Not following your logic. The post said he soundly refuted some of the allegations. He did. He said he was dismissed from the diamond mine lawsuit. He addressed his bankruptcy (which was on his site immediately after the Zina issue and prior to this release) in more detail.

He explained that from a fiscal point of view he is able to be bonded and is in fact (according to him) bonded.

Seems like he refuted it to me. It will be interesting to see if The Capital does a follow up or not.

The post outlined what he did and most readers (I think) grasped that. If you wanted to read his entire statement, you were given the option to read it.Honestly, it made no sense to waste all the real estate on the entire press release. We do that often (and in new media it is the norm)and also did it with the City’s release on the Czech award.

Does his refutation make him the best candidate? Who knows. I don’t personally have a dog in the race, I live in 7.

Sorry, but I failed to see any Soundly Refuted response. Since the list of charges is long and the responses are to only a few charges. I do not think your “teaser” is correct.

Second, to continue my complaint about formatting. You should at least provide a summary paragraph before requiring a jump. It is often the journalistic format: Tell them the story in one paragraph, then [after the jump] explain the story. Your one-liners are not sufficient. They often mislead.

Paul