Placeholder when loading item promotions
The chair of the House Committee on Oversight and Reform wrote on Friday that she found no “valid reason” for Washington Commanders owner Daniel Snyder’s refusal to testify at next week’s Capitol Hill hearing about the team’s workplace issues, and urged him to “reconsider his decision.”
In a six-page letter to Karen Patton Seymour, an attorney for Snyder, Rep. Carolyn B. Maloney (DN.Y.) offered some “additional precautions” to persuade Snyder to agree to testimony, but characterized other requests for special treatment as “highly unusual and inappropriate.” She gave Snyder until Monday morning to respond.
The hearing is scheduled for Wednesday. NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell is scheduled to testify remotely.
Roger Goodell will testify, Daniel Snyder will not testify at the congressional hearing
In a four-page letter from Seymour on Wednesday, Snyder declined the committee’s original invitation to appear at the hearing. Seymour cited issues of “fundamental fairness and due process”. Seymour also wrote that Snyder had a “longstanding business dispute involving commanders” and planned to be out of the country for the hearing date.
In her Friday response, Maloney went into detail about the reasons Seymour gave for Snyder. Maloney characterized some of these reasons as false and others as imprecise, while not believing any of them to be valid.
“Your letters of June 6 and June 15 to the committee contain a number of inaccurate allegations and demands, but no valid reason for Mr. Snyder’s refusal to appear at the June 22 hearing,” she wrote.
“The committee intends to proceed with this hearing and uncover the truth about the toxic work culture at the Commanders led by Mr. Snyder,” Maloney wrote. “I am writing to you today to address certain mischaracterizations and claims in your letter and to make additional arrangements to address the concerns you have expressed. Given these adjustments and the importance of Mr. Snyder’s testimony, I urge Mr. Snyder to reconsider his decision to decline to testify publicly, thereby refusing to be accountable for his actions and the culture he fosters on his team has to take over.”
A spokesman for the Snyders wrote in response to a request for comment: “Mr. Snyder’s attorneys have received the letter, are reviewing it and plan to respond directly to the committee.”
Maloney noted that the committee extended invitations to Snyder and Goodell in the June 1 letters, claiming that three weeks’ notice was “ample time” to defer personal conflicts and exceeded the committee’s usual practice.
Regarding the business conflict and plan to leave the country, which Seymour cited as one of the reasons for Snyder not attending, Maloney noted that the committee allows Snyder to appear remotely.
Given that Goodell chose that option, Maloney wrote, Snyder should be able to both attend the hearing and “attend an awards ceremony in France.”
Perspective | As the World Cup declines in Washington, Daniel Snyder’s shame goes global
Snyder’s refusal to testify, she wrote, was “inconsistent” with his repeated promises to cooperate with the committee. Furthermore, it would “challenge your claim that commanders are now ‘a model of how to make extraordinary improvements in work culture.'”
“Mr. Snyder is no different than any other witness that the committee is seeking to testify in the context of an important investigation,” Maloney wrote. “Any suggestion that the committee treated Mr. Snyder unfairly is baseless, particularly given that NFL -Commissioner Roger Goodell has agreed to testify voluntarily at the same hearing.”
The committee did not issue a subpoena to compel Snyder to testify. David Rapallo, the committee’s former staff director and current associate professor at Georgetown Law School, said this week that the committee would normally make one more attempt to find housing before issuing a subpoena.
Snyder, through his attorney, made several arrangements to consider whether to attend the hearing. As Maloney summarized, he appeared to be demanding the identity of other witnesses who had testified about him or the team, whether those witnesses had made allegations against him or the team, and the substance of those allegations. She called such requests “highly unusual and inappropriate requests for access to the Committee’s internal investigative material” and contrary to the Committee’s past practices.
However, as a “courtesy mark” and “a gesture of good faith,” Maloney said the committee would grant the request to provide copies of documents the panel intends to ask Snyder about if he agrees in writing to appear at the hearing.
Lisa Banks and Debra Katz, the attorneys for more than 40 former team members, this week asked the committee to issue a subpoena to compel Snyder’s testimony.
The NFL told the committee Wednesday that Goodell accepted the invitation to testify.
Tiffani Johnston, a former cheerleader and marketing manager for the team, told the committee during a congressional roundtable in February that Snyder molested her at a team dinner, placed his hand on her thigh and pushed her toward his limousine. Snyder called the allegations leveled directly at him “utter lies.”
The committee’s investigation also uncovered allegations of financial irregularities involving the team and Snyder. The commanders denied committing any financial irregularities.