Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

Here's an idea.... Instead of having just 1 day for primaries and elections why not have a larger window of time. It could be a few weeks or a few months. Put all of the states in the same window of time, too, so none of them have disproportionate influence like they do in the primaries.... Do any other countries have a similar system?

Maybe this is a bad idea for some reason, but I can't think of a good reason why yet....

Two things:

1) Assuming that the media still has license to free speech, they will probably start reporting election results based on exit polls and whatnot. Not sure if you've noticed how they'll call a state a minute after voting ends because they know it's "safe", despite 0% precincts reporting. 

2) It's unworkable for primaries to be different for one party than the other in a state. Many states will have other ballot choices going on during primary season. So the idea that the Republicans might move their California primary to September because they won't win CA anyway while the Democrats will move their California primary to January because they win CA all the time makes no sense. California won't hold 6 different primaries for all the different parties that want one on *their* date. They've gotta hold ONE primary. 

Yeah, Flynn pled guilty to the least of his crimes and the feds dropped the more serious stuff.  Now he wants to retract his guilty plea.  I have little sympathy for the guy.
However, I'll always believe that if I as an Army officer had disclosed the classified information that Hillary did before, during, and after her tenure as Secretary of State I would have been court-martialed, convicted, and sent to Leavenworth for the Long Tour.  I was in three different assignments that required me to have a TS-plus clearance, so I've had some experience dealing with classified material.  As we operated when I was an air cavalry squadron S-2 (intelligence and security officer), my team would not disclose information from open sources if we knew that it was classified.  So, even if TIME magazine had a story that included information in it that we knew to be classified, we would not use that information in a non-classified briefing.  Hillary, at the opposite end of the carefulness spectrum, figured that if she just deleted the classification markings from a document, it was OK to deal with it as if it came out of TIME magazine.
I saw an analysis of what the FBI did and it did not meet the definition of entrapment.  Entrapment is when you trick the other party into committing a crime, not when you trick him into admitting that he committed it.
I don't think the FBI has clean hands in all its dealings with Trump associates, subordinates, and hangers-on, but that doesn't mean that Flynn should not suffer punishment for his crimes.

Well a significant portion of the Trump administration has done the exact same thing Hillary did.  They have all been caught using private servers to avoid FOIA.  That's not political, that's a fact.

Absolutely Hillary is guilty, but if you're being truly impartial, you should realize this is very common.

Here's a few links

Jared
devos


Ivanka

5 more