Boges Posted January 25, 2013 Author Report Share Posted January 25, 2013 (edited) It's funny that everyone was mocking Ford for not reading the councillor code of conduct when no one thought to see if Council even had jurisdiction to have a vote forcing Ford to repay the money. Apparently that's why Ford got off. He can't be in conflict of interest of a vote that wasn't lawful in the first place. Edited January 25, 2013 by Boges Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted January 26, 2013 Report Share Posted January 26, 2013 Hahahahahaha! Look at all the lefties squeal! I hope Ford is mayor of Toronto for the next thirty years! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BubberMiley Posted January 26, 2013 Report Share Posted January 26, 2013 I guess he ended his hunger strike. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rue Posted January 27, 2013 Report Share Posted January 27, 2013 (edited) [/size] Yes because I was totally trying to give a full breakdown of the ruling here. Will you be there with your many (imaginary) gay friends? I love your little faces BD.Its always nice to have graphic illustrations. I would like to give you one too but the smileys don't quite offer the one I would love to share with you. They are limited in expression and movement you know. As a legal lecturer I think you are fun. I think you should become a law professor. Sounds like your expertise in municipal law conflict of interest is as brilliant as I have ever heard. As for me having imaginary gay friends no none of my gay friends are fairies. They also don't like anti-semitic shrills,self righteous dickwads and people who use their collective identity as a pretense or pretext to discriminate against others and lecture others as to what they should think. Trust me we don't "hang" in the same circle. Have your assistant call my "girl" and we can arrange lunch with Kyle Rae to discuss the results. Edited January 27, 2013 by Rue Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rue Posted January 27, 2013 Report Share Posted January 27, 2013 Hahahahahaha! Look at all the lefties squeal! I hope Ford is mayor of Toronto for the next thirty years! Oh just you wait, we will get fatso on his campaign spending. Hmmmmmmf. Geez I am not sure what smiley face to use. Its so overwhelming to have so many choices. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted January 27, 2013 Report Share Posted January 27, 2013 I love your little faces BD.Its always nice to have graphic illustrations. I would like to give you one too but the smileys don't quite offer the one I would love to share with you. They are limited in expression and movement you know. As a legal lecturer I think you are fun. I think you should become a law professor. Sounds like your expertise in municipal law conflict of interest is as brilliant as I have ever heard. As for me having imaginary gay friends no none of my gay friends are fairies. They also don't like anti-semitic shrills,self righteous dickwads and people who use their collective identity as a pretense or pretext to discriminate against others and lecture others as to what they should think. Trust me we don't "hang" in the same circle. Have your assistant call my "girl" and we can arrange lunch with Kyle Rae to discuss the results. If you are a legal lecturer, then I'm the Queen of Sheba. I would expect someone in such a position would possess a modicum of communications abilities and not rant like a deranged syphilitic. On the plus side, kudos for discovering the virtues of brevity in your posts: now we only have to spend a few seconds top see you are full of shit instead of the usual minute or so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keepitsimple Posted January 28, 2013 Report Share Posted January 28, 2013 (edited) Oh just you wait, we will get fatso on his campaign spending. Hmmmmmmf. Geez I am not sure what smiley face to use. Its so overwhelming to have so many choices. It doesn't get much play in the media.....but Adam Chaleff-Freutenhaler, the 27 year old political activist who initiated the Conflict of Interest case against Ford by using Paul Magner as a proxy - is the same guy who initiated the Campaign Financing accusation, this time using Max Reed as a proxy. Clayton Ruby's law firm provided pro-bono work in the Conflict of Interest case but his firm also provided the legal team in the George Foulidis/Tuggs defamation lawsuit (dismissed). I have no doubt that Ruby is providing more advice in the Campaign Financing charges. Clayton Ruby and Adam Chaleff-Freutenhaler - there's a story for you....they call them the champagne socialists. Edited January 28, 2013 by Keepitsimple Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted January 28, 2013 Report Share Posted January 28, 2013 (edited) It doesn't get much play in the media.....but Adam Chaleff-Freutenhaler, the 27 year old political activist who initiated the Conflict of Interest case against Ford by using Paul Magner as a proxy - is the same guy who initiated the Campaign Financing accusation, this time using Max Reed as a proxy. Clayton Ruby's law firm provided pro-bono work in the Conflict of Interest case but his firm also provided the legal team in the George Foulidis/Tuggs defamation lawsuit (dismissed). I have no doubt that Ruby is providing more advice in the Campaign Financing charges. Clayton Ruby and Adam Chaleff-Freutenhaler - there's a story for you....they call them the champagne socialists. These guys must truly be powerful if they were able to manipulate Ford into influence-peddling for his pet causes and overspending on his campaign. These attempts to get Ford are politically motivated. Rob Ford is a fuckup. These are not mutually exclusive concepts. Also, the "champagne socialists" charge is pretty hilarious, given Ford is the son of a millionaire who has never had to make an honest day's living in his entire life, from being installed at daddy's company to being shunted by his family into politics (no doubt to get him out from underfoot). Edited January 28, 2013 by Black Dog Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boges Posted January 28, 2013 Author Report Share Posted January 28, 2013 (edited) What evidence does Adam Chaleff-Whateverhisnameis have that Ford broke rules? Inquiring minds want to know. We know now from the ruling from this appeals court that the Conflict of Interest vote was a trump up against Ford. Council had not authority to force Ford to pay back the donations. People are just looking for whatever will stick to try and reverse the results of the election. Ruby is 0-2. I hope he's going to have to write a fat cheque to Ford to cover his legal costs. Edited January 28, 2013 by Boges Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boges Posted January 28, 2013 Author Report Share Posted January 28, 2013 Google is my friend. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/toronto/why-rob-ford-may-yet-be-ousted-from-the-mayors-office/article7887664/ There is no precedent of a sitting mayor being removed from office for campaign finance violations. Apparently the same cabal of people made similar challenges to several right-wing candidates. The formal request for an audit came a month later amidst a flurry of similar allegations against other members of council’s right wing. Council’s three-person compliance audit committee – two lawyers and a former head of Elections Ontario – agreed to order the audit in May, 2011. Mr. Ford all along insisted that his campaign organization had followed the rules, but his legal team made two ultimately unsuccessful attempts to block the process in the courts.A forensic auditor has spent over half a year scrutinizing every aspect of Mr. Ford’s campaign finances, including fundraising expenses that were allegedly excluded from the spending cap, and claims that the donation of some goods and services came from private companies. There aren’t many. In the City of Vaughan, a flurry of allegations of campaign finance irregularities in the early 2000s morphed into several long-running legal battles involving compliance audits against former mayors Linda Jackson and Michael DiBiase, as well as another city councillor. A judge dismissed all three cases for procedural reasons raised by the politicians’ lawyers. The courts never actually ruled on the substance of the election misspending accusations, says Mr. Wilkin, who acted for the City of Vaughan as outside counsel. The only other high-profile case involved former Hamilton mayor Larry Di Ianni, who had been accused of accepting improper donations during the 2003 election. After extensive political jockeying at Hamilton Council, the case finally ended up in the courts, with Mr. Di Ianni pleading guilty. He agreed to make a charitable donation and write an essay in Municipal World Magazine about why it’s important for candidates to strictly supervise their own campaign accounting practices. He lost the subsequent election. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted January 28, 2013 Report Share Posted January 28, 2013 If Ford beats the campaign finance rap as well, he can focus on getting back to what he does best: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted January 28, 2013 Report Share Posted January 28, 2013 Actually, he's a pretty good mayor, he just needs to learn to keep his mouth closed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guyser Posted January 28, 2013 Report Share Posted January 28, 2013 Actually, he's a pretty good mayor, he just needs to learn to keep his mouth closed. Hey, you'd be pretty smart if you didnt post words ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boges Posted January 28, 2013 Author Report Share Posted January 28, 2013 This from BD arch nemesis Sue-Ann Levy today. http://www.torontosun.com/2013/01/27/time-for-mayor-rob-ford-to-push-ahead Speaking of a close eye, it wouldn’t hurt someone in the mayor’s office to keep a closer watch on whether some of Ford’s opponents are following the Code of Conduct and not inappropriately using their own offices for personal gain.For example, in her Jan. 24 e-newsletter to her constituents, Councillor Janet Davis promotes the first annual fundraising dinner for Harmony Hall, a senior’s centre in her ward that got $74,355 in city grants in 2011 and is no doubt one of HER pet projects. She invites constituents to buy $50 tickets to the Feb. 23 event called “Girls Night Out.” I can’t understand how this is different than what set the left into paroxysms of self-righteous disgust — that is, the mayor’s use of letterhead to raise funds for his football team. She's got a point doesn't she? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guyser Posted January 28, 2013 Report Share Posted January 28, 2013 This from BD arch nemesis Sue-Ann Levy today. http://www.torontosu...d-to-push-ahead She's got a point doesn't she? She does, but she doesnt see that there is a huge difference between the two as she posts? Sue Ann aint too bright then. But yes, any misuse of public funds, offices or whatnot should be reported. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted January 29, 2013 Report Share Posted January 29, 2013 (edited) This from BD arch nemesis Sue-Ann Levy today. http://www.torontosu...d-to-push-ahead She's got a point doesn't she? I don't know that she does. Promoting events in their ward is the kind of thing all councillors do. The issue with Ford was using city resources to solicit funds from registered lobbyists for his own personal project and the appearance that gives of influence-peddling. In Sue Ann's example, we have only her suggestion that the senior's centre is Davis' pet project and no indication that buying tickets to the event is part of a quid pro quo. In other words, it's pathetic hackery from the city's most pathetic, grasping hack. Edited January 29, 2013 by Black Dog Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boges Posted January 29, 2013 Author Report Share Posted January 29, 2013 So if he had e-mailed constituents asking for donations for to the Football charity it would be different? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted January 29, 2013 Report Share Posted January 29, 2013 So if he had e-mailed constituents asking for donations for to the Football charity it would be different? I think you are still missing the point. Le'ts put it this way: if what Davis is doing is a conflict of interest, then every time a Councillor promotes an event in their ward, that would be a conflict. And that's just dumb. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rue Posted January 29, 2013 Report Share Posted January 29, 2013 I think you are still missing the point. Why is that Queen Sheba does he have syphilis too? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted January 30, 2013 Report Share Posted January 30, 2013 A Conflict of interest case where he used his clout to raise money for at-risk football players? Is that how you want him to be defeated? If you think Ford should be fired over this then I assume you'd have had no problem seeing former US President Bill Clinton lose his job over getting his knob polished by an intern and lying about it. Both were loopholes that really have no bearing on how said politician does his job. Perfect. I couldn't have said it better.I supported Clinton and I support Ford. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BubberMiley Posted February 2, 2013 Report Share Posted February 2, 2013 I support Ford. How much can you bench press? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted February 2, 2013 Report Share Posted February 2, 2013 So if he had e-mailed constituents asking for donations for to the Football charity it would be different? If he didn't ignore the law then ignore requests from those enforcing the law to fix his error it would be different. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boges Posted February 2, 2013 Author Report Share Posted February 2, 2013 If he didn't ignore the law then ignore requests from those enforcing the law to fix his error it would be different. The results of this appeal show that the integrity commissioner had no authority to try and make Ford repay that money. So you could argue he was right to ignore her. No one is talking about the audit finding? It found that Ford spent $40,000 improperly? I guess because there's no realistic chance he'll be removed from office over this, but no one cares. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted February 2, 2013 Report Share Posted February 2, 2013 The results of this appeal show that the integrity commissioner had no authority to try and make Ford repay that money. So you could argue he was right to ignore her. No one is talking about the audit finding? It found that Ford spent $40,000 improperly? I guess because there's no realistic chance he'll be removed from office over this, but no one cares. He didn't spend it improperly he spent over the election cap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boges Posted February 2, 2013 Author Report Share Posted February 2, 2013 There were issues of him getting a loan from his family company. Apparently you're not allowed to do that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.