Jump to content


Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 04/30/2020 in all areas

  1. 6 points
  2. It's not surprising that someone like Tucker Carlson would bristle at seeing a black man at a country club.
    5 points
  3. Black kids have been shot by police for carrying airsoft guns, but these clowns can bring actual weapons to the state house without consequence.
    4 points
  4. Don't overreact to 2 bad apples. Frost suspended them. It sounds like the problem is with the department who is suppose to complete the investigations.
    4 points
  5. Okay, this new info that is coming out now in the Yahoo article that I posted, and the article that Red Denver posted - contains new stuff that should be scrutinized. If there is new evidence, follow it. It raises more questions, keep going. To @BlitzFirst's point, these things can take a long time to arrive at the truth, but maybe you never get to the truth either. That is a realistic possibility. But if you have no idea how these kinds of investigations work, and if you don't know what the investigators are already doing or have done, then you are just pissing in the wind. This is it right there. To what end is this going? There will be no definitive guilt or definitive exoneration from any of this. Reade should be afforded all of the support and resources that are available to her if she has been victimized. But at the end of this all, the country has to make a choice between Trump and Biden. One of the two is clearly more immoral, disgusting, dishonest, unqualified, and slimy than the other.
    4 points
  6. I haven't paid super close attention to everything but: Everyone's got a different take on the credibility (or lack thereof) of Reade's accusations. Everyone's got a different idea how Biden should respond. Several folks would like Biden to clear his name so they can vote for him with a clean conscience. Trump's allegations and misconduct is more thoroughly supported by evidence and generally regarded as worse. Biden acknowledged fault with his boundary issues and pledged to change his behavior. To my knowledge, Trump never has and continues to assert all allegations against him are unequivocally false. Biden will be going on noted journalistic heavyweight Morning Joe tomorrow to address the matter. Arnold Schwarzenegger was actually a decent actor.
    3 points
  7. There was quite a bit of disagreement, but it was generally an intellectually honest conversation in which people were trying to sort through facts. You wouldn't be interested.
    3 points
  8. I'm just saying, you don't see a lot of black folks taking their guns to the capitol within spitting distance of a bunch of police... I wonder why?
    3 points
  9. Top of the list of most uneducated things I've seen posted on the virus.
    3 points
  10. What's the evidence that it is more important? That we're talking about it? Half of the conversation is about how she doesn't seem credible, and another 30% is about why we're having the conversation. I'm not sure it is more important than allegations against Trump. It's not getting covered much. There's no charges filed, Trump is currently in litigation. We all (on HB and across the nation) talked a lot more about Trump's Access Hollywood tape than we are about Reade. Yeah, you're making a caricature of the argument here. There's a lot of space between "she's lying because she doesn't have perfect recall" and "It's weird and possibly important that her behavior has been pretty notably inconsistent without a compelling reason"
    3 points
  11. Agree 100%. The genius of political parties that create an 'us vs them' environment is that it keeps people trapped on the 2 different plantations. Prolife people like myself, often think they have to vote GOP because the other side is painted by GOP insiders as evil, God deniers. So to go and vote Dem is like denial of one's faith. I don't get Dem fund raising letters but I'm sure it goes the same way. Thus this is how we end up wt 80% of evangelicals supporting Trump. Indoctrination over decades means you can't vote for the 'after birth' prolife issues that the Dems support because most of those Dems are also pro-choice (GOP newsletters would say pro--abortion to make the meat even more red).
    3 points
  12. I remember when the whole Maurice Washington thing first was reported and everyone on here acted like the whole university was going down in flames, and we should fire everyone....just calm down. Everyone wants bad people to pay for what they did. I hope Hunt and Legrone get jail time, but don't overreact at this point. If we find out we covered things up then start to panic.
    3 points
  13. It sounds easy sitting anywhere: don't touch people in inappropriate ways. 100% agree.
    3 points
  14. Sure. You can complain about it or whatever else you want to for that matter. But what exactly is the point if Trump allegedly has done the same or worse? It sure comes off as holding each candidate to a different standard. Why does Trump get a pass? I’ll just say that from someone who’s pretty neutral on Biden, this Biden slamming from known Bernie supporters, sure looks like sour grapes.
    3 points
  15. If in the current climate what the article is saying is true, UNL is a huge f#&%ing failure. I truly don't know how you can be this stupid, now of all times.
    3 points
  16. Doctors from Stanford, earlier this evening, stated the chance of dying from Covid in the state of California is .003%. Too many crying wolf me thinks. Doctors are always over protective, and they are running the show. The good point I guess, traffic deaths are down, murders are down, robberies are down, but the sad part is spousal abuse, suicide is way up. Hydro-Choroquene is being used on the front lines, and it helps tremendously if given during early on set of the virus. This is fact. I deal directly with a CNO in Riverside County, CA. Very small chance of heart damage if the patient is monitored. Quit buying what all the doctors are spewing. Hell 90% of them won't go near a patient. Most are setting at home doing phone appointments. This is killing the hospitals, no money coming in for elective surgeries, IE knee replacements, hip replacements, heart attacks, stroke. People are dying at home because they are terrified to go to the hospital because it is so overhyped, the nation may never recover from it. Hell the world might not due to the stupidity of this.
    3 points
  17. So two people (who are voting for Biden, and not for Trump) talking about Biden's allegations on a messageboard is proof or evidence that the Reade allegation is "more important". Ok. Here you go with this again. You also are not talking about Trump's allegations. Biden's allegation must also be more important to you?
    2 points
  18. Dear necks... It is not your job to hunt down people - Everyone
    2 points
  19. It's like the entire issue is backwards. The people need to be holding the party accountable by criticizing it when it's warranted. Voters pushing back against wrong ideas or wrong things parties do is what make them change for the better. What we have are parties who feed the voters crap to keep them in the fold. Voters feel like they need to support the party similar to how they support their favorite football team and defend them at all cost. People get offended if someone says something bad about "their party". It's a sad situation.
    2 points
  20. I don't think you can dismiss either side at this point. It could have happened, it might not have happened, it will be almost impossible to move past assumptions. This is the crux for me. I don't see how Biden is proven guilty, at the same time, it's pretty much impossible for Biden to prove his innocence. "Reade has said that she cannot remember the date, time or exact location of the alleged assault, except that it occurred in a “semiprivate” area in corridors connecting Senate buildings. After I left the Justice Department, I was appointed by the federal court in Los Angeles to represent indigent defendants. The first thing that comes to mind from my defense attorney perspective is that Reade’s amnesia about specifics makes it impossible for Biden to go through records and prove he could not have committed the assault, because he was somewhere else at the time. For instance, if Reade alleged Biden assaulted her on the afternoon of June 3, 1993, Biden might be able to prove he was on the Senate floor or at the dentist. Her memory lapses could easily be perceived as bulletproofing a false allegation."
    2 points
  21. Covid+ lack of practices for a team that didn’t show any progress last year + no recruiting momentum + more off field crap + top 5 toughest schedule the next two seasons
    2 points
  22. Ok. Fair enough. You want to feel good about your voting. Nothing wrong with that. But why keep posting Reade/Biden allegations on HB? Can you not research this for yourself? Are you (and a few others) trying to recruit others to get riled up about Biden too? That’s what it looks like. And considering Trump’s own allegations, that doesn’t sit well with some of us. Especially when we strongly believe Trump needs to be defeated in November. No one is telling you how to vote, but if you or others continue with these posts on Reade/Biden and not Trump, it’s perfectly reasonable for people to criticize those posts.
    2 points
  23. I didn't realize it was so clear cut. Well then, I guess I was sexually assaulted over a dozen times during my college days at UNL. Maybe I should have made a big stink about it and gotten each of those evil college girls in trouble for those criminal butt grabs. Instead I just laughed it off. Silly me.
    2 points
  24. Thanks for posting this article, knapplc. This is a good assessment. With a he said/she said case, without any direct evidence, the only thing you really have to go on it credibility. Unfortunately, Reade doesn't have it. I agree that we should take all such allegations seriously, and look at facts when available. But, for the folks that keep pushing this story, without more credibility and without evidence, what are we actually supposed to do with this story?
    2 points
  25. I understand it just fine. All allegations rape or SA are serious as these are terrible crimes. One candidate has one such allegation. The other candidate has 18. You are focusing on the candidate with one and ignoring #18. Am I correct in assuming this means you are either voting for 18, or are still upset that zero (Sanders) got beat out by One? If this is correct then it explains the Biden slamming adequately. So am I correct?
    2 points
  26. An opinion piece that's worth a read. It's very long, but detailed and well-explained. The bullets are fully explained in the article, but per HuskerBoard policy I'm, of course, not copying all of it.
    2 points
  27. The football program and the university all have compliance people out the wazoo. There is no way the football team is going to remove players based on sexual misconduct allegations without consulting with the Title IX office and UNL administration. If the football program takes action on a university (and federal) policy without due process, it is the football program who gets sued. 100% guarantee that the removal of the players was coordinated with a Title IX investigation.
    2 points
  28. This is that whole perjury trap garbage again. Nobody makes you purger yourself, you're the one who can't tell the truth!
    2 points
  29. Incident #1 was NOT reported Incident #2 ws a butt grab. I am not saying that is right by any means, but it's hard to punish someone on this right? Incident #3 was a rape reported case where Hunt and Legrone were kicked off the team What more could have been done?
    2 points
  30. Most of us can't remember the exact timeline of everything we did yesterday...let alone 20 years ago during a traumatic event. And the idea that "research" was done without questioning the lady and the man involved...is crazy. That is not research...that is guessing. This is not a high school english paper over To Kill a Mockingbird.
    2 points
  31. So you’re ok with Trump’s double digit rape/SA allegations, but not Biden’s single one.
    2 points
  32. Martinez was described as a "friend" of Davis. The only complaint I saw involving him was that the athletic dept asked her to deal with the rumor publicly, but didn't ask him to. I didn't read anything in there that would accuse Martinez of anything improper.
    2 points
  33. Please allow me to think outloud about a few things in the article, some of which will be devil's advocate. This is all a bunch of musing, without knowing any of the actual facts of the cases, but a few things to ponder... Honestly, this kind of complaint is pretty common at many universities, often by people who have been impacted by sexual misconduct but for whatever reason did not take full advantage of the resources that are available. I certainly don't want to blame any victims, as these situations are scary and confusing. But I have heard similar statements at the college where I work (printed on social media and student newspapers, for example) but when we look at the actual incidents, we have always found that one of these scenarios: the process was followed perfectly but the evidence just wasn't sufficient enough to take disciplinary action, or resources and accommodations were offered to a student but the student did not take advantage, or the incidents were either not reported at all or the victim specifically chose not to pursue an investigation. There was even one newspaper article where someone said an investigation was done against her wishes, when she had very clearly chosen to pursue it every step of the way, but then it didn't turn out in her favor. But of course the university was not allowed to comment on the case at all. Every situation is different, and we have no idea at this point if UNL actually did the right thing in these cases or not. But this is a pretty vague (yet believable) statement, and I wonder what could have or should have been done differently in each case that would have been better. I have actually asked this exact question to many people ("what could we have done differently?") during and after investigations, but I almost never get any actual suggestions. These statements are usually borne out of frustration, not facts. So, if a report was made, there will be a record of it. If the trail stops there, that is bad news for everyone. But an incident report alone typically does not result in an investigation. The complainant will choose to pursue such an action, or they can choose not to pursue. The choice should be made in writing. If there are actual allegations to be investigated, those allegations will also be in writing. UNL's policy (https://studentconduct.unl.edu/student-code-conduct#appendix-A) says: 2a. Upon receipt of a sexual misconduct complaint or report, the University will provide the Complainant a written notice describing the options of pursuing a criminal complaint with a law enforcement agency, filing an administrative charge with an external agency, and/or using the University’s investigation and disciplinary processes. The Complainant may go forward with one or more options at the same time, but the University’s investigation may need to be delayed temporarily by, or scheduled around, an ongoing criminal or external administrative investigation. 2b. Any member of the University community may submit allegations of sexual misconduct against a student. Allegations shall be prepared in writing and directed to the Student Affairs Officer or designee. The Student Affairs Officer shall then direct the allegation(s) to a Conduct Officer for investigation. Any allegation should be submitted as soon as possible after the alleged misconduct takes place, preferably within, but not limited to, seven (7) University business days after the misconduct occurred. 2c. The Complainant must state, in writing, if he or she wishes to pursue a complaint. If he or she does not wish to pursue the complaint and/or requests that his or her identity remain anonymous, the Student Affairs Officer will make note of that wish in the report. Regardless of the Complainant’s choice, the University is still required to investigate reports of sexual misconduct. The Complainant must be informed if the University cannot ensure anonymity. I have also often heard people say "this was reported to your office in the past but nobody did anything." It usually turns out that it was the complainant's choice in those cases not to move forward. Having said that, even if there is not a willing complainant, if there is a potential rapist running around out there and it is an issue of public safety, the university can and should move forward anyway. But it depends on what information is known and how cooperative a complainant is. The question here is what resources, if any, were offered to her. Did she request any accommodations? Again, these conversations should be documented somewhere. So in this case, there was an investigation. An investigator should interview relevant witnesses, but not necessarily everyone a complainant suggests. Many people often provide "witness" names who are nothing more than character references, or a friend who was told about the incident second or third-hand ("talk to them, they know what happened!"). Most of the time, those particular witnesses have no actual evidence to offer (although a friend who was told about the incident can sometimes discuss the victim's response at the time and can be used to see if details are consistent). It is also disingenuous to say "found there had been no wrongdoing." I would bet that there is no report that says there was no wrongdoing. Instead, it would say that there is not enough evidence to show this or that, which is very different than definitively saying that nothing happened. UNL's website (https://studentaffairs.unl.edu/title-ix-training-staff) says: "When students enroll at the University of Nebraska, they are required to complete an online training on Title IX. Likewise, employees need to complete this training after being hired." Now, it is easy to be confused about what to do and what resources are available when an incident actually occurs, but universities are drilling this stuff into students and employees these days, with extra training for certain staff (residence life, for example). Again, if you asked what they should be doing differently, what would the specific answers be?
    2 points
  34. Be careful to not assume the article is accurately reporting the matter. A few key words can completely distort the case. It seems highly unlikely that UNL did not investigate these matters but quite likely that complaining parties and the accused may not like or agree with the results. These are nearly always he said she said cases with only credibility of each or all concerned to base a decision on. It may well be that the essence of the complaints focus on the process or methods as much as anything. The trouble is that finding physical or third party evidence to cortoborate or refute things may be impossible and often statements come in that are inconsistant or dubious. This is common in neatly all investigations across many subjects.
    2 points
  35. IN the state of California. There is a difference, even though California is the most populous state. Every news cast is based in terror. Control. I know a lot of people have died in New York. But each state is different. Most of us don't live in apartment buildings 10 stories high, living in filth. We don't ride filthy subways too and from work. We don't walk thru crowded streets where you can not even see the pavement. Most of the Stanford information does not get highly publicized as it normally does not fit into the terror pattern the news media wants to promote. The cure for this is turning out to be worse in the long run. All of this was to flatten the curve, of the expected 1.2 to 2.2 million predicted to die from it. That has been attained, with far less deaths than the medical field predicted. But some states are extending the stay at home orders, making masks mandatory. It seems to me to be about power. We seem to be following like sheep.
    2 points
  36. I can't understand party loyalty. It's ok to be loyal to a sports team because it's not important in the grand scheme of things. But why do people feel they need to defend the political party they belong to at all costs? Do they think it will somehow hurt them to admit the things their party does wrong? Do they think they lose something if they say what they like about a different political party? It's completely illogical to think millions of us are split into 2 groups and that we actually agree with everything about the group we belong in. No one would actually agree with everything their political party does if they would stop to truly think about it - a lot of people are just blinded into believing they do. And I think we all lose because so many people are like this. It allows politicians to gain while the rest of us lose, and makes our country susceptible to corruption. All they have to do is trick us into hating the other and then we don't try to stop our "side" from doing the same corrupt bulls#!t we hate the other for.
    2 points
  37. What I am arguing is that Covid-19 does not have a 4-5% mortality rate, much closer to 0.5%. You are using numbers based on positive tests, but we know that only the sickest of the sick get tested so I am simply saying that if 100 people get corona virus and 60 of them show no symptoms, 35 of them show mild symptoms, 4 of them get very sick and one gets sick enough that they are actually tested.. That 1 positive goes into the stats, and if you run the cycle 100 times, of those positives, approx 4 will die. So, the actual mortality rate of the disease itself is much less than 4%, we dont know how much less officially. The mortality rate of the sickest of the sickest that actually get tested is 4%, but even that is up for debate based on the way things are qualified. Long story short, if a virus truly had a 5% mortality rate, it would be devastating to humanity in general. 1million positives in the US currently. If we even assume one out of every 20 people are tested, that is 20million true positives. at a 5% mortality rate, thats 1million deaths.. Instead we find ourselves at 55k deaths. Still not good, but nowhere near 5% disease mortality rate.
    2 points
  38. 1 point
This leaderboard is set to Chicago/GMT-05:00

Visit the Sports Illustrated Husker site



×
×
  • Create New...