So then City Council member John Cranley resigns from office in 2009 as a means to halt the State of Ohio ethics violation investigation. If you have done nothing wrong, why resign?
That is a very legitimate question that should have been asked by the local news media to Cranley and then asked repeatedly until he answers it fully. The Enquirer instead decides to publish a whitewash article that portrays itself as an in-depth explanation that spins the story to make Cranley look like a good developer.
Why not ask another question to Cranley: If Cranley didn't violate any ethics rules in 2009 when he invested in the project, why would he need or even want to divest himself of the property if he is elected Mayor?
While they are at it, why doesn't someone ask Cranley if he did violate ethics rules over this project?
So, if a news outlet can't ask the bottom line questions, why cover the story at all? It wouldn't be bias towards Cranley, would it?