Monday, August 24, 2009

Brian Baird: Coward (XVII) So, who's Lying? The Columbian as they continue to front for Baird? Or Chief?

.
My, my. Aren't we in a conundrum.

We have the local rag; a despicable waste of wood pulp with a history of lies, distortions and exaggerations.

Then we have Bob Koski, with arguably the most popular Clark County political web site who has never been known to lie, distort or exaggerate... a website that seems to have a much broader readership than the rag.

As noted below, Koski has indicated that the completely worthless waste of skin representing us in Congress has, up to COB Friday, failed to notify the Capital Police of any of these so-called death threats.

Koski, of course, ultimately did the job of the leftist leg-humpers infesting the local paper by actually taking the time to engage in that quaint custom of actually VERIFYING a source's claim, even if that source is the fringe leftist nutberger you support.

And what he found out, as mentioned below, is this:
When I called Records and Reports, I spoke with the very polite and helpful lady there who is responsible for typing and submitting any kind of a report like Brian Baird is claiming was filed. I asked her specifically if she had a report of a telephoned threat that stated "You think Timothy McVeigh was bad, there is a Ryder Truck out there with your name on it," or anything remotely similar to a statement like that.

She said that if anything like that had happened to any member of Congress, she would know about it. She has heard nothing, repeat NOTHING like what Brian Baird claims to have reported to the Capitol Hill Police, or from any other member of Congress.
So, along comes the Columbian. Their managing editor, finally seeing what the rest of have seen in a heartbeat; namely that Baird is in political trouble of Titanic proportions, immediately does what the Columbian will always do in situations like this:

Write something to cover Baird.

If chief's allegation is accurate; namely that no death threat was reported, then he is done. He is over.

Brancaccio knows this. The scum at the Daily Kos knows this.

So, Brancaccio FINALLY gets around to looking into this situation... which he SHOULD have done BEFORE word ONE of this "threat" bullshit ever was printed.

And what does he have to print?

Absolutely nothing that refute's Koski's claim.

Nothing.

Oh, as usual, Brancaccio attack's Koski's veracity. He asks some totally moronic questions with self-evident answers that even a fringe left not job like himself should be able to answer, such as:
But a few things puzzled me:

-- There was no name attached to the info the blogger said he had from the Capitol Police. I asked the blogger if he had a name. He said I was bothering him. I should do my own legwork.
And you should have. These things are also completely irrelevant.

What IS relevant is that YOU didn't ask the damned question BEFORE Koski did.
-- The Capitol Police had been quite uncooperative with us but was willing to give out info to someone else?
So, idiot, did you actually talk to someone in records? Or did you talk to their PIO?

Maybe they were so "uncooperative" with YOU because they know what a worthless, biased rag you work for.
-- And why would Baird lie about something like this? Eventually you would be certain to get caught.
No one has EVER said that Baird has been the brightest bulb on the tree. But then, maybe he was counting on your legendary journalistic incompetence. I know *I* do.

Why would he lie?

Are you fricking KIDDING me?

He would lie because he's a liar.

He would lie because he got stuck on stupid.

He would lie because he called people something that, were he to do it to their faces, might wind up with him getting punched in the mouth.

He would lie because there is NEVER, ANY excuse for failing to face your constituents. And he needed one... and you've done all you can to get him one.

EVER. No matter how much YOU spin for him like he was giving you a briefcase full of cash.

Brancaccio ends with this:
"Look, we hold all politicians accountable. I'm sure Baird has been none too pleased with much of our coverage. But we won't jump into a story without vetting it first. We'll still make mistakes. But we'll work hard at not making mistakes. And don't blame the bloggers here. Users simply have to manage the information they get. from wherever they get it. And the best bet for good info still is newspapers."
And here, in a nutshell, is precisely why I don't believe Brancaccio and I DO believe Bob:

When the rag's editor writes: "But we won't jump into a story without vetting it first," then how come they didn't vet THIS story "first?" How come they took Baird's word for it?

"Vetted" my ass. There was no vetting done here by this rag. Koski did the vetting.

And Brancaccio's column, while rife with innuendo and snide remarks, provides absolutely NOTHING to show that Koski is wrong.

This is yet another of the despicable, inexcusable efforts by this rag to provide cover for Baird; cover that he's desperate for.

But it's too late. Baird is done, and this massive, colossal waste of wood pulp with him.

Who to believe? Who to believe?

Gee. That's a toughy.
.

No comments: