Lie by inference--an ANTI specialty

After Elizabeth Jaka's forum piece, found here:

http://nctimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/article_6164f23a-ab93-5977-af1c-23b5bfc4db9b.html?mode=story

an ANTI blogger, JustTheFacts, wrote in to the comment section another one of our ANTI's favorite kind of blogs, one that contains lies by inference. In this case, two lies. I have posted the part of his comments with those two lies (in red) followed by my response (in blue).

JustTheFacts at 8:36am wrote "what does a high school which is now nearly completed have to do with the subject of CURRENT secret meetings"

First there are no "current" secret meeting"s". You are lying by inference. What was that commandment about bearing false witness?

The accidental coming together of three friends LAST March happened only once. It was not planned. No school business was discussed. It was not secret. It was not a meeting in any formal sense of the word.

Secondly while it is true Gibson and Guffanti never were in the majority, their support was necessary to acquire the land. California State law requires FOUR out of five votes for that procedure. Gibson and Guffanti refused to support the purchase of the cheap, level, fully graded Kawano site behind Strawberry Hill.

Gibson took money from those who opposed that site. He ran a campaign with huge signs "STOP the 10000 car mega school" all over VUSD. But he never told taxpayers that stopping construction at that primary site and forcing the district to find a secondary site would cost an extra 40 million dollars.

The primary Kawano site with construction would have cost the about 50 to 60 million dollars. It would have been completed and opened by the fall of 2005. The secondary site is costing our district taxpayers 100 million dollars! It is still not open for students. $40 million and more than four years later where is your outrage at Jim Gibson and Stephen Guffanti?

The question is why doesn't Dorothy care about that waste? She and you focus on something that was not secret, was not a board meeting, violated no law, and cost the district no money. Why 'strain at this imagined gnat and swallow a camel" of Gibson and Guffanti board actions?