Wincam employee public liar desn't know the answer to his own questions, but we do!!!

On public figure Joe Viglione's blog tonight he writes:

Why was Martha Coakley in Winchester? At a certain TV station?

Is Martha checking out how the competition works next door?

Gee, isn't it rather coincidental that Martha Coakley was in Winchester behind the high school at a TV station...

breaking news...

Do stay tuned....

(Does it have anything to do with the non-profit's division in touch with this editor by personal letter just a couple of days before....OK...stuff even Johnny doesn't know....do stay tuned...like M.P. said..."This is going to be fun!")

Well we know why she was there, Joe. Were you aware of the documents she brought with her, Joe? Were you aware whether or not she had a copy of the Woburn Court Judge's papers on his findings of the Natalia Vs. Viglione lawsuit, Joe? You know the one we mean Joe; it's the one where the judge said you obviously know nothing about business, almost nothing about public access and have a self aggrandizing opinion of your own self importance, Joe. It's also the report that says no respectable segment of the community would believe anything you say, Joe. You do remember that part of the report, don't you, Joe?

You don't? Gee, that's funny - because WE do, Joe. And I'm sure Martha Coakley does, too, Joe. It's kind of hard for the State Attorney General to forget something like that once she's read it, Joe. Now don't you think that the State Attorney General would be very concerned upon learning that a public school in her State would hire such an unqualified person (as the judge has determined that you are) to be hired by them, Joe? Don't you think that Martha Coakley would be concerned that such a person (meaning you, Joe) would be paid by them, Joe? Don't you think that Martha Coakley would be concerned that they are using ratepayer's (the public who votes for her position) money in such a wasteful fashion as to hire and pay such an obvious incompetent (as the judge so determined you to be, Joe) to administer Public Access to them, Joe? Don't you think that Martha Coakley wants to see what kind of negligent individuals would do such a thing to the City of Winchester, Joe? Don't you think that if Martha Coakley personally went to Wincam to check this all out that someone in Wincam is in deep trouble, Joe?

And don't you think that someone like us would have supplied Martha Coakley with that copy of the judge's decision and tipped her off about how you are defrauding the City of Winchester, Joe? What's that you say, Joe? You don't think so? Well that's funny, BECAUSE WE DO! So we're not going to worry about Martha Coakley's visit to Wincam, Joe; but YOU SHOULD!!!