Quote:
Originally Posted by Mean Mr. Mustard
The statement has awkward wording all over the place though and it seems like something that lawyers have gone over more than a few times.
He said he doesn't smoke crack cocaine and isn't an addict - once again he doesn't say that he never has smoked crack cocaine in the past. With regards to the video he says he "cannot comment on a video that I have never seen or does not exist" (emphasis added). Once again the use of the word or changes the complexion of the sentence.
You may argue that it may be a slip of the tongue but this is a statement that took 8 days to deliver and there were undoubtedly teams of lawyers that were pouring over each word used. The statement is one that seems full of half truths rather than outright denials - although even those based on his history aren't really worth much.
|
You really didn't follow this story unless it follows your theory do you. In fact I'm afraid for your safety because your reaching so far for a mythical cookie jar that you're going to fall off of the stool and crack your head open on the ground.
The day after the story broke the evening before he called the story ridiculous, that to me is a pretty strong statement about the story itself.
Then he says I do not smoke crack and I'm not an addict of crack. Pretty clear statement to me, but people then make up some insane troll logic that he didn't deny past use. Literally clinging on to the story with a death grip.
Then you take this
Quote:
|
"cannot comment on a video that I have never seen or does not exist"
|
And say that its suspicious? to me its pretty clear he hasn't seen a video or any proof, there's a rumored one floating around there, there's also a add on Canada online looking for a Rob Ford look alike smoking a cigar and puffing a cigar and chuckling into the camera. But the statement is pretty clear, he hasn't seen crap, there's no sinister wording that says he bought the video and burned it in a bum barrel, its pretty much a statement that his legal council gave him for contingencies.
On top of that I get accused of supporting Rob Ford, I really don't, but I think that this story is an interesting indictment of the power of the media, its an interesting indictment of poor journalism and sensationalist publishing. Its a really interesting story about how desparate people are that the story is true to the point of really creative word smithing and granular interpretation of statements to make them believe anything that you want.
I think Rob Ford should resign and call a new election to see if the people want him to continue as mayor of Toronto . I think in terms of his fairly well known drinking issues that he should absolutely get help. I think the guy is an absolute blowhard and buffoon. I don't know enough about his mayorial policies to comment on them.
But I also think in this case that the Gawkers and Stars of this world should to some extent get called onto the carpet for what I feel is shoddy sensationalist based journalism.
Part of this is about playing devils advocate, which I've clearly failed at. Part of this is because its an amazing and interesting story of failures on every single side of this story.