Lorewarn

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

I think that's where it started but he got blitzed somewhere else - pretty sure he got pulled over at like 4a or something

But Carl would.

His replacement is far from being a legend over several decades but thankfully has his own bona fides and experience and connections in Texas HS as well. I don't imagine Josh will have the job longer than just this one season regardless.

Definitely worse things than having an immediate replacement who coached up two draft picks at SMU in the last four years.

If it wasn't any different with Hillary then she should have been charged as well. I'm no expert on the Clinton email controversies, but the way it's probably different is because you don't bring charges unless you can prove them and there wasn't a strong case. The FBI investigated for years and eventually concluded/recommended ""that no charges are appropriate in this case... Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case." The State Department investigated for a long a$$ time and concluded that she "increased the risk of compromising State Department information, but "there was no persuasive evidence of systemic, deliberate mishandling of classified information"". The DOJ Inspector General investigated the how the DOJ and FBI handled their investigations and found that their conclusion, "was consistent with the Department’s historical approach in prior cases under different leadership, including in the 2008 decision not to prosecute former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales for mishandling classified documents." So on and so forth. Another reason it's probably different is because what Trump did was unprecedented and loud and bold - what Clinton did wasn't unprecedented and was in line with the last several people in her station, pointing to a lot of lax inadequacies related to government security.

I would not categorize that anywhere close to the same type of thing as what Decoy73 is proposing as a hypothetical.

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

I wonder where the 2006 core would rank in terms of solidity. Purify, Nunn, Hardy, Swift, Petersen, with Lucky out of the backfield and like eight million dependable TEs.

I have nothing to base this on other than my own head but I'd guess that the B1G prefers landing at 20 over 24. 20 allows you to go back to divisions of 10 teams each, and either keep the 3 OOC/9 conference game model only within your division to go back to the old school days of Big Ten conference play, or ditch OOC games altogether and have 9 division and 3 cross division games yearly, then the winners play for the conference championship. Anyways probably not right just a hunch in my head and I think the ideal additions to the conference are USC, UCLA, Notre Dame, GA Tech, and either Oregon/Washington, Cal/Stanford, or UNC/UVA

Not sure, but it's an interesting question. I have no problems with any solutions here - maybe only banned from running for federal office, or banned from the presidency, or maybe it's a time windowed thing where you need to be X amount of years removed.

idk, voting is a constitutional right - holding political office isn't

A president can only pardon federal crimes right?

Your arguments trying to backtrack your hot take are all over the place. Iowa has chosen as a program that they like where they are -- so has Oklahoma State Wis is absolutely an outlier as a program....before Barry that program was terrible -- all the same for Kansas State The mindset of down teams in the B1G is “Celebrate 7 wins, bowl eligibility, and act as if it means you’ve arrived as a program.” -- Yeah because Indiana, Rutgers, and Northwestern are sooooo different than Kansas, Iowa State, and Texas Tech in terms of the amount of grit and gumption and tenacity they have to not be satisfied as mid-level programs. And since you brought up number of winning seasons as part of your argument, are you saying that Nebraska is one of the "just accept what you are" mindset teams?

I doubt the B1G is going to take any of them right now. The conference is sitting in an ivory tower made of money, and not interested in throwing out liferafts. There may be a future time when UO/UW/Stanford/Cal get invites, but I think the B1G is currently sitting comfortable and confident and waiting for the ACC to fall apart, leaving Notre Dame in a vulnerable spot as well as getting a southern footprint.

90%??? The conference currently has 14 members, 3 of which are blue bloods and one is right on the threshold (3 out of 14 is 20%, 4 out of 14 is 28%). Wisconsin is very obviously trying to beat the big dogs, getting one of the best splash coaching hires of the offseason, routinely scheduling marquee OOC matchups, and being a few bad breaks away from a few more championships and playoff berths. Michigan State has won the conference, made the playoffs, and played spoiler to the big dogs a good handful of times over the last 12 years. So, respectfully, how do you get 90% when you've got three blue blood, one new blood, and at least two other programs floating around the championship level bubble since we've been in the league?

Regardless of what the BoR's internal motivations were, which we don't know, while Paterno wasn't criminally liable and hit a legal threshold of accountability, he absolutely and completely failed in his moral obligations as the leader of PSU football. He knew that what he reported to his superior never made it to the police, and chose to do nothing. Not only that, but in the aftermath the former FBI director's investigation found that Paterno (along with others) had knowledge of Sandusky's evil and concealed it to protect the football program. The school also honored all of the terms of his surprise early retirement negotiations that he started in secret before the scandal broke but after he was informed of the police investigation.

CU made the best decision with the info they had back then, and now as well.

Yes. There's almost absolutely nothing of substance here - just a 'journalist' sourcing from social media recommendations trying to make a splash in the wake of the Northwestern scandal.

His puppeteer underneath the podium had to hit the pause button to readjust himself.

Actual outsiders or people inside who for whatever reason can't fit in, will always see any community system that is tight knit around a specific shared goal and belief as being 'cultish'. Sports locker rooms are absolutely up there with the best of them in terms of groupthink, because you fail without buy-in. That's why the leaders try to eliminate outside distractions and have clear messaging, values, expectations, etc. Same is true of churches, the military, bands on tour, etc.

I'm a fan of no stripes but if you're gonna do em that's about the best possible look. The stripes through the 00's-10's were way too big and added too much noise to an otherwise very minimal uniform.

I would disagree with the assertion that we're less than thrilled with the Iowa matchup at the end of the year. First of all, we haven't played Oklahoma regularly since 1995, so at this point we've got nearly 30 years of reps with a "lesser" program as our black friday game. Second, due to us sucking, Iowa raising their floor a decent amount, and enough time, the amount of people who would say it isn't a rivalry is much less than it was 10 or even 5 years ago. That being said, we would have no problem with PSU as a protected rivalry - I think by and large our fanbase really loves playing them and the matchups are pretty much always really solid. Unfortunately Iowa makes too much sense at this point, but once we go division-less who knows?

Absolutely brilliant relational chess playing by Rhule

I don't know, I'm not a climate scientist, and your reductionistic takes seem to scream from the rooftops that you aren't either.