ADVERTISEMENT

Trustees walked out on Lubrano today

This is why they are jokes. And then they pulled demlion in for good measure.
I am somewhat surprised that Dem has neither provided any comment on the Freeh Report (as I believe he said he was going to), or responded to the many posts questioning why he went silent on the subject. I do not understand it.
 
How many games did he sit in the press box?
13 I believe, not counting one missed altogether in 2006. The first 3 of 2011are included in that 13.

I think he earned the right to go out on his own terms. That said, he was definitely a bit selfish in pursuing the record.

He kept getting injured doing basic things that are required to be a head coach. Without the record I doubt Paterno puts himself in that situation.

JMO.
 
His "big thing" came and went - the Paterno Party at Medlar Field.

Is there really anyone who didn't know that at the time?
Could there be anyone left who still doesn't realize that was the deal Anthony and the other alumni trustees made?

Placing Lubert on the throne, and Dambly on the throne (The two where both accomplished with the vote in July of 2016. This month's vote was just a formality), in exchange for having a shin-dig with Mike Reid on the piano.

That was a trade that, at the time, most Penn State fans applauded. As best I can recall.


Buyer's Remorse won't change that.

First, we never made any such deal with Ira.

Second, the 50th Anniversary celebration was organized by Sue Paterno and the letterman without the assistance of PSU. In fact, they did not require the university's help. Medlar Field is leased to a third party that has operating control of the venue.

Finally, Ira's primary goal as we saw it was to resolve the Paterno dispute. He did not although he could have orchestrated that resolution. He chose not to. Shame on me for ever thinking he would.

In July, 2012, when Rod Erickson asked each Board member for his/her thoughts on the Paterno statue, Ira's response was to suggest the statue remain. However, he thought a sign should be placed at the statue with the statement, "With the benefit of hindsight I wish I had done more."
 
I am somewhat surprised that Dem has neither provided any comment on the Freeh Report (as I believe he said he was going to), or responded to the many posts questioning why he went silent on the subject. I do not understand it.

Because his previous words will look completely stupid if he now tells what he knows?

Who wants to come out after all he said and then say, "Freeh was being a judgmental, sanctimonious prick, but essentially, his facts are correct, and there don't appear to be any significant additional facts out there."

Who wants to say that?
 
Because his previous words will look completely stupid if he now tells what he knows?

Who wants to come out after all he said and then say, "Freeh was being a judgmental, sanctimonious prick, but essentially, his facts are correct, and there don't appear to be any significant additional facts out there."

Who wants to say that?


Ann ass like you?
 
  • Like
Reactions: zhokov
"Shame on you"? - For thinking Lubert would work with you to fulfill your agenda? No
That is not "shame". What it is, though, is incredibly naïve - to say the least.

Your passion to try to "right a wrong" with respect to the University's treatment of Joe Paterno is admirable.

What should be the source of "shame" is that you were willing to sell out the entire University, and completely ignore YOUR fiduciary duties.
All in return for a pledge (from a man that you knew was a liar) that he would assist you in fulfilling your quest.

That is shameful. Regardless of whether Lubert ignored, or lived up to, his worthless pledge.

Your willingness to sell out your duty to serve the University as a responsible trustee - at the drop of a hat - for any whiff of hope to further your desire to restore the Paterno legacy, is shameful.
It is both shameful AND a tremendous loss, because your passion (for anything) - even if harmfully myopic in this case - is a trait that is far too rare among members of the Board.

Ironically enough, it is also counter-productive. The unwillingness of the elected members of the Board of Trustees to perform their duties as responsible stewards of the University has lent significantly to burying the chances of cleaning up the Paterno-era legacy.
Those chances WOULD HAVE BEEN greatly enhanced if only the Alumni-elected members of the Board had placed responsible governance first - and allowed the restoration of "Paterno" to fall into line as they performed those duties.

The sooner everyone, including yourself, realizes that, the sooner we may once again have a chance to see responsible governance at Penn State - AND a chance at realizing whatever restoration of the Paterno-era legacy remains possible.

Based on what we witnessed on Friday, any such realization is a long ways off.

And today, whatever hope remains is now much slimmer than at any time since November of 2011.

Unfortunately.

Clearly you do not understand the meaning of the the term "fiduciary duty."

Penn State needs its alumni base to support it with their time, talents and treasures. With such a divided alumni community, we need to. Ring them together. Recognizing Joe Paterno's 61 years of service, in my view, would do just that.

I feel no shame for thinking Ira Lubert actually wanted to achieve the same objective. Nonetheless, I was wrong in that belief.
 
I'm just surprised that you trusted him. From our point of view, he seems like the last guy on earth that could be trusted, particularly with how badly he had treated the alumni trustees up to that point already. He would seem to be eminently untrustworthy.
 
Clearly you do not understand the meaning of the the term "fiduciary duty."

Penn State needs its alumni base to support it with their time, talents and treasures. With such a divided alumni community, we need to. Ring them together. Recognizing Joe Paterno's 61 years of service, in my view, would do just that.

I feel no shame for thinking Ira Lubert actually wanted to achieve the same objective. Nonetheless, I was wrong in that belief.


It was known long ago that Ira is a rotten hog.
 
Clearly you do not understand the meaning of the the term "fiduciary duty."

Penn State needs its alumni base to support it with their time, talents and treasures. With such a divided alumni community, we need to. Ring them together. Recognizing Joe Paterno's 61 years of service, in my view, would do just that.

I feel no shame for thinking Ira Lubert actually wanted to achieve the same objective. Nonetheless, I was wrong in that belief.

You tried. Better than 99% of us did. Good for you.

I do wish you would state as simply as possible, what additional facts, IF ANY, you've come across.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zenophile
Clearly you do not understand the meaning of the the term "fiduciary duty."

Penn State needs its alumni base to support it with their time, talents and treasures. With such a divided alumni community, we need to. Ring them together. Recognizing Joe Paterno's 61 years of service, in my view, would do just that.

I feel no shame for thinking Ira Lubert actually wanted to achieve the same objective. Nonetheless, I was wrong in that belief.

Recognizing Joe's 61 years is just a small part of bringing alums together.

We hike on in search of the truth...and we want those BOT members and their cronies exposed and held accountable for their self-serving betrayal of OUR university.

Unfortunately, absolute power and money corrupts absolutely. There are now two parallel, never intersecting, paths: (1) a corrupt, mutual admiration BOT society who will continue to serve their own interests at the expense of OUR university (2) and a much larger in number real Penn State community whose lives will swell the fame of PSU. Success with Honor will thrive.

The members of the BOT and the individuals who empower them can not and will not ever understand the ideals of values-based servant leadership.
 
In July, 2012, when Rod Erickson asked each Board member for his/her thoughts on the Paterno statue, Ira's response was to suggest the statue remain. However, he thought a sign should be placed at the statue with the statement, "With the benefit of hindsight I wish I had done more."

Seriously? That any member of the BOT or PSU admin wanted to use those words in that way speaks volumes to the craven leadership infesting the university.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tobakkorudy
You tried. Better than 99% of us did. Good for you.

I do wish you would state as simply as possible, what additional facts, IF ANY, you've come across.

Louis Freeh is a fraud.

I continue to review the materials.

Patience is not my strong suit the same, I suspect, as most on this board. Nevertheless, please be patient. Unlike Freeh, I'm actually looking at ALL the material.

Measure twice but cut once.

Sorry for such a cryptic response.
 
Because his previous words will look completely stupid if he now tells what he knows?

Who wants to come out after all he said and then say, "Freeh was being a judgmental, sanctimonious prick, but essentially, his facts are correct, and there don't appear to be any significant additional facts out there."

Who wants to say that?

Facts? Freeh himself has already admitted that his conclusions are opinion-based, not fact-based. His statements regarding Paterno directly conclict with the lead OAG Prosecutor, Fina's, statement that he is unaware of even any evidence that Paterno did anything wrong whatsoever.
 
Louis Freeh is a fraud.

I continue to review the materials.

Patience is not my strong suit the same, I suspect, as most on this board. Nevertheless, please be patient. Unlike Freeh, I'm actually looking at ALL the material.

Measure twice but cut once.

Sorry for such a cryptic response.
Thanks Mr. Lubrano, I continue to hope we will win in the end. I know it's coming, everyone will call me naive, stupid or probably worse! These despicable skunks may steal my school but they will not steal my soul. Thanks again.
 
Louis Freeh is a fraud.

I continue to review the materials.

Patience is not my strong suit the same, I suspect, as most on this board. Nevertheless, please be patient. Unlike Freeh, I'm actually looking at ALL the material.

Measure twice but cut once.
Any eta when you will be done reviewing the materials?

Yes but I cannot share at this time.
 
So we've seen what was coming "after Sept. 17" or that expectation/statement is now null and void?
 
  • Like
Reactions: zhokov
First, we never made any such deal with Ira.

Second, the 50th Anniversary celebration was organized by Sue Paterno and the letterman without the assistance of PSU. In fact, they did not require the university's help. Medlar Field is leased to a third party that has operating control of the venue.

Finally, Ira's primary goal as we saw it was to resolve the Paterno dispute. He did not although he could have orchestrated that resolution. He chose not to. Shame on me for ever thinking he would.

In July, 2012, when Rod Erickson asked each Board member for his/her thoughts on the Paterno statue, Ira's response was to suggest the statue remain. However, he thought a sign should be placed at the statue with the statement, "With the benefit of hindsight I wish I had done more."

Ira's suggestion for the plaque tells me all that I need to know about him. He's a sanctimonious coward just like the rest of them.
 
First, we never made any such deal with Ira.

Second, the 50th Anniversary celebration was organized by Sue Paterno and the letterman without the assistance of PSU. In fact, they did not require the university's help. Medlar Field is leased to a third party that has operating control of the venue.

Finally, Ira's primary goal as we saw it was to resolve the Paterno dispute. He did not although he could have orchestrated that resolution. He chose not to. Shame on me for ever thinking he would.

In July, 2012, when Rod Erickson asked each Board member for his/her thoughts on the Paterno statue, Ira's response was to suggest the statue remain. However, he thought a sign should be placed at the statue with the statement, "With the benefit of hindsight I wish I had done more."
And this is the individual the A9 voted to be chairman.
 
  • Like
Reactions: zhokov
First, we never made any such deal with Ira.

Second, the 50th Anniversary celebration was organized by Sue Paterno and the letterman without the assistance of PSU. In fact, they did not require the university's help. Medlar Field is leased to a third party that has operating control of the venue.

Finally, Ira's primary goal as we saw it was to resolve the Paterno dispute. He did not although he could have orchestrated that resolution. He chose not to. Shame on me for ever thinking he would.

In July, 2012, when Rod Erickson asked each Board member for his/her thoughts on the Paterno statue, Ira's response was to suggest the statue remain. However, he thought a sign should be placed at the statue with the statement, "With the benefit of hindsight I wish I had done more."

Was he in favor of memorializing all the hypocritical BOT Members who were the actual supporters and enablers of Sandusky and his FRAUDULENT Personal Charity specifically repeatedly using PSU Assets and Resources to enable him? Things such as effectively deeding over 40 Acres of PSU Land adjacent to the campus in April 2002 directly after PSU's highest-ranking Officers running the day-to-day operations of PSU's Campus (which is a recognized independent, unincorporated "PA municipality") had TERMINATED JS's right to bring his personal charity on campus AND notified The Charity they were kicked off campus, so Sandusky could build the massive "Campus HQ - Education, Athletic Infrastructure including dorms Center" ("Victim Factory" according to no less than the PA OAG) that he'd always dreamed of??? Or Trustee Ira Lubert himself allowing to Sandusky to use his Properties to host Summer Camps for years and years (as well as serving on the Board of one of Sandusky's Second Mile Boards)????
 
  • Like
Reactions: Royal_Coaster
Louis Freeh is a fraud.

I continue to review the materials.

Patience is not my strong suit the same, I suspect, as most on this board. Nevertheless, please be patient. Unlike Freeh, I'm actually looking at ALL the material.

Measure twice but cut once.

Sorry for such a cryptic response.

The cryptic responses are your weak spot. People take them to mean one of two things.

I have something, but can't say because of politics/law issues.
I don't have anything, so I want to delay while I keep building my case.

If 1 is true, fine. But remember, if it isn't, you eventually end up looking bad if you can't come up with the goods.

If 2 is true, also fine. But you will be amazed at the people who will defend honesty, even if it is not what they want to hear.

So, if the word is "there are really no new facts", I think you should say so and if you're continuing to look, say that as well.
 
Please feel free to enlighten us. I am fine with being wrong. But if you simply say there's some mysterious "thing to come later" that will show me wrong...well, that's why so many have lost faith on this board.
I don't speak for @demlion, but I have spoken with him. And he won't be addressing this subject until he gets the green light to do so.
 
I don't speak for @demlion, but I have spoken with him. And he won't be addressing this subject until he gets the green light to do so.

I believe the problem here for some was a lack of communication not that every step needs to be accounted and published here. I believe some thought the review of materials had been over for awhile now and nothing stated publically. When in fact they are still reviewing the materials.
 
So late in the game, few even care any longer about whatever "facts" are introduced.
The public's view is cemented.
The bastards are winning still or have already won.
The latter. And all of the delaying and waiting for "green lights" certainly did nothing to help the cause. Absolutely none of this matters at this point. Heck, even I don't care what information they have any more.
 
The latter. And all of the delaying and waiting for "green lights" certainly did nothing to help the cause. Absolutely none of this matters at this point. Heck, even I don't care what information they have any more.

I care about the information. The truth has value all its own.

Waiting for more than a couple years for a "green light"?

Who is withholding the "green light"?

It is tough to understand how it can take so long to review the Freeh review and associated documents.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT