So Mike McQueary Actually Said Nothing on CBS

The full transcript via CBS:

"When do you think you'll be ready to talk," Keteyian asked.

"The whole process has to play out," McQueary replied. "I just don't have anything else to say."

"Describe your emotions right now."

"All over the place, just kind of shaken." 


"Crazy," McQueary replied. 

"You said like what, Mike?" 

"Like a snow globe."

"Like a snow globe," Keteyian asked.

"Yes sir."


What the fuck? Bob Costas got Jerry Sandusky to talk about snapping towels in the shower with little boys, and CBS got McQueary to talk about snow globes? Tomorrow, I'll stalk out Graham Spanier and have him tell me to go fuck myself– BOOM, exclusive!!!

Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on linkedin
Share on email

11 Responses

  1. CBS is really getting to the heart of the matter here and asking the hard hitting questions that we all want to know the answers to!
    This was really bad considering what both NBC and CNN delivered.

  2. Whatdya expect? It was reporting for the nightly news segment, not a formal interview for a full-length show. It looks like Katayan was staking out his house and snagged him for some quick words. Perhaps they’re working on getting a full interview for 60 minutes?
    What I find troubling is at the end Katayan reported that there are no records indicating that McQueary ever spoke to the police, whereas McQueary claimed from an email that he was questioned by them after he supposedly he stopped the buggery that he apparently witnessed. That contradictory shyte in of itself means that he has more splaning to do to the authorities. Hopefully he’ll be subpeenied and get his arse hauled to the interrigation room at the station.

  3. Aye Gallagher, you can’t. But I still love the female kind of fire crotch.
    Anyways, you can’t trust females—the whole lot of them. But that still doesn’t mean we men can’t enjoy their feminine features and talents.

  4. @Iron Balls McGinty
    It’s interesting. I really doubt that McQueary would perjure himself or obstruct justice at this point, especially since he was not charged with anything.
    There seem to be two themes emerging:
    – The side of Paterno and McQueary seems to be logical with the events that take place given what the alleged victims have said.
    – The side of Sandusky, Sandusky’s lawyer, Curley, Schultz, and Spanier is a total circus that just doesn’t make any sense and gets more bizarre by the day.

  5. “I really doubt that McQueary would perjure himself or obstruct justice at this point, especially since he was not charged with anything.”
    Posted by: NickFromGermantown | November 15, 2011 at 08:57 PM
    He could be that dumb. And I’d believe he could be that. Didn’t the moron say he asked Daddy McQueary what he should do after he allegedly witnessed the buggery? I may be a reform skool flunkie, but a grown man relying on his daddy to decide on the right thing to do when something like what he saw happened shouldn’t be trusted for anything except for being a moron. But now his story is changing, that he intervened and stopped the buggery. Sounds like CYA to me, and I say again, people are that stoopid.
    This circus ain’t left town yet!

  6. Do people realize that the report that was released by the grand jury was made up of quotes and summaries? That not everything that was asked, and responded to by the lawyers and witnesses (maybe not the correct term, but generalizing) is included in the document? There could be parts that is missing, but because of the on going investigation the witnesses can not speak further on the matter until there is a trial. Just want to remind everyone that all the facts are not out….

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *