‘Callahan Coverup: The Cantelmi Police Report’
From today’s LV Ramblings’ update post on the Bethlehem police story:
I call this the “Callahan Coverup” because someone in his administration obviously made sure this story never reached The Express Times or Morning Call.
The deduction that “someone in [Callahan's] administration obviously made sure this story…” isn’t enough–not nearly enough–to call this the “Callahan Coverup.”
July 26th, 2010 at 11:39 am
It’s not a deduction, but an inference, and a fair one unless you wish to defend a Democratic candidate for Congress..
July 26th, 2010 at 1:57 pm
Bernie, we’re not analytic philosophers. Deduction and inference mean the same thing. Yes, I’m probably more sensitive to charges against Callahan, since I support him in his race against Charlie Dent. But I will accept charges that are backed up with evidence, even if they are embarrassing (or worse) to Callahan. By your logic, I shouldn’t accept a thing you say about Callahan since you are an open Dent supporter. Instead, I just expect evidence. It’s true that it’s unusual for a police cruiser accident to go unreported in both local papers. It’s also true that there’s a big gap between “unusual” and proof that Callahan or anyone working under him covered this up. It’s plausible, but that’s not nearly good enough.