenity, child pornography laws, speech that incites imminent lawless action, and regulation of commercial speech such as advertising. Within these limited areas, other limitations on free speech balance rights to free speech and other rights, such as rights for authors over their works (copyright), protection from imminent or potential violence against particular persons (restrictions on fighting words), or the use of untruths to harm others (slander). Distinctions are often made between speech and other acts which may have symbolic significance.

Despite the exceptions, the legal protections of the First Amendment are some of the broadest of any industrialized nation, and remain a critical, and occasionally controversial, component of American jurisprudence...

Sterling did have the right to say what he wanted to but when it was taped and broadcast to the public for everyone to view and then the NBA had no choice but to react this way.. What do you think they should do...Just turn a blind eye..You can't yell fire in a crowded movie theater and not expect to be punished... It is really terrible that the NBA has turned a blind eye to this piece of crap over the last 30 years.. I do boycott he Hobby Lobby...(I guess it is not enough sadly).... Once public NBA finally did the right thing...

 

[tomdalton22]

While I find what he said to be offensive I think the more offensive act was the taping of the conversation and "selling" it to TMZ. I don't know if she sold it but my bet is she did. Here is an interesting article about the legality of the conversation being taped and a possible outcome.

"California Wiretapping Law

In California, it is a crime to record or eavesdrop on any confidential communication without the consent of all parties. This is called a “two-party consent law” and is referred to as California’s Invasion of Privacy Act (“CIPA”). The details can be found under California Penal Code ?632. If Sterling’s mistress (or someone one her behalf) recorded Sterling without his permission, then a crime may have taken place in California.

I say this because confidential communications are protected. They are defined by California case law as being the types of conversations where at least one of the parties has a reasonable expectation of privacy that no one is listening in or overhearing the discussion. Flanagan v. Flanagan (2002) 41 P.3d 575. This ruling also applies, in my opinion, to private online video chats or the use of hidden video cameras to record conversations. California v. Gibbons (1989) 215 Cal. App. 3d 1204.

The test of whether or not you or Sterling have a reasonable expectation of privacy is an objective one. Absent Sterling’s consent, then I believe that expectation is present in a private telephone call as in this alleged call between Sterling and Stiviano.

If the call was made by a person on a speaker phone in a public or semi-public place and all parties knew this was happening, then the issue of whether or not there is a real objective expectation of privacy is probably not present. Based upon published reports to date, that public type of call did not happen here.

Civil Liability and Damages

In addition to the person who recorded Sterling’s alleged private telephone conversation being exposed to criminal penalties, including fines and jail time, that same person may also be subject to civil damages under Cal. Penal Code ?637.2. Under this code section, the law provides for a private right of action and civil lawsuit.

The civil claim may be brought by “any person who has been injured by a violation of this chapter,” and that person may bring an action against the person who committed the violation for the greater of “either (1) $5,000” or “three times the amount of actual damages, if any sustained by the plaintiff.”

Published reports and Forbes magazine place Sterling’s original 1981 $12 million dollar investment in the LA Clippers as now being worth about $575 million. If, Sterling is damaged financially because of the any illegal recorded conversations, then under Cal. Penal Code ?637.2(a), he may be able to seek monetary damages. In this case, the amount could be rather substantial.

Regardless of which state you’re making a telephone call in (and this probably includes online calls and videos), if you’re thinking about recording the conversation with a California resident or business, make sure to first get written or recorded permission."




I would like to see him have to sell the team then sue that whore / TMZ for damages. I would think that TMZ would be liable as well since they used the illegally taped conversation.

 

[Michchamp]

...

He's a racist, but the Constitution still allows him to voice his opinion and his customers and workers have the right to not buy his product or work for him. Levy a big fine, no issue with that. His comments hurt the NBA, kind of...by that I mean the NBA is getting tons of press out of this, and it isn't like the NBA has a (recent) tradition of being a quality product, so how much more damage could actually have been done when the NBA already sucks?

Mentioning the Constitution isn't relevant here because he's not subject to any criminal penalties for what he said. I think you get that, but because you've been so conditioned by Wingnuts on Fox News to mention the 1st Amendment whenever someone gets criticised for saying something stupid or racist, you threw it out there.

While I find what he said to be offensive I think the more offensive act was the taping of the conversation and "selling" it to TMZ. I don't know if she sold it but my bet is she did. Here is an interesting article about the legality of the conversation being taped and a possible outcome.

...

yes, it's offensive that this racist's views finally cost him his NBA franchise... idiot.

What she did was illegal, but I doubt the state chargers here. If they do, she should definitely request a jury trial. And I don't see Sterling suing over it (maybe, but who knows?)... it would be nothing but bad publicity for him, and all sorts of his awful personality would be dragged out into the open during the trial.

 

[tomdalton22]

yes, it's offensive that this racist's views finally cost him his NBA franchise... idiot.

What she did was illegal, but I doubt the state chargers here. If they do, she should definitely request a jury trial. And I don't see Sterling suing over it (maybe, but who knows?)... it would be nothing but bad publicity for him, and all sorts of his awful personality would be dragged out into the open during the trial.

I don't see the state going after her either. I do see Sterling going after her and TMZ in civil court if he believes her illegal taping of a private conversation costs him $100M

 

[zyxt9]

Mentioning the Constitution isn't relevant here because he's not subject to any criminal penalties for what he said. I think you get that, but because you've been so conditioned by Wingnuts on Fox News to mention the 1st Amendment whenever someone gets criticised for saying something stupid or racist, you threw it out there.



yes, it's offensive that this racist's views finally cost him his NBA franchise... idiot.

What she did was illegal, but I doubt the state chargers here. If they do, she should definitely request a jury trial. And I don't see Sterling suing over it (maybe, but who knows?)... it would be nothing but bad publicity for him, and all sorts of his awful personality would be dragged out into the open during the trial.

no, I throw the 1st amendment out there because, once again, he has the constitutional right to say what he did, even though it was stupid and racist. the rest of society does not have to agree with him, they do not have to give him more money (though they obviously did when they went to the games afterward...which is equally stupid, IMO). just like many are no longer shopping at various places due to the things the owners of those places say.

if what he said this time was so offensive as to cost him the franchise now, then apparently what he said in the past was actually less offensive, despite seeming to be moreso.

I agree he seemed to have legal grounds for suing her (not that she has any money to make it worthwhile as she just lives off her sugar daddies), but then he and his lawyer came out and said that he was aware the conversation was being recorded. that is probably just the easiest way for him to move forward and try to live out his life in solitude, but if he was aware then the conspiracy element just screams that this was all some sort of scheme.