Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

Comments

  1. David:

    <

    p>
    You are either sick in the head or have entirely too much time on your hands.  It’s just my opinion, but it seems like you’re piling on here.  His lack of a signaure is not weird, it’s sloppy.  A judge will look at his printed name and it will hold the same weight as his signature.

    <

    p>
    Are you trying to start a second career as Bob Woodward or something?

    <

    p>
    The evidence is mounting against Galluch.  He’ll have to answer to some very serious charges in court later this month for which I’m sure there is substantial evidence.  This lack of a signature, unfortunately is not part of that evidence.

    <

    p>
    I landed on this site to hear “reality-based comments on politics and policy”.  We have far more important things to discuss than Galluch’s lack of a signature on the police report.

    <

    p>
    Mr. Goodie

    • If you have enough time to write meta-comments about what David should be doing with his time, including Wikipedia links to Bob Woodward (thanks for the news flash) you have enough time to write us a post on health care reform if that’s what interests you, or even start your own blog if you don’t like this one. In the meantime, what I’d like to see is a response from Galluccio’s office confirming that he meant to sign the report and a copy of a properly signed document. I bet the people injured in the accident would also like to see the same. More generally, this subject is about drunk driving, politicians being held accountable for their actions just like everyone else, the Boston Police administering justice in a fair and impartial manner, and justice (however the case may play out — and I agree Galluccio is innocent until proven guilty) for the numerous people who were hurt and had their property damaged and their evenings ruined by the Councillor. That’s important enough to warrant discussion, in MHO.

    • for the proposition that an unsigned document (and make no mistake, this document is unsigned) is treated the same as a signed one, I’d be interested to see it.

      <

      p>
      As to the rest of your comment, I agree with Bob.

  2. Barrios will be running for re-election to the Senate, nice call Ernie Boch, III, so Galluch is irrelevant. The prince of the liberals has been beheaded and humbly will return to the Senate (his 1st ass kicking)and now it’s time for the normal people of the commonwealth to take back our state, i can sense it, the people are becoming restless with the birkenstock elitists, the do-gooders and the phony leftists. GO MUFFY! BARRIOS, the wicked witch is dead, LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL yyyyeeeeeaaaaaaahhhhhhh

  3. He’s too cute through out the whole process.

    <

    p>
    Character problem perhaps?

  4. I haven’t seen that thing in a couple months.  Interesting though, isn’t it?  And what’s that diagram supposed to show anyway?

    <

    p>
    On a side note:  Not much love on the boards for Barrios, huh?  Any particular reason?  Ernie?

  5. Great reporting, David! You did some great digging and came up with a hard bit of evidence and a great story.

    <

    p>
    Also, I fail to see how anyone other than Galluccio and his defense team could skewer David and the BMG for doing some great reporting.

    <

    p>
    And, just b/c Galluccio is again irrelevant doesn’t mean this story should die. It’s “got legs” as they say in the biz. How often does a former mayor of a well-known city cause a four car pile-up, b/c he was very likely sloshed?

    <

    p>
    Keep up the good work, David!

    • Well with Barrios’ decision, that’s the end of the Galuccio for senate discussion.  Stick a fork in Galluch’s campaign.  He’s all done.

      <

      p>
      David and Bob – my words were out of line yesterday and I apologize.  I just didn’t think that his lack of signature did anything to further implicate him in the accident and that the document was obviously still attributed to him.  However, do not mistake the intention of my original post.  His drunk driving case is 100% relevant discussion matter and it’s clearly not going to go away for him.  I just view the lack of signature as dressing to the case and not an integral component. Obviously, I am alone in my opinion.

      <

      p>
      Also, nice call about my hypocrisy.  Will get around to health care now that this affair has been settled.

      • I don’t think the lack of a signature on the crash report is “integral” either – certainly it’s of less importance than, for example, the eyewitness and EMT accounts that have already been publicized.  But I frankly think it unlikely that his not signing the line that says “signed under pains and penalties of perjury” was simply an oversight, which is why I brought it up.  To me, it at least indirectly bolsters the account first publicized at prizblog.

Archives