News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 9.7K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 41K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 5.5K     0 

Status
Not open for further replies.
One symptom of cocaine abuse is an inflated sense of self-worth.

picard-facepalm.jpg
 

Attachments

  • picard-facepalm.jpg
    picard-facepalm.jpg
    31.4 KB · Views: 442
it's like rob ford thinks he's st. john bosco himself...

Well that explains the burns on the Shroud of Turin, improper use of a pipe in the sanctuary.
 
I'm not sure whats supposed to be so problematic about this latest controversy.

There's nothing at the current moment to suggest Ford did anything to circumvent the background checks.

If something does come up to suggest that, then that would be a controversy. For all we know (and for what the article suggests), "Peter Payman" was the one who deliberately circumvented the necessary background checks. If Ford simply brought him in, then he did nothing wrong. It was up to the school board to decide whether to hire this man given his criminal record.
 
This is what I think is going on:
Doug is running a drug trafficking empire (it would explain his financial situation much better than any dividends from Deco would), and Rob is an addict. Rob's stupidity and the dumb ass company he keeps has now shone a light on Doug's activities. Doug will throw Rob under the bus before this is done because he will be facing some serious charges. I'm guessing drug trafficking, racketeering, probably some bribery and intimidation charges. Rob is culpable in this, but this is Doug's baby.
I wonder if they are connected to Project Traveler too, and along with it, illegal gun sales?

My own hunch is that there is some sex trade trafficking going on here too.

These Ford guys are too stupid and egotistical to run any large scale operation. Maybe the cops are using the Fords to get to the big guys.
 
I'm not sure whats supposed to be so problematic about this latest controversy.

There's nothing at the current moment to suggest Ford did anything to circumvent the background checks.

If something does come up to suggest that, then that would be a controversy. For all we know (and for what the article suggests), "Peter Payman" was the one who deliberately circumvented the necessary background checks. If Ford simply brought him in, then he did nothing wrong. It was up to the school board to decide whether to hire this man given his criminal record.

The school didn't know because he lied on the police check.
 
I'm not sure whats supposed to be so problematic about this latest controversy.

There's nothing at the current moment to suggest Ford did anything to circumvent the background checks.

If something does come up to suggest that, then that would be a controversy. For all we know (and for what the article suggests), "Peter Payman" was the one who deliberately circumvented the necessary background checks. If Ford simply brought him in, then he did nothing wrong.

It would seem Ford knew he was doing this job under a pseudonym (people were not referring to him by the name Rob would have known him by). One would have to assume Ford would also know why he would be doing it under a pseudonym.

It was up to the school board to decide whether to hire this man given his criminal record.
Aye aye aye. The fake name means that they didn't make the decision. They couldn't without the correct background information.
 
Last edited:
I'm not sure whats supposed to be so problematic about this latest controversy.

There's nothing at the current moment to suggest Ford did anything to circumvent the background checks.

If something does come up to suggest that, then that would be a controversy. For all we know (and for what the article suggests), "Peter Payman" was the one who deliberately circumvented the necessary background checks. If Ford simply brought him in, then he did nothing wrong. It was up to the school board to decide whether to hire this man given his criminal record.

If Rob Ford brought him in to the school to help coach kids, he is guilty of not doing his own due dilligence.
 
If something does come up to suggest that, then that would be a controversy. For all we know (and for what the article suggests), "Peter Payman" was the one who deliberately circumvented the necessary background checks. If Ford simply brought him in, then he did nothing wrong. It was up to the school board to decide whether to hire this man given his criminal record.

If he brought him in knowing his background - and it seems like he knew his relationship with Lisi - then it's kinda wrong on moral grounds, no?

If you're so sure this isn't a controversy, how about this: tell us why it's a good thing that Ford brought a guy with a number of assault charges and ties to the drug trade in to help him coach high school kids. Go ahead - defend it... rather than just claim that it's baseless to criticize it.
 
This is standard robbie apologist stuff. Treat everything as though it's isolated, exists in a vacuum and not related to a larger narrative. It's becoming really boring. I would think most robbie boosters would just jump ship after realizing that it's exhausting to mentally contort oneself so often to rationalize the idiot's behaviour.
 
That's a ridiculous accusation. No indication of that whatsoever.

It's a symptom of people guilty of having child porn to behave as though they have something to hide and try to prevent people from finding them out. Didn't you know that?

Correlation equals causation man, it's that simple.

/sarcasm
 
Had to go by City Hall today so I checked out council. Last time I saw Ford was March pre-crackgate. He looks incredibly unhealthy. Red and booze faced. Leaning back on his chair looking completely disinterested in the proceedings. It looked like a struggle of a lifetime for him to lean in to vote. Even if I had no idea who he was among the group of 44 he would have stood out.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top