[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

"International court’s attack on Israel a sign of the free world’s moral collapse"

"Pete Hegseth Is Right for the DOD"

"Why Our Constitution Secures Liberty, Not Democracy"

Woodworking and Construction Hacks

"CNN: Reporters Were Crying and Hugging in the Hallways After Learning of Matt Gaetz's AG Nomination"

"NEW: Democrat Officials Move to Steal the Senate Race in Pennsylvania, Admit to Breaking the Law"

"Pete Hegseth Is a Disruptive Choice for Secretary of Defense. That’s a Good Thing"

Katie Britt will vote with the McConnell machine

Battle for Senate leader heats up — Hit pieces coming from Thune and Cornyn.

After Trump’s Victory, There Can Be No Unity Without A Reckoning

Vivek Ramaswamy, Dark-horse Secretary of State Candidate

Megyn Kelly has a message for Democrats. Wait for the ending.

Trump to choose Tom Homan as his “Border Czar”

"Trump Shows Demography Isn’t Destiny"

"Democrats Get a Wake-Up Call about How Unpopular Their Agenda Really Is"

Live Election Map with ticker shows every winner.

Megyn Kelly Joins Trump at His Final PA Rally of 2024 and Explains Why She's Supporting Him

South Carolina Lawmaker at Trump Rally Highlights Story of 3-Year-Old Maddie Hines, Killed by Illegal Alien

GOP Demands Biden, Harris Launch Probe into Twice-Deported Illegal Alien Accused of Killing Grayson Davis

Previously-Deported Illegal Charged With Killing Arkansas Children’s Hospital Nurse in Horror DUI Crash

New Data on Migrant Crime Rates Raises Eyebrows, Alarms

Thousands of 'potentially fraudulent voter registration applications' Uncovered, Stopped in Pennsylvania

Michigan Will Count Ballot of Chinese National Charged with Voting Illegally

"It Did Occur" - Kentucky County Clerk Confirms Voting Booth 'Glitch'' Shifted Trump Votes To Kamala

Legendary Astronaut Buzz Aldrin 'wholeheartedly' Endorses Donald Trump

Liberal Icon Naomi Wolf Endorses Trump: 'He's Being More Inclusive'

(Washed Up Has Been) Singer Joni Mitchell Screams 'F*** Trump' at Hollywood Bowl

"Analysis: The Final State of the Presidential Race"

He’ll, You Pieces of Garbage

The Future of Warfare -- No more martyrdom!

"Kamala’s Inane Talking Points"

"The Harris Campaign Is Testament to the Toxicity of Woke Politics"

Easy Drywall Patch

Israel Preparing NEW Iran Strike? Iran Vows “Unimaginable” Response | Watchman Newscast

In Logansport, Indiana, Kids are Being Pushed Out of Schools After Migrants Swelled County’s Population by 30%: "Everybody else is falling behind"

Exclusive — Bernie Moreno: We Spend $110,000 Per Illegal Migrant Per Year, More than Twice What ‘the Average American Makes’

Florida County: 41 of 45 People Arrested for Looting after Hurricanes Helene and Milton are Noncitizens

Presidential race: Is a Split Ticket the only Answer?

hurricanes and heat waves are Worse

'Backbone of Iran's missile industry' destroyed by IAF strikes on Islamic Republic

Joe Rogan Experience #2219 - Donald Trump

IDF raids Hezbollah Radwan Forces underground bases, discovers massive cache of weapons

Gallant: ‘After we strike in Iran,’ the world will understand all of our training

The Atlantic Hit Piece On Trump Is A Psy-Op To Justify Post-Election Violence If Harris Loses

Six Al Jazeera journalists are Hamas, PIJ terrorists

Judge Aileen Cannon, who tossed Trump's classified docs case, on list of proposed candidates for attorney general

Iran's Assassination Program in Europe: Europe Goes Back to Sleep

Susan Olsen says Brady Bunch revival was cancelled because she’s MAGA.

Foreign Invaders crisis cost $150B in 2023, forcing some areas to cut police and fire services: report

Israel kills head of Hezbollah Intelligence.


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

United States News
See other United States News Articles

Title: Despite NY Win, It Was a Bad Week for Trump
Source: [None]
URL Source: http://townhall.com/columnists/davi ... -a-bad-week-for-trump-n2152590
Published: Apr 23, 2016
Author: David Limbaugh
Post Date: 2016-04-23 08:42:36 by no gnu taxes
Keywords: None
Views: 8781
Comments: 68

Despite his big win in New York on Tuesday, Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump has had a pretty bad week. But will it matter? It should -- and just might.

During an NBC "Today" show town hall Thursday, the host read a question from Twitter concerning Trump's views on LGBT issues and how he plans to be inclusive as president. "Speak about North Carolina bathroom law in particular."

Trump responded: "I had a feeling that question was going to come up, I will tell you. Well, look, North Carolina did something that was very strong, and they're paying a big price, and there's a lot of problems. ... North Carolina, what they're going through, with all of the business that's leaving and all of the strife -- and that's on both sides -- you leave it the way it is. There have been very few complaints the way it is. People go, they use the bathroom that they feel is appropriate. There has been so little trouble."

In response to a follow-up question, Trump said he would not support putting new bathrooms in Trump Tower. "I think that would be discriminatory in a certain way."

These politically correct answers from the alleged king of political incorrectness have to be music to the ears of Democrats -- not only those far left enough to agree with Trump's view but all others because they know this will alienate Trump from the tons of Republican voters who recognize such lunacy. Perhaps Trump should have been more forthcoming about his true New York liberal values.

Before you buy into Trump's inevitable walk-back of this disaster, remember how he began his answer: that he had anticipated the question. I'm not sure whether that should be more damning than if his answer had been purely spontaneous, revealing his true feelings apart from political calculation, but it's greatly troubling either way.

Trump says he is concerned about the strife and "the economic punishment (North Carolina is) taking." But it seems he also sees the issue from the perspective of adult men who want to use little girls' bathrooms. Has he even considered this from the perspective of the parents of these girls and all other sane people who don't feel comfortable sharing bathrooms with people of the opposite gender?

Who thinks like this, other than a candidate pandering to new constituencies? Who actually believes that prohibiting grown men from using little girls' bathrooms is discriminatory against the transgender community rather than against the 99 percent of people who have always had the comfort of going to public restrooms without the fear that people of the opposite gender could invade their privacy? Isn't protecting public safety one of government's chief duties?

It will be interesting to see how Trump's infinitely forgiving fans explain this one away or whether they'll even bother to try. I get it; all they think about is unfair trade and "the wall," so maybe they'll explain why Trump wants to tear down public bathroom walls.

Also on Thursday, Trump said he would support raising taxes on the rich, which should concern all economic conservatives who support reducing taxes across the board to stimulate robust economic growth. It should also concern Trump's defenders who believed he was standing by the tax plan posted on his website, which includes a cut to the top rate, from 39.6 percent to 25 percent.

Those convinced that Trump has few ideological moorings and an inclination toward liberal positions are vindicated -- again. No matter what written plans Trump has proposed for use in his campaign, his instincts are to support the liberal position on many issues. And for those who buy that he's made a strong conversion from his previous liberal ways, you should know that there has apparently been no change in Trump's views about taxes since 1991, when he testified as a Democratic expert witness and described Ronald Reagan's tax cuts as "catastrophic."

Those who still believe in the sincerity of Trump's conversion to conservatism should be aware of the other bombshell that exploded this week in Camp Trump, which may be the most troubling of all.

In a private meeting aimed at reassuring concerned GOP leaders about Trump's positions and electability in a general election, Trump's "chief lieutenants" reportedly told them that Trump has been "projecting an image" up to this point in the primary season and "the part that he's been playing is evolving" in a way that will make him more palatable to general election voters. How utterly comforting.

Trump's new campaign guru, Paul Manafort, reportedly told Republican National Committee members that Trump has two personalities -- a private one and another one when he's onstage. "When he's out on the stage, when he's talking about the kinds of things he's talking about on the stump, he's projecting an image that's for that purpose. You'll start to see more depth of the person, the real person. You'll see a real different guy."

So his own campaign chief just comes right out and says Trump has been playing a role -- pretending to be someone he's not? This is just incredible stuff, folks.

For the life of me, I don't understand how Trump's most ardent supporters can feel comfortable relying on his always-shifting promises -- even on immigration. Those who still feel comfortable about his candidacy baffle me.

Yes, Trump won his liberal home state resoundingly, but looking back, this could be one of his worst weeks of the campaign.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 42.

#2. To: no gnu taxes (#0) (Edited)

" Despite NY Win, It Was a Bad Week for Trump "

My family & I really liked Trump. We really liked his frank talk, and really liked his stance on trade & immigration.

But when he stuck his nose into the controversy in PA about the pedophile coach, and now the perverts wanting to use womens rest rooms, he has blown it with us!

We will support the Constitution Party.

I know in the grand scheme of things, me & my family are not that many votes. But, I suspect there are a lot more just like us. How many is yet to be seen.

He desperately needs to learn when to STFU !

Stoner  posted on  2016-04-23   9:11:17 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#28. To: Stoner, no gnu taxes (#2)

But when he stuck his nose into the controversy in PA about the pedophile coach

Donald Trump only referred to coach Paterno.

The Penn State case involved an ex-coach, Jerry Sandusky, who left coaching in 1999.

Joe Paterno is not alleged to have been a pedophile. The incidents are not alleged to have occurred while Sandusky was a coach.

After legal setbacks and under pending threat of litigation, the Freeh Report was discredited, and the NCAA action based on the Free Report was largely reversed. 111 wins were restored to the official record of Joe Paterno and Penn State, and Joe Paterno is again the winningest coach in NCAA history.

The most serious charges against Graham Spanier, the former Penn State President were thrown out by the Superior Court in reversing the lower court. Now, Spanier is suing Freeh for defamation, and Penn State for breaching terms agreed to upon his resignation in 2011.

http://www.pennlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2015/01/409_again_penn_state_football.html

409 again: Penn State football wins restored under settlement

By Teresa Bonner | tbonner@pennlive.com
PennLive
on January 16, 2015 at 12:52 PM, updated January 16, 2015 at 1:26 PM

A proposed settlement has been reached that will restore 111 wins by teams under legendary football coach Joe Paterno and one win by Tom Bradley that were wiped from the record books by the sanctions imposed by the NCAA in the wake of the Jerry Sandusky sex abuse scandal.

The announcement was made by the NCAA, moments before state Sen. Jake Corman was scheduled to make an announcement regarding his lawsuit against the NCAA. The lawsuit, originally an attempt to keep the $60 fine the NCAA imposed on Penn State in Pennsylvania, has become a case testing the validity of the penalties imposed by the NCAA.

Those penalties include the $60 million fine and the vacation of 112 victories earned by the football team between 1998 and 2011. It also included a ban on bowl games and scholarship reductions that have since been lifted.

In recent days, reports that a settlement was in the works have prompted speculation that the football teams 112 wins — for some alumni, the most grievous of the penalties — could be restored, making Joe Paterno once again the winningest major college football coach, with 409 wins.

http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2014/04/pennsylvania_court_ruling_puts.html

Pa. court ruling puts NCAA's controversial Penn State punishments back on the table

By Charles Thompson | cthompson@pennlive.com
PennLive
on April 09, 2014 at 7:35 PM, updated April 10, 2014 at 6:29 AM

The NCAA probably didn’t see this coming.

But experts believe what started out as a simple fight to keep control of its $60 million in Penn State University fine proceeds now has quite likely turned into a battle over the very validity of the controversial NCAA punishments on the university.

It happened courtesy of a 6-1 Commonwealth Court ruling Wednesday that not only upheld a year-old state law requiring Penn State’s fines to be expended in-state, but also called for a hearing on the validity of the consent decree itself.

That was a moment worth celebrating for the legions of Penn State alums and fans who feel the school’s once-unassailable Paterno Era heritage was thrown under the bus by current university leaders in the hopes of making the Jerry Sandusky child sex abuse scandal disappear.

“This is where the consent decree really starts to completely unravel,” Scott Paterno, son of the late head football coach Joe Paterno and a lead plaintiff in a separate lawsuit over the sanctions in Centre County court, posted Wednesday afternoon on Twitter.

Several independent NCAA watchers said Scott Paterno might have a point, based on the strong language in Judge Anne Covey’s majority opinion.

“High school athletes who had no involvement in the criminal acts [committed by Sandusky] were prevented from obtaining a free college education,” Covey wrote referring to the football program’s reduction in scholarships.

“Student-athletes, trainers, coaches and support personnel who were taught and trained to be and do their best were stopped from competing by the prohibition against post-season play.

“Student-athletes, trainers, coaches, administrators and support personnel who had excelled in their jobs through hard work, practice, commitment, team work, sportsmanship, excellence and perseverance were told none of that mattered,” the judge continued, in a reference to the paper vacation of 111 Joe Paterno-coached football wins from 1998 through 2011.

All that happened, Covey wrote, because of “the NCAA's questionable involvement in and its dubious authority pertaining to a criminal action against a non-University official which involved children who were non-university student-athletes.”

“This Court will not make a legal determination which has such far reaching implications without conducting a hearing on the disputed factual issues,” Covey concluded, referring to state Sen. Jake Corman's request for immediate enforcement of the fine law, which Corman sponsored.

For more on Covey's opinion and President Judge Dan Pelligrini's solo dissent, click here.

Those open factual issues, of course, boil down to whether the NCAA had the right to go outside its normal enforcement procedures to hand down the Penn State punishments in July 2012.

The NCAA said little about its next move Wednesday, other than it will continue to fight for what it believes is a lawfully executed agreement between it and Penn State.

NCAA Chief Legal Officer Donald Remy said the association stands by its belief that Corman's act on the fines is unconstitutional, and added "We are even more surprised the court determined the consent decree itself is somehow at issue, although the validity of the agreement has not been questioned by the plaintiff."

The association has always maintained that — based largely on Freeh Report findings that top administrators at Penn State were ineffective in stopping Sandusky when they had the chance — the violations were so extraordinary as to warrant executive action.

Several outside observers, however, believe the court’s proposed fresh look has the potential to embarrass the NCAA and its beleaguered president, Mark Emmert.

“I think this does pose a threat to the NCAA,” said Ellen Staurowsky, a professor of sports management at Drexel University. “Often when we get a glimpse into the inner workings, if becomes difficult for them to defend their actions.”

Gerald Gurney, a former Division I sports administrator now on the faculty at the University of Oklahoma, was even blunter.

“By any measure, Penn State was at the time of the Sandusky scandal a model athletic program," Gurney said.

“I think when the court looks into the validity of the consent decree, it will be bothered by the duress President Erickson and Penn State were under from the threat of a four-year death penalty …

“And I think it will be bothered by the complete circumvention of established NCAA enforcement rules,” Gurney said.

The one wild card, of course, could be what Penn State — whose top leaders did sign off on the consent decree — says now that it is being brought into the case.

So far, “official” Penn State has stood with the NCAA in other court battles, insisting that its main goal is to comply with all aspects of the agreement and become a better institution for it.

That approach, ironically, has earned praise to date from Emmert and the independent monitor tracking Penn State's compliance with the penalties' terms.

It gets a little more complex for Penn State in this case, however.

The lead plaintiff is in the Commonwealth Court case is none other than Corman, a Centre County Republican whose status as Senate Appropriations Committee Chair makes him probably the university’s number one patron in the General Assembly.

Corman, for his part, seem interested Wednesday in taking advantage of his new leverage, telling PennLive that while the validity of the sanctions was not his initial interest, “now that the court has opened up that potential we certainly have to explore it.”

Plaintiffs in the Paterno estate's suit and their allies cheered that prospect.

In a statement Wednesday evening, Wick Sollers, the family's attorney, called the latest ruling a “milestone development …

“As we have said from the beginning, the only way the NCAA's hasty and ill-conceived actions will be resolved is through a transparent review of the facts. Today's opinion is an extremely encouraging development.”

At least one member of Penn Staters for Responsible Stewardship, the grassroots alumni group that has fought steadfastly against the Freeh Report and the sanctions, said he hoped NCAA leaders would consider surrendering now.

“This decision, though not a complete victory, yet, is … a clear sign to the NCAA, and the [Penn State] Board of Trustees, about the outcome of an examination of the Consent Decree,” said Rob Tribeck, a Harrisburg attorney.

Tribeck renewed calls for Penn State trustees to renounce the Freeh Report, and for the NCAA to immediately lift all remaining sanctions.

http://articles.philly.com/2016-01-24/news/70015302_1_elizabeth-ainslie-spanier-lawyer-graham-b

Ruling reverses charges against Spanier, others in Sandusky case

By Susan Snyder and Craig R. McCoy, STAFF WRITERS
Philadelphia Enquirer
Posted: January 24, 2016

The Pennsylvania Superior Court scaled back the criminal case Friday against three former Pennsylvania State University administrators accused of conspiring to cover up Jerry Sandusky's child sex abuse, validating their assertion that it was unfair to let the university's former top lawyer testify against them.

In three opinions, the judges reversed a lower-court ruling that upheld obstruction of justice and conspiracy charges against former Penn State president Graham B. Spanier, former vice president Gary Schultz, and former athletic director Tim Curley, as well as perjury charges against Spanier and Schultz.

The judges left intact charges of child endangerment, a third-degree felony, and failure to report suspected child abuse, a summary offense, against all three men, as well as a perjury charge for Curley.

But defense lawyers hailed the rulings, perhaps their biggest legal victory in a case that has languished for four years. "We're elated that they threw out the most important charges," said Elizabeth Ainslie, an attorney for Spanier.

A spokesman for Attorney General Kathleen G. Kane said her office would review the ruling and decide if it would appeal to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.

Prosecutors contend that Spanier, Curley, and Schultz either ignored signs that Sandusky, a longtime assistant to football coach Joe Paterno, was a sexual predator or covered it up.

All retired, resigned, or were forced out in the wake of Sandusky's arrest. Each has denied the allegations.

Beyond email and other evidence, the case against them was built on the testimony of Cynthia Baldwin, a former Pennsylvania Supreme Court justice, who was chief counsel for Penn State during the Sandusky investigation and was present when each testified before the grand jury.

Prosecutors and Baldwin say she was there serving as the lawyer for the university, not its officers.

In her own testimony, Baldwin savaged Spanier, maintaining that information he gave to reporters about his knowledge of Sandusky or his conduct was filled with falsehoods. "He is not a person of integrity," she testified. "He lied to me."

For three years, the defendants' lawyers have fought to quash her testimony. They contend that Spanier and the others viewed Baldwin as their lawyer, and that she could not be a witness because her contact with them was protected under attorney-client privilege.

Superior Court upheld that assertion.

"We find that Ms. Baldwin breached the attorney-client privilege and was incompetent to testify as to confidential communications between her and Spanier during her grand jury testimony," said the opinion, issued in Spanier's case and echoed in the others.

The lawyers for Spanier, Curley, and Schultz only challenged the obstruction, perjury, and conspiracy charges because they were connected to Baldwin.

Timothy K. Lewis, another Spanier lawyer, said he was confident his client would overcome the remaining charges, too. "We and Dr. Spanier have maintained his innocence from the beginning and have always been confident that he would be vindicated, and we remain confident that he will be vindicated of the remaining charges, which have never been adjudicated."

Lawyers for Curley and Schultz did not return calls for comment.

If the rulings stand, the prosecution case may have to rely more on email traffic among Spanier, Curley, and Schultz to prove wrongdoing.

In one series of exchanges, the men appeared to discuss how to respond to a complaint that Sandusky sexually assaulted a young boy in a campus shower. They initially agreed to inform Sandusky's charity, alert authorities, and bar the former coach from bringing children to Penn State's locker rooms. Curley later wrote that he changed his mind about contacting authorities.

"The only downside for us is if the message isn't 'heard' and acted upon, and we then become vulnerable for not having reported it," Spanier responded in a 2001 email.

Spanier has said he had no memory of that email and was unaware of any inappropriate or criminal act.

In its ruling, the three-judge panel also sharply criticized Frank Fina, the former state prosecutor who led the investigation and who has since become entangled in a running feud with Kane. The judges said that Fina had told the grand jury judge he would question Baldwin about her conversations with the three defendants, but that many questions ultimately involved "potential confidential communications."

In sum, the panel wrote, Fina's questioning was "highly improper." Fina could not be reached for comment Friday.

Written by Judge Mary Jane Bowes with the agreement of William H. Platt and Patricia H. Jenkins, the opinions spurred immediate reaction from Penn State alumni who have been saying for years that the men were unfairly charged and the university unfairly tarnished.

"The court overturned the despicable violation of these men's constitutional rights by the Office of the Attorney General in collusion with former Penn State trustee and counsel Cynthia Baldwin," said the group Penn Staters for Responsible Stewardship in a statement.

ssnyder@phillynews.com
215-854-4693 @ssnyderinq
www.inquirer.com/campusinq

Staff writer Mark Fazlollah contributed to this article.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graham_Spanier

[Excerpt]

On January 22, 2016, a three judge panel of the Pennsylvania Superior Court unanimously overturned a decision by Judge Hoover and threw out charges of perjury, obstruction and conspiracy against Spanier and Schultz, and charges of obstruction and conspiracy against Curley. The court found that Baldwin breached attorney-client privilege by testifying as to confidential communications between her and Spanier to the grand jury.

On February 10, 2016, Spanier filed separate lawsuits against Freeh and Penn State, claiming university trustees and Freeh colluded in placing blame for Sandusky's sexual misconduct on lack of action by Paterno, Schultz, Curley and Spanier. Spanier seeks a damage judgment against Freeh for defamation, and against the university for breaching terms agreed to upon his resignation in 2011.

In the wake of the Sandusky investigation, a Phoenix, Arizona private investigator named Paul McLaughlin publicly alleged he had been sexually abused by Penn State Professor John R. Neisworth and two other men in the late 1970s and early 1980s. McLaughlin claimed to possess a tape of telephone conversations with university officials, including Spanier, to verify that he had tried twenty years later to inform the university, but he later had to file an affidavit acknowledging that he did not have such tapes. The charges filed against Neisworth and the two other men in 2005 were dropped that that same year for lack of evidence.

nolu chan  posted on  2016-04-23   12:23:46 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#29. To: nolu chan (#28)

" Donald Trump only referred to coach Paterno.

The Penn State case involved an ex-coach, Jerry Sandusky, who left coaching in 1999.

Joe Paterno is not alleged to have been a pedophile. "

Agree. Thanks for the history.

But it still was politically stupid for Trump to interject opinion into the whole sordid matter.

IMHO, politically, he should have stayed out of it.

Stoner  posted on  2016-04-23   12:30:40 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#42. To: Stoner (#29)

IMHO, politically, he should have stayed out of it.

Agree completely.

Pinguinite  posted on  2016-04-23   13:15:16 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 42.

        There are no replies to Comment # 42.


End Trace Mode for Comment # 42.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com