" 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 !

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.

Trump's answers are not "politically correct". They are his opinions. And he's right.

The issues this election are regulated capitalism with a social state and a nationalist trade policy that favors the redevelopment of domestic manufacturing OR heavily-regulated and taxed capitalism with a heavier social state, free trade policies and maintaining our global imperial stance.

Trump offers the first. Hillary offers the second. Cruz WANTS to make things like toilets the issue, but toilets are only the issue for hysterics, and there are not enough hysterics to let him get within a mile of the White House.

Socialism and Empire, or Capitalism and Nation - those are the issues, Hillary or Trump - choose.

If you want Capitalism and Nation, then bleeding out the eyes over toilets, to try to change Trump's mind or mine, is useless. His mind and my mind are set. We're not going to give you anything on that front, because you're wrong and the issue is stupid. If the issue is so important to you that you're going to torpedo Trump, then we'll have socialism and empire with Hillary. Most of us have done fine under socialism and empire, so we will accept a continuation of what we have rather than EVER compromising over something stupid like toilets. Why? Because it's a free speech issue - and we're not going to STFU and be "politically correct" to the left OR TO THE RIGHT.

The tail is not gonna wag the dog. No way. No how. Trump is right. He's not going to back down. And he shouldn't.

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.

So, now the question is whether enough of you will abandon Trump to give the election to Hillary. We'll find out in November.

Better to have Hillary and socialism than to let the tail wag the dog over toilets.

He desperately needs to learn when to STFU !

You and your family need to learn to fight the fights that matter. Toilets and statues of a dead coach don't.

" So, now the question is whether enough of you will abandon Trump to give the election to Hillary. We'll find out in November. "

True. It appears that with either Hillary or Trump, the perverts will have free reign. If that happens, we are going to have a society that I do not think you will like.

But Trump is the one that is driving the bus over the cliff. He needs to get back on track, and STFU about these pervert issues.

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!

Stoner, you're pole vaulting over mouse turds. IOW, you're letting these little hot button issues sway you.

JoePa was a great coach and man.

Public bathrooms...I'm sure you rarely use them.

I don't think so.

"JoePa was a great coach and man. " Maybe, but the guy that molested those kids was an asshole. Joe did not do anything about it, in fact allowed it to continue.

Your letting your love of the game sway you from good morals & common decency.

If that happens, we are going to have a society that I do not think you will like.

But Trump is the one that is driving the bus over the cliff. He needs to get back on track, and STFU about these pervert issues.

We already live in a society where perverts are free to do as they please. They can marry, they can use toilets, they can make people give them equal service in commerce. And that's all from a Republican Supreme Court. I don't care. I'm not going to care.

I care about International relations, trade, immigration control, industrial policy, taxes, the social safety net, and free speech.

"STFU" as a standard leaves me cold. I say "Let your freak flag fly" - it's no skin off MY nose, but stuff those who want to restrict speech.

I'll be happiest under Trump. There are things that Obama has done, and that Hillary will do, that are good. And those are the choices on option. If I didn't think it mattered, I wouldn't bother to vote at all. But it does on the margins, so I have voted Republican. But Republicans really only care about tax breaks for the super rich, and that has become very, very toxic, so I've abandoned them. Trump looks set to drag them away from that towards a more healthy and balanced policy, one that is different from the Democrats in good ways.

I know this because Trump speaks his mind. He's not going to STFU, and he shouldn't.

Because of his opinion on toilets and the statue of a dead guy, you're going to go vote for Mickey Mouse. You may as well stay home and use your time for something more profitable for you. Things will happen without you this time, at your option. Either Trump will win, and we'll get those various policies, or Hillary will and we'll get hers. I'll be fine either way. I'll be better off economically with Hillary, but I'm still going to vote for Trump.

Your letting your love of the game sway you from good morals & common decency.

I am putting war policy, trade policy, industrial policy, tax policy, immigration policy and health policy, and control over general policy through control of the court, ahead of common decency concerning the statue of a man who is dead, and ahead of the silly question of who can use toilets. That's right.

The dead Paterno should have done more. Therefore, open borders and socialism! - that's what you're doing.

It's called losing sight of the ball. It's called taking boob bait for Bubbas.

If enough Bubbas take the boob bait, Bubette will be President, which means more emoire, free trade, higher taxes, open borders, Obamacare preserved as is, gun control, and liberal Democrat control of the Supreme Court (which means open bathrooms and the death of the things you consider common decency). Joe Paterno's statue will stay gone. woo-hoo.

We already live in a society where perverts are free to do as they please. They can marry, they can use toilets, they can make people give them equal service in commerce. And that's all from a Republican Supreme Court. I don't care. I'm not going to care.

You lie like satan.

I am putting war policy, trade policy, industrial policy, tax policy, immigration policy and health policy, and control over general policy through control of the court, ahead of common decency concerning the statue of a man who is dead, and ahead of the silly question of who can use toilets. That's right. "

Yeah, I'm sure God will buy that. /sarc

And besides that, as politically astute as you normally are, I am very surprised that you fail to see the political stupidity of Trump opening his mouth and getting involved in these issues. Then you rationalize to defend it. I am very surprised.

If enough Bubbas take the boob bait, Bubette will be President,

You already said you would vote for Hillary if Cruz got the nomination.

That is the position of a baby killing boob head.

Are you mentally ill?

Then you rationalize

That is an astute observation.

He rationalizes everything immoral. Well not everything but many many things.

As for Trump.

He is going to disappoint us.

I may or may not vote for him.

As for Trump.

He is going to disappoint us.

I may or may not vote for him.

You're a Nervous Nellie, like Stoner.

" We already live in a society where perverts are free to do as they please. "

All thanks to a bunch of asshat lawyers, judges, & politicians. Now that Trump is out of the closet, it will continue with either him or Hillary.

Sooner or later, some little girl(s) will get molested in a rest room. If we are lucky, the girl/woman will have a CCL and terminate the perv on the spot. Or, he / she / it will be arrested, then defended by some asshat lawyer, and turned loose by some asshat judge. Yeah, he / she / it has rights!

Then, some pissed off father, husband, brother, uncle, grandfather, will put said pervert in the crosshairs at 700 yd, and administer a 168gr HPBT attitude adjustment to said pervert.

Then the people that are supporting the pervs today will be crying & wailing: " The rule of law, the rule of law, the perverts have rights, the poor pervs have rights " . Then said asshat lawyers & asshat judges may consider a new career path.

Justice delayed is justice denied. If the "enlightened" continue to get their way, there will be a reckoning.

I do not want to see our society have to go that way.

I do not want to see our society have to go that way.

Do you keep track of what your neighbors do?

Just asking.

Who uses what bathrooms is not a federal issue. Treating it as one is shows a lack of understanding of Constitutional limitations.

As long as Trump is likely to expose federal corruption and put America first (if that's true), he's still the man for the job.

" Nervous Nellie, like Stoner "

LOL, hardly.

I have a family that God entrusted me to protect & look after. I take that obligation very serious!

Fred, I look at things as they are, and with common sense see where they are headed.

I consider that being realistic. To do otherwise, is to go around with "head up ass"

Would he sign it?

I know it isn't the biggest issue. But it goes to character.

I'll still probably vote for him considering he is running against that dumb woman.

" Discussion about Trump's position on things that the president has no control over is a red herring. I know it's what's been going on for along time, but presidents are not kings. Or not supposed to be.

Who uses what bathrooms is not a federal issue. "

Agreed.

However, that said, it was politically stupid for him to utter his thoughts on the subject. To do so exposed his thinking and inclination.

He would have been much smarter politically to have stayed out of it. By running his mouth, he has lost some votes.

Well hasn’t America arrived at a wonderful place where she cannot decide who belongs in which bathroom. Since so many freaks are gender confused we have to allow them into the women’s bathroom to take a piss. In the old days, of around two years ago these guys would get their butts kicked if they wanted to force their way into a women’s bathroom or shower.

We have always had cross dressers and society lived with it like every other strange sexual perversion. Now they are being used to attack Judeo-Christian values like every other Marxist weapon. This is just one more tangent of the never ending battle between God and the worship of the world. This is not so much as new as pushing the envelope one more inch to destroy Christianity.

The liberal cult requires adherence to its beliefs and tenets fundamentally and those religious laws change constantly. To be a good liberal you are required to be a better person than the less evolved person next to you. Some of the more obvious lifestyles are being a vegetarian, tolerant, dirt worshiping, being organic and vote Democrat. That list alone will make you a good person and superior to those who do not and especially voting Democrat. You do all of the tenets of the church of Oprah and vote Republican and you are not a good person.

Marxism uses religion as a tool to give its followers a deep faith based experience. It has copied all of the cults of the world and has stolen many of the Eastern faiths to control its followers. If you look at one of the basic truths such as Global Warming you will find only faith and no facts. If you dare ask where the proof of Global Warming is you will be attacked for heresy, err denial. Now they want to convict and jail you for GW denial. There is no actual proof that the world is heating up and the only true data, satellite laser measurement says that it is either unchanged or cooling due to lack of sun activity, but that will not stop the belief of moving forward. You must believe without question.

To receive the religious high you have to believe that GW exists or you are a denier and nobody wants to be labeled as that. Being a denier means that you are not trusting science which makes you stupid and nobody wants to be uninformed. So you join the rest of the cult and accept the fact that Algore’s movie was fact and CO2 molecules somehow hold in heat and ignore the latest actual data holding to your faith. After all if billionaires like Gore and every Hollywood starlet says it is true, who can argue with those mental giants.

As a liberal you have to believe whatever science says since that is where man’s truth exists. Once science believes something and issues a truth or as they call it Settled Science then the church of man begins worshiping it. Never mind that these High Priests of man have been wrong more than right such as Acid Rain, Ice Age, Spotted Owl, DDT, Expanding Ozone Hole, Polar Bear, Grizzly Bear, Eagle eggs, lead in gas, Heterosexual AIDS, solar power, wind power, evolution, Nazi Germany, USSR, Communism, etc you must believe anything they say as absolute truth.

According to the Church of Man you must believe there is no God or Christ and the highest intellect is man. Ironically, you must also believe that every animal is superior to man, yet man is the top of the intellectual chain. The only thing superior to man is a gaggle of men like a University or a similar collection of superior intellectuals like gummit. The two Vaticans of liberalism is Academia and Government which work hand in hand in the cult with the same ultimate goal which is a manmade utopia. So far those utopias have become giant killing fields.

The latest Academic decree is that homosexuality is good and we are not actually men and women but our gender is fluid like water. You can bet they have a bunch of data manipulated studies using the same tactics as GW and have decided that the only people who are normal are cross dressers and homosexuals and if you do not believe that you are an intolerant denier. Never mind there are reams of data showing these people have elevated levels of mental and physical issues, they are normal and we must worship them. We must not only accept this abnormal behavior, we must celebrate their empty lifestyle and promote it. You must allow them in the women’s changing rooms and showers to show your tolerance. If there are a few rapes along the way they will only prove our loving tolerance.

The fact of the matter is homosexuality is an addiction that leads to depression and death. Homosexuals’ life span is fifteen years less than heterosexual men. This is due to their massive rates of STDs and suicide rates that are off the charts. They end up spending more time in hospital beds than party beds. When men enter into the homosexual lifestyle, usually by rape of a trusted figure they enter into an out of control sexual addictive lifestyle filled with drugs and alcohol. Since there is no pregnancy regulator these men engage in hundreds of partners per year and expose themselves to the most unhealthy activities imaginable leading to sexual diseases like AIDS, Hepatitis C, Mono, Syphilis, Gonorrhea and anything else that is being spread. These are the Saints of the Church of Liberalism who they declare as a healthy lifestyle. If cigarettes shortened your life 20 years they would be outlawed, but homosexuality is celebrated as healthy.

The crossdressing and homosexual agenda is perfect for Marxism. It attacks the two biggest enemies of the Democrat Party, Christianity and Businesses. The ultimate goal is to close down all of those intolerant churches and marginalize their close minded belief and end businesses. Once they require churches to marry homosexuals or be sued out of existence or even jailing pastors they have won. There are lawyers lined up waiting to file these suits and only have to find one judge to begin that process since they can site Academia as their ultimate witness.

The cost of added bathrooms is going to eliminate many small businesses like restaurants, hotels and bars. The goal of Marxism is no private enterprise and this is one large step towards that utopian society. The elimination of the right of privacy is a step towards that goal which says the gummit decides what right you do and don’t have. Now that all knowing power says that girls now have to take showers with guys because they think they are girls even though they are not. Sorry buddy, if you have a penis you shower with the other guys.

The reason God gave us the Bible and Jesus Christ was to protect us from this confusion. He knows man is inherently evil and when left to his own desires will go to the worst places ending in death and suicide. He has warned us about homosexuality although never told us why, just stay away from it. Now we know that it only causes destruction not only to the person, but now we see it leads to confusion and destruction of society. We have evolved to where women and girls have to show their naked bodies to a man to prove our tolerance. This is exactly what God warned us about and are seeing the thorns of his warning. Welcome to our Marxist utopia, so take your clothes off and submit to the Church of Man.

Christianity says just the opposite. It is not what you do that makes you a good person it is what he did. He died for man's evil and his perfection is what sanctifies you and makes you a good person. Rather than spending all that time and energy chasing man's definition which is windswept smoke and ash, he died so you can live free. The most simple task of asking him to forgive is all it takes and you enter his utopia.

Pray America wakes

www.braylog.com/id59.html

" Do you keep track of what your neighbors do?

Just asking. "

Only if they are doing anything that might affect me & my family.

My neighbors are all for the most part good, honest God fearing family people.

I am pretty sure none of them are pervs, if that is what you mean. Out in the country, if one were, the whole county would most likely know.

I think you live in the big city of Louisville. How about you, just asking?

You probably have more neighbors within 2 or 3 blocks, than I do in my whole county, LOL

As a side note, I used to be very good friends with a former Chief of Police in Louisville. Big city!

You lie like satan.

Funny, I was thinking the same thing about you.

Your values are diametrically opposed to mine on everything. You call yourself a "Christian". I am a Catholic.

Your values are diametrically opposed, your religious bielefs seem to be diametrically opposed.

So yeah, one of us is in Satan's helper, and one of us is following Jesus.

And we're each sure who those roles are.

One of us is going to get a nasty surprise in the end.

Have you ever experienced impossible medical miracles or had things that were dead come back to life in your hands? I have.

That's no lie.

Your values are diametrically opposed, your religious bielefs seem to be diametrically opposed.

I guess according to you I would have to vote for pro abort satanist Hillary.

No thanks.

Have you ever experienced impossible medical miracles or had things that were dead come back to life in your hands? I have.

That's no lie.

That is a lie. Once a person is dead they are dead. It is appointed for men to live then die.

Maybe your talking about a seed. But that is not your little secret.

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.

" 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.

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 !

Here's the flaw in your logic.

Those issues that caused you to flee Trumps support, how do you think that asshole Commie Sanders stands on those positions? How do you think that twat, KILLary feels about them? Then ask yourself, how they stand on the border, guns, social welfare.

Then take a step back and think, who's the only person that can beat either of those socialist scumbags.... and all of a sudden, I don't care if some sick twisted faggot dressed like a girl walks in the girls room to deposit a turd.

Despite his big win in New York on Tuesday, Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump has had a pretty bad week.

Actually, it was not all that bad for Trump. His New York destruction of Ted Cruz mathematically eliminated the only remaining competition for a first ballot win. It sent the Cruz campaign cratering, and Trump rising in the polls so that he appears on the cusp of 5 more primary victories of NY proportions, and polls 49% in California with a 27 point lead.

Indeed, Trump's week went much better than that of the Limbaugh brothers. Life is not easy being a shill for the GOP Elites when they choose to back Ted Cruz for tactical reasons, and turn their shills out as presstitutes to spout the party nonsense.

The party attempt to open a lane for Paul Ryan, John Kasich or another non-Trump/Cruz candidate came crashing down. Having presstituted themselves for Ted Cruz, David Limbaugh is left attempting to fictionalize that Trump had a bad week when he utterly destroyed the Limbaugh's man Cruz.

As Cruz has declined to just die, and he carries on with a zombie campaign, Trump will kill him 5 more times on Tuesday. David Limbaugh can once again presstitute himself to declare that Trump's additional 5 wins, and various additional third-place finishes for Cruz, add up to a bad week for Trump.

As to Hillary or Bernie, well, the games are going to start sooner or later, regardless.

Trump is easily the most popular candidate on this planet. Watch and see.

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.

You may be right that it was unnecessary and not politically wise. We should know on Tuesday if it seriously hurt Trump in Pennsylvania.

But I still say it was politically stupid of him.

I agree... but what I like best about Trump is that he's dumb enough to speak him mind. Something nobody has been allowed to do since the phrase "politically correct" was coined by this libtarded society.

I'll concede that no candidate will think 100% like me... I like it when Trump is blunt enough to let me know where we differ... all the others are turds painted gold and polished. Then we get the same old same old.... either party sucks

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.

I certainly agree that Paterno is not a pedophile and is a decent man. I believe these issues happened when Sandusky was participating in private youth camps on the facilities of Penn State. There were eye witnesses there to many strange things going on with Sandusky. Paterno probably had to know about the suspicions with Sandusky. There are moral questions that exist about not his actions, but his inactions. As i have said, he was in an impossible situation that he really didn't know how to deal with.

Trump is easily the most popular candidate on this planet. Watch and see.

I agree, with the exception of inside the establishment/elite political circles. They're scared to death he may take away their grip on party power.

In addition of independents, a significant number of Democrats will cross over. Even with a complete party lock, it is difficult for Hillary to generate any signs of enthusiasm for her campaign.

What if they sent Trump a bill to make NC law illegal.

Would he sign it?

Well, first, a law can't get to the president unless a majority of Congress favors it. THAT is where the issue might be real.

He has 3 options. Sign it, veto it, or let it become law without signing. He should veto it as it's a state issue and not a fed issue. The Fed courts should rule it unconstitutional for the same reason not involving interstate commerce, and therefore out of fed jurisdiction.

But what he'd do, who knows? I don't.

I know it isn't the biggest issue. But it goes to character.

When you need someone to do a specific job, and the best one for it happens to have a private life that you'd never partake in, would you hire someone else knowing the job will be done poorly?

I'll still probably vote for him considering he is running against that dumb woman.

Trump is wild card / loose cannon. I've been saying that for a while. We like that he's anti-establishment, I like that he is not a politician, and while his changing his mind on issues shows a lack of preparation, it also shows he's willing to change his mind if he thinks it's the right thing to do and logic shows he was wrong. That as opposed to never changing positions because some special interest has paid you to take it and hold it forever in spite of it perhaps being insanity. No one else is going to change anything. Trump might. No guarantees, but with the other candidates, the guarantees we do get is more of the same that the USA has been doing for decades or longer. More corruption, more wars, more inflation, etc. That is a critical issue for the country. Though bathroom usage raises potential moral issues that can be serious, it's simply not a federal case, and not something that the president has any meaningful control over. A (very) little, yes, in the example you gave, but no more.

Is that possibility worth trading away along with someone who might actually do something about the economy that is hurting a lot more people a lot more than this bathroom issue might?

The free market solution is when businesses start making individual stalls for single person usage making all bathrooms suitable for everyone. Cost more, and makes a sad commentary on society, but it would resolve the issue.

However, that said, it was politically stupid for him to utter his thoughts on the subject. To do so exposed his thinking and inclination.

True. He's demonstrated very poor skills as a politician. But we don't want a politician. That's one way of looking at it.

He would have been much smarter politically to have stayed out of it. By running his mouth, he has lost some votes.

I would love for him to start expressing the fact that many of these issues are not presidential issues, that he's running for president, not for pope, that the people of NC have opinions about what's best for them and that they as a state should resolve it on their own.

Sure he's lost votes. Then again, he probably gained some too. Far from perfect for sure.

I know as pres he'll do stuff that I and others here will despise. Everyone's approval rating drops when they start doing stuff instead of saying stuff. Trump won't make it a perfect world. I'm not deluded about that.

One of us is going to get a nasty surprise in the end.

Everyone is & will be very pleasantly surprised when they learn that God is no more interested in academic knowledge than he is in physical skills.

There are moral questions that exist about not his actions, but his inactions.

There are, indeed, questions. What is lacking are really firm answers as far as any improper action/inaction of Paterno. It is possible Paterno knew about more than grab-assing in the shower, but it is possible that he did not.

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

Agree completely.

What if they sent Trump a bill to make NC law illegal.

Would he sign it?

He said that in Trump Tower he would let people use which restroom they wanted. But he followed up that it should be left to the states to decide what the law should be.

Based on his denial of Federal authority to legislate the issue, it would appear that he would tend to not sign such a bill. No one will really know until it happens.

Based on his denial of Federal authority to legislate the issue, it would appear that he would tend to not sign such a bill. No one will really know until it happens.

Not sign it or veto it? If he simply doesn't sign, it becomes law.

But yes, no one knows. He probably doesn't even know himself, which is just as well, I suppose. The details of the law would likely be a factor as well.

" True. He's demonstrated very poor skills as a politician. But we don't want a politician. That's one way of looking at it. "

Well, I am trying.

He started off displaying what I thought were very accute political instincts - trade & immigration.

Now, he has opened his mouth spewing this liberal BS.

Now, he has opened his mouth spewing this liberal BS.

Yeah.... but to become pres, he has to win votes from liberal types too.

Once he's in, he may dump that and be his old self again. Since the NY win, he has less reason to focus on traditional conservatives/Republicans, and more reason to focus on libs/Democrats.

It is possible Paterno knew about more than grab-assing in the shower, but it is possible that he did not.

Just to be clear, I was never on the crucify Paterno train.

However I am also not naive. If he didn't know, it's because he didn't want to know. It's like a wife saying, "I never knew my husband was molesting our daughter."

[#20] Would he sign it?

[#43] Based on his denial of Federal authority to legislate the issue, it would appear that he would tend to not sign such a bill.

[#44] Not sign it or veto it? If he simply doesn't sign, it becomes law.

The specific question was, "Would he sign it?" Specifically, he would not sign it.

If Congress is in session, he would not sign it, he would write VETO on it, and return it unsigned.

If Congress is not in session, he would not sign it, and may stick it in his pocket and not bother to return it. It is called a Pocket Veto. The bill does not become law.

Whether by Pocket Veto or standard return Veto, the President does not sign the bill.

If Congress is in session and he does not return the bill, then it becomes law.

be his old self again.

His old self IS liberal - he didn't start pretending to be a conservative until some time after the 2012 election.

I don't care if some sick twisted faggot dressed like a girl walks in the girls room to deposit a turd.

What about the sick twisted straight man who dresses like a girl so he can, under cover of "transsexual" "senstitivity", walk in the girls room to spy on or rape a girl?