jacee Posted January 2, 2014 Report Share Posted January 2, 2014 That is the difference between harper and the liberals, he will support you untill you screw up and you are gone, where the liberals would just do nothing and keep the guy. Link? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Squid Posted January 3, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 3, 2014 That is the difference between harper and the liberals, he will support you untill you screw up and you are gone, where the liberals would just do nothing and keep the guy. LOL You're making a joke, right? He supported Duffy at first... Then claimed he did an honourable thing by paying back the money... Then we found out Duffy didn't pay anything back. Harper finally decided what he did was wrong. Wright was an honourable, upstanding guy who paid the money back for his good buddy out of his own pocket. No one else knew. Then Wright was a criminal when we found out what really happened. And it turns out that several people in the PMO knew about it, including Harper's personal lawyer. Yeah, Harper is smelling like a rose on this one! lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted January 3, 2014 Report Share Posted January 3, 2014 The latest Nanos poll shows just how bad the Harper brand has become. And come election time, if Trudeau decides to go nasty the way Harper does, he has lot's of arrows in his quiver. Let's see, a little collage of Harper's endless contradictions of himself in QP is where I would start. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Topaz Posted January 3, 2014 Report Share Posted January 3, 2014 In his Xmas interview, Harper said that Wright knew what he was going was WRONG when he wrote the personal cheque then later in the same interview, he said WHEN Wright realized that it was wrong to write the cheque. Wright, himself, has come out and said, that he did nothing wrong. So, if Wright did nothing wrong that meant he had permission to do it and either Harper or Harper's lawyer gave him the okay to go ahead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacee Posted January 3, 2014 Report Share Posted January 3, 2014 The latest Nanos poll shows just how bad the Harper brand has become. And come election time, if Trudeau decides to go nasty the way Harper does, he has lot's of arrows in his quiver. Let's see, a little collage of Harper's endless contradictions of himself in QP is where I would start.Link? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted January 3, 2014 Report Share Posted January 3, 2014 Link?Press Release: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/canada-is-headed-in-the-wrong-direction-majority-says-in-poll/article16135971/ Nanos Publication: http://www.nanosresearch.com/library/polls/POLNAT-W13-T591E.pdf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bud Posted January 4, 2014 Report Share Posted January 4, 2014 That is the difference between harper and the liberals, he will support you untill you screw up and you are gone, where the liberals would just do nothing and keep the guy. you mean he will support you until you get caught. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReeferMadness Posted January 4, 2014 Report Share Posted January 4, 2014 Press Release: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/canada-is-headed-in-the-wrong-direction-majority-says-in-poll/article16135971/ Nanos Publication: http://www.nanosresearch.com/library/polls/POLNAT-W13-T591E.pdf Check the first graph in the Nanos link. It shows that Canadians are finally waking up to just how badly Harper and his knuckle-draggers are embarrassing us internationally. He's gotta be gone next year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Topaz Posted January 4, 2014 Report Share Posted January 4, 2014 I wonder how much this next election is going to cost Canadians when the Tories start throwing money around to buy back their supporters? I'd take the money, say thank you and vote against them. I's sure Toronto area will get a huge portion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted January 4, 2014 Report Share Posted January 4, 2014 Check the first graph in the Nanos link. It shows that Canadians are finally waking up to just how badly Harper and his knuckle-draggers are embarrassing us internationally. He's gotta be gone next year. If there's one thing that's certain, it's that public sentiment changes during campaigns almost every time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReeferMadness Posted January 5, 2014 Report Share Posted January 5, 2014 If there's one thing that's certain, it's that public sentiment changes during campaigns almost every time. It's certainly distressing that the public seems to have the attention span of a gnat. But there's still hope. I think the senate scandal has finally tainted Harper in the eyes of the public. And that taint will be tough to wash off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted January 6, 2014 Report Share Posted January 6, 2014 Is anybody at all surprised that Harper has planned a trip to the middle east for early January, sort of around the time the house goes back in session? I suspect not. He know's the senate scandal is going to be right back where it was left before Xmas and so he's heading for the hills. That's our leader! There is speculation in some corners that he may resign upon his return. That will be sad for Tom Mulcair as he had such fun bashing him in QP, however it seems it would be welcome by a majority of Canadians. Perhaps because we'd like to see some business get done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted January 11, 2014 Report Share Posted January 11, 2014 (edited) This is going to get interesting. Senators are concerned and they should be!! http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/senate-faces-toughest-expense-probe-in-its-history-1.2490863 When members of the Senate voted to invite the federal auditor general to audit their expenses, some senators may not have anticipated what they were letting themselves in for. Most senators, lulled by an "honour system" in filling out expense forms could not have foreseen an audit that would be police-like in its scope. Nor could they have imagined that every claim and receipt would be scrutinized, and their names made public once the audit is complete. The honour system, which was eliminated by the Senate this year, allowed two words — "Senate business"— to explain any trips they took, and didn't require receipts for airport taxis. Auditor General Michael Ferguson seems to be aiming for the kind of sweeping investigative audits that occurred in Newfoundland and Labrador in 2007 and Nova Scotia in 2009. Those audits led to some members of each province's legislatures being charged and even going to jail. Several senators, listening to Ferguson's plans during two meetings held in the aboriginal room of the House of Commons, asked if he is doing a forensic audit, and not the gentle probe they perhaps expected. Another senator said there was "a great deal of paranoia" expressed. Let's start with the PMO office and work our way down. Edited January 11, 2014 by GostHacked Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted January 12, 2014 Report Share Posted January 12, 2014 This is going to get interesting. Senators are concerned and they should be!! http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/senate-faces-toughest-expense-probe-in-its-history-1.2490863 Let's start with the PMO office and work our way down. Good idea. Can you imagine the paranoia in the PMO already with the RCMP breathing down their necks? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimG Posted April 15, 2014 Report Share Posted April 15, 2014 (edited) Looks like RCMP have confirmed that there was no criminal actions on the part of Wright: Stephen Harper’s former chief of staff Nigel Wright is no longer being investigated by the RCMP over his $90,000 payment to Senator Mike Duffy. RCMP spokeswoman Corporal Lucy Shorey said the force has decided the evidence does not support charging Mr. Wright. “When the RCMP initiated the investigation there were sufficient grounds to pursue the matter with regards to the offences of breach of trust, bribery, frauds on the government, as well as receiving prohibited compensation contrary to the Parliament of Canada Act,” Cpl. Shorey said. “Upon completion of the investigation, we have concluded that the evidence gathered does not support criminal charges against Mr. Wright." http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/rcmp-drop-probe-into-wright-over-90000-duffy-cheque/article18023811/ This does not surprise me because intent matters when it comes to bribery and I could not imagine how using your own money to re-pay taxpayers could be a criminal act. Edited April 15, 2014 by TimG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted April 15, 2014 Report Share Posted April 15, 2014 This does not surprise me because intent matters when it comes to bribery and I could not imagine how using your own money to re-pay taxpayers could be a criminal act. stay tuned: "It was decided that it was best for him to act as a witness"... something about fraud, breach of trust, re-writing that audit report, etc.. Notwithstanding the ethics side yet to be ruled upon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan Posted April 15, 2014 Report Share Posted April 15, 2014 Looks like RCMP have confirmed that there was no criminal actions on the part of Wright: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/rcmp-drop-probe-into-wright-over-90000-duffy-cheque/article18023811/ This does not surprise me because intent matters when it comes to bribery and I could not imagine how using your own money to re-pay taxpayers could be a criminal act. I said that from the beginning. Regardless of how you felt about Duffy, calling the repayment of his expenses fraud was ridiculous to the extreme. Let's see if the vindication will get anywhere near the same airtime that the initial slander did. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Guy Posted April 16, 2014 Report Share Posted April 16, 2014 What has happened to our government and our sense of decency when the fact that a public official in not formally charged with a criminal act that then appears to clear him of wrong doing? Has the bar been set that low? Does the fact that an act is "legal" make it acceptable as a function of a democratic government? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted April 16, 2014 Report Share Posted April 16, 2014 ...calling the repayment of his expenses fraud was ridiculous to the extreme. no - that was not being called fraud... that was being called bribery as intended to keep Duffy in line. Fraud aligns with other actions... like re-writing/tailoring the audit report. Of course, as I said earlier a few posts back, the ethics side has yet to be ruled upon... the measure of rightness isn't legality; if it was, the code of ethics for parlimentarians wouldn't exist. In any case, the best is yet to come. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boges Posted April 16, 2014 Report Share Posted April 16, 2014 (edited) What has happened to our government and our sense of decency when the fact that a public official in not formally charged with a criminal act that then appears to clear him of wrong doing? Has the bar been set that low? Does the fact that an act is "legal" make it acceptable as a function of a democratic government? No but it seems that the idea that this exchange was fraud and potentially illegal was premature and ultimately wrong. If this was bribery, I'd like to know what Duffy was supposed to be paid off to cover up? Since he has since been thrown under the bus and utterly discredited, what exactly did he have on this government that would cause the PMO to pay him off? Perhaps they just wanted Duffy's problem to be taken care of. Would people have just preferred he go into debt being forced to pay back his improper claims? I still can't understand why people were freaking out over this. Yet Canada's 2nd largest government in Ontario is mired in REAL scandal and corruption and cover-ups that led to the waste of more than a Billion dollars, yet we mostly hear crickets about that. Edited April 16, 2014 by Boges Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keepitsimple Posted April 16, 2014 Report Share Posted April 16, 2014 I still can't understand why people were freaking out over this. Yet Canada's 2nd largest government in Ontario is mired in REAL scandal and corruption and cover-ups that led to the waste of more than a Billion dollars, yet we mostly hear crickets about that. That's exactly how I feel......is it any wonder that many people feel the MSM tilts their coverage in favour of Left leaning parties like the Ontario Liberals. People died in Walkerton as a result of two drunken brothers deliberately falsifying water tests - yet the Star literally called Mike Harris a murderer and continue to perpetually depict him as a mean-sprited Ogre. Yet people died because of Ornge Air Services incompetence - a service created by the McGuinty government, the rife-with-fraud framework of which was put in place under the legal guidance of Alf Apps, the former President of the Liberal Party of Canada. Where is the outrage - where are the lynch mobs that castigated Harris? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted April 16, 2014 Report Share Posted April 16, 2014 I'd like to know what Duffy was supposed to be paid off to cover up? Since he has since been thrown under the bus and utterly discredited, what exactly did he have on this government that would cause the PMO to pay him off? Perhaps they just wanted Duffy's problem to be taken care of. Would people have just preferred he go into debt being forced to pay back his improper claims? huh! It's been shown that, behind the scenes, Duffy was vehemently opposed to paying back the $90K expense claims; he genuinely felt he was playing by the rules and direction received. Then... all of a sudden he repays the claimed expenses and the next thing we see is the PMO and high profile Harper Conservative ministers lauding the actions of Duffy in paying back the claimed expenses... the ole' Duffster is back! Of course, ultimately things began to unravel... the how and exact circumstances aren't clear yet. What is known is that Duffy began to push back once info began to "leak forward" about supposed manipulations of the audit report, of the initial internal movements to have the expense claims payed back with actual Conservative Party funds, etc., ... and then we have Wright come forward to reveal he "loaned a good friend the $90K out of his own pocket"... and then Wright resigns. Notwithstanding there are a dozen others named in those RCMP documents that are no longer in the positions they held during that time... as in "clear the decks" time! Of course, Duffy began to sense, rightly or wrongly, that he was being set-up to take the fall and was incensed he might be subject to criminal charges related to fraud/breach of trust. Shortly after, Duffy went nuclear. The actual actions of Wright in this seem somewhat benign to the bigger picture... of course, it is intriguing to presume on the details and timing of Wright being lauded for his actions by Harper (and many others), to particulars of Wright going from having resigned... to having been fired (and 'thrown under the bus'). You ask 'what did Duffy have on them'? Well, as I said... the best is yet to come! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boges Posted April 16, 2014 Report Share Posted April 16, 2014 So we don't know what Duffy has on them? Why wouldn't he just spill the beans, it's not like he has anything to lose. Why wait? In this instance the cover-up is, of course, worse than the crime. I'm just unsure, beyond Duffy's expense claims, what the crime from the PMO was. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted April 16, 2014 Report Share Posted April 16, 2014 So we don't know what Duffy has on them? Why wouldn't he just spill the beans, it's not like he has anything to lose. Why wait? In this instance the cover-up is, of course, worse than the crime. I'm just unsure, beyond Duffy's expense claims, what the crime from the PMO was. you could show the same naivety by simply asking "why didn't they just abandon Duffy from the onset"... from day 1, publicly, when the initial audit came forward. As for the timing of Duffy 'spilling the beans', clearly, he wants to do that on his timing and circumstance... which seems to suggest alignment with his apparently expressed intent to "take them all down"! Now, how much of that is Duffster-bluster, that will ultimately show. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
overthere Posted April 16, 2014 Report Share Posted April 16, 2014 The usual rush to judgement here, from the usual suspects, in the abscence of evidence to the contrary. The RCMP have cleared Wright in a criminal investigation. To some, that is just evidence of a conspiracy. Even the cops are crooked! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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.