Someone said :
But it later turned out he had not received the envelope at all. He had been at the fundraiser yes but there is no impropriety involved.
It turned out he confusingly admitted to organizing fund raising, collecting envelops that may or may not be brown; that may or may not be full of cash up to the legal donation limit; that he may or may not have brought to the fund raising manager. He was just not sure this envelop was one of the many.
Whatever the nature of the accusation made at the time, it showed he had things to hide, that he had lied about his (very very strong) relationship to FF, and that he was up to his knees with a brown stuff smelling of the distinctive FF fund raising scent.
As I said before, many time: I never fund raised for FF or collected brown envelops. I do not need to check if asked. I know I never did it, or was never in any way associated with it.
I would have known that this envelop could not have been one of the many, because I would have had no other envelops I was trying to hide.
Someone said :
The point is that an election was decided based on a falsehood and that RTE assumed it's veracity without verifying it first. As such it represented an undue influence on voters close to the cut-off point for political-coverage by broadcasters, unfairly denying Gallagher time to set the record straight. A policy on tweets is urgently required lest this affair lend itself to repeat-performances in future elections.
No, it was decided on his reaction to that "falsehood" (if we were to admit it were).
What sunk him was his reaction to it, and his inability to offer a clear cut version of an acceptable truth.
The tweet was fake... but it exposed his own falseness as regards his strong, unsevered and unassumed connections to FF.
SF-IRA tried to trick him with a pot of green paint.
But in the end what sunk him was to be caught red-handed, in his own web of semi-truths.
SF may have circulated a lie.
But his inability to be able to disconnect this lie from his own lies made his fall.