Gawker Claims Video Exists of Rob Ford Smoking Crack
- Thread starter Phil C. McNasty
- Start date
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.
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.
Doug Sr. must be turning in his grave.
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.
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.
Two drug dealers said..........
FAST
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??
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??
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.
You guys kill me! :rofl:
You are all making pointless arguments.
Does a video exist? Who knows?
(Until it surfaces, all else is a moot point.)
If yes, is it Rob Ford? Who knows? (Until it's proven to be him, not a look alike or digitally inserted, all else is a moot point.)
If yes, what's in the pipe? Who knows? (How will we ever know... but until the first 2 hurdles have been cleared what does it matter?)
You are all making pointless arguments.
Does a video exist? Who knows?
(Until it surfaces, all else is a moot point.)If yes, is it Rob Ford? Who knows?
(Until it's proven to be him, not a look alike or digitally inserted, all else is a moot point.)If yes, what's in the pipe? Who knows?
(How will we ever know... but until the first 2 hurdles have been cleared what does it matter?)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.
But instead they went with the headline that insinuated he smokes crack, and thats irresponsible reporting
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.
this fiasco of a story has shown only that those who hate the fords are willing to believe anything that besmirches them and that those who support the fords are willing to continue to support them no matter what is said.
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.
At this point the reporters journalistic credibility and ethics can be placed up for questioning. Who are they? What is their agenda? The fact that they went with the story without proof is as bad as anything the National Enquirer has done. No evidence to speak of. Just their word. No Video. No Credibility.
Is that so unreasonable?
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??!
Read the article.
http://www.thestar.com/news/city_ha..._rob_ford_in_crack_cocaine_video_scandal.html
Fundraiser is up to $186,177 with 16 hours left:
http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/rob-ford-crackstarter
http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/rob-ford-crackstarter
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. I trust there are enough ignorant and really stupid voters to keep eating the shit the fords shovel into their mouths and continue to support them. It's sad that the truly stupid people in the world get the same chance to vote as the more intelligent ones. A downfall of democracy but a necessary one I suppose.
200k is nothing to the rich boys family. Especially now that Doug has his sights set on Queens park. I trust there are enough ignorant and really stupid voters to keep eating the shit the fords shovel into their mouths and continue to support them. It's sad that the truly stupid people in the world get the same chance to vote as the more intelligent ones. A downfall of democracy but a necessary one I suppose.
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??
