RCMP raids Tory party headquarters

[Argus]

Correct, not transfered back to be spent Nationally...

Which neatly defeats the shrill complaints that taxpayers money was involved. They would have gotten the tax writeoffs whether the money was spent nationally or locally.

[DrGreenthumb]

Which neatly defeats the shrill complaints that taxpayers money was involved. They would have gotten the tax writeoffs whether the money was spent nationally or locally.

So in your opinion the conservatives only cheated to fraudulently win the election, but did not actually steal from the taxpayers?

I still feel like they are thieves AND cheaters. They knew they would get more votes by illegally spending campaign money on the national campaign even though they had already reached their legal limit. Those votes translate into rebates from the taxpayer, so they cheated Canadians out of a fair election, and CONNED them out of their money. I still consider CON men to be theives.

[Right-Wing]

There shouldn't even be limits at all on campaign spending. A private person cannot even take out an ad supporting their party of choice under the draconian laws of EC. Outrageous to have this in a supposed "free society".

[punked]

Which neatly defeats the shrill complaints that taxpayers money was involved. They would have gotten the tax writeoffs whether the money was spent nationally or locally.

No it does not. You see the money is going to places where the money was not spent. I don't know about you but I would rather the money which suppose to be spent in in my riding not go to a riding in Ontario. That is just economics. Don't make the claim you spent in my riding giving the money back to the local wing where money is not spent becuase they don't think my riding is important. If they don't want to spend the money fine but they don't get to take that money away and spend it somewhere where they are not allowed to spend it. I am glade however you see how this is different from what the other parties did.

[jdobbin]

Was it not pointed out earlier that the EC commisioner is not appointed by the government but by parliament? Now if you have a majority that can mean the same thing, but clearly that is not the case with Harper.

The Commissioner is appointed by the CEO. The CEO is appointed by the government and voted on by Parliament. The selection is made by the government and anywhere along the line, any party can object and they can go back into the selection pool. One assumes that the Tories must have been happy with their selection since they picked Mayrand from the list of eligible candidates and then voted for him.

[jdobbin]

So the money would simply have been spent locally.

I don't think anyone would have had a problem with that. It is the money going in and going out with, in some cases, altered paperwork for the invoices.

Edited April 24, 2008 by jdobbin

[jdobbin]

But because one nobody Liberal MP speculates that an invoice looks different than the company's usual invoices Jdobbin starts routinely stating, as fact, that the Tories altered invoices.

It's that kind of mindset that allows him to unhesitantly support the most corrupt government in a century while whining endlessly about the most minor allegations and insinuations against its opponent.

It wasn't a Liberal party member who investigated the altered invoices. It was Elections Canada. And Retail Council could not give an explanation other than they believed the document had been altered. It would help if you got that right.

As for the rest of your anti-Liberal rant, it is just baiting again with the standard Liberals are worse response.

[jdobbin]

Complete lie, of course, but that wouldn't mean anything to a Liberal.

And Tories can't accept that this investigation was not instigated by the Liberals.

A number of Tories expressed concern about the legality of the scheme - because unlike Liberals the Tories generally try to follow the law. The party consulted its lawyers, and the lawyers told them it was legal, so they went ahead with it. Nothing wrong with that.

Tell me, did Stephan Dion consult the Liberal Party's lawyers before he okayed all that Adscam money being stolen and spent on Liberal campaigns?

Oh, of course, he was completely ignorant! Just because he was Jean Chretien's Quebec lieutenant doesn't mean he'd know anything!

God knows he knows nothing about anything now.

It is funny the contortions the right wing are going through to lash out at people and say they didn't do anything wrong.

[sharkman]

dobbin, don't be hypocritical. At the slightest provocation, you whine about personal attacks. Now you're doing the same to Argus. Play the ball and not the man.

[DrGreenthumb]

There shouldn't even be limits at all on campaign spending. A private person cannot even take out an ad supporting their party of choice under the draconian laws of EC. Outrageous to have this in a supposed "free society".

the reason we have SOME freedom is because we do not allow the rich to use their money to buy elections. The wealthiest 5 or 10% that benefit by voting conservative would love to be able to flood the airwaves with brainwashing to convince people to vote conservative even though that party is the worst possible choice for 90% of Canadians, who are not already wealthy. There has to be spending limits to keep elections fair. The cheating conservatives ignored the rules so that they could steal the PMO, its that simple. Unfortuneately for Harper his party got got cheating.

It is no surprise to me that members of the eliteist conservative party think they should be able to buy their way into power, the rich always seem to think they are better than the rest of us and deserve more.

Our democracy depends on all the parties getting an equal chance to get their ideas out, we need a somewhat level playing field. Letting conservatives spend as much as they want attacking the other parties leaders in national ads gives an unfair advantage to the wealthiest canadians to trick the rest of the people into electing a party that does not best represent their interests.

The conservatives who like to call themselves the "law and order party" sure don't seem to like obeying the law themselves. If conservatives are allowed to only obey the laws they like then the rest of us should be givin the same opportunity. So I'll just use bill c-26 for asswipe if i run out of conservative mailings.

[jdobbin]

Which neatly defeats the shrill complaints that taxpayers money was involved. They would have gotten the tax writeoffs whether the money was spent nationally or locally.

They wouldn't have gotten the tax rebates for money they overspent nationally.

[sharkman]

One issue has been pretty much ignored by Liberal supporters: why did Elections Canada drive from Ottowa to Toronto to get a judge to sign the warrant? Aren't there judges in Ottowa? This is judge shopping plain and simple. It appears that they tried to get an Ottowa judge to sign it, but were unsuccessful. Or, avoiding the more political savvy Ottowa judges, who would have been more aware that Elections Canada was asking permission to raid the offices of the party they were embroiled in a court case with, and were to take the stand the next day.

[Right-Wing]

Quotes are taken frFor the full article please click this linkom this article by JANE TABER AND GLORIA GALLOWAY From Thursday's Globe and Mail April 23, 2008 at 9:37 PM EDT

For the full article please click this link

The steps taken by the RCMP are outrageous, the RCMP has enough problems of their own as it is so this doesn't help them at all. To show up in full body armor, Liberals with cameras and media with cameras in tow. Obviously they were tipped off by EC or the RCMP. The RCMP barges down the door and floods the room like Al capone is behind it is just overkill.

“What, did they expect us to shoot back?” said the official, who asked not to be named.

EC takes everything from the CPC office. Documents not even related to the allegations. Documents on campaign strategy even. What does that have to do with the allegations. This is appalling and I wouldn't be surprised if the CPC launches another suit against EC for this excessive abuse. I find it funny that this invasion occurs just before the CPC are to dispose the EC upper management. And during the invasion they manage to take everything that could be used against EC. They even take items that had nothing to do with with investigation like campaign strategy as I mentioned earlier.

The party, he said, has done nothing illegal. “We went to great lengths to comply with Elections Canada.”

EC are digging their hole even deeper. When nothing turns up from their investigations they will have a whole slew of civil suits against them.

[Fortunata]

EC are digging their hole even deeper. When nothing turns up from their investigations they will have a whole slew of civil suits against them.

I think Canadians (other than the very partisan Cons) trust Elections Canada more than they trust any governing party. After all EC is invited to actively participate in elections around the world because of their neutrality and their adherence to policies and laws. Steve et al. smearing EC is not going over well; people have been hearing this "conspiracy" that everyone is against the poor Cons too many times now to take it seriously. Steve is getting to be known as our national whiner and blamer, which is funny because the right wing is supposed to take personal responsibility seriously and preach it on every possible occasion (at least when it doesn't apply to themselves).

They even take items that had nothing to do with with investigation like campaign strategy as I mentioned earlier.

According to whom? The CPC who lies and misrepresents easier and more often that a person breathes? And which campaign strategy even if this is true - the one coming up or the last one in which there was a memo to the effect that the in and out scheme to rob taxpayers may not be legal (and certainly not ethical)? That campaign strategy that points out that the CPC knowingly committed to what may likely be fraud?

[Argus]

They wouldn't have gotten the tax rebates for money they overspent nationally.

And did not, which is why they're sueing.

However, no taxpayer money was lost by their scheme.

Unlike with your party's many crooked and corrupt schemes.

[Argus]

One issue has been pretty much ignored by Liberal supporters: why did Elections Canada drive from Ottowa to Toronto to get a judge to sign the warrant? Aren't there judges in Ottowa? This is judge shopping plain and simple. It appears that they tried to get an Ottowa judge to sign it, but were unsuccessful. Or, avoiding the more political savvy Ottowa judges, who would have been more aware that Elections Canada was asking permission to raid the offices of the party they were embroiled in a court case with, and were to take the stand the next day.

Judge Ian V.B Nordheimer signed the warrant. Judge Nordheimer was appointed in 1999 by the Liberals. Prior to that he contributed several thousand dollars to Allan Rock's (then Liberal Justice Minister) election campaign.

It would be interesting to know whether EC attempted to get a warrant signed by a judge in Ottawa but were turned down, or if they knew Nordheimer for some reason.

[Fortunata]

The situation needs to be looked at by the Ethics Commission for sure...some of these things aren't adding up.

And then if the Ethics Commission agrees that the warrant was warranted will the Cons yell conspiracy? How long do you think that will take them (or the flock)? An hour, two?

[Fortunata]

The Conservatives are to hold an open press conference today on the subject so we'll see what they have to say for themselves.

And we should believe what they say ... why? Their credibility is at a zero over this issue but it might be worth some entertainment value. If the questions get too hard maybe we can see them slither down the nearest stairwell like they did last time.

[Argus]

And we should believe what they say ... why? Their credibility is at a zero over this issue

Why is their credibility "zero" over this issue? They have a disagreement with EC over the interpretation of election law. This is no secret, and is why they've sued EC over it so they can get a judge to decide.

Or is it just that they have "zero credibiilty" because you hate Conservatives?

Who do you think has credibility on this issue, Stephan Dion?

[Fortunata]

Why is their credibility "zero" over this issue? They have a disagreement with EC over the interpretation of election law. This is no secret, and is why they've sued EC over it so they can get a judge to decide.

The memo from the lawyer saying the in and out scheme "may" be illegal according to the rules and the falsified invoice belies their "so-called" interpretation.

Or is it just that they have "zero credibiilty" because you hate Conservatives?

I don't "hate" Conservatives. I have no respect or liking for Steve but that's a whole different story.

Who do you think has credibility on this issue, Stephan Dion?

Steph has more credibility than Steve on this but that's only because Steve has none.

[Argus]

The memo from the lawyer saying the in and out scheme "may" be illegal according to the rules and the falsified invoice belies their "so-called" interpretation.

You are referring to the letter from the ad exec who said he was pretty sure it was legal, but not beyond any reasonable doubt - which caused them to seek the advice of their lawyers - who said it was legal?

I don't "hate" Conservatives. I have no respect or liking for Steve but that's a whole different story.

Why?

Steph has more credibility than Steve on this but that's only because Steve has none.

Why?

[jdobbin]

Judge Ian V.B Nordheimer signed the warrant. Judge Nordheimer was appointed in 1999 by the Liberals. Prior to that he contributed several thousand dollars to Allan Rock's (then Liberal Justice Minister) election campaign.

He also contributed to the Progressive Conservatives.

It would be interesting to know whether EC attempted to get a warrant signed by a judge in Ottawa but were turned down, or if they knew Nordheimer for some reason.

Easy enough to find out. The Tories can ask that in their lawsuit.

[jdobbin]

And did not, which is why they're sueing.

However, no taxpayer money was lost by their scheme.

And hopefully none will be lost if this proves to be a scam by the Tories to by pass election rules.

And perhaps some Tories will face criminal charges for going over election spending rules and altering documents.

Unlike with your party's many crooked and corrupt schemes.

Glad to see your party is acting in a transparent and non-crooked way. Not.

[sharkman]

He also contributed to the Progressive Conservatives.

Easy enough to find out. The Tories can ask that in their lawsuit.

So why is it when the Liberals drive from Ottowa to Toronto to get a warrant signed for a seizure in Ottowa, you can find nothing suspicious with it?

[punked]

So why is it when the Liberals drive from Ottowa to Toronto to get a warrant signed for a seizure in Ottowa, you can find nothing suspicious with it?

You don't find it suspicious that the conservatives forged documents? We can do this all day. Fact is a judge signed the warrant making it legal.