Brian Baird: Coward (XXXVI) Yet another in the series of Columbian rehab efforts for their boy Baird.

.
Our local paper has worked far harder than even the Cowardman to rehabilitate his image, and today is no exception.

Brancaccio writes for this clown like he owns a piece of him.

The latest effort? Excusing the Cowardman's decision to use his made-up death threat as an excuse to avoid facing us:

We've heard from many readers who said Baird should have never even mentioned the death threat, let alone turn it over to law enforcement. They say he was just using it as cover to get out of doing the town hall meetings.

But not turning it over made no sense to me.

Few things, apparently, do.

When you get to the point that Baird or one of his minions made it all up, the rest is easy.

IF this threat WAS real, the BEST way to handle it would have been TO turn it over...AND THEN NOT MENTION IT.

Good God, but our community is cursed with morons at our local paper.

You can bet that Baird had no idea this was winding up with the FBI. The LAST thing he'd want is what he got: that he made it up as an excuse to avoid facing us.

The reader at this point might ask something like: "Well, it doesn't say THAT anywhere, does it?"

Nope. Sure doesn't.

But unlike the Columbian, I am unable to suspend common sense and just go with the rest of the leftist tards and not draw the proper conclusion.

The FBI, we are told, did not deem the threat "credible."

What does that mean, exactly?

Well, it could mean there never was a threat. It could mean that their was a threat, but the threatener has vaporized. Or, it could somehow mean there was a threat, and the threatener is unable to walk, talk and/or is a quad amputee.

The standard for threatening a congressman isn't "credibility." The threat, credible or no, in and of itself, violates federal law.

In short, anyone making a threat (and let's remember, there were two such threats: spoken (left on a "message" to the "office..." oddly, a message we've never heard) and a fax) has violated the law, even before the issue of credibility enters into it.

But is it illegal or credible to threaten yourself?

Don't think so.

So, here we are.

We've never HEARD the "message" leaving the threat. We've yet to get an identification of the person BEHIND the "threat." And we get this additional idiocy from Brancaccio:

It's not Baird's job to figure out if it's real or not. Leave that to the professionals. He got this one right.

Of course it is. When you threaten yourself, you KNOW it isn't real. PARTICULARLY when you DIDN'T TURN IT OVER UNTIL AFTER IT BECAME THE EXCUSE TO AVOID FACING US... AND AFTER A BLOG BROKE THE STORY THAT THE COWARDMAN NEVER REPORTED IT.

If the threat was real, it's also not the FBI's job to determine if it's credible or not. That's a court's job.

But... no arrest... no trial... no conviction... PRECISELY like I and so many others SAID there would never be... and it adds up to Baird using the fake threat as an excuse.

Of course, Brancaccio isn't going to let this rest, is he? He's going to keep going after the story, since now that the investigation is closed, they will be more than happy to provide a copy of the file..... right?

Fat chance.

Brancaccio and the rest of the Cowardman Clown Posse want this put to bed now. They NEED this to go away.

Well, guess what: that ain't happening.

They have one month to get that file and report on it, or I'll FOIA it myself and break it here. But it's about time that blogs stop carrying the stain on journalism's load, that they get past their rank partisanship and end their efforts to rehab the scumbag Cowardman representing us.
.