Sports

Washington Command owner Dan Snyder testifies voluntarily before Congress



ASHBURN, Va. – Washington Commanders Owner Dan Snyder has begun testifying before a congressional committee investigating the NFL team’s history of workplace misconduct.

A spokesman for the US House of Representatives Oversight and Reform Committee confirmed Snyder began announcing his impeachment Thursday morning in a virtual and private manner. The hearing is not public.

“Snyder has committed to providing a complete and complete testimony, and to answering Committee questions about his knowledge and contribution to the Commander’s toxic work environment, as well as his efforts to his efforts to interfere with the NFL’s internal investigation without concealing non-disclosure or other confidentiality arrangements,” a spokesperson on behalf of the committee said in a statement.

President Carolyn Maloney (DN.Y.) had wanted Snyder to testify under subpoena as part of their investigation into the franchise’s workplace culture, but Snyder wanted to do it freely. vows and, therefore, not under oath. The committee eventually agreed to let him do so voluntarily.

Although the recall is private, the committee may release all or part of the transcript. Abolition is usually carried out by committee members, but other committee members may participate if they wish.

In a statement, the spokesperson said Snyder was “committed to providing a complete and complete testimony, and to answering the Committee’s questions about his knowledge and contribution to the workplace.” The Commander’s malicious intent, as well as his attempt to interfere with the NFL’s internal investigation, without hiding behind other non-disclosure or confidentiality agreements.”

The statement also said that if Snyder fails to fulfill his commitments, the committee will “prepare to force his testimony on any unanswered questions upon his return to the United States.”

Earlier this month, Maloney said in a letter to Snyder’s attorney, Karen Patton Seymour, that she did not want Snyder to avoid answering questions by claiming he was unable to do so because it violated breach of a non-disclosure agreement. Seymour said in a letter to Maloney that such concerns are “unfounded.”

Snyder’s testimony was given the day before the Break in August. Maloney issued a subpoena for Snyder, but it was never served. Snyder remains overseas and therefore cannot be served. According to website shipfinder.com, Snyder’s yacht is currently moored in the Mediterranean off the coast of Italy.

Snyder has told the committee that he does not want to testify before now because he and his family are in Israel to celebrate the one-year anniversary of his mother’s death with events over the course of several weeks.

U.S. police chiefs serve subpoenas on behalf of the commission in the United States but, according to the spokesperson, the Marshals Service “has no authority to serve congressional subpoenas internationally. “

Maloney may have waited for Snyder to return to the United States and serve the subpoena at that time. Had he not subsequently demonstrated his disqualification, Congress might have looked down upon him. At that point, Snyder may have tried to go to court to cancel the subpoena – a process that can take months. If Republicans regain control of the house after the November election, James Comer, the ranking minority member, said they would no longer pursue the investigation. That means Snyder can avoid testifying under subpoena or otherwise.

There is an important difference between testifying by subpoena and doing so voluntarily.

“If you’re subpoenaed, you have to answer the question posed,” Dave Rapallo, the Democratic chief of staff for the House Oversight Committee from 2011 to 2021, told ESPN last month. “If it’s voluntary, and you’re not subject to a subpoena, you won’t.”

Multiple employees and former employees who participated in the NFL’s internal investigation into the Commanders’ workplace culture, which resulted in a $10 million fine in July 2021, signed non-disclosure agreements. exposed, commonly known as NDA.

Although the committee’s statement made it clear that he expected Snyder to answer questions, Rapallo said, “Snyder could tell the committee, ‘I’m not authorized to answer questions because there’s an NDA. He can insist. I can’t answer because of the NDA unless there’s a subpoena.”

Earlier this week, attorneys for more than 40 former employees of the organization said in a statement that they wanted Snyder to drop the NDA so their clients could speak to the committee. Snyder dropped them off from the NDA to speak with attorney Beth Wilkinson as she investigated the franchise for the NFL. They were also released to speak to Mary Jo White, who was investigating for the NFL a new claim about Snyder’s sexual misconduct.

“If it is true that Mr Snyder did not intend to impede witnesses’ ability to speak to the Commission, we ask that he agree to waive any NDA for that purpose,” said attorneys Lisa Banks and Debra. Katz wrote. “That will provide much-needed comfort for my clients and many other witnesses so they can speak freely without fear of legal danger.”

The Associated Press contributed to this report.



Source link

newsofmax

News of max: Update the world's latest breaking news online of the day, breaking news, politics, society today, international mainstream news .Updated news 24/7: Entertainment, Sports...at the World everyday world. Hot news, images, video clips that are updated quickly and reliably

Related Articles

Back to top button
Immediate Matrix Immediate Maximum