They were told by the drug dealers in their car when they were all viewing the video on their cell phone. That's what I recall in the article.Quick question, how would 2 reporters know what Ford was smoking on the video ?
Did they read a book ?
FAST
We all know it's hearsay from a legal perspective, even the Star knows that. However, the Star is trying to put pressure on the Ford's all around them by getting as may media and people involved as possible as part of their long time vendetta and hope the Ford's will eventually come clean and quit. If the Ford's have that video under their control it ain't gonna happen, the Star will have egg on their face unless that video surfaces. I will probably cancel my subscription at that point.Until a video surfaces and is proven to be REAL... (not faked... we all know that is possible in this day and age...) everything else is immaterial and/ or hearsay.
Ask any lawyer.
They were told by the drug dealers in their car when they were all viewing the video on their cell phone. That's what I recall in the article.
that's not the point and I couldn't care less whatever he was smoking, if anything. I answered Fast's question. Read his post 753.and as we all know drug dealers never lie.
No, but I am saying those who claim the Star conspired with Gawker and just made up the story are kooks, and none too bright.So you demand that Ford resign immediately based on a video that only 3 people have seen (2 Star reporters & Gawker).
Is that right?
So they took the word of two drug dealers, and printed that as fact ???They were told by the drug dealers in their car when they were all viewing the video on their cell phone. That's what I recall in the article.
No, they didn't. They were careful to report that the fact was it was the word of two drug dealers.So they took the word of two drug dealers, and printed that as fact ???
FAST
Are you saying reporters never lie, or are sometimes fooled by hoaxes??No, but I am saying those who claim the Star conspired with Gawker and just made up the story are kooks, and none too bright.
Even bigger kooks and even less bright if you also believe the G&M made up their story about Ford family drug dealing.
What opinion you want to draw from the facts, whether he should resign, is up to you. Disputing the facts is kooky in this case. Iraqi information minister kooky
Wut?? Do you even know what you're saying anymore, fuji??!No, they didn't. They were careful to report that the fact was it was the word of two drug dealers
I was the first to advance the theory that it was a hash pipe. I think discussion that starts with believing the Star reporters did see what they reported is sensible. They wrote very carefully about exactly what they saw and exactly who made what claims.Are you saying reporters never lie, or are sometimes fooled by hoaxes??
Remember Dan Rather, he couldnt even tell he'd been fooled by a fake memo. And he's a seasoned reporter. See here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killian_documents_controversy
How do you know its not hash in that pipe Ford is alleged to be smoking, and not crack??
Then how can anyone say The Star has fair reporting. They shouldve said, we dont know whats in the pipe, it could be hash or it could be crack.I was the first to advance the theory that it was a hash pipe. I think discussion that starts with believing the Star reporters did see what they reported is sensible. They wrote very carefully about exactly what they saw and exactly who made what claims
its no kookier than those saying that the fords murdered a drug dealer to get the video, or the fords run with drug dealers and give them inside police information (which they wouldn;t have access to) or the fords bought the video and destroyed it.No, but I am saying those who claim the Star conspired with Gawker and just made up the story are kooks, and none too bright.
Even bigger kooks and even less bright if you also believe the G&M made up their story about Ford family drug dealing.
What opinion you want to draw from the facts, whether he should resign, is up to you. Disputing the facts is kooky in this case. Iraqi information minister kooky.
But reporters can and have lied. Just look at the reporting you refute down in the Middle East threads. I haven't said they lied Fugi. But I think they have been fooled.No, but I am saying those who claim the Star conspired with Gawker and just made up the story are kooks, and none too bright.
Even bigger kooks and even less bright if you also believe the G&M made up their story about Ford family drug dealing.
What opinion you want to draw from the facts, whether he should resign, is up to you. Disputing the facts is kooky in this case. Iraqi information minister kooky.
So they took the word of two drug dealers, and printed that as fact ???
FAST
You guys, and many others on this thread, should really read the article by those two Star reporters before challenging others. Believe it or not, fuji has it right, the two reporters reported what they were told by the drug dealers upon reviewing the video on a smart phone. The Star even went further and stated they could not substantiate the video and the work "appears" shows up several times throughout the article, among many other carefully used words. If you don't think the Star legal team didn't review this article before they published it to ensure the Star didn't cover their large ass, then you're smoking crack.Wut?? Do you even know what you're saying anymore, fuji??!
If Ford did buy the video, how would he know the drug dealer didnt make backup copies to be distributed at a later date for even more money??Ford stays silent for 8 days. Then gawker claims the sellers have disappeared and ford claims no video exists? Sounds like ford had 8 days to negotiate and buy the video.
200k is nothing to the rich boys family. Especially now that Doug has his sights set on Queens park