Smear tactics in Ottawa

[jdobbin]

I have no doubt that he wouldn't see a problem with lieing under oath, the bigger problem is the Cadmans and that darn recording.

I wonder if the Tories want Harper to actually have to testify in court in front of a jury about what he meant with the $1 million policy and to actually name names on who might have made that offer.

Unlike Parliament where he can insult the person asking that question, he won't get that sort of leeway from the judge.

[jdobbin]

I'm sorry you can't get your head around the RCMP investigation results. You were wrong and just can't admit it.

I think you are saying Dona Cadman was wrong to make that claim. You can't seem to admit that.

And if she is wrong, why is she running for the party? Why wasn't she being sued for claiming the Tory party tried to bribe her husband?

[scribblet]

Dona Cadman was obviously wrong, and obviously misunderstood or didn't hear him correctly, we don't know what he said, only what she thought she heard from a dying man heavily sedated. Not to mention that Cadman stated clearly no such offer was made to Mike Duffy and that's recorded for everyone to see and hear.

Even John Moore, (CFRB) a strong left winger, said yesterday 'it doesn't pass the sniff test' - as we have all said before, it doesn't make sense that any insurance company would underwrite a million dollar policy to a dying man, the Cadmans got it wrong.

The Liberals made fabricated accusations outside of the House, that's where it becomes libel... talking about enquiries - when do we get one on the bribes made to Stronach et al

[jdobbin]

Dona Cadman was obviously wrong, and obviously misunderstood or didn't hear him correctly, we don't know what he said, only what she thought she heard from a dying man heavily sedated. Not to mention that Cadman stated clearly no such offer was made to Mike Duffy and that's recorded for everyone to see and hear.

Even John Moore, (CFRB) a strong left winger, said yesterday 'it doesn't pass the sniff test' - as we have all said before, it doesn't make sense that any insurance company would underwrite a million dollar policy to a dying man, the Cadmans got it wrong.

The Liberals made fabricated accusations outside of the House, that's where it becomes libel... talking about enquiries - when do we get one on the bribes made to Stronach et al

I love how the right wing can say bribe about Stronach and it isn't libel.

If Cadman is wrong, why is she being allowed to run? Why would someone who makes an accusation of bribery a suitable candidate?

And if a $1 million dollar policy was not offered, why does Harper acknowledge it when asked by the author?

Edited May 17, 2008 by jdobbin

[Wild Bill]

The Liberals made fabricated accusations outside of the House, that's where it becomes libel... talking about enquiries - when do we get one on the bribes made to Stronach et al

What's more, what this situation really proves is the lack of experienced managers in Dion's team. Under Chretien or Martin there was no way a Liberal would be so stupid as to make such comments outside the protection of privilege in the House. Warren Kinsella would have flayed them alive!

Virtually all of Dion's gaffes can be chalked up to a lack of an experienced team. This reinforces my belief that he was always expected just to be a 'caretaker' leader. No high level candidate wanted to be leader with Adscam still so fresh in the public mind. They knew their party had no hope of government for at least a term or two. So they let Dion hold the fort. Harper's likely to be in power for another term, maybe even with a majority. After that enough time would have passed for the electorate to forget. The Liberals will have a REAL leadership convention with lots of media hype and hoopla! The big names will come out of the woodwork and the big money will be donated.

When that happens, I wonder what kind of shape Harper and his party will have left themselves in? After all, the immediate election will be easy, especially if Dion asks Canadians to believe that a Carbon Tax won't hurt them on an individual basis. It's the one after that will prove to be the challenge...

[scribblet]

Dion is on his way out, he did let them go too far with the smears. However, he might survive this one if he offers an apology, doing it in such a way that they (Liberals) come out appearing that they are taking the high road and recognize their mistakes. I think the public would go for that rather than more mudslinging. Besides, the only people who seem to care about it are a handful of partisan posters.

[jdobbin]

Dion is on his way out, he did let them go too far with the smears. However, he might survive this one if he offers an apology, doing it in such a way that they (Liberals) come out appearing that they are taking the high road and recognize their mistakes. I think the public would go for that rather than more mudslinging. Besides, the only people who seem to care about it are a handful of partisan posters.

Citation for the public demanding an apology?

Dion leaving before the election? I'll admit that he isn't doing great but the Liberal party is still statistically tied with the Tories in the polls. You aren't going to see a leadership convention before the next vote.

Seems to me that the even some Tory friendly journalists are remarking at how the Tory government is becoming the masters of mudslinging.

Edited May 17, 2008 by jdobbin

[jdobbin]

When that happens, I wonder what kind of shape Harper and his party will have left themselves in? After all, the immediate election will be easy, especially if Dion asks Canadians to believe that a Carbon Tax won't hurt them on an individual basis. It's the one after that will prove to be the challenge...

I keep hearing the next election will be easy for the Tories. Why can't they break clear now is overwhelming support?

My guess is that the Liberals will propose very large income tax cuts in the election. That should be an easy sell.

[scribblet]

Large income tax cuts will sell, but not if Dion continues with the carbon tax proposal, that's a loser.

Citation for the public demanding an apology? ?- I never said the public was demanding one, I said they would go for it if he offered one.

[Michael Bluth]

I keep hearing the next election will be easy for the Tories. Why can't they break clear now is overwhelming support?

My guess is that the Liberals will propose very large income tax cuts in the election. That should be an easy sell.

Warren Kinsella's May 16th post has a demand for an apology. Link

Large tax cuts? A revenue neutral tax cut? Getting green while getting rich? Massive increases to social spending? Staying in budget surplus?

Yeah, that's a real easy sell.

[Wild Bill]

Dion leaving before the election? I'll admit that he isn't doing great but the Liberal party is still statistically tied with the Tories in the polls. You aren't going to see a leadership convention before the next vote.

There is no possible way there will be a Liberal leadership convention before the next election at all! Unless Dion walks under a bus.

The moment the Liberals would call a convention Harper would precipitate an election, the new 'fixed election date' rules notwithstanding. The Liberals just don't have the resources to survive such a situation. They would be decimated in the polls.

And why shouldn't Harper do such? The Liberals did it to his side, more than once!

Turnabout is fair play.

No, the Liberals are stuck with Dion and have to make the best of it. They have no other choice but to put on a brave face and tell us their leader will personally save the planet!

Without any pain to the average Canadian at all, of course.

[jdobbin]

Large income tax cuts will sell, but not if Dion continues with the carbon tax proposal, that's a loser.

Citation for the public demanding an apology? ?- I never said the public was demanding one, I said they would go for it if he offered one.

I would have said raising income taxes to cut the GST was mostly a loser policy as well but what do you know...

Canadians will gladly accept large income tax cuts. There will not be additional gas taxes. The rest of the energy tax will be broadened. If not by the federal government, then by the provinces.

Do you have some inside knowledge that the Tories want an apology? Seems Harper wants his day in court. If that is the case, I guess he will have to testify.

[jdobbin]

No, the Liberals are stuck with Dion and have to make the best of it. They have no other choice but to put on a brave face and tell us their leader will personally save the planet!

Without any pain to the average Canadian at all, of course.

I've said many times I expect that Harper will win another minority. The Liberals will replace Dion if the Tories win. I wonder if Tories will replace their own leader if a majority is not possible. The Liberals are not likely to be as weak later on.

[scribblet]

Interesting piece by Kay

http://tinyurl.com/5wv92p

Jonathan Kay on the Cadman non-scandal: Told you so

Posted: May 16, 2008, 5:14 PM by Jonathan Kay

This just in: "The RCMP have concluded their investigation into allegations of bribery in the so-called Cadman affair, saying there is no evidence to file charges."

Which allows me to recite the three words every pundit loves to say: Told you so.

Jonathan Kay: Before we give the slightest credence to the Chuck Cadman story, how about we check Tom Flanagan's resumé?

Posted to FullComment.com: February 29, 2008, 1:45 PM

Before anyone gives any credence to the idea that the federal Conservatives offered Chuck Cadman $1-million to help bring down Paul Martin's government in 2005, please listen to this Feb . 28 CBC As It Happens interview with Tom Zytaruk, the author of the book from which the accusation springs. In the interview, (which is the first segment in the linked As It Happens audio file), the journalist — who seemed oddly clueless about many of the questions put to him — makes it clear that he had no other basis for the claim than the say-so of Cadman's widow, Dona. That, in itself, is not fatal to the allegation: This would hardly be the first scandal story to be single-sourced. (And in any case, the Cadmans' daughter has since come forward to back up her mother's claim.) But listen to the interview and it's clear that Zytaruk was entirely in the dark about the most basic details of the alleged offer — including the identities of the Conservatives who allegedly made the offer.

[Keepitsimple]

The media often states that Harper has filed a lawsuit against the federal Liberal party, referring only to the fact that the Liberals say that Harper knew about the alleged bribery. This grossly under-represents the maliciousness of the Liberals' personal attacks on Harper. In fact, the lawsuit refers to very specific and damaging accusations that appeared on the Liberal Website:

1) Harper must come clean about allegations of Conservative Bribery

2) He knew that it was immoral

3) He knew that it was unethical

4) He knew it was illegal

These statements, for which the Liberal Party and its leader refuse to offer an apology, are shameful and go far beyond the usual unsavoury Parliamentary antics. These personal attacks on a sitting Prime Minister of any stripe are totally unacceptable and fully warrant the litigation that is underway.

Notice of Libel: http://www.ctv.ca/generic/WebSpecials/pdf/...3-02-183001.pdf

[Shakeyhands]

he was still offered "something" Just because the RCMP don't have enough to lay a charge (i.e. something in writing) doesn't mean it didn't happen.

Crooked.

[Wild Bill]

he was still offered "something" Just because the RCMP don't have enough to lay a charge (i.e. something in writing) doesn't mean it didn't happen.

Crooked.

No, but it means that those who insist that SOMETHING HAPPENED have to keep coming up with more and more complicated conspiracy stuff to make it sound like something happened.

Carried to enough of an extreme, the Tories eventually will be suspected of having faked the moon landings.

[AngusThermopyle]

the Tories eventually will be suspected of having faked the moon landings.

What!

Are trying to say that you didn't already know that?

I thought it was a well established fact!

[jdobbin]

No, but it means that those who insist that SOMETHING HAPPENED have to keep coming up with more and more complicated conspiracy stuff to make it sound like something happened.

Don't think it is anymore complicated than the primary witness to the event is dead. All we can go by is what his widow said and that is her husband regarded it as a bribe and rejected it.

As far as the lawsuit goes, libel is not a slam dunk just because the RCMP didn't lay charges.

[Oleg Bach]

Don't think it is anymore complicated than the primary witness to the event is dead. All we can go by is what his widow said and that is her husband regarded it as a bribe and rejected it.

As far as the lawsuit goes, libel is not a slam dunk just because the RCMP didn't lay charges.

No police report no case..

[scribblet]

The media often states that Harper has filed a lawsuit against the federal Liberal party, referring only to the fact that the Liberals say that Harper knew about the alleged bribery. This grossly under-represents the maliciousness of the Liberals' personal attacks on Harper. In fact, the lawsuit refers to very specific and damaging accusations that appeared on the Liberal Website:

......

Notice of Libel: http://www.ctv.ca/generic/WebSpecials/pdf/...3-02-183001.pdf

Talking about malicious and misleading - The Liberals apparently have knowledge the RCMP doesn't have, check out their web site, it's quite a piece -

http://www.liberal.ca/story_13986_e.aspx

Mr. LeBlanc said while he fully accepts the RCMP's determination that there is insufficient evidence to proceed with criminal prosecution,

insufficient evidence it was clear the RCMP said NO evidence... but I guess we don't let facts get in the way of a good piece. LOL

[Alta4ever]

he was still offered "something" Just because the RCMP don't have enough to lay a charge (i.e. something in writing) doesn't mean it didn't happen.

Crooked.

Give it up.

You are wrong, the liberal party was wrong. Time to swallow your pride and admit you were wrong.

[jdobbin]

Give it up.

You are wrong, the liberal party was wrong. Time to swallow your pride and admit you were wrong.

Why give it up while there many questions left to be answered?

http://www.thestar.com/comment/article/426725

According to the RCMP, there's no evidence Conservative party officials broke the law back in 2005 when they tried to persuade Chuck Cadman, an independent Member of Parliament, to rejoin their ranks and topple Paul Martin's Liberals in a confidence vote.

But that doesn't mean Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his cohorts have no questions to answer. Now that the Mounties have closed their probe, the House of Commons ethics committee should open one of its own to shed some light on this sordid affair.

Just what did Conservative officials offer Cadman, who was dying of cancer, for his support? His wife, daughter and son-in-law say Cadman told them he was offered a $1 million "life insurance" deal.

The Conservatives deny any wrongdoing, but Harper has confirmed that party officials had discussions with Cadman about "financial issues" and "financial insecurity." And Harper has said Cadman was made an offer, but "only to replace financial considerations he might lose due to an election."

What financial issues? What insecurity? What exactly was Cadman offered and on what terms?

[Fortunata]

No, but it means that those who insist that SOMETHING HAPPENED have to keep coming up with more and more complicated conspiracy stuff to make it sound like something happened.

Something like the Mulroney-Schrieber affair?

Carried to enough of an extreme, the Tories eventually will be suspected of having faked the moon landings.

Now that's typical of what we love about the Cons and the herd. Always throw out an over the top stupidity comment that has no bearing on the topic at hand but it is hoped that it will divert attention away from what is being discussed.

[Oleg Bach]

Something like the Mulroney-Schrieber affair?

Now that's typical of what we love about the Cons and the herd. Always throw out an over the top stupidity comment that has no bearing on the topic at hand but it is hoped that it will divert attention away from what is being discussed.

A good governing person and statesman makes sound and wise statesments.. Smearing an percieved opponent is self indulgent and bares the bones of the person smearing - showing that he or she is weak and inept..You don't need to slander to rule..just rule with diginity and real honour....I really believe that the title "honourable" so and so should be removed untill they earn it.