
Originally Posted by
FleetDefender
For me, that's too easy - and doesn't put the blame where it belong: with the Mayor.
The boss gets to decide who the employees are. If the boss keeps one that gets him in trouble, that's the boss's fault. I guess the Mayor deserves credit for being loyal to people (except, apparently Libman), but then it becomes a political issue about whether keeping that employee is a bad enough reflection on the boss.
Plus, the Mayor's a lawyer, too, right? How do we really know whether the Mayor is pushing the agenda and the city attorney is just along for the ride?