CORRIDORS: Politician refuses to pay for high-end car she hired for party event

A VOCAL FEMALE politician under a new political formation is under fire for allegedly refusing to pay for a hired vehicle she used during a recent party function. Sources in the know say the politico hired a high-end vehicle from a local businessperson to attend the eminent event, aiming to project power. However, after basking in the political limelight, she reportedly failed to settle the car hire fee and instead has resorted to hurling insults when confronted over the bill.

JUST HOW LAID-BACK can some government officials choose to be, including where they are expected to show tenacity over critical matters? This is the grand question members of an oversight team were reportedly overheard asking themselves about an entity they’re checking. The team was questioning the entity’s top boss’s way of handling matters, calling the fellow out for perennial ill-preparedness. The team insists that the officer handling the lucrative entity must change his ‘I don’t care’ attitude when dealing with them. They suspect that the man is a stooge of powerful individuals.

IS THERE A quiet rivalry between a county chief and a senior official over credit for government legacy projects? Well, social media banter suggests tension, with both sharing project photos while downplaying each other’s role in their respective successes. Reports claim the county chief views the official’s actions as overreach, with their rift evident at a recent public event where neither acknowledged the other. It is speculated that the dispute may be tied to political ambitions ahead of the 2027 general elections, though neither side has commented.

A COUNTY LAWMAKER from a major urban county is allegedly evading authorities following accusations of accepting millions to influence his committee’s findings. Sources claim the funds—suspected to be a bribe—came from a senior executive under probe for alleged graft. The executive reportedly sought to sway the committee’s report, which initially implicated them. After the transaction, the findings were purportedly revised, absolving the executive and blaming junior staff. Investigators are yet to confirm the claims, and neither party has publicly responded.