You lost a dispute with your landlord in rural Latah County in 1985, and
this proves Moscow "refuses to honor federal mandates"? Sorry, if I've
misunderstood your message maybe you need to clarify it.
>From your own case, where you have some direct knowledge (though I have
trouble discerning what it is), you move on to hearsay accusations of drug
use by a local judge and local attorney. If you have evidence of a crime
being committed, you should report it. If you don't have direct knowledge,
I say it is irresponsible to repeat rumors.
You say you did report some accusations (it is unclear which ones) to a
whole list of authorities at various levels. To you, their silence seems to
prove some sort of vast conspiracy. To me, it suggests that 18 different
entities have concluded that your stories are unconvincing.
And really, does this conspiracy extend to all the local news media? We've
all had our disappointments with the Daily News (especially since Kenton
Bird left its editorial page), but do you think the Lewiston Tribune and
Spokesman Review are scared by some tough power brokers in Moscow, Idaho?
This region is full of hungry young reporters who would love to get their
bylines on a local scandal, and their editors would love to sell more papers
by publishing it. So if the media knew of your accusations and didn't
publish, I'd say that indicates they concluded there was noting credible to
report.
You are quick to accuse people of greed, arrogance, illegality, and improper
motives. I wish you would remember an honest difference of opinion doesn't
make the other person evil. You would get more sympathy if you communicated
more facts and less anger.
Jack Porter