Unstoppable? - Macleans.ca


A sneak peek at this week’s cover story, on Rob Ford


A week and a half of madness at Toronto city hall and Rob Ford, his world crashing down all around him, shows no sign of stopping.

In the June 10 cover story of Maclean’s, which hits newsstands on Thursday, senior writer Nicholas Köhler considers the slow-motion implosion of Toronto Mayor Rob Ford. It is a soap opera interlaced with the dark night of a Toronto mayor’s soul, told with the unrelenting momentum of tragedy, according to a plot centred around a video file that may or may not exist.

“Anxiety over how Ford’s mayoralty could end comes amid unprecedented, fast-paced developments at city hall,” Köhler writes. “It has been a relentless chronology.”

The momentum driving Ford became established years ago, during those heady days in the fall of 2010 when his campaign team briefly worried that Ford was doing too well in the polls, that they had peaked too soon.

The pressures of the job, one source tells Maclean’s, led Ford to drift into substance abuse problems early on in his term as mayor, when he stopped listening, came into work late or not at all, ceased alerting his office to his whereabouts, and refused to be accompanied by handlers from his office.

Soon top aides began hearing that Ford was buying mickeys of alcohol, purchases he asked his lower-wrung staffers to keep secret.

His mayoralty has unspooled according to its own unforgiving logic since then, and his options have now diminished to one between resignation and self-destruction.

Maclean’s chronicles Ford’s descent in its latest cover story, “Rob Ford. Unstoppable?” Watch for the story online in the coming days.

In the meantime, keep watch on Macleans.ca for the latest developments:



  1. This comment was deleted.

    • Hey, Waldorf, I actually prefer your new moniker ‘

      • What are you talking about?

        • I often wonder the same about you and the TORONTO STAR :)

          • You may have me confused with somebody else.

          • Nope! You’re unique. I’d recognize you anywhere. I’m sure I even have it on video. I’d loan it to you but I seem unfortunately to have lost it :)

          • It’s on your cell phone. You left it next to the crack pipe

          • That’s my boy! Now you’re back in the ring. The flailing TORONTO STAR needs someone in its corner – it certainly doesn’t seem have have much else going for it on this!

  2. Little Robbie Ford sat on a wall,
    Little Robbie Ford had a great fall,
    All of City Hall’s horses,
    And all of City Halls men,
    Couldn’t put him back together again.

    • cool story bro. Needs moar zombies tho.

    • Robbie’s not so little. If he sat on that wall, he might just break the bricks under his massive butt

      • Hey, I see that your friends at the Toronto Star appear to still be in what some might call the ‘news manufacturing’ business. They certainly seem to have an endless supply of ‘anonymous sources’ and un-named ‘insiders’ when they apparently decide to put together what might be reasonably called another ‘stitch up’ story on Rob Ford and the so-called ‘scandal’ that THEY created, not him! One might wonder why what some might possibly refer to as being high-minded, self-inflated hacks would feel the need to keep relying on anonymous sources to keep their proprietary ‘scandal’ going when their own newsroom principles apparently expressly forbid them to do this! But what do I know – I just try to live life as a decent human being. Here’s the latest from those who might possibly be referred to by some as ‘reckless reputation-wreckers’, headlined “Rob Ford Video Scandal: Mayor Ford Said He Knew Where Video Was, Sources Say” The story below then alleges in what might then be described as panting, feverish style, a supposed meeting that alleged took place in Ford’s office. We are apparently supposed to be persuaded of the accuracy of this lurid account because, well, the Toronto Star has un-named ‘sources’ for it. Ahem, just like it had anonymous crack dealers and a video it couldn’t produce when it began this, shall we say, ‘exclusive investigative farce’. Pressing on, however: having breathlessly described the alleged conspiratorial huddle at which it wasn’t present it then,in an act of unbelievable journalistic bravery (or hubris, whichever you prefer), sends an account of its newly-minted allegations to the alleged participants and invites them to comment on its ‘scenario’. They, perhaps thinking, “What are they SMOKING over there at the Star?”. don’t even bother to acknowledge or reply to it. .This appears to be enough for the Star to hang another ‘story’ on, and it then presents this masterwork of alleged ‘investigative reporting’ for the world to further pound Toronto’s reputation into rubble with. Apparently.THESE anonymous alleged ‘insiders’ don’t appear to be of the drug-dealing kind, so perhaps ‘source’ quality is improving in that regard at least.

        • 2 media agencies came out with this at the same time; Gawker, and the Toronto Star.

          Then the Globe & Mail reveals an 18 month investigation into past drug affiliations in his immediate family, one of whom works in the mayor’s office.

          Most importantly, if Rob Ford were completely innocent from the start, he’d have held a press conference on day one, stating so — not avoid the subject for 7 days and fire your staff along the way.

          If you were famous, and some newspaper stated you ate shit for breakfast on video, would you duck and dive for a week? No, you’d roll your eyes, face the allegations head on, and tell the world, “there’s no way that’s true. show the video and let’s move on with our lives.”

          • But the TORONTO STAR apparently claimed that this was their ‘Exclusive’ story! And world media is quoting the TORONTO STAR on this not the, some might say ‘trashy’, Gawker. The ‘Globe’ wisely sat on its story for months, apparently deeming it non-relevant, and only released it when the TORONTO STAR created this so-called ‘scandal’. As for ‘show me the video’ – we’ve ALL been saying this, INCLUDING the Fords, and the TORONTO STAR still CAN’T! This is going to end very badly for the TORONTO STAR, IMHO – it’s already apparently damaged its own reputation almost as much as its widely-circulated stories have damaged the global reputation of this city! No free pass at all for them on this, in my book!

          • The Globe and Mail conducted an 18-month investigation, well before the Gawker story surfaced. Stop putting the blame on the Star and the messagers of bad news. If it weren’t for journalists who risk much to bring you the news, you’d be stewing in the dark and fed garbage by people like Ford.

          • Yeah. The Globe And Mail conducted an investigation and. like a responsible newspaper, reportedly had previously decided to shelve it because it wasn’t relevant. The TORONTO STAR ran what can only be described, in my opinion, as a story bereft of even the minimum of proof, based on some overturres from anonymous crack dealers and a video that no one can now examine but which two of its reporters say included someone who looked like Ford. If you look at the link at the top of this page you’ll see how easy it is to fake such an alleged video. No matter, the STAR trumpeted this allegedly ‘exclusive’ story and has been pushing hard on it ever since, utilizing un-named and anonymous ‘sources’, while Toronto’s global reputation has been collapsing in ruins on a daily basis directly because of this. And you are DEFENDING them in doing this to our city?

    • Wow-How mature ! ….Would you like some cookies and milk before Nap time ?

  3. Now here’s a glaring example of the ‘quality’ and ‘reliability’ of the Toronto Star’s reporting on this ‘scandal’ it appears to be getting desperate to keep going on flimsier and flimsier grounds. These are the first two paragraphs of a story it has just run, headlined, ‘Rob Ford’s Former Staffers’ Emails, Telephone Records Ordered Destroyed: Sources’: “Mayor Rob Ford’s staff asked city employees to destroy email and phone records produced by administration officials who resigned or were fired during the ongoing crack cocaine scandal, sources told the Star on Wednesday. The city’s director of communications, Jackie DeSouza, denied the Star’s report. “The city has not received a request from anyone in the mayor’s office to destroy records” DeSouza said in an email.” You’d think that this categorical denial at the top of the story would settle it, right? But no, the Star then drags it out for paragraph after paragraph, perhaps hoping readers will only read and absorb the headline! And – guess what – other newspapers pick it up, headline and all, and it spreads like wildfire, IN SPITE of the fact that the city’s Director of Communication, according to the story itself, says it’s UNTRUE!

    • “I can confirm the Mayor’s Office did not ask the City to destroy
      records from any staff in their office” = The Mayor’s Office asked some
      person or entity other than “the City” to destroy the records.
      City has bylaws and policies in place to ensure that city records are
      not destroyed.” = A statement of the law that has nothing to do with
      what may or may not actually be happening.
      She went on to say that
      the Mayor’s “personal, political, and constituency business” would be
      exempt from Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act = Ford
      will claim that the destroyed records ARE personal, political and/or
      constituency business.
      [O]nly City records are subject to City bylaws that govern what can be destroyed and what can’t. = (ditto)

      • Nice try. She didn’t dodge the bullet; they appear to have dodged her denial. Now their CLAIMS, which she has emphatically denied, are being quoted elsewhere as a FACT (see the AtlanticWire’s version of this story for its many American readers, directly attributed to the Toronto Star, for example). The Toronto Star, IMHO, has done and continues to do more damage to Toronto’s global reputation in its apparent attempts to pin SOMETHING on Rob Ford than can ever be imagined. This salacious ‘scandal’, based on anonymous informers and an alleged video tape that no one can produce, has people around the world openly laughing at this city. I’m getting really tired of, and angry at, the Star for starting and fueling this global mockery of Toronto on such specious grounds and i suspect I’m not the only one. Why don’t they just admit they’ve made a really, really big mistake here, go home, and leave the rest of us to try to repair the city’s badly-damaged reputation as best we can?

        • Now that the damage has been done and the original story has been picked up and reproduced by other media inside and outside Canada, the Toronto Star now appears to have quickly re-written it. The headline now reads ‘Rob Ford Video Scandal: Concerns Raised Over Safety Of Email Records’ and the story now begins: “The email and phone records of former staffers of Mayor Rob Ford have not been ordered destroyed, a Toronto city hall official says. “The city has not received a request from anyone in the mayor’s office to destroy records,” director of communications Jackie DeSouza said in an email…” So does the Toronto Star think that all of those other media outlets world-wide which have already gleefully picked up the original version of this story and posted it on their websites are going to notice and make this correction? The damage has already been done. IMHO, the Toronto Star has single-handedly destroyed the global reputation of this great city in a matter of days with what I consider to be utterly crass, indefensible and irresponsible journalism!

          • Why do you reply to your own posts?

            Do you talk to yourself like that when you’re offline, too?

          • Yeah. I prefer quality conversation to your infantile babbling.

          • If so, again, like Ford, you haven’t answered the question: Why do you talk to yourself?

          • Wow! You learn fast! That seems to me to be a classic TORONTO STAR interrogation technique: ‘No video to show you, but is that YOU in it?’ I’m sure they could find a position for you there (if you’re not already drawing a TORONTO STAR pay check already, that is)!

          • Why does Disqus make it possible?

            You could call it an epilogue, or an addendum, or a footnote. All kinds of things. Why does it bother you?

          • Rob Ford destroyed the reputation is this city by being a terrible mayor. The guy is terrible politician and disgusting person. The only people still supporting him are idiots that voted for him that don’t know the difference between a talented right wing politician and a complete arrogant, unsophisticated imbecile, sexist, racist, bigot, WHO WAS FIRED, but still allowed to keep his job as mayor. Only idiots will be happy with a politician just because they happen to be right wing or left wing. Smart people actually want talented politicians. Ford Crack Nation is full of idiots just like him who like seeing an idiot in charge.

          • I take it that you are yet another reader of the ‘Toronto Star’?

          • I take it you’re yet another listener of talk radio hosts who, when confronted with serious allegations against Ford that ties him to drug dealers, only want to shoot the messenger? Get a grip: Reality doesn’t have it in for Ford. His own misguided denials do.

          • You really are a ‘true believer’, aren’t you. ‘Serious allegations’? They come from the TORONTO STAR, for goodness sake! ‘Serious’ from that anonymous crack dealer quoting, missing video tape citing, unnamed ‘insider’ proclaiming, source? Are you kidding me?

          • How about blaming Ford for his own personal actions, such as his DUI? How convenient it is for conservatives like you, who otherwise place so much on “personal responsibility,” for blaming the media instead of the man who himself caused much of the focus on his sordid past?

          • How about the Toronto Star living up to its much-proclaimed ‘journalistic principles’ which reportedly state, among other things, that anyone attacked in the TORONTO STAR has the right to know the identities of their accusers?

    • So when Ford admits things after he’s denied it, that counts for nothing? He gets people like you every time. Ford blames the media when a story surfaces, and then he denies it, and then he has to finally admit that the story is true. And yet like an overfilling garbage can you accept everything Ford says without question. How many times will you be fooled by denials by people, like Ford, who have everything to gain by lying the public?

      • The issue is not what Ford may or may not have done that he’s since owned up to. heaven knows, no one is perfect. The REAL issue is the global trashing of Toronto’s global reputation, in addition to that of the Mayor, by the the TORONTO STAR because of the sensationalist allegations it CHOSE to print even though it apparently knew there was no DEFINITIVE PROOF for them. Those allegations were immediately picked up and broadcast world wide and the damage began to be done. But did the TORONTO STAR, seeing that, responsibly back off and decide it wasn’t worth ruining the city’s reputation world-wide in order to score a point against Rob Ford with NO DEFINITIVE EVIDENCE? No, they went on, in my opinion, like fervent addicts themselves, apparently determined get SOMETHING for their efforts in meeting up with some un-named crack dealers and watching an ALLEGED video, even if it meant bringing the city’s world-wide reputation down around all of our ears. And they are still at it! If the law hadn’t been abruptly changed on this back in 2009, it’s my firm belief that they would never have DARED to do what they are now doing!

  4. I’m curious: Which Toronto newspaper do Maclean’s readers feel might now adopt the slogan: ‘All The ‘News’ That’s Fit To Invent’? I think that the winning choice on this may be too easy to forecast but – hey! – you just might win a copy of a fake video worth $200,000 tossed into your lap from an anonymous and speeding car if you turn out to be the winner! Go for it! It’s a slow news day – take the challenge, check it out with your local iPod-owning crack dealer and you too may become a star!

    • Are you on crack, Rob?

      • Are you working for the Toronto Star, too? That kind of moronic attitude and question would probably skyrocket you up overnight as one of their “crack investigative reporters”. Thanks for the laugh!

        • Paranoia is one of the side effects, Rob.

          • As you’ve obviously experienced often. Where’s the video tape you promised to make available? You’re letting Gawker and the Toronto Star down!

          • Or maybe dyslexia, Mr. Waldorf.

          • As one of their own columnists wrote today, “Encrusted with a sense of entitlement and invincibility, they feel they don’t have to answer to anyone.”Although he certainly didn’t intend it to be taken in this way, I’m starting to feel that no better description could be applied to the TORONTO STAR itself!

    • The Star wasn’t the only company to see the video. Gawker, the American blog saw it also. This isn’t a left wing conspiracy. Only an idiot would think that and behave that way. Sane conservatives think Rob Ford is an idiot buffoon because he is. Sane conservatives don’t just want someone to be mayor because they happen to be conservative. Intelligent right wingers actually want skilled politicians who have the smarts and talent to run a city. Dumb conservatives go on rants about how evil one newspaper is because their idiot right wing leader told them so, even though every newspaper in city, and RANDOM AMERICAN blogs that have no stakes in the matter are ALSO in agreement.

      • Okay. Let’s settle this. SHOW US THE VIDEO!

        • Hey Mary, show us the documents that support anti-Liberal statements that conservatives like you like to make about McGuinty and Wynne. Such as the McGuinty did the power planet thing for political reasons, etc., bla bla bla. Get a grip. Stop demanding legal proof for people’s suspicions only when it suits YOUR SIDE!

          • I don’t have a side. Unlike, apparently, the TORONTO STAR or its supporters, I need to see DEFINITIVE PROOF before I set about publicly trashing the reputation of anyone! And, no, I didn’t even vote for Rob Ford in the last election and could by no means be considered a member of ‘Ford Nation’. I just believe in the old Anglo-Saxon principles of fair play and fair justice (as in ‘innocent until PROVEN guilty’ rather than ‘Trial by allegation, anonymous sources and unavailable videos’) – but that, in itself, will probably be enough to get you choking with rage! And I also don’t like to see my city’s reputation globally trashed because the TORONTO STAR appears to have some kind of continuing vendetta against Rob Ford. But if theTORONTO STAR wants to continue building up the backlash against itself with its current behaviour here, who am I to intervene? They alway seem to know best, it appears, even when they don’t have the proof!

          • So people aren’t allowed to hold opinions about anything until it’s been proven in a court of law, is that it?

            People can form their own opinions about the veracity of these accusations based on Ford’s behaviour, and his staff fleeing in droves, thank you very much. And they can register those opinions at the ballot box next election (if Ford manages to stay in office that long).

          • What an utterly stupid comment, There’s always one idiot around in any discusssion! An opinion,mister, is just that – an opinion. Your opinions seem to be worthless but since you make yourself look stupid by exposing them to the world voluntarily, you are certainly entitled to do so. A scurrilous or criminal allegation about someone else is an altogether different matter. Learn the difference!.

          • This comment was deleted.

          • If I were Rob Ford, I’d be sending staffers out to buy copies of the TORONTO STAR from every large privately-owned newsagent in the city every time they published a statement about me that could have been considered defamatory under the pre-2009 law. And I’d make sure they got a receipt. The TORONTO STAR may be able to shield ITSELF behind the 2009 case that constitutes the current law but would its independent distributors and newsagents? Now THERE’S a test case just a-waiting to be tried! I strongly suspect that they probably wouldn’t, in which case they’d be hit hard with damages. No distributors and newsagents willing to take that risk thereafter would probably pretty soon mean no TORONTO STAR, And, based on what we’ve been seeing over the past days, that would be good riddance, in my opinion.

      • Three weeks later where the eff is the video!

  5. #FordLibel

  6. “…lower-wrung staffers”

    Bad vocab, or bad joke?

  7. All the mindless support for Rob Ford rings of anti-transparency and anti-accountability. I can only compare it to the adoration received by some of the worst tyrants in history. If the majority of Torontonians feel that way, Toronto does not deserve their self-appointed status as Canada’s premier city.

    • All the mindless left-wing belief in the alleged anonymous crack dealer ‘sources’ for this ‘scandal’ and the supposedly incriminating ‘crack video’ which can’t be produced by the liberal Toronto Star rings of ‘anti-transparency and anti-accountability’ in and of itself! If the majority of left-wing Torontonians feel that way, Toronto does not deserve their self-appointed status as Canada’s premier city.

      • All the mindless right-wing belief that Ford is the Chosen One based on self-serving statements of a braggart like Ford himself rings of an inability to critically evaluate the actual personal history of this demagogue whose only worthwhile feature is that he is so flawed he has no chance of being elevated to higher office. A trivial example: The man clearly admits to reading documents while driving on the public roads; I guess he’s too good to follow the rules the way that we peons do! If you defend clear arrogance like that, then you’re clearly hopelessly in love with a man who believes himself better than the people he rules.

        • And what does this have to do with the whereabouts of the alleged ‘incriminating’ video tape that you so obviously worship and would have us believe in?

      • Nothing to do with it. The man is a train wreck and unfortunately Toronto will be collateral damage. I feel sad about this, Toronto is where I lived when I immigrated from Northern Ireland 35 years ago and I will always have a soft spot for that town. But Ford is not what a great city like Toronto needs.

        • And neither is a newspaper which is apparently willing to wreck the city’s reputation globally in order to get at the Mayor – and all, again, on the basis of NO DEFINITIVE EVIDENCE. Toronto has already suffered apparently massive world-wide ‘collateral damage’ to its reputation because of this. We’ll certainly never regain the attractive, rosy-cheeked image that Americans had of us before the TORONTO STAR chose to create this apparently unsupportable ‘scandal’, based on an alleged video they couldn’t even produce. Does Toronto really need a newspaper that is apparently willing to wreck the city’s global reputation as incidental ‘collateral damage’ in pursuit of an apparent vendetta?

        • De amalgamation now!!!!!Let the suburbs go their own merry way,and leave Toronto proper alone.

  8. The Star has just reported on a Ford staffers meeting after the video news first surfaced where Ford told staff the address where the video could be found. Since neither Ford nor staffers are denouncing & denying the story as Star fabrication, there seems good reason to think it’s true. If the crack stories were just all baseless, conspiratorial slander, Ford & co. would surely be screaming & suing. Ford’s reaction so far, including his carefully worded non-denial-denials, suggests guilt, not innocence. The sudden resignation of 3 key staffers in the midst of the scandal is another suspicious development that does not favour the “Rob is innocent” thesis.

    • I rarely use this word out of charity but you can only be described as an ‘idiot’ who doesn’t know the law in these in these matters. The TORONTO STAR obviously does and the very story you cite might make a good example of how it is carefully using it to apparently shield itself from just such a suit!

      • I don’t know what in my post would lead you to think I’m unaware the Star’s lawyers will have carefully checked all Star stories related to Ford to ensure they’d likely stand up to libel suits. But your tossing around of accusations of “idiocy” is most interesting, as you seem to be the one stupidly ignoring the fact The Star’s lawyers would deem Star stories libel-proof ONLY IF THE FACTS claimed in those articles could be demonstrated to be substantially TRUE or that The Star had substantial evidence to suggest the facts were true.

        This suggests the Fords are avoiding suing because they know the advantage is with the Star & Globe because Fords know the press stories are substantially true, & that Fords are both guilty of the acts they are portrayed as engaging in. Mary is evidently quite contrary to reason when it comes to the Fords.

        • On that you are absolutely wrong. Don’t mistake your opinion of what the law of libel once was – and, IMHO, still should be with regard to newspapers – with the current reality. That all changed in 2009. Were we back under the old libel law, Ford would soon probably own the Toronto Star as a result of the apparently specious allegations which started all of this .Read up on the law as it now stands and tell me how brave you think they are after you’ve learned the facts on this! And remember, what they are now doing to him they could probably also do to you in the future if they wanted to and you virtually wouldn’t have a legal leg to stand on. The TORONTO STAR isn’t publishing this stuff because it’s TRUE – they are apparently publishing it because legally they now presumably CAN provided they do it the ‘right’ way under current law, whether it finally turns out to be TRUE or NOT! You think they are BRAVE in doing this? I think the OPPOSITE!

  9. This is absolutely a MUST WATCH from YouTube that actually demonstrates how easy it would be to create a FAKE alleged Rob Ford ‘crack video’! If this guy, who isn’t even a professional at this, can do it reasonably well in less than an hour, then so could the TORONTO STAR’s alleged anonymous criminal underworld ‘sources’!

    • Oh boy. This again….you’re joking, I hope.

      • No. ‘Joking’? The TORONTO STAR is the only ‘joke’ in this scurrilous affair, as far as I’m concerned :)

  10. In every civilized society there is one and I repeat ONE right that all are guranteed else it is not a civilized society – if someone accuses you of soemthing you have the right to face your accuser and investigate the evidence against you!!!!!! what has happened to our fifth column – where are the principles in journalism – what we have happening now in front of us is the worst sort of slaner and libel imagined – sure always couched in terms prepared by the legal staff BUT nonetheless – if it bleeds it leads – the Toronto Star and everyone else repoting on this story ought to be ashamed of themsleves –

    • A columnist over at the Globe and Mail reportedly called it a ‘lynching’ several days ago. I think that pretty well sums it up!

    • “fifth column” (?)
      I don’t think that phrase means what you think it does.

      • I think he may have been referring to the TORONTO STAR’s industrious and probably debatable ‘news’ reports over the last week or so, which appear to have had the highly-efficient collateral effect of wrecking the city’s global reputation? If so, “fifth column” might actually be an extremely apt term!

  11. I think that there’s really only ONE question that really needs to be answered now – who will be resigning from the TORONTO STAR over this apparently unsupportable and globally damaging journalistic fiasco?

    • only one real question why doesn’t RoFo SUE the Star????

      • It may be that this is what the TORONTO STAR actually WANTS you to think! And it’s a fair question. The sad truth of the matter is that since the Grant vs Torstar case in 2009 (‘Torstar’, does that name ring any bells?) the law of libel as it applies to newspapers has been profoundly changed, and NOT in favour of any plaintiff defamed by a newspaper – and the TORONTO STAR no doubt knows and may very well be relying on this! NOW the TORONTO STAR can presumably claim that new defense of “Responsible communication in the public interest” by stating and showing that it made a ‘diligent’ attempt to see whether the allegations were correct or not before publishing them – even if they later turn out to be absolutely UNTRUE! To effectively avail itself of that legal defense, however, the TORONTO STAR would presumably have to be able to demonstrate convincingly that it HAD acted ‘responsibly’ in publishing what it published and that it HAD made ‘diiligent’ attempts to establish that the allegations were true beforehand. Ah, now there’s the rub! DID they? I personally feel that they got so crazily carried away with this alleged ‘scandal’ that they may well have gone FAR beyond the cover of that legal defense, so it’s now quite possible that the Mayor might well be able to sue and win in spite of any presumably desperate attempt by the TORONTO STAR to rely upon it! That would be expensive, distracting and protracted for him, however, and – though I have never voted for Rob Ford – I’m starting to see in him a Mayor who’s still admirably determined to concentrate on the city’s business and deny the TORONTO STAR the possible satisfaction of overturning the voters’ choice in the last election through what increasingly appear to me now to be actually merely salacious, unsupported and ludicrous allegations, even as the city’s global reputation is apparently being ‘progressively’ wrecked by the TORONTO STAR itself in doing this. And we are all now seeing what the TORONTO STAR might apparently be capable of doing to any of US in the future if we are ever in the public eye and the TORONTO STAR decides to move in for the kill! Feel safer now?

  12. Seriously now Macleans….You call yourself a news magazine ? …Reporting on the false allegations/heresay of people who simply dont like Ford and trying to paint him as some alcoholic and substance abuser now who has fallen from grace ? ..My …I hope your CEO has a good lawyer and is willing to fight on your behalf against the forthcoming lawsuits that will no doubt develop as a result of this type of Character Assassination against Ford. You do realize that making false allegations against someone publicly is “Defamation of Character” and “Libel” in the Criminal Code of Canada and are considered “CRIMINAL OFFENCES” against a persons character.

    If you were any type of serious publication you would be well aware of that fact and steer away from participating in this type of tabloid illegal activity.

    • Damn you, all media in the entire world!

      Why oh why are you all* secretly collaborating to conspire against Rob Ford in this vast and darkly evil worldwide conspiracy to discredit hizzoner?

      *That means you too, Fox: “A cellphone video purportedly depicting Toronto Mayor Rob Ford smoking crack cocaine is being shopped by a group of Somali men involved in the drug trade.”

      • You mean FOX and the TORONTO STAR are finally on the same page – and on something that’s this feverish and lurid? Before the TORONTO STAR perhaps pulled off this latest caper in what some might think of as an apparent attempt to reverse the choice of Toronto’s voters in the last election, even I wouldn’t have thought they’d maybe stoop to THAT level! But on reflection, I’m starting to think that your observation may be extremely perceptive…

  13. To MaryQuiteContrary, remember this name: Lance Armstrong. He was an innocent, wrongly accused junkie, too. Everything was fabricated and he won a number of million dollar settlements. And then? Well, maybe your YouTube expert also faked that Oprah interview with Lance, right? There’s loyalty; there’s BLIND loyalty and then a few miles up the road there’s this delusional moron named MaryQuiteContrary. That’s you, dear.

    • I’ve no idea what you are rambling on about although such irrelevant ramblings might perhaps lead other readers here to wonder if you, too, work for the TORONTO STAR’. Talking of the ‘TORONTO STAR’, ‘delusional’ and ‘irrelevancy’, is the STAR now finally beginning to attempt to backtrack into what appears to be objectivity over this globally-damaging alleged ‘scandal’? I notice that they are now running a story headlined “Rob Ford Crack Video Scandal: Anthony Smith’s Killing Was ‘Street Level Stuff,’ Sources Say”, with the sub-head “Speculation has run rampant Mayor Rob Ford may be connected to a series of violent incidents in North Etobicoke. That does not appear to be the case.” Graciously forgoing any opportunity to claim credit for perhaps fueling that ‘speculation’, the story then says “Anthony Smith was murdered for “street level stuff,” not because of a video of Mayor Rob Ford appearing to smoke crack cocaine, neighbourhood sources have told the Star. “(Anthony’s murder) had nothing to do with the video,” said a man who works in the Dixon housing complex who spoke on condition of anonymity over safety concerns. Instead, the shooting appears to be over a months-old feud between two rival neighbourhood groups. Smith was at King Street’s Loki Lounge on March 28 with his friends from the Dixon and Islington area when they bumped into another group of young men they had a previous “beef” with. In the weeks since the Star reported about a video of Mayor Rob Ford appearing to smoke crack cocaine — and published a picture of Ford alongside two victims of recent gun violence — speculation has run rampant that the mayor may be connected to a series of violent incidents in North Etobicoke.That does not appear to be the case…As well, Toronto Police have waded in on the case. Homicide investigators interviewed Ford’s recently fired chief of staff, Mark Towhey, after he went to the police with information that the mayor’s head of logistics, David Price, asked “hypothetically” if the location of the video was known, “What would we do?” Price also told Towhey the video may have been the reason Smith was killed, a source told the Star. While homicide investigators were assigned to the case, head of homicide Greg McLane told CP24 earlier this week the investigation is not connected to a murder, but that his detectives had certain expertise. Police sources supported this claim on Thursday. While media reports have identified Smith as a drug dealer, a close friend is adamant he never sold drugs. The friend was also adamant that Smith did not shoot the video of Ford. Police are investigating whether the cellphone the video of the mayor was shot on originated with Smith, sources say. The friend described Smith as a “good guy” who loved basketball and was fun to be around. The international scrutiny has been very difficult for his family, says the friend…” Well, all I can say regarding the TORONTO STAR on this is perhaps “Ooops!!!” You can read the rest of this apparent attempt to claw this ludicrous ‘scandal’ back into the realms of reality by Googling the headline above.

      • You’re not well, Mary. I’ve got no horse in this race. I don’t particularly care for the “Star” (a little too far left of centre for my tastes), but your dislike and hostility borders on obsession. Why would you look at or consider anything they have to say? Look at the length of your posts, ma’am. I would have to say you give the word “rambling” real meaning.

        • ‘Rambling’ might be the correct description here since much of that post was a quotation from the TORONTO STAR :)!

          • Well, we will all just have to “stay tuned” as the TV stations used to say. Let’s see what (media) or who (mayor) outlasts the other.

          • I think that’s a fair response.

        • My money’s on the Star. They’ve been in business a long time and have many awards for their investigative journalist. The ORNGE and eHealth stories started with them, along with many others.

  14. Mary and Disgusted, while you’re clamouring for more PROOF, are you still on the “Lance Armstrong is innocent” bandwagon?

    • Ignoring your peurile attempt to distract attention from the lack of any DEFINITIVE PROOF with regard to these now globally-disseminated ‘crack smoking’ allegations, let’s examine where the TORONTO STAR may now be standing with regard to this. The defense of “responsible communication in the public interest” introduced as a result of Grant vs Torstar in 2009 would apparently depend upon the media outlet involved being “diligent” and “responsible” in its reporting. So I have a few questions on that. (1) Was it ‘responsible’ of the TORONTO STAR to run a story like this based on a video which allegedly showed Toronto’s Mayor smoking crack when (a) the video itself couldn’t be produced at the same time for examination and (b) some ‘diligent’ research could have shown reasonably quickly that such an alleged video could be easily and quickly faked (see the link and example on this further down these comments)?; (2) Was it ‘responsible’ to run a photo of the Mayor with two men, one of whom we were led to believe by media reports was a since-murdered alleged ‘drug dealer’, when (a) the Mayor, a genial and outgoing guy by anybody’s standards, protested quite reasonably that he had his photo taken with LOTS of people, (b) some ‘diligent’ enquiry beforehand among those who knew the murdered man best would have apparently quickly refuted this, and (c) it has evidently caused great and understandable distress to his family?; (3) Then there’s the ‘ROB FORD – POLICE INVESTIGATION – MURDER!!!’ apparent innuendos – were THEY ‘responsible’ and ‘diligently’ researched? And that leaves out the other really BIG question staring us in the face on this: was it ‘responsible’ to apparently trash Toronto’s reputation world-wide in addition to massively disrupting the work of the Mayor’s office as a result of perhaps having done any or all of the above? I’m just asking questions that I, for one, feel are entirely reasonable and need to be asked and answered at this point.

  15. Well, you can all be assured that there is at least one commenter on this thread that couldn’t possibly ‘have a dog in this hunt’, oh sorry, I mean “a horse in this race”…and that would have to be the prolific MaryQuiteContrary, as evidenced by her/his very infrequent and ever so brief comments in this matter which obviously scarcely even concerns her/him :)

    • Quite right. No one in Toronto should be concerned about media witch hunts based on no provable evidence and anonymous informants which wreck their city’s reputation world wide. In such a city, the TORONTO STAR will perhaps no doubt feel a lot safer going about its ‘investigative’ business :)?

  16. I like this comment extracted from the Globe And Mail, which has shown, I think, a far higher level of ethical commitment in reporting on this contrived ‘scandal’ than at least one of its local newspaper neighbours: “Mr. Ford was elected to his office, and only the people who put him there should be able to remove him. If further allegations arise that make it impossible for him to continue as mayor, public pressure will force him to step aside. But that is a big if. For better or worse, Mr. Ford can ride out his mandate and take his chances in next year’s municipal election. That is the democratic process…” Now, to be fair, they appeared to be aiming that comment at the Provincial premier – but I wonder if the TORONTO STAR might learn a valuable civics lesson from it, too?