RCMP raids Tory party headquarters

[punked]

Everything that doesn't come from the media is spin. The media and the LPC website are the only gospel. Courts lie according to punked.

"Back in November of last year, the Conservative Party filed an affidavit (the "Donald Affidavit") with the federal court."

That seems like the holy grail of impartial documents. They did this so they could keep accusing other parties and spinning but when you read the document which I am sure you haven't done it is full of accusations of things that "kinda, somewhat like, but not really the same but maybe close though" things the other parties did. I personally don't think it is wrong to help your candidates reach their spending limits like this document assesses, but giving money to a candidate then pulling it out to throw that candidate to the wolves so you can spend more then the legal limit on another candidate seems wrong to me. Either way you would agree they are not the same thing?

[punked]

Apparently......but it is to be expected, from those types ignorance is bliss, and if you try to educate them on the subject they put their fingers in their ears.

What are you talking about the document he referred too is not a court document it is a document from the Conservative party which doesn't even accuse the other parties of the same practice. You are the one not even listening to your own party. There are also a lot of Conservative party member who were left out in the wind who felt wronged too.

[Alta4ever]

What are you talking about the document he referred too is not a court document it is a document from the Conservative party which doesn't even accuse the other parties of the same practice. You are the one not even listening to your own party. There are also a lot of Conservative party member who were left out in the wind who felt wronged too.

So I ask you why it has a court number right on the top?

[punked]

So I ask you why it has a court number right on the top?

Because it is an Affidavit, it is not something coming from the court it is something coming from the Conservative party. Read the web page you do not even have to read the document you have to read the first sentence before the "Donald Affidavit" to know it comes from the Conservatives not the courts.

[Qwerty]

Because it is an Affidavit, it is not something coming from the court it is something coming from the Conservative party. Read the web page you do not even have to read the document you have to read the first sentence before the "Donald Affidavit" to know it comes from the Conservatives not the courts.

Punked: Is everything the Conservatives say a lie?

[punked]

Punked: Is everything the Conservatives say a lie?

I assume what they wrote int the Affidavit is not a lie because it is a sworn statement. Which is when I read it I find they never say anyone did what they did but things which are similar. Here lets us an example I ask my friend if I can take his car out and then I do, or I just take his car out with out asking. They are similar things which I did but on is stealing and illegal that what them saying the other parties did similar things is not a charge I am willing to by from the Tories.

[Qwerty]

I assume what they wrote int the Affidavit is not a lie because it is a sworn statement. Which is when I read it I find they never say anyone did what they did but things which are similar. Here lets us an example I ask my friend if I can take his car out and then I do, or I just take his car out with out asking. They are similar things which I did but on is stealing and illegal that what them saying the other parties did similar things is not a charge I am willing to by from the Tories.

Please stop using causality. This is bad form and should be avoided during a debate.

Thank you.

[punked]

Please stop using causality. This is bad form and should be avoided during a debate.

Thank you.

My point stands even if you want to ignore it and redirect.

[Qwerty]

Punked do you not find anything strange about EC using the RCMP to serve a warrant against the CPC when the CPC has a civil suit against EC?

That just stinks to me.

Perhaps the EC should clear up the questions that the CPC has for EC in the civil matter before it starts confiscating documents related to the case against them.

[jdobbin]

You know, it seems to me that we KNOW that the money the Liberals stole from the taxpayer went into their campaign - under the table. Did Elections Canada ever issue warrants to check into that? We heard that the Liberals gave judges robes to lawyers who provided them with free services during the election. Did Elections Canada ever look into that? Ever issue any warrants? Wonder why not.

Perhaps you can ask Mulroney's appointee Kingsley. Or maybe you can ask Harper's appointee Mayrand. The Liberals haven't appointed a chief electoral officer in nearly 20 years.

[jdobbin]

As usual, you misunderstand. It was not over the limit had it been used locally. Had the Tories thought that it was illegal to use this money federally, they would have used it there.

But clearly they didn't want to waste the money on a flyer campaign or signs for a riding they didn't think they could win. They moved it to the national campaign. Many of the local Tory candidates thought it was sketchy. They were right to be wary since it appears invoices were changed to make it all possible.

[jdobbin]

Next we will have jdobbin spouting a proof is a proof is a proof, and saying that this isn't proof because it was posted on the blogging tories.

I have seen these documents before and I'm sure the Tories will bring it up in their lawsuit. Elections Canada disputes that the Tories ever intended the money to be used in the local campaign and they question the invoices which appear to be altered. In other words, someone in the federal party appears to have given false information about expenses.

[Qwerty]

I have seen these documents before and I'm sure the Tories will bring it up in their lawsuit. Elections Canada disputes that the Tories ever intended the money to be used in the local campaign and they question the invoices which appear to be altered. In other words, someone in the federal party appears to have given false information about expenses.

Do you not find anything strange about EC using the RCMP to serve a warrant against the CPC when the CPC has a civil suit against EC?

Perhaps the EC should clear up the questions that the CPC has for EC in the civil matter before it starts confiscating documents related to the case against them.

That just stinks to me.

[punked]

Do you not find anything strange about EC using the RCMP to serve a warrant against the CPC when the CPC has a civil suit against EC?

Perhaps the EC should clear up the questions that the CPC has for EC in the civil matter before it starts confiscating documents related to the case against them.

That just stinks to me.

Yes it has to do with the law suit the Conservatives brought against elections Canada cause the lawsuit is about this issue. The law suit says EC is wrong in not giving the Conservatives money back, and EC says they broke the law they are one in the same about the same issue not two different issues. Qwerty have you read anything about this subject?

You can not get a search warrant for "I want to punish them for filing a law suit" you have to have some sort of proof. BWT

[sharkman]

Do you not find anything strange about EC using the RCMP to serve a warrant against the CPC when the CPC has a civil suit against EC?

Perhaps the EC should clear up the questions that the CPC has for EC in the civil matter before it starts confiscating documents related to the case against them.

That just stinks to me.

Yes, that they seized documents pertaining to this very court case the day before the EC was to present their case really stinks. It seems there are many things going on behind the scene in the age old struggle for power.

[DrGreenthumb]

Do you not find anything strange about EC using the RCMP to serve a warrant against the CPC when the CPC has a civil suit against EC?

Perhaps the EC should clear up the questions that the CPC has for EC in the civil matter before it starts confiscating documents related to the case against them.

That just stinks to me.

What stinks to ME is you copy and pasting the exact same response over and over in all the tory corruption threads. Its really sickening when you double post the same crap multiple times just to make sure the last post in the thread is not an anti-tory post. It makes it hard to follow the posts and reply to an actual thought out post that someone else has made. You debate like a 3 year old. Grow up. you are screwing up the flow of this discussion. We are talking about how the "law and order" tories think they should be above the law, and get away with whatever kind of corruption they want. The conservatives only want the laws applied to "other people", while they feel like they should be able to only obey the laws they "agree with".

[Alta4ever]

What stinks to ME is you copy and pasting the exact same response over and over in all the tory corruption threads. Its really sickening when you double post the same crap multiple times just to make sure the last post in the thread is not an anti-tory post. It makes it hard to follow the posts and reply to an actual thought out post that someone else has made. You debate like a 3 year old. Grow up. you are screwing up the flow of this discussion. We are talking about how the "law and order" tories think they should be above the law, and get away with whatever kind of corruption they want. The conservatives only want the laws applied to "other people", while they feel like they should be able to only obey the laws they "agree with".

Sounds like your describing a different party. The Tories are fighting that the same electoral laws apply to them as they do to the Liberals and NDP.

[punked]

Sounds like your describing a different party. The Tories are fighting that the same electoral laws apply to them as they do to the Liberals and NDP.

Nope they are fighting so things "sort of kinda like" what they did count as the same as what they did. Too bad these other parties didn't break the law doing the things that were sorta like what the conservatives did but with out the illegal differences.

[jdobbin]

Sounds like your describing a different party. The Tories are fighting that the same electoral laws apply to them as they do to the Liberals and NDP.

Perhaps if the Tories hadn't altered invoices, they might have had their expenses approved. Instead, their own people expressed suspicion about money that went in and out.

[Alta4ever]

Nope they are fighting so things "sort of kinda like" what they did count as the same as what they did. Too bad these other parties didn't break the law doing the things that were sorta like what the conservatives did but with out the illegal differences.

sort of kinda like.......either what was done was similiar or not. Sort of kinda like, sounds sort of kind of like the liberals and the NDP should sort of kind of like have to answer for the the same sort of kind of like activity.

[Alta4ever]

Perhaps if the Tories hadn't altered invoices, they might have had their expenses approved. Instead, their own people expressed suspicion about money that went in and out.

So tell me why the independent auditors the ones who get the books before elections Canada get them didn't have any proplems with it?

[punked]

sort of kinda like.......either what was done was similiar or not. Sort of kinda like, sounds sort of kind of like the liberals and the NDP should sort of kind of like have to answer for the the same sort of kind of like activity.

That is why the Affidavit they submitted is not very good proof they never say other parties did what they did and they never accuse them of anything other then things that were sorta kinda like what they did. It is a bunch of double speak.

[Alta4ever]

That is why the Affidavit they submitted is not very good proof they never say other parties did what they did and they never accuse them of anything other then things that were sorta kinda like what they did. It is a bunch of double speak.

Sounds to me that elections Canada is altering its stance on what it will allow from the conservatives but not for any other party.

[jdobbin]

So tell me why the independent auditors the ones who get the books before elections Canada get them didn't have any proplems with it?

Citation for that? Many Tories reported their concerns when the audits were taken according to many of the links in this thread.

[jdobbin]

Sounds to me that elections Canada is altering its stance on what it will allow from the conservatives but not for any other party.

Sounds like our prime minister should sue. And if the party get charged by the RCMP, he should sue.