It's breaking news according to CHML and the front cover of the Hamilton Spectator today.
Apparently the ethical, upstanding gentleman fingered as the middle-man in the Sam Merualla coruption case has "cleared Sam's name". I guess we can send the OPP home now that the case is closed. No need to interview city staffers, workers or others involved in the case.
I'm sure you won't find a more reliable witness than the honourable middle-man and a friend of the accused.
Surely, only truth could have come from his mouth or else the Spec wouldn't have printed their front headline in such bold, case-closed' type print.
Glad that's settled, just in time for the election.
By jason (registered) | Posted November 13, 2006 at 18:22:16
by the way, I mentioned earlier this weekend that a 'source' had told me that the Eisenberger camp received over 7,000 calls for lawn signs the 2 days following the breaking of the Merulla story early last week.
I haven't been able to verify this, but juding by these irresponsible headlines in Hamilton's media, I am strongly inclined to believe that the surge in the Eisenberger camp is true. There can be no other explanation for such strange headlines. One glaring question that needs to be answered is how this 'business-man, middleman' was going to be able to get an outdoor patio license for the CD Club on Ottawa?? Is he allowed to just walk into city hall and write one up?
I say we allow the OPP to conduct their investigation before proclaiming who name is and isn't 'cleared'.
By Brendan (registered) | Posted November 13, 2006 at 19:45:20
"I say we allow the OPP to conduct their investigation before proclaiming who name is and isn't 'cleared'."
I say we allow charges to be laid, before we run FOUR DAYS of full-page headlines insinuating that one of our counsellors took bribes. I know very little about Sam Merulla, but I know a last-minute snow job when I see one.
By Brendan (registered) | Posted November 13, 2006 at 19:47:38
"I say we allow the OPP to conduct their investigation before proclaiming who name is and isn't 'cleared'."
I say we allow charges to be laid, before we run FOUR DAYS of full-page headlines insinuating that one of our counsellors took bribes. I know very little about Sam Merulla, but I know a last-minute snow job when I see one.
By Frank (registered) | Posted November 14, 2006 at 12:27:14
"I know very little about Sam Merulla, but I know a last-minute snow job when I see one."
Brendan... watch a city meeting and you'll see the antics of one Sam Merulla. Then you'll understand why it's not much of a snow job... besides if the OPP is investigating I'd say the allegations are fairly serious.
By jason (registered) | Posted November 14, 2006 at 14:00:19
I don't think anyone is saying Sam is guilty, although I know a guilty conscience when I see one: he was the only councillor who felt the need to call his lawyer and ask "is this about me?" All we know is that he is under investigation by the OPP. Not once did anyone say he is guilty. The Spec did, however, put a huge headline making it sound like he was cleared.
Talk about an election day 'snow-job' after hearing how that story had hurt DiIanni's campaign. The poor Spec got caught reporting the real news for a few days before realizing it was hurting their agenda.
By to be fair (anonymous) | Posted November 14, 2006 at 14:34:19
Jason, to be fair,
1. He probably asked because CDs is in his ward. Why would the bar owner bribe the councilor of a different ward?
2. If he knew he was guilty, I'd think he would try to NOT draw attention to himself, especially just before an election. I guess he could be using some reverse psychology, but...well, it's Sam Merulla. He's goofy and egocentric, not crafty and sophisticated.
By jason (registered) | Posted November 14, 2006 at 15:47:14
you might be right about point number 1. Regardless, I don't think anyone needs to proclaim him innocent or guilty until we know for sure.
You must be logged in to comment.
There are no upcoming events right now.
Why not post one?