There no kind words for Eric Kaler in this discussion. In fact, there is a lot of speculation as to whether he can survive the scandal. Here's a statement that particularly baffles the group. Last week, Kaler said that if Teague had not resigned, there would have been a university investigation.
Say that again? The university planned to investigate if Teague had not resigned? Jana Shortal says, "I was just kind of dumbfounded. Why would it stop? Wouldn't you want to know what your athletics director did?"
The second half of the podcast is devoted to the way Star Tribune editors have handled the Teague story. Now that the dust has begun to settle over the revelations by Star Tribune sports reporter Amelia Rayno -- which were, if anything, even worse than the complaints at the U ("the colonel is coming after you") -- a lot of people are starting to ask why Rayno's editors sat on a major story of sexual harassment for 16 months. As Rosenbaum asks: When Rayno told her editors about what had been happening to her, didn't they, in effect, advise her to take one for the team?
It's a fascinating discussion -- not just of scandal and intrigue at the U, but of journalistic ethics. The Holding Court website can be found here.