Helena Guergis cleared

msdogfood · July 27, 2010

Well, with her being with child I'm sure she won't be back, at least to Ottawa. I also, would say, that with Harper, maybe if SHE had been a HE from the former Alliance party she/he would have still be part of the Tories and there's a double standard with him.

Althought , he did get the former Natural Resource minister out of the limelight, didn't he?

True!

betsy · August 3, 2010

I remember clearly how the Liberals were clamoring for Guergis' removal (resignation or firing) when the first of the scandal came up, that incident at the airport. I remember clearly how the Opposition castigated the PM for keeping Guergis inspite of her airport "tantrums."

Then the Jaffer scandal broke out. The Opposition went on a frenzy with Guergis, demanding her head on a silver platter. They castigated and ridiculed the PM for not acting. Finally later, Harper gave a simple statement about giving the case to the RCMP regarding some allegations, and removed her from Caucus. I remember clearly how the Opposition was not satisfied with that and proceeded to pester and pressure the government to divulge the allegations....forcing the PM to publicly tar and feather Guergis, ignoring that she's supposed to be deemed innocent until proven guilty.

Well thank you for the PM's steadfast stance and did not cave in to silly Ignatieff. Just imagine the lawsuit that would've ensued and the settlement that the taxpayers would've had to pay. Even now, there may still be a lawsuit but I imagine the damage will not be as much.

The Liberals suddenly were batting for Guergis and again castigating the government for removing her from caucus. Suddenly they were trying to be the hero for this fallen woman (of course they tried to use the gender card).

The Liberals have a very very short memory....or quite so sleazy slick. The accusing finger should not be on Harper....but at the guys sitting opposite him in the House.

If we know what's good for us, a political party that sleazy bad should never be allowed to lead.

Edited August 3, 2010 by betsy

betsy · August 3, 2010

Question still is, Harper why you fire her?? Days leading up to her firing Harper was praising her as a minister and so was other within the Tories. I guess they were lying....again. I hope she can sue the Tories and Harper.

I hope she sues the Opposition who applied all sorts of pressure from Day 1.

This remind me of an old movie with Jodie Foster (The Accused?) where-in she was gang-raped in a crowded bar, with other bunch of voyeurs encouraging the rape. The voyeurs ended up guilty as well.

We know how the Opposition played this. They instigated the public rape of Guergis!

Edited August 3, 2010 by betsy

bloodyminded · August 3, 2010

The Liberals have a very very short memory....or quite so sleazy slick. The accusing finger should not be on Harper....but at the guys sitting opposite him in the House.

Well, no. Both parties are pretty hypocritical about pointing fingers, of course...but both parties certainly deserve to be pointed at.

betsy · August 3, 2010

I also, would say, that with Harper, maybe if SHE had been a HE from the former Alliance party she/he would have still be part of the Tories and there's a double standard with him.

There must be more to the issue than meets the eye....and the I think Harper is taking the high road in not making it public. Who knows perhaps there are conflicts within the party that involves Guergis....which should just stay within the party.

And since you've brought up the issue of gender, I think Ignatieff and his party behaved like cads in ganging up and applying all sorts of pressure to force Harper to fire this hapless pregnant woman from office even though everything were just allegations at that time. A lot of Conservative MPs on talk shows were reminding everyone that this is all allegations at the time.

That made no difference to the Opposition.....showing that they will willingly sacrifice anyone's reputation without batting an eye just to win some points.

betsy · August 3, 2010

Well, no. Both parties are pretty hypocritical about pointing fingers, of course...but both parties certainly deserve to be pointed at.

Which party aside from the Liberals do you mean? The NDP? Please explain....

bloodyminded · August 4, 2010

Which party aside from the Liberals do you mean? The NDP? Please explain....

Obviously, I meant the Conservatives. I had thought that pretty clear.

Neither the NDP nor the Greens are impressive. But we can't judge them as Federal leadership parties. We can speculate, probably correctly, that they wouldn't be too good.

However, there is no speculation needed for the Liberals or Conservatives.

Edited August 4, 2010 by bloodyminded

Oleg Bach · August 4, 2010

What smear campaign? The woman was letting her husband (a *former* MP with connections to some pretty shady business dealings) use her office and supplies. It certainly doesn't constitute criminal activity in and of itself, but ethically, this woman was a sewer.

The part of the world that this "husband" evolved from culturally - has a tradition of institutionalized corruption - this is a sub continental import of the same mindset...RCMP..can putter all they want but it does not change the fact that we are dealing with white and brown trash.

betsy · August 4, 2010

Neither the NDP nor the Greens are impressive. But we can't judge them as Federal leadership parties. We can speculate, probably correctly, that they wouldn't be too good.

However, there is no speculation needed for the Liberals or Conservatives.

Well what do you mean then about the Conservatives being hypocritical in pointing fingers?

My opinion about the ethical conduct of the Liberals regarding Guergis was not based on mere speculation.

Besides, if it boils down just between Ignatieff and Layton, I wouldn't pooh-pooh the NDP so readily....

Edited August 4, 2010 by betsy

msj · August 6, 2010

The Ethics review is still coming down the pike, and while Guergis's allowing her husband to use her office, supplies, etc. wouldn't be a violation of law, it is pretty clearly on the dark side of the ethics question.

Guergis is quoted as saying this in the Globe and Mail today:

Lots of caucus members have given their Blackberries to their spouses. That’s a fact. When he was caucus chair, Rahim received a number of emails from spouses that clearly identified they were using a parliamentary account. He still has all those emails,” she said.

I wonder who else has allowed their family members to use government issued blackberries.

The dark side of the ethics question should be answered by all the parties (since they are probably all doing it).

msdogfood · August 7, 2010

Guergis is quoted as saying this in the Globe and Mail today:

I wonder who else has allowed their family members to use government issued blackberries.

The dark side of the ethics question should be answered by all the parties (since they are probably all doing it).

yes that is a very good story!!

msdogfood · August 12, 2010

who is beting she will take legal Acton against the PM??.

bloodyminded · August 12, 2010

Well what do you mean then about the Conservatives being hypocritical in pointing fingers?

You're saying you don't think the Conservative Party ever behaves hypocritically?

I'm afraid the implied partisanship in this question--and the partisanship is extreme and profound--means I don't think it's a serious one.

My opinion about the ethical conduct of the Liberals regarding Guergis was not based on mere speculation.

I didn't say it was.

I said saying that the notion that the NDP or the Greens would behave hypocritically were they to achieve Federal leadership is mere speculation. (I happen to believe they would, but that doesn't change the fact that it's speculative).

All I was saying is that we don't have to speculate that the Liberals and Conservatives "would" act hypocritically as leaders...we know for a fact that they both have. It's not a debatable matter.

I get the impression you believe (for some reason, unstated) that the Conservatives are clean and honest. That's not a serious assertion that deserves sober debate.

Besides, if it boils down just between Ignatieff and Layton, I wouldn't pooh-pooh the NDP so readily....

I'm not; while I'm underwhelmed by Layton, I prefer him to Ignatieff.

betsy · August 17, 2010

You're saying you don't think the Conservative Party ever behaves hypocritically?

I'm afraid the implied partisanship in this question--and the partisanship is extreme and profound--means I don't think it's a serious one.

I didn't say it was.

I said saying that the notion that the NDP or the Greens would behave hypocritically were they to achieve Federal leadership is mere speculation. (I happen to believe they would, but that doesn't change the fact that it's speculative).

All I was saying is that we don't have to speculate that the Liberals and Conservatives "would" act hypocritically as leaders...we know for a fact that they both have. It's not a debatable matter.

I get the impression you believe (for some reason, unstated) that the Conservatives are clean and honest. That's not a serious assertion that deserves sober debate.

I was talking about the Guergis scandal. I was referring to the sleazy outright bald-faced move by the Liberals regarding Guergis! Stick to the topic.

I'm not; while I'm underwhelmed by Layton, I prefer him to Ignatieff.

According to polls, so did other Canadians....and that includes me. The NDP, at least showed some ethical restraint - and common sense - about the Guergis affair (at least that's what I saw in some political talk shows).

The Liberals, of all people, had the shameless gall to demand the resignation of Guergis when she had her airport tantrum....and yet during the bus-tour, Ignatieff and Chretien (with a laughing Justin Trudeau in the background) gleefully parodied the the thug-like behaviour of the-PM Chretien when he grabbed a protester by the throat.

When you compare the tantrums of Guergis to this physical assault by Chretien....not only does it glaringly show the hypocrisy of the Liberals...but also their arrogant contempt for all Canadians whom they believe to be all stupid!

bloodyminded · August 17, 2010

I was talking about the Guergis scandal. I was referring to the sleazy outright bald-faced move by the Liberals regarding Guergis! Stick to the topic.

you brought it up, not me; this specific issue aside, you strongly implied that the Conservatives would not act like hypocrites.

I have news for you; it's not that they would, it's that they are hypocrites.

For some reason (unstated) you assume I'm defending the Liberals. I'm not.

You're the only one defending one of the major, entrenched, power-mad, corrupt parties.

betsy · August 18, 2010

you brought it up, not me; this specific issue aside, you strongly implied that the Conservatives would not act like hypocrites.

Where did I "strongly implied that the Conservatives would not act like hypocrites?"

For some reason (unstated) you assume I'm defending the Liberals. I'm not.

If you are not defending the Liberals, then you agree with my opinion regarding their shamelessly sleazy behaviour regarding the Guergis scandal!

So why are you arguing?

You're the only one defending one of the major, entrenched, power-mad, corrupt parties.

I'm more like directing those accusing fingers where they ought to be pointed. The Liberals!

I just pointed out how the Liberals are trying to do a sleight of hand....it's kinda like a shell-game. You gotta follow that hand real well...because they are sharks!

You seem angry. Are you angry?

Edited August 18, 2010 by betsy

bloodyminded · August 18, 2010

Where did I "strongly implied that the Conservatives would not act like hypocrites?"

You said:

The Liberals have a very very short memory....or quite so sleazy slick. The accusing finger should not be on Harper....but at the guys sitting opposite him in the House.

When actually, with both parties pointing fingers at one another, at least both are rightfully being pointed at.

If you are not defending the Liberals, then you agree with my opinion regarding their shamelessly sleazy behaviour regarding the Guergis scandal!
So why are you arguing?

I'm arguing with the amusing, hyper-partisan implication that Harper is somehow an honest leader.

You seem angry. Are you angry?

Not a bit.

betsy · August 19, 2010

You said:

When actually, with both parties pointing fingers at one another, at least both are rightfully being pointed at.

Well read again what I had to say about the Liberals.....and why!

I'm arguing with the amusing, hyper-partisan implication that Harper is somehow an honest leader.

For someone who claims he isn't defending the Liberals, your reaction seem to be just that! I am fuming of the way the Liberals played the Guergis scandal!

It was the Liberals who pushed too hard to get Guergis fired or to step down when she had her airport tantrum. It was the Liberals who again, wanted her to step down or get fired when the Jaffer scandal broke out.

When Harper finally moved her out of caucus and gave the case to the RCMP, it was the Liberals who strongly pushed for Harper to divulge the allegations publicly! Harper stuck to his guns and refused to go down the tabloid path. Conservative MPs in talk shows cautioned and reminded everyone that these are just allegations. It was the Liberals who were rabid at these talk shows in shredding Guergis' reputation - even the NDP showed some restraint!

AND THEN SUDDENLY, when Guergis was cleared by the RCMP....the Liberals started to play the hero to this fallen lady!

This is not about partisanship on my part....although I am admittedly a Conservative. I am just so appalled at the way the Liberals treated Guergis....and the sleazy way they tried to cash in on it at every possible angle!

Like it or not, among all three leaders....Harper and Layton behaved as they should. Ignatieff, being the leader of the Liberals, unfortunately, for all his high education and all....ended up lowly and trashy. The bus tour photo ops with Chretien parodying Chretien's goon-like behaviour only proved it all the more!

The Liberals made a big deal out of Guergis' verbal tanturm at the airport....and yet they see nothing wrong - in fact they're even proud of Chretien's PHYSICAL ASSAULT tantrum directed at a protester!

You might hate Harper....but that doesn't mean the incidents I've described above did not happen. Hating Harper is one thing....but turning a blind eye on the reality that played out in high definition is another!

Edited August 19, 2010 by betsy

Topaz · August 19, 2010

Hey Betsy, what the Libs asked for is for Guergis to be removed as a minister for her behaviour at the airport, NOT kick out of caucus. When the Libs were calling for this the PM was praising her for work as a junior minister and we don't know yet the real reson he got rid of her from the causus. I wonder if he would have done the same thing with Rona?

bloodyminded · August 19, 2010

Well read again what I had to say about the Liberals.....and why!

For someone who claims he isn't defending the Liberals, your reaction seem to be just that! I am fuming of the way the Liberals played the Guergis scandal!

It was the Liberals who pushed too hard to get Guergis fired or to step down when she had her airport tantrum. It was the Liberals who again, wanted her to step down or get fired when the Jaffer scandal broke out.

When Harper finally moved her out of caucus and gave the case to the RCMP, it was the Liberals who strongly pushed for Harper to divulge the allegations publicly! Harper stuck to his guns and refused to go down the tabloid path. Conservative MPs in talk shows cautioned and reminded everyone that these are just allegations. It was the Liberals who were rabid at these talk shows in shredding Guergis' reputation - even the NDP showed some restraint!

AND THEN SUDDENLY, when Guergis was cleared by the RCMP....the Liberals started to play the hero to this fallen lady!

This is not about partisanship on my part....although I am admittedly a Conservative. I am just so appalled at the way the Liberals treated Guergis....and the sleazy way they tried to cash in on it at every possible angle!

Like it or not, among all three leaders....Harper and Layton behaved as they should. Ignatieff, being the leader of the Liberals, unfortunately, for all his high education and all....ended up lowly and trashy. The bus tour photo ops with Chretien parodying Chretien's goon-like behaviour only proved it all the more!

The Liberals made a big deal out of Guergis' verbal tanturm at the airport....and yet they see nothing wrong - in fact they're even proud of Chretien's PHYSICAL ASSAULT tantrum directed at a protester!

You might hate Harper....but that doesn't mean the incidents I've described above did not happen. Hating Harper is one thing....but turning a blind eye on the reality that played out in high definition is another!

But I am not defending the Liberals. At all.

Your comments on Harper are much larger than this issue; you don't think he's a hypocrite.

That's my issue.

when I made a remark about the hypocrisy and foolishness of both major parties, you coyly asked if I was talking about the NDP! (Which, by the way, you knew I wasn't.)

I don't think you like to hear that little sneaky moral degenerate--Stephen Harper--being criticized.

And yes, yes, of course the Liberals are terrible. And I think Ignatieff sucks.

The only one playing follow-the-leader here is you.

Edited August 19, 2010 by bloodyminded

betsy · August 20, 2010

Hey Betsy, what the Libs asked for is for Guergis to be removed as a minister for her behaviour at the airport, NOT kick out of caucus.

And how did the Liberals view Chretien's tantrum - physically assaulting a protester - while he was a Prime Minister???

I wouldn't have brought out this comparison between Guergis and Chretien....however, just only recently during Ignatieff's bus tour stop in Shawinigan, that photo op with Ignatieff and Chretien (and Liberal Prince Trudeau laughing his head off in the background) strongly showed how insensitively they trivialized that incident - when our then-Prime Minister had clearly lost his cool in public and behaved like a drunken hooligan,- treating Chretien's shameful behaviour not only as acceptable.....but as a badge of honor!

That photo-op showed it all!

When the Libs were calling for this the PM was praising her for work as a junior minister and we don't know yet the real reson he got rid of her from the causus. I wonder if he would have done the same thing with Rona?

So Harper was praising her for her work! So what? She may have been good at her work before the incidents...don't some if not most employers try to stand up by their employees in public until they have real reasons not to? As you said, who knows what the real reason was why he got rid of her. At least he refused to be pressured to spit out the allegations in public.

As for Rona, I'm curious why do you bother to wonder when it's all just a fantasy in your head at this point? Instead, why not chew on the obvious? That photo-op of the three laughing amigos.

Ponder on the glaring contradictions that the Liberals had presented on how they view and treat the Guergis tantrum and the Chretien tantrum. Quite brazen, in fact. Scary if they sit in power....no need to even wonder about that.

Two-tiered justice. Untouchables. Abuse of power. Those are just a few things that quickly pop in mind.

Edited August 20, 2010 by betsy

betsy · August 20, 2010

But I am not defending the Liberals. At all.

Your comments on Harper are much larger than this issue; you don't think he's a hypocrite.

That's my issue.

when I made a remark about the hypocrisy and foolishness of both major parties, you coyly asked if I was talking about the NDP! (Which, by the way, you knew I wasn't.)

I don't think you like to hear that little sneaky moral degenerate--Stephen Harper--being criticized.

And yes, yes, of course the Liberals are terrible. And I think Ignatieff sucks.

The only one playing follow-the-leader here is you.

So you hate Harper. That is your issue.

Then start your own topic about it then. I've already explained to you about my statements....

bloodyminded · August 20, 2010

So you hate Harper. That is your issue.

I don't hate anyone.

Then start your own topic about it then. I've already explained to you about my statements....

Our little argument is dead, you're right, and it wasn't an especially good one to begin with.

August1991 · August 22, 2010

It wasn't the wrong move either ethically or legally.
There is nothing unethical about removing someone who has brought disrepute upon your political party from the caucus. And there's nothing illegal about it.

But that's not a reason to kick her out of caucus. A PM might allow a different person in similar circumstances to stay.

I think Harper kicked her out to keep his caucus happy. Harper has a penchant for being loyal and defending MPs/staff long after they deserve his protection. This makes sense. A PM without caucus support is dead in the water.

So, if Harper kicked Guergis out, it was because the caucus wanted it. Harper didn't do this on his own.

-----

BTW, if there were one place in Ottawa that I would like to be (Gawd, did I just type that?) as a fly on the wall, it would be in a Conservative caucus meeting. Harper's no Mulroney but I think he must have a personal contact with each of them. I suspect too that Harper doesn't need his ego stroked - so no rounds of applause either.

Dunno.