And, yes, how a mother who was seemingly as intelligent (and upright and honest) as Barbara was, could turn out this sort of offspring. Well, that is one of life’s mysteries, I suppose.

Her son has sullied her good name by taking payments and spreading W’s propaganda. He can not get a pundit’s job in Canada, But then again the Canadian media does not usually allow people on the air that can not back up what they claim.

I too have followed this case from the beginning.

You and I must read different newspapers.

For example read the recent Chicago Tribune article which describes the (literally) millions of dollars in personal expenses that Black had Hollinger
pay for. And for which no tax was paid by either the Company or the Blacks. Additionally, those millions were dollars that belonged to the shareholders.

This is Leona Helmsely all over again.

WITHOUT question none of you who have posted comments against Frum would have put any trust in what he said anyway (payments or no payments) so why do you now act as if he *was* your most trusted pundit until this information came out!?

The tragedy here is that you are all so blinded by your hatred for Conrad Black and the “neo conservative” agenda that he is said to represent that you can not objectively weigh the evidence that has now been presented by the prosecution. I have followed this case from day one and have read the evidence — as presented by both left leaning and right leaning media outlets — both filtered through my understanding of the law as an attorney. The prosecution has failed to meet its burden to establish that Conrad Black or any of his co defendants have committed a crime. What they have demonstrated is just how much of a bully the US justice system can be.

There seems to be this knee jerk reaction on both the political right and left to just slam the other side whenever you can without necessarily considering the facts. So, someone like Keith will take a quote from David Frum out of context. Yes, Frum said that disclosures can become “silly and pedantic”, however he said this after defending the payments as being in line with industry norms and right before saying: “Do I really have to mention that I used to write speeches for George W. Bush every time I write about him?”. Somehow the context here makes a difference — regardless if he should have disclosed the payments or not.

I will promise not to prejudge ALL issues through my generally right of centre political views, IF you also agree to independently evaluate circumstances and not simply lash out, without all the facts just b/c an issue may appear to “hurt” the right.

Pardon my French, but GOD-DAYYYAAMN!