Difference being, taxes are real and are a matter of public record, ergo there is proof.
There has yet to be any proof of him smoking crack at a crack house.
Gawker Claims Video Exists of Rob Ford Smoking Crack
- Thread starter Phil C. McNasty
- Start date
There has yet to be any proof of him smoking crack at a crack house.
One of those reporters didn't know what residents of Toronto were called
The other two would only go as far to say "appeared to be" and would not categorically state it was him, people are all over Ford for not being specific enough in his denials, but ambiguity is ok for the so called witnesses.
You don't seem to have understood Fuji's post. I've copied it here below.
The issue is not whether or not "there is evidence that taxes are real". The issue is that things that disclosure of a politician's income taxes is an example of the different standard in a court of public appeal vs a legal court. In the latter, evidence of wrongdoing would be required before one might be required to disclose one's income taxes.
Those who continue to say "this would not meet the burden of proof in a court of law" seem to be willfully missing the point.
The point is the volume of circumstantial and testimonial evidence on this matter (and other's), and the man's fitness to complete the responsibilities of his elected office.
As a final note, I am a fiscal conservative, a social liberal, and a lifetime resident of downtown Toronto.
That could have been gleened from the original Gawker article, which revealed which neighbourhood it was in, and the Star article made it even easier to figure it out.
For those who haven't read the latest from Gawker on the home invasion at the house where the photo was taken (and where the video was allegedly filmed).
http://gawker.com/a-pipe-wielding-thug-stormed-the-rob-ford-crackhouse-s-511642073
http://gawker.com/a-pipe-wielding-thug-stormed-the-rob-ford-crackhouse-s-511642073
Here's what I dont understand, why has Gawker in the past shown such great interest in stories aboot Rob Ford?? Gawker is a US based gossip site, it makes no sense for them to run stories on a Canadian mayor.
There is something fishy going on here.
Below are some of their news articles over the past 2 years. And remember, all these stories were published well before the crack story came out:
March 31, 2011: http://gawker.com/5787782/mayors-office-tries-to-hide-all-naked-portraits-of-toronto-mayor
August 30, 2012: http://gawker.com/5939347/toronto-m...-sexual-assaults-by-not-dressing-like-a-whore
January 25, 2013: http://gawker.com/5978975/the-best-...-mayor-rob-ford-an-introduction-for-americans
There is something fishy going on here.
Below are some of their news articles over the past 2 years. And remember, all these stories were published well before the crack story came out:
March 31, 2011: http://gawker.com/5787782/mayors-office-tries-to-hide-all-naked-portraits-of-toronto-mayor
August 30, 2012: http://gawker.com/5939347/toronto-m...-sexual-assaults-by-not-dressing-like-a-whore
January 25, 2013: http://gawker.com/5978975/the-best-...-mayor-rob-ford-an-introduction-for-americans
It is no secret that the chief editor at gawker is a raving liberal and cannot stand Rob Ford. another failed orchestrated attempt by the left to dethrone our duly elected Mayor. Absolutely no respect for democracy, for journalistic standards or privacy - parasites the lot of them.
Go Ford!
Go Ford!
