I never expected when I titled my article as the "Cliff Olney Chronicles" that i would have to waste more time writing about him. But I woke this morning to find Olney didn’t just respond to my reporting—he had a full-blown meltdown in print.
In a letter to the Watertown Daily Times' NNY360, Olney traded facts for flair, dodging accountability with the finesse of a guy cornered in his own contradictions. He wants the public to believe that anyone who dares to report on his actions must be part of some grand conspiracy—one that includes ethics boards, court records, petitioners, and, apparently, meme pages.
Let’s be honest: this isn’t a rebuttal. It’s a tantrum. And it says a lot more about Cliff Olney’s character than it does about mine.
Olney opens his screed with a jab at me and my publication—Trash Media—as if the size of my operation somehow invalidates the facts I report facts. That’s the move of a man more concerned with optics than truth. Sorry Cliff, but you don’t get to dismiss journalism just because it’s independent. If anything, it’s the independence that makes it honest.
He then claims my editorial “reads less like journalism and more like an angry meme with spellcheck.” Cute line. But here’s the thing: I didn’t fabricate his ethics violations. I didn’t make up the petition concerns. I didn’t invent his long history of bullying behavior, combative public comments, or the legal threats he lobs at constituents who dare to criticize him. I just documented them—and that documentation clearly hit a nerve.
Olney also insists the ethics complaint about the golf course deal was “already ruled legitimate by a court.” What he doesn’t say is that the court didn’t rule on the ethics—it ruled on the sale process. Ethics aren’t confined to legality. The public has every right to question whether a sitting councilman steering a city purchase to a property he personally negotiated for is appropriate. Spoiler: It’s not.
Then comes the real kicker: his attempt to spin the petition scrutiny as some kind of political hit job. He paints the woman who raised the red flags as a partisan operative—completely ignoring the actual concern, which is that his petitions were suspicious enough to spark formal complaints. This is his fifth time doing it “this way,” he says. That’s not a defense, Cliff—that’s a confession.
Olney ends his letter with a dramatic flourish, claiming he’s simply “turning on the lights” and exposing the so-called smear machine. But here’s the truth:
Sunlight doesn’t bother honest men.
It only makes the rot easier to see.
Cliff Olney isn’t the victim of a witch hunt—he’s the subject of legitimate scrutiny. And instead of answering questions or clearing the air, he lashes out at journalists, ethics boards, legal processes, and everyday citizens. That’s not leadership. That’s damage control.
This community deserves elected officials who respond to criticism with transparency, not theatrics. They deserve representatives who see accountability as a duty, not a personal attack. If Olney truly believes in serving the people, then he should welcome tough questions—not hide behind punchlines and projection.
Because the lights are on, Cliff. And we’re all watching.
Chris O'Neil © Trash Media Group 2025
https://www.trashmediagroup.com
