The Rudz Letter: ONLY My Opinion

[mark blazejewski]

Just My Opinion:

While others may disagree, from the strict standpoint of a legally-acceptable, clever deception, this is a very good letter, just my opinion of course.

The most significant illustration of that deception resides in this independent clause:

"Here is what the evidence shows:"

The word "evidence" merely means "the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid."

In the case of the letter, the word "evidence" does not specifically attach itself to the findings of the VOL investigation.

Therefore, could not the vague use of "evidence" embrace a broad, public narrative which of course could include innuendo, highly qualified comments, and highly prejudiced characterizations?

In the Rudz letter, does it not appear that the author may have selectively cherry-picked elements from the entire public narrative, and then cleverly twisted and blended those components into a brilliant, synthetic final product that to some, may be a compelling indictment?

With that said, is it not possible that the glancing, casual reader may accept, without serious challenge, the truth of the subsequent evidentiary statements?

Equally, is it not possible that the more critical reader may suspect that the unattached word "evidence" may suggest that the noun is so suspiciously vague that the subsequent evidentiary statements may require scrutiny?

I consider myself a reader of the latter category, and now present these questions regarding the subsequent evidentiary statements:

(1) Regarding point one, can not the assertion that Dickman "facilitated the sexual harassment of a young female employee inviting other employees to watch what he termed would be entertainment' " possibly be considered both clever and appalling?"

Considering Dickman did admit showing the tape to the victim's step-father with the suggestion that "her parents could decide whether they would take any actions," is it not true Dickman's noble action did in fact constitute an invitation to the victim's step father to view the video, and perhaps a further invitation to the step father to appropriately share the tape?1

It has been publicly acknowledged that the victim's mother "took it from there," 2 and eventually, the tape made its way to the desk of VOL DPW Superintendent, who then it is said, provided it to the VOL Board. 3

Are not the victim's step father and the VOL DPW Superintendent "employees?"

Moreover, if the victim herself, out of necessity, watched the video which resided in the custody of her family, could that not be considered "facilitating...?"

Again, clever, appalling and perhaps disgusting?


(2) On point two, the Buffalo News did describe the video as "vulgar" and "misogynistic," 5 and Dickman agreed that this particular video was "sexually offensive and vulgar." 6

I am however, curious about the letter's use of the word "funny."

One definition of "funny" is "difficult to explain or understand; strange or odd."

Absent the use of quotation marks around the word funny, can it not be argued that the letter merely characterized the video as "strange, odd, and difficult to explain;" a depiction which actually tends to support Dickman's accounts of his intentions and very limited distribution?

Regrettably, is it also not fair to assume that the casual reader may conclude that Dickman, based on the clever wording, acted in a highly inappropriate way?


(3) Point three is pure hogwash, IMHO.

To some, a simple rebuttal may be considered an attempt to cover-up, while to most others, a simple rebuttal is a legitimate response.

Regarding the "gag order" assertions about the Mayor, I understand that in matters concerning personnel issues, confidentiality is a legal requirement.

As such, is it not reasonable to suggest that the term "gag order" is merely a deliberately twisted characterization, perhaps applied in order to leave an ominous impression upon the reader?

More parsed sentences, shaded words, and pejorative overtones, eh?

If the letter has any vulnerabilities, they may reside in this sentence:

"To date, the Village has already spent tens of thousands of taxpayer dollars in legal fees and in perpetuating the cover-up."

But, my best guess is that somewhere within total context, there resides an escape clause, what say you?

Sources:

(Rudz Letter, Click Attachment To Enlarge)

image (82).png

*1-Buffalo News, October 24, 2021

*2- WKBW News Story, October 19, 2021, https://www.wkbw.com/news/local-news...-investigation

*3- Buffalo News, October 24, 2021

*4-https://www.lancasterbee.com/articles/dickman-responds-to-allegations-of-sexual-harassment-mother-of-dpw-worker-speaks-out-at-meeting/

*5-Buffalo News, October 16, 2021

*6-https://www.lancasterbee.com/articles/dickman-responds-to-allegations-of-sexual-harassment-mother-of-dpw-worker-speaks-out-at-meeting/

[Frank Lee Blunt]

MARK.......no interest from the slime eaters?

[mark blazejewski]

MARK.......no interest from the slime eaters?

The Cats must have their tongues, eh Blunt?

[WNYresident]

I'm surprised at the extent the people marketing the candidates are going with the mailers.

If I didn't see the mom giving her side of the story I might think otherwise but we all witnessed her statement.

Personally I wouldn't want people behind something like that on my town board.



Did you all see this. They are all cut from the same cloth...

The Lincoln Project roasted as 'deranged hacks' for orchestrating viral hoax to smear Youngkin

The disgraced anti-Trump group The Lincoln Project is facing intense backlash for orchestrating the viral hoax involving tiki torch-holding individuals associating themselves with the Youngkin campaign.

Twitter was set ablaze after images of a group wearing white shirts, khakis, baseball caps and sunglasses stood alongside the campaign bus of Virginia gubernatorial candidate Glenn Youngkin reportedly vocal expressing support for the Republican, according to local NBC affiliate anchor Elizabeth Holmes.

https://www.foxnews.com/media/lincol...-hoax-youngkin

[Frank Lee Blunt]

Res, these locals watch that kind of garbage and try to adopt the same kind of approach here. They have NOTHING to offer the voters except dirty politics and lies to the TOL. They have NO good message other than "you can't elect these guys" and "we have the experience" and "they are all crimminals, don't trust them".
Just a couple more days of their failed leadership.

[Breezy]

I'm surprised at the extent the people marketing the candidates are going with the mailers.

If I didn't see the mom giving her side of the story I might think otherwise but we all witnessed her statement.

What did the mom say ?? She said Adam Dickman sent her the video and she took it from there. She said the regular skits were put to an end due to this skit. And she decried the politicalization of the matter.

Adam Dickman subsequently said the mother "cleared" him of any wrongdoing.

She is absolutely entitled to her opinion, yet, I don't think her vindication ends the story. Especially with the heightened talk of a coverup, and evidence that points to Mr. Dickman stating falsehoods about the matter.

I think you are taking the mother's understandable emotional statement as a vindication when you do not know all the facts.

Are you even reading these posts or just skimming through them???

[Breezy]

I'm surprised at the extent the people marketing the candidates are going with the mailers.

If I didn't see the mom giving her side of the story I might think otherwise but we all witnessed her statement.

Did you even read this, or read the recent letter sent to Village residents from Trustee Rudz ???

WNYMedia.net https://wnymedia.net/2021/10/28/trustee-speaks-out-as-village-of-lancaster-continues-to-coverup-sexual-harassment-scandal/

Weighing in again, this time on Lancaster Village Trustee Rudz's letter...

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Trustee Speaks Out as Village of Lancaster Continues to Cover-up Sexual Harassment Scandal

A letter from Village of Lancaster trustee Pual Rudz recently hit Lancaster mailboxes explaining the facts of the sexual harassment case against current Town of Lancaster Board member Adam Dickman.

Dickman is the Village Highway employee who recorded the vulgar performance by a fellow Highway department employee where a Lancaster Village Department of Public Works employee can be seen singing a re-make of the song “When the end of the month rolls along.

Dickman then zooms into a female employee to get her cringeworthy reaction to the song.

Recent social media postings including what was supposedly a formal press release from the Village of Lancaster first appeared on a Dickman supporters Facebook page in a desperate attempt to portray the victim’s mother as supporting the actions of Dickman.

The victim’s mother’s claim that Dickman ‘only’ sent the video to the victim’s stepfather, has been totally discredited and has been verified that the video was widely sent to Town and Village of Lancaster employees and residents weeks before it ever landed in WNYmedia Network’s inbox.

Dickman has continued to change his story multiple times since the story first broke in early September.

Dickman is currently up for re-election as his supporters and members of the village of Lancaster board continue to try desperately to make this controversy go away.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Understandably, not everyone is taking Adam Dickman's word on the horribly infamous event this past summer in a Village of Lancaster highway facility.

I've been seeing the word 'coverup' a lot more lately concerning this matter.

This story from yesterday seems to be the hottest yet, in negativity I mean, and some people on here think WNYmedia.net was tricked into posting the video on September 29, 2021. Others including me posted that the website probably wouldn't risk their finances, or their reputation, by posting the video when they did, had they not believed what they wrote. They must have believed that the narrative of what happened that they portrayed in their coverage on the matter was accurate and correct. They most have felt pretty comfortable. So they must be comfortable with this update.

Either way the update is interesting!

[WNYresident]

From WNYmedia

A letter from Village of Lancaster trustee Pual Rudz recently hit Lancaster mailboxes explaining the facts of the sexual harassment case against current Town of Lancaster Board member Adam Dickman.

Was there ever an actual sexual harassment case?

And I would expect people to cover their butts who are involved in those mailers.

Once again. I think anyone behind those mailers should not be on anyone's town board.

After reading Paul Rudz "letter" I don't think he should be on the lancaster town board. As you read his letter you see how he is framing the situation.

Seeing wnymedia will not say how they got the video anything they say is meaningless. Just made up like the Russia Russia Russia BS.

[WNYresident]

Did you all catch this?

https://wnymedia.net/2021/10/28/trus...sment-scandal/

Councilman Dickman videoed the event which the Buffalo News called “vulgar” and “mysoginistic”, then
circulated the video because he thought it was funny.

No disrespect because I don't know him other that what I'm reading here.

Paul Rudz is a mind reader. That's awesome. He's assuming he knows that a person thought something was funny.

I'm not making this up.

My opinion. These people have poor judgement just by witnessing the agenda they support and the candidate their group put into the whitehouse. Remove these people from your town board and any other positions they hold. The support starts are the bottom with the nonsense we see coming from the DNC.

https://ecdems.com/candidates/

Town of Lancaster
Councilman- Paul H. Rudz
Councilman- Michael J. Wozniak
Town Justice- Anthony G. Marecki
Town Superintendent of Highways- Daniel J. Amatura
Trustee Public Library- Suzanne M. Jacobs
Trustee Public Library- Barbara J. Tamol

[Breezy]

Did you all catch this?

https://wnymedia.net/2021/10/28/trus...sment-scandal/



No disrespect because I don't know him other that what I'm reading here.

Paul Rudz is a mind reader. That's awesome. He's assuming he knows that a person thought something was funny.

I'm not making this up.

My opinion. These people have poor judgement just by witnessing the agenda they support and the candidate their group put into the whitehouse. Remove these people from your town board and any other positions they hold. The support starts are the bottom with the nonsense we see coming from the DNC.

https://ecdems.com/candidates/

This is very weak. Are you a mind reader, too ??? It's crazy to conclude that every person on the Dem line supports the federal issues being discussed by national Dems, or even issues supported locally by ecdems.com.

There is no loyalty oath, WNYresident. Nor is there one for GOP candidates.

[mark blazejewski]

Paul Rudz is a mind reader. That's awesome. He's assuming he knows that a person thought something was funny.

Res,

The letter, IMHO, was written in such a way as to leave the reader only with a subjective impression, when in fact that impression can be contradicted by a rigorous scrutiny of the actual words and sentences; perhaps an intentional, clever protection of the author from legal liability?

Concerning the use of the word "funny," the letter may leave the reader with the impression that Dickman at some point, actually characterized the performance as amusing and humorous.

However, in that event, should not the adjective require quotation marks around the word funny in order to attribute that specific word to Dickman?

To the contrary, the subject adjective lacked those quotation marks.

As such, the letter, IMHO, seems to reflect a rephrased characterization of previous Dickman comments suggesting that contents of the video were difficult to explain, and therefore, of his need to provide it to the victim's family, so that they could determine the appropriate action.

(2) On point two, the Buffalo News did describe the video as "vulgar" and "misogynistic," 5 and Dickman agreed that this particular video was "sexually offensive and vulgar." 6

I am however, curious about the letter's use of the word "funny."

One definition of "funny" is "difficult to explain or understand; strange or odd."

Absent the use of quotation marks around the word funny, can it not be argued that the letter merely characterized the video as "strange, odd, and difficult to explain;" a depiction which actually tends to support Dickman's accounts of his intentions and very limited distribution?

Regrettably, is it also not fair to assume that the casual reader may conclude that Dickman, based on the clever wording, acted in a highly inappropriate way?