In such cases, the rules and practices are bent or ignored to add to the momentum of the mighty push to evict the targeted individual from his position. Thus did the chief of Toronto’s generally very good police force announce that he could not comment on the evidence of the mayor’s possible wrongdoing, but that the reflections of the rabidly hostile and muck-inventing, raking and throwing Toronto Star were accurate and he, the chief, Bill Blair, was “as a citizen, disappointed in the mayor.” He is paid and sworn to uphold public security. “As a citizen,” in a press conference he called as chief of police, he can keep such reflections to himself.
And it is not clear by what perversion of justice a judge is selectively making scraps of “evidence” public, while redacted chunks of a 500-page police report that does not seem to contain anything that justifies a charge, are receiving attention like film of death camps at the Nuremberg Trials. We seem to have reached the turning: those who should not have become so vocal do not seem able to put up or shut up, and the mayor, who is not, for many people, a style-setter, appears to be competent to continue in the task which he was elected to perform.
I don’t see why he should. He should be more careful, including in the avoidance of inflammatory malapropisms. But nothing has come to light that disqualifies him from fulfilling the mandate his electors gave him, and I do not believe that the City Council has any legal capacity to redefine the powers of the mayor, unless the provincial legislature assigns the authority over municipal government to the Toronto Star, shelter for rabid editorial writers.