Rob Ford Turfed ?

[Argus]

It's right there:

No, it isn't, actually, since he didn't receive any money.

[Argus]

The rules are quite clear,

The Act was in place long ago.

And how many municipal officials have been prosecuted under that act?

[guyser]

And how many municipal officials have been prosecuted under that act?

About as many as have been charged with allowing pigs to roam a city street in Toronto.(its against the law)

Not sure the point.

Argus, read the verdict. The judge had no choice even though he was loathe to sentence him. He tried to give the Mayor an out, the Mayor kept slamming that door shut.

This has nothing to do with money, nothing to do with political spectrums, nothing to charity.

Edited November 28, 2012 by guyser

[Argus]

About as many as have been charged with allowing pigs to roam a city street in Toronto.(its against the law)

Not sure the point.

My point is, as I've said before, councillors vote on matters they could be accused of having a conflict on every day all across Ontario. The difference in Toronto was that you had leftist agitators laying in wait for Ford to do anything at all they could trip him up on, and in this case one of them recruited a citizen and brought another leftist agitator lawyer in to file private charges against Ford. Miller could have done the same and not gotten charged. Heck, I bet if you investigated the voting patterns of the entire city council most could be brought up on the same charge.

[wyly]

from my understanding the laws broken are meant to prevent the type of corruption that we are now seeing montreal...saying that isn't the case in this instance with ford is irrelevant removing these conflict of interest guides increase the likelihood of big time corruption and influence pedaling...ford could have avoided it all he was given numerous opportunities to do so but his arrogance did him in...

[Shady]

Seems to me that it's indisputable that Rob Ford has done an absolutely fantastic job managing the city of Toronto and its finances. You may hate the guy, but it's the truth. But, he likes to help underprivileged kids to play football, so he's got to go!!!!!!!!!!

[guyser]

My point is, as I've said before, councillors vote on matters they could be accused of having a conflict on every day all across Ontario.

From my readings they are common, conflicts that is, and generally once they are exposed they either re-vote and the offender is recused from voting, or they get the OMB and their statutes involved, Most never get near charges because...well most people are smart enought o see the writing on the wall.

Again, Ford could have stopped this numerous times but he has a stubborn sense of entitlement, exactly what he ran on, getting rid of entitlement at City Hall.

The difference in Toronto was that you had leftist agitators laying in wait for Ford to do anything at all they could trip him up on

Not true in the sense of trip up on, but that may be merely pedantic. And if so....why fall into that trap unless you are too dumb to avoid it. He has advisors, why not listen.

, and in this case one of them recruited a citizen and brought another leftist agitator lawyer in to file private charges against Ford. Miller could have done the same and not gotten charged. Heck, I bet if you investigated the voting patterns of the entire city council most could be brought up on the same charge.

Miller wasnt that dumb. He would have seen the writing and acquiesced.

Ford didnt, and pays the price.

All of this melted down leaves arrogance and stupidity on his part. He's admitted as much. The judge certainly said as much.

Play stupid games , get stupid consequences.

[guyser]

Seems to me that it's indisputable that Rob Ford has done an absolutely fantastic job managing the city of Toronto and its finances. You may hate the guy, but it's the truth. But, he likes to help underprivileged kids to play football, so he's got to go!!!!!!!!!!

Another bon mot from shady.

Not on point, not a shred of relevance, misconstruing the facts, outright faslehoods....atta boy Mitt er Shady.

[wyly]

Another bon mot from shady.

Not on point, not a shred of relevance, misconstruing the facts, outright faslehoods....atta boy Mitt er Shady.

shady like fletch and mitt live in a different reality than the rest of us...it's a bubble world where the truth is whatever they say it is...

[login]

Ford deserved it but I wouldn't be surprised if he stays in office for a bit.

[jacee]

No, it isn't, actually, since he didn't receive any money.

Yes he did, and refused to pay it back. That benefitted him personally.

[jacee]

Seems to me that it's indisputable that Rob Ford has done an absolutely fantastic job managing the city of Toronto and its finances. You may hate the guy, but it's the truth. But, he likes to help underprivileged kids to play football, so he's got to go!!!!!!!!!!

You want all the football teams supported by taxpayer money?

And all the other charities too?

[Black Dog]

My point is, as I've said before, councillors vote on matters they could be accused of having a conflict on every day all across Ontario. The difference in Toronto was that you had leftist agitators laying in wait for Ford to do anything at all they could trip him up on, and in this case one of them recruited a citizen and brought another leftist agitator lawyer in to file private charges against Ford. Miller could have done the same and not gotten charged.

Lousy stupid engaged citizens trying to hold their elected officials responsible.

Heck, I bet if you investigated the voting patterns of the entire city council most could be brought up on the same charge

So get at it.

[bleeding heart]

Lousy stupid engaged citizens trying to hold their elected officials responsible.

"Leftist agitators," yet.

Still a Red under every bed, it seems.

[scribblet]

Yes he did, and refused to pay it back. That benefitted him personally.

He didn't receive money personally, funds he solicited using city hall letterhead (his big mistake) went to a charitable foundation. $3,100.00 is peanuts to Ford so would not have benefited him in anyway, he refused to return the money to the donors on a matter of principle Mistake on his part, sure, but he has never taken money for himself or used taxpayer's money for himself.

[Black Dog]

He didn't receive money personally, funds he solicited using city hall letterhead (his big mistake) went to a charitable foundation. $3,100.00 is peanuts to Ford so would not have benefited him in anyway, he refused to return the money to the donors on a matter of principle Mistake on his part, sure, but he has never taken money for himself or used taxpayer's money for himself.

Not having to shell out $3,000 out of his own pocket most certainly benefited him financially.

[jacee]

He didn't receive money personally, funds he solicited using city hall letterhead (his big mistake) went to a charitable foundation. $3,100.00 is peanuts to Ford so would not have benefited him in anyway, he refused to return the money to the donors on a matter of principle Mistake on his part, sure, but he has never taken money for himself or used taxpayer's money for himself.

He voted, in conflict of interest, to save himself $3100.

That's money in his pocket that should have been paid back.

He used city letterhead and city staff time, paid for by taxpayers, to peddle his influence and strongarm money out of people lobbying him for city contracts.

He's just too stupid and corrupt to be mayor.

[Guest Peeves]

Not having to shell out $3,000 out of his own pocket most certainly benefited him financially.

IF indeed the money was at issue, the judge would have ordered it paid back, he didn't. The matter of money solicited for and used solely for kids should not have been at issue., at it's status quo has not changed.

ONLY an agenda to torpedo Ford would have used the matter to attack him. Only those out to get him would have chosen to make a point of such a picayune matter that ONLY helped kids.

I call them cowards.

Ford was dumb enough to fall into any trap, but, his motives were far more honorable than those that attacked him.

Edited November 29, 2012 by Peeves

[Guest Peeves]

He voted, in conflict of interest, to save himself $3100.

That's money in his pocket that should have been paid back.

He used city letterhead and city staff time, paid for by taxpayers, to peddle his influence and strongarm money out of people lobbying him for city contracts.

He's just too stupid and corrupt to be mayor.

Wrong, Wrong Wrong.

[guyser]

IF indeed the money was at issue, the judge would have ordered it paid back, he didn't. The matter of money solicited for and used solely for kids should not have been at issue., at it's status quo has not changed.

ONLY an agenda to torpedo Ford would have used the matter to attack him. Only those out to get him would have chosen to make a point of such a picayune matter that ONLY helped kids.

I call them cowards.

Ford was dumb enough to fall into any trap, but, his motives were far more honorable than those that attacked him.

You really have no idea what this was about do you?

The Judge wasnt adjuducating about any money.

The money solicited wasnt not the matter in court.

Cowards? What or who hid behind whom?

What do you call someone who misses the whole idea behind the court case ? I know a few words that would describe that sort person .

[guyser]

Wrong, Wrong Wrong.

True true true....except for the corrupt part.

I dont think Ford is taking anything under the table. Although that may surface with respect to the Chicago trip the Mayor took.

[Black Dog]

IF indeed the money was at issue, the judge would have ordered it paid back, he didn't.

Er. No. The money itself wasn't the question he was dealing with. Rather, he was looking at the conflict created by Ford voting to save himself the three large.

The matter of money solicited for and used solely for kids should not have been at issue., at it's status quo has not changed.

Again, it wasn't at issue in this trial. It was the vote, stupid.

ONLY an agenda to torpedo Ford would have used the matter to attack him. Only those out to get him would have chosen to make a point of such a picayune matter that ONLY helped kids.

Word of the day calender paying off, hey?

I call them cowards.

Ford was dumb enough to fall into any trap, but, his motives were far more honorable than those that attacked him.

Taking on the mayor to hold him accountable is cowardly? I call that pretty ballsy.

Edited November 29, 2012 by Black Dog

[jacee]

IF indeed the money was at issue, the judge would have ordered it paid back, he didn't. The matter of money solicited for and used solely for kids should not have been at issue., at it's status quo has not changed.

It's 'status' is that it was elicited from people lobbying for city contracts via influence peddling by Ford, who used taxpayer funded resources to do so.

Is this is ok with you?

The judge ruled on the matter before him - Ford voting in a position of conflict of interest.

ONLY an agenda to torpedo Ford would have used the matter to attack him. Only those out to get him would have chosen to make a point of such a picayune matter that ONLY helped kids.

So it's ok with you if ALL municipal councillors in Ontario use taxpayer funded staff and resources and peddle their influence to 'solicit' charitable donations from contractors/suppliers lobbying for city contracts?

Ford was dumb enough ...

You got that right ... too dumb to be mayor.

[jacee]

True true true....except for the corrupt part.

I dont think Ford is taking anything under the table. Although that may surface with respect to the Chicago trip the Mayor took.

Ford may not be taking anything for himself, but he's taking city resources and peddling his influence to solicit money.

That's corruption.

And he has $3100 in his pocket that he should have paid back so the lobbyists who donated wouldn't expect 'special consideration' for city contracts.

[Boges]

Ford may not be taking anything for himself, but he's taking city resources and peddling his influence to solicit money.

That's corruption.

And he has $3100 in his pocket that he should have paid back so the lobbyists who donated wouldn't expect 'special consideration' for city contracts.

Well now you're the one making false remarks. It may have been improper for him to use his City Letterhead to solicit those donations but you have no proof he forced the people to donate or they wouldn't get a contract from the city. Was he even the mayor when these events happened?

Also he didn't have $3,100 in his pocket. That money went to the charity.

Edited November 29, 2012 by Boges