Chitwood's new years resolutions - Page 2
Page 2 of 21 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 207
 
  1. #11
    Unregistered
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
    Henry can’t spell or report new events. That’s nothing new either. You’d think in 2020 he would invest in a spell checker or just get educated. Why do we need a Sanford blogger anyways? We have a fine local journalist named Mark D. Barker.
    Barker is a blogger with an unanswered ethics complaint and furthermore this post is about Chitwood. Frederick and Barker have their own headers on another thread, wouldn't you serve a better more focused purpose on those threads rather than here. FOCUS because you mention Henry three separate times and Mark once. You say Henry isn't qualified and yet offer advice on his spelling but not his reporting. I find that confusing as you suggest Henry would be successful with spellcheck. Mark can spell, I agree, but he cannot tell a story without bias. You really do not make sense. Show me where Henry hurt you. Point to the area on this doll where he touched you snowflake.
        

  2. #12
    Unregistered
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
    Barker is a blogger with an unanswered ethics complaint and furthermore this post is about Chitwood. Frederick and Barker have their own headers on another thread, wouldn't you serve a better more focused purpose on those threads rather than here. FOCUS because you mention Henry three separate times and Mark once. You say Henry isn't qualified and yet offer advice on his spelling but not his reporting. I find that confusing as you suggest Henry would be successful with spellcheck. Mark can spell, I agree, but he cannot tell a story without bias. You really do not make sense. Show me where Henry hurt you. Point to the area on this doll where he touched you snowflake.
    Ouch. Best post of the year so far!!!
        

  3. #13
    Unregistered
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
    Barker is a blogger with an unanswered ethics complaint and furthermore this post is about Chitwood. Frederick and Barker have their own headers on another thread, wouldn't you serve a better more focused purpose on those threads rather than here. FOCUS because you mention Henry three separate times and Mark once. You say Henry isn't qualified and yet offer advice on his spelling but not his reporting. I find that confusing as you suggest Henry would be successful with spellcheck. Mark can spell, I agree, but he cannot tell a story without bias. You really do not make sense. Show me where Henry hurt you. Point to the area on this doll where he touched you snowflake.
    Barker’s View is his view. Are you too slow to figure that out? So, it doesn’t take much brain power to figure out there is bias. Barker’s ethic complaint was also unfounded. You must be pretty slow to figure that one out too. I don’t not make sense because you’re obviously challenged. If anyone is biased, it’s Henry and his yellow style journalism bias. He should have an ethics complaint filed against him for being a crook of a “journalist.”
        

  4. #14
    Unregistered
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
    Barker’s View is his view. Are you too slow to figure that out? So, it doesn’t take much brain power to figure out there is bias. Barker’s ethic complaint was also unfounded. You must be pretty slow to figure that one out too. I don’t not make sense because you’re obviously challenged. If anyone is biased, it’s Henry and his yellow style journalism bias. He should have an ethics complaint filed against him for being a crook of a “journalist.”
    Exactly, Barkers views are skewed. Barker had an ethics complaint whereas Henry hasn't. Barker didn't clear his name a technicality did.
        

  5. #15
    Unregistered
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
    Exactly, Barkers views are skewed. Barker had an ethics complaint whereas Henry hasn't. Barker didn't clear his name a technicality did.
    Henry was sued for liable. Barker has never been sued for liable if you really want to go there. Just because Mr. C dropped the case, means it still did happen by your logic. Barker was cleared of any wrongdoing after an investigation. He wasn’t even interviewed because the accusation against him was weak. There was no evidence to indicate otherwise. Show me evidence and I’ll apologize and agree with you. Until then, you’re like Alvin and running your mouth aimlessly. Anyone can alleged something, it doesn’t mean it’s true. It sounds like you have an axe to grind and are looking to trash talk like the others.
        

  6. #16
    Unregistered
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
    Henry was sued for liable. Barker has never been sued for liable if you really want to go there. Just because Mr. C dropped the case, means it still did happen by your logic. Barker was cleared of any wrongdoing after an investigation. He wasn’t even interviewed because the accusation against him was weak. There was no evidence to indicate otherwise. Show me evidence and I’ll apologize and agree with you. Until then, you’re like Alvin and running your mouth aimlessly. Anyone can alleged something, it doesn’t mean it’s true. It sounds like you have an axe to grind and are looking to trash talk like the others.
    Yes, Henry was sued for "iibel" not liable, and yes I want to go there! Henry responded as required as courts. His response caused the suit to fail as standards were not met. You can sue someone for nearly anything but few ethics complaints are pursued. John dropped the suit but Henry kept the story and won his argument, so please explain you comparing a known serial sue-er (Mr. C) to a state ethics committee. Henry fought and won and Barker wasn't relevant. Mr. C has sued everyone from Rudy Giuliani to Henry. Do a quick Google search of your example. John cannot be considered a winner to neighbors and certainly not to any office he ever ran for. Jesus! Barker did not matter because he no longer held office and that is why he wasn't interviewed. That is called being irrelevant and not important enough to have been given the mic to clear his name. Can we please keep the discussion on subject and relevant to the discussion. I'm objecting to your opinion and you call it running my mouth. Lighten up Mr Knowitall
        

  7. #17
    Unregistered
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
    Yes, Henry was sued for "iibel" not liable, and yes I want to go there! Henry responded as required as courts. His response caused the suit to fail as standards were not met. You can sue someone for nearly anything but few ethics complaints are pursued. John dropped the suit but Henry kept the story and won his argument, so please explain you comparing a known serial sue-er (Mr. C) to a state ethics committee. Henry fought and won and Barker wasn't relevant. Mr. C has sued everyone from Rudy Giuliani to Henry. Do a quick Google search of your example. John cannot be considered a winner to neighbors and certainly not to any office he ever ran for. Jesus! Barker did not matter because he no longer held office and that is why he wasn't interviewed. That is called being irrelevant and not important enough to have been given the mic to clear his name. Can we please keep the discussion on subject and relevant to the discussion. I'm objecting to your opinion and you call it running my mouth. Lighten up Mr Knowitall
    Wait, another non smiley face post. Are you the real Alvin or the faker? Barker didn’t need to fight, because he was cleared. Barker was never interviewed because there wasn’t a sliver of evidence to need an interview. I noticed you couldn’t refute otherwise. Looks like Alvin and John have something in common, they both didn’t prevail in court. There’s also a reason why Henry is not invited to VSO press conferences. Thank goodness our Sheriff keeps the wannabes out so the real news stations can cover the stories accurately. .
        

  8. #18
    Unregistered
    Guest
    [QUOTE=Unregistered;3085625]Wait, another non smiley face post. Are you the real Alvin or the faker? Barker didn’t need to fight, because he was cleared. Barker was never interviewed because there wasn’t a sliver of evidence to need an interview. I noticed you couldn’t refute otherwise. Looks like Alvin and John have something in common, they both didn’t prevail in court. There’s also a reason why Henry is not invited to VSO press conferences. Thank goodness our Sheriff keeps the wannabes out so the real news stations can cover the stories accurately. .[/QDoes name calling verify you and your opinions? Does it make you feel superior? It seems you are trying very hard to be relevant. It is VCSO BTW and a Sheriff doesn't get to decide who covers stories. If he does he has something to hide. FOCUS and stay on topic M'kay, I know it is hard when something is personal to you.
        

  9. #19
    Unregistered
    Guest
    [QUOTE=Unregistered;3085626]
    Quote Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
    Wait, another non smiley face post. Are you the real Alvin or the faker? Barker didn’t need to fight, because he was cleared. Barker was never interviewed because there wasn’t a sliver of evidence to need an interview. I noticed you couldn’t refute otherwise. Looks like Alvin and John have something in common, they both didn’t prevail in court. There’s also a reason why Henry is not invited to VSO press conferences. Thank goodness our Sheriff keeps the wannabes out so the real news stations can cover the stories accurately. .[/QDoes name calling verify you and your opinions? Does it make you feel superior? It seems you are trying very hard to be relevant. It is VCSO BTW and a Sheriff doesn't get to decide who covers stories. If he does he has something to hide. FOCUS and stay on topic M'kay, I know it is hard when something is personal to you.
    “The Sheriff doesn’t get to decide,” however, he did decide. That was a train wreck of a response. I felt like I was reading the Headline Surfer. Another why Sheriff Chitwood banned him from press conferences. You can’t understand what he writes anyways.
        

  10. #20
    Unregistered
    Guest
    [QUOTE=Unregistered;3085675]
    Quote Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post

    “The Sheriff doesn’t get to decide,” however, he did decide. That was a train wreck of a response. I felt like I was reading the Headline Surfer. Another why Sheriff Chitwood banned him from press conferences. You can’t understand what he writes anyways.
    Chitwood is a cross dressing hypocritical homo
        

Page 2 of 21 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •