Rob Ford Transgressions Thread

[MelBridgeman]

Originally Posted by rubecube

I wouldn't exactly call Gawker obscure, and they are exactly the type of publication that would be all over something like this.

Well not any more - they are all over the net now.

[smoothpops]

Originally Posted by MelBridgeman

Gawker reported it first - My thinking is the other way.

If the video is legit - why go to some obscure outfit like gawker - the fact they are involved makes me lean to it doesn't exist.

Of all the defenses of Rob Ford that i've heard so far, that's the weakest one. This is coming from me; a guy whose defended him (to a certain extent) in the past.
Because of the 3-4 times that Rob Ford has been caught blatantly lying on record, (his education, football, the dui, etc...) he gets no benefit of the doubt, whereas no one has questioned gawker's credibility, and the Toronto Star has never been wrong so far on Rob Ford.

[kipperfan]

Originally Posted by MelBridgeman

I never said it was gawker who created this insanity.
your argument assumes that.

Originally Posted by MelBridgeman

Gawker reported it first - My thinking is the other way.

If the video is legit - why go to some obscure outfit like gawker - the fact they are involved makes me lean to it doesn't exist.

So you're now saying that it was Gawker who "created this insanity"? Because it was their reporter who started this story by claiming he saw the alleged video; if it doesn't exist we're back at my original question of why would Gawker care enough about Toronto or Ford to fabricate a story about their reporter having personally viewed a video that doesn't exist?

[sun]

Originally Posted by MelBridgeman

Well not any more - they are all over the net now.

No, they were not obscure before this story:

http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/gawker.com

Doesn't look like the day the Ford story was posted was even their highest pageviews for the month, if it was posted on the 16th and I'm reading it right.

Ranked 291 (in USA) in popularity online, which is damn high.

[jammies]

Hey, if I've never heard of it, it can't be popular. That's how the internet works, right?

[Hemi-Cuda]

I think Rob Ford is a buffoon and an embarrassment to Canada's largest city, but this is starting to look more and more like a giant smear campaign. Go after him because he's incompetent and willfully negligent with city money and resources, but don't make stuff up about hardcore drug abuse with zero evidence to back it up. What a hack job by the Star and Gawker (who I'm guessing has someone working there with ties to Toronto that kicked this whole thing off)

[oilyfan]

Gawker's post about Rob Ford's "denial". The river in Egypt

Ford, who—aside from briefly referring to the charges as "ridiculous"—has remained silent in the eight days since we published our story about his crack tape, made two claims in his remarks this afternoon:

1) "I do not use crack cocaine."

2) "Nor am I an addict of crack cocaine."

Neither of those statements is inconsistent with Rob Ford having been caught on tape smoking crack cocaine within the past six months. The fact that Rob Ford says he does not currently use crack cocaine has no bearing on his past behavior. He did not say, as one who has never smoked crack cocaine might say, "I have never smoked crack cocaine." He said he does not smoke crack cocaine, which is the sort of thing that someone who woke up this morning and decided to stop smoking crack cocaine might say, on the grounds that it's not presently untrue.

[Minnie]

Well, if he's ousted from his mayoral position, perhaps he can do some PR work for Samy & Amy Buzaglo...

[Cowperson]

Originally Posted by Hemi-Cuda

I think Rob Ford is a buffoon and an embarrassment to Canada's largest city, but this is starting to look more and more like a giant smear campaign. Go after him because he's incompetent and willfully negligent with city money and resources, but don't make stuff up about hardcore drug abuse with zero evidence to back it up. What a hack job by the Star and Gawker (who I'm guessing has someone working there with ties to Toronto that kicked this whole thing off)

Seriously?

Cowperson

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by oilyfan

Gawker's post about Rob Ford's "denial". The river in Egypt

Gawker needs to stop, now they're looking foolish

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by fotze

Is it possible he paid these guys off already? Hell, look at this thread title, he's slippery'er than a greasy walrus. He knows how to get out of things, just look how he gets out of the pocket as a quarterback.

It would be a dumb move, pay a blackmailer once and they'll just keep coming back to you.

(Puts on his Mikey Hat), he had them killed off with the help of the illuminati and the new world order. The bodies were disposed of using the UN controlled weather device by creating a massive Tornado in Oklahoma which sucked the bodies up through a micro wormhole created by the allied Reptile aliens through arrangements with the Bilderberg group. The bodies are now interned on mars.

[Daradon]

Originally Posted by fotze

Is it possible he paid these guys off already? Hell, look at this thread title, he's slippery'er than a greasy walrus. He knows how to get out of things, just look how he gets out of the pocket as a quarterback.

I was thinking the same thing. Perhaps whoever has the video is unreachable because his camp was finally able to pay them. That would also make the timing of the press conference make sense.

[Minnie]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

(Puts on his Mikey Hat), he had them killed off with the help of the illuminati and the new world order. The bodies were disposed of using the UN controlled weather device by creating a massive Tornado in Oklahoma which sucked the bodies up through a micro wormhole created by the allied Reptile aliens through arrangements with the Bilderberg group. The bodies are now interned on mars.

[Mean Mr. Mustard]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Gawker needs to stop, now they're looking foolish

They aren't looking foolish at all, if anyone is, it is you with your defending of Rob Ford at every possible instance, insisting that he is being set up by some grand conspiracy it seems and non-probable excuses for every occurrence.

[MelBridgeman]

Originally Posted by Mean Mr. Mustard

They aren't looking foolish at all, if anyone is, it is you with your defending of Rob Ford at every possible instance, insisting that he is being set up by some grand conspiracy it seems and non-probable excuses for every occurrence.

Labelling someone guilty until proven innocent is pretty foolish. It's pretty simple no video, no proof - does not hold up in court. There is is much angst against Rob Ford for a variety of reasons, a lot of people are having trouble looking at this objectively. I don't think CC is saying anything about a conspiracy -

[jammies]

Originally Posted by MelBridgeman

It's pretty simple no video, no proof - does not hold up in court.

We're not in court.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Mean Mr. Mustard

They aren't looking foolish at all, if anyone is, it is you with your defending of Rob Ford at every possible instance, insisting that he is being set up by some grand conspiracy it seems and non-probable excuses for every occurrence.

You have a real comprehension issue, you have since day one that you came to this board.

Its not about defending Ford, its more about the lousy job that Gawker and the Star did in terms of attacking someone without even having the video in hand or in the Stars case being willing to pay for the video so they had it in hand.

I'm not going to repeat it anymore cause I'm getting bored. I think Ford is a pretty lousy mayor with a personality disorder and some real personal demons in terms of his drinking.

But the bottom line is that Gawker doesn't have the video, their source has dried up and vanished and now they're persisting with ######ed word parsing.

This whole thing since the story broke has been like the classic media witch hunt, where they've basically tried to see the whole he's guilty with out proof, and asking you to believe that hearsay (our reporters think its real) is enough to try to destroy a guys personal and professional life. As someone has said earlier in this case its accepted that Ford is guilty and having to prove his innocence which is opposite of our own accepted law standards.

And people are now persisting with the whole he said that he doesn't smoke crack and making the leap and putting words into his mouth such as "Well that doesn't mean that he didn't in the past", or the insidious conspiracy that Ford bought the video to bury the story.

If there's any conspiracy its on the side of the people that are so desperate to prove his guilt and keep this story going that they're making leaps of logic.

I'm not defending Ford as much as I'm arguing about the crappy job that the Star and Gawker did with their look after you leap school of journalism, and now persisting with the stupidity of trying to analyze his statement.

Until the tape shows up this thing is pretty much dead. Gawker is looking desperately at keeping the story going to keep their hits up.

But keep believing the conspiracies, of Ford buying the video, and doing some clever wordsmithing and whatever, and then magically flipping the conspiracy theory accusations to the people that are arguing against your point.

Have fun with that Mikey err Mustard. Maybe you'll want to throw some sheeple references in there just for fun.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by jammies

We're not in court.

No but the burden of proof has to rival if you're going to try to destroy someones personal and professional life without proof in hand.

[MelBridgeman]

Originally Posted by jammies

We're not in court.

What.

[longsuffering]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

No but the burden of proof has to rival if you're going to try to destroy someones personal and professional life without proof in hand.

Unless you're bitching about Trudeau. amirite?