Decoy73

1 hour ago, teachercd said:

You just finish out this season and do the best you can...then you go in the portal and you will have your pick.

Simply stated and likely the best option at this point.  

I can’t stop being a fan.  But I can stop being a dumb s#!t.  Although it usually takes a day or two post game.   Rhule is very much the guy for the job. MN doesn’t change that at all.  This thread needs to die.  

1.  I learned a new coaching staff with an entire offseason isn’t enough to overcome what has plagued this team for over 10 years.  Turnovers and stupid penalties that turn what should have been a win over an average to below average team to another gut-wrenching loss.   They’re chokers and have been for a long time.  
2.  I’ve likely gone to my last away game for a while.  Maybe ever.   Not a knock on Minnesota fans.   Just not fun anymore.   
3.  I’ll have more spending money next year when I more than likely won’t renew my season tickets.  
 

note:  I still think Trev and Rhule are the best people for the job right now.  I’m just fatigued from being a fan.  The disappointment of fHCSF was the last straw.   
 

2 minutes ago, knapplc said:

 

Nebraska Football.  A losing tradition. 

8 minutes ago, cellman2010 said:

On the play that tied the score at 10 all, the left tackle had a huge jump before the snap.  So obvious --  how did they miss that ?

 

Big Ten refs.  That’s how.  

New attendance WR for women’s sports.  Impressive!

Game Day is overrated, but we’re 7.5 point dogs to unranked MN, so they’re not wrong disrespecting us until we give them a reason to not.  

Turnover margin is the key factor. If we’re positive, we win 8 minimum.  If we’re negative again, we win 5 at most.  That being said, I’d bet us covering against Michigan and Iowa.  Also, northwestern covering, but losing to us.  

11 hours ago, Born N Bled Red said:

I am certain this has absolutely nothing to do with the incredible work of the Nebraska state legislature this year or the current political climate in this state. 

 

I won't go any further as this isn't the right forum, but you reap what you sow. 

No doubt in my mind this has at least something to do with it.  I just hope it doesn’t someday chase Trev or Coach Rhule away too.  

If I’m Fani Willis, I’m exhibiting this at trial.  Look, the defendant is admitting to election interference.   Then hoping he takes the stand to clarify.  Oh the chance to cross examine TFG would be priceless.  

1 hour ago, BigRedBuster said:

The election was 2.5 years ago and not one person has come up under oath to prove there was election fraud.  Meanwhile, every single person who is testifying against him, are Republicans and at one time supported him.

 

People who don't look back and say.....dang.....he should have never been President and I shouldn't have supported him, are not based in a sense of being self aware of mistakes.

I understand.  It’s an attempt to make it look like he really thinks he won and it was rigged.  It could make the prosecution case more complicated, but all they need is one person to testify that Trump knew he lost.  In that case, the conspiracy charge is pretty rock solid, IMO.  

With this “conclusive “ report, he’s doing nothing but trying to shed doubt on the fact that he knew he lost the election.   Legal strategy pure and simple.   

3 hours ago, TGHusker said:

5 years  - I wonder if he goes into the slammer after his conviction or after his appeals which will certainly come?

I would guess after appeals, just because of the potential ramifications of it.  Plus his buddy CT oversees GA for the SCOTUS.  So I’m sure it would go all the way up there.  However, if there are co-conspirators convicted, then shouldn’t there be equal treatment for all?  Unfortunately, I just don’t see Trump doing any serious time behind bars because of our multi-tiered justice system.  

34 minutes ago, Mavric said:

Seems like the pod system - despite seemingly making a lot of sense - isn't going to catch on anywhere.

 

But it would work out well for a 20-team conference.  Play your pod (five teams, four games) every year and one of the other pods each year (five games).  I would have the winner of those pairings play in the CCG but that probably wouldn't happen either.

 

With Clemson & Florida State:

 

Eastern - Penn State, Florida State, Clemson, Maryland, Rutgers

Central - Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State, Purdue, Indiana

Northern - Wisconsin, Iowa, Minnesota, Illinois, Northwestern

Western - Nebraska, USC, UCLA, Oregon, Washington

The geography makes some sense, but the Northern POD would be the new B1G West.  Of course Iowa would get the easy draw again. SMH

On 7/29/2023 at 3:55 PM, Lorewarn said:

 

 

The conversation was surrounding hypothetical felons running for the presidency; to be a felon presumes being convicted.

Of course, but a plea is not a conviction.  I’m guessing you meant guilty verdict.   Instead of “guilty plea.”

23 hours ago, Lorewarn said:

Manufacturing a felony charge and then getting a guilty plea out of it is a very, very, very difficult thing to do.

Who said anything about a guilty plea?  

1 hour ago, TGHusker said:

The gov't should establish certain minimum requirements for office  - one being "not currently serving time for a felony conviction'    The govt has a responsibility to protect us from us!

I agree, however I could see rogue attorney generals “manufacturing” felony charges against leading candidates of the opposite party.  So It would have to be a federal crime felony, but even then the potential for corruption would exist.  

If this country elects a felon who is in prison, we truly are doomed.   I mean, we clearly are a stupid country, but are we really that stupid?

So if the J6 indictment comes, does that get lumped in with the documents charges for one big trial or would it be a separate trial at a different court/location?

6 hours ago, BigRedBuster said:

He’s right. Desantis’s answer is unacceptable. 
 

 

Chris would be better off as a Democrat.  The GOP voting base doesn’t want to hear the truth or facts about anything that might shed their dear leader in a negative light.  DeSantis knows this and that’s why he does what he does.  He’s banking on TFG being incarcerated in order to get a shot.  Christie has absolutely no shot with this pathetic modern GOP and that’s pretty sad.  

49 minutes ago, teachercd said:

 

 

I wonder, and this is total conspiracy theory stuff that I am usually not a fan of but could there be a "Hey...we will never actually bring you into court IF you just announce that you are not running for President, ever again". Like, they would just drag it out. and out and out until he dies.

 

Probably not something that would happen but it would make for a good Netflix series!

He couldn’t be trusted to commit to that.  Plus, then that would effectively label this as a political prosecution.  

2 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

Here's what I think we are seeing.  I think he knows he is absolutely screwed in court.  So, he's trying to convince as many wackos as possible about all this stuff so when he's hauled off to jail, there is violence in the streets.

Or so that his wackos demand that the next Republican POTUS pardons him.  Which I believe is likely to happen anyway.  

44 minutes ago, Archy1221 said:

Not in my mind, in reality.  You were quite certain with your statement security guards were exempt.    When asked to show proof, you then said the bill doesn’t spell it out, I.e., not certain.  LOL
 

What’s a hired poster?  The Mods? Do people get paid just to post on Huskerboard?   That would be a sweet gig depending on the pay.  

Hired/planted. Whichever. 

27 minutes ago, Archy1221 said:

Oh, but wait didn’t you just say this…

 

Wouldn’t you be just as guilty of posting bulls#!t as what you claimed I did??

Maybe in your mind.  Call me out if it makes you feel better. I don’t care.  I’m not a hired poster.  

40 minutes ago, Archy1221 said:

 

Employers should be able to require certain trained employee to confront shoplifters.   An 18yr old check out clerk, no.  
 

Section 12 doesn’t state that or make any differences on employee type like security guards.  Are you seeing this spelled out somewhere else in the bill.   If so please copy and paste.  

You can disagree with the bill or not, I don't care.  I do care about your original post's source was intentionally misleading and false.

The Bill doesn't spell it out, but this was in Newsweek.

Quote

 

The California bill, if enacted in law, would require employers to provide active-shooter training to workers, keep a log of any violent incidents, and allow companies to apply for workplace violence restraining orders.

SB 553 is not targeted at—and does not affect—trained security guards. In fact, the bill highlights the need for dedicated safety personnel.

 

Quote

 

https://www.newsweek.com/store-retail-violence-robbery-theft-stealing-california-1804565

14 minutes ago, Archy1221 said:

You might be anti your own posts then I guess.  You think it’s not going to be harder to prevent shoplifting after this bill.  And then combine it with the change from $400 to $900 to be considered felony shoplifting.   It’s no wonder “petty” shoplifting is out of control.  You should be more outraged at the “bulls#!t” shoplifting than people calling out CA for their pro shoplifting crime laws. 
 

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202320240SB553

So you think employers should be able to require employees to confront shoplifters.  Note that hired security guards are exempt from the bill.