PMO paid for Duffy's fraud

jacee · October 31, 2013

After reading the timeline, I noticed that Duffy said that either Wright or Tkachuk and Olsen told him "If you do as we want, the Prime Minister will publicly confirm that your entitled to sit as a senator from P.E.I. and you won't lose your seat" Now, how could any one say that, if the PM didn't know what was happening?

Good question.

But that's Duffy's claim and they'll deny saying it of course.

waldo · October 31, 2013

and yet another succinct and scathing summation on the Harper Conservative Senate scandal... pointedly at Harper's lack of responsibility... for almost anything!

Andrew Coyne - National Post: To recap, the prime minister is not responsible for almost anything

To recap, the prime minister is not responsible. He is not responsible for appointing Mike Duffy and Pamela Wallin and Patrick Brazeau to the Senate. He is not responsible for appointing senators from provinces in which they were not resident, and he is not responsible for their subsequent activities shilling for the Tories across the country at public expense.

And he is most certainly not responsible for the clandestine campaign, involving officials in his office, the chairman of the Conservative Fund Canada, and several leading Conservative senators, to repay Senator Duffy’s falsely claimed expenses on his behalf and conceal his misdeeds from the public. He is not responsible for his spokesman’s statements, even after the plot had been exposed, praising Mr. Duffy for “doing the right thing” and vouching confidence in his chief of staff, Nigel Wright.

On the other hand, he is responsible, by his own account, for telling Mr. Duffy to repay his expenses, though he had for months denied having any involvement with the file, and he was briefly responsible for “dismissing” Mr. Wright, though he had earlier claimed he resigned, and though he now seems unwilling to say which version is operable.

But he is not responsible for the current campaign to suspend the three senators two years without pay for “gross negligence” — a made-up penalty for a made-up offence, meted out by a process that seems to change by the day. He is not responsible because, as everybody knows, the Senate is wholly independent of the prime minister — as independent as his own office.

He is not even responsible for answering questions about his responsibility in this affair. He does not answer questions from the media, and when called upon to answer questions in Parliament as often as not passes them off to his parliamentary secretary. Even when he does answer questions, he doesn’t answer them.

.

jacee · October 31, 2013

Will Harper be able to rally the troops?

http://www.nationalpost.com/m/wp/blog.html?b=fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2013/10/30/john-ivison-calgary-convention-gives-conservatives-chance-to-face-problems-that-dont-involve-the-senate

Thank God, I dont have to go back to my riding, said one. I dont know what to tell them anymore.

The Senate scandal has rattled the party to its core

...

Many of the folks who show up for the convention in Calgary likely would have bought that line and been prepared to turn a blind eye to the Wild West justice of booting Mr. Duffy, Pamela Wallin and Patrick Brazeau out of the Senate before theyd had the right of reply to the specific allegations against them.

But the $13,560 cheque to pay Mr. Duffys legal fees, not to mention the apparent scripting of the lie about the source of the $90,000 by the Prime Ministers Office, complicates the black and white narrative. Its hard to argue your side are the good guys when the lies and misuse of money are so rampant. To make matters more disturbing for the party faithful, it was their donations that were misused.

Will the party accept Harper's blame game?

I think they know he's handled it badly.

The bully is always the wussy when it comes to accepting responsibility for his own actions.

Edited October 31, 2013 by jacee

Jimmy Wilson · October 31, 2013

and yet another succinct and scathing summation on the Harper Conservative Senate scandal... pointedly at Harper's lack of responsibility... for almost anything!

Andrew Coyne - National Post: To recap, the prime minister is not responsible for almost anything

.

Because,it's all about the "transparency and accountability"...

cybercoma · October 31, 2013

I wonder if Conservatives are ok with the party paying Duffy's legal fees and with their leader for appointing such a terrible senator.

Smallc · October 31, 2013

If paying legal fees is party practice for members I'm fine with that, but Duffy never should have been a senator.

PIK · October 31, 2013

I wonder if Conservatives are ok with the party paying Duffy's legal fees and with their leader for appointing such a terrible senator.

What did harper say about the dippers doing the exact same thing for 100g's. I just caught a little of it, so what was he talking about?? And I woinder idf union memebers are happy with thier money going to pay off martin the mouth troubles??? Edited October 31, 2013 by PIK

cybercoma · October 31, 2013

What did harper say about the dippers doing the exact same thing for 100g's. I just caught a little of it, so what was he talking about?? And I woinder idf union memebers are happy with thier money going to pay off martin the mouth troubles???

The NDP did no such thing. What Harper brought up was a civil defamation judgment nearly 15 years ago paid by the Liberal Party of Quebec for comments Mulcair made in the course of his job in the Quebec National Assembly. Contrast that to the criminal investigation Harper's Senators and the PMO are under.

Edited October 31, 2013 by cybercoma

Icebound · November 1, 2013

The good news in all this is that maybe all Senators will question the wisdom of blind loyalty, when their role is actually supposed to be independent thought.

... and maybe the Canadian public are becoming more aware that a separate and independent senate is actually necessary as a counter-balance to the tyranny of overwhelming majorities and controlling prime ministers.

Abolition of the senate should be a non-starter in a democracy. The first plank in Mussolini's manifesto (okay... the FIFTH plank) in 1919 was the abolition of the senate... for the very reasons that it gets in the way of all-controlling power.

Now it DOES need reform. And the primary reform that it needs is that Senators must cut political ties.

Money scandals are small potatoes, compared to the fact that SENATORS actually sit in the caucus together with the COMMONS. Talk about conflict-of-interest.

Oh, let me assure you... Duffy and Wallin, et al, will never be favorites of the left.... but even THEY have realized that their blind loyalty was misplaced.

...

eyeball · November 1, 2013

The good news in all this is that maybe all Senators will question the wisdom of blind loyalty, when their role is actually supposed to be independent thought.

... and maybe the Canadian public are becoming more aware that a separate and independent senate is actually necessary as a counter-balance to the tyranny of overwhelming majorities and controlling prime ministers..

I'd like to see Citizen's Assemblies perform the role of the Senate. Every Canadian should have a duty to participate in the country's governance in the same manner they do if called to serve on a jury.

On Guard for Thee · November 1, 2013

The NDP did no such thing. What Harper brought up was a civil defamation judgment nearly 15 years ago paid by the Liberal Party of Quebec for comments Mulcair made in the course of his job in the Quebec National Assembly. Contrast that to the criminal investigation Harper's Senators and the PMO are under.

Correct. And, it happenned 17 years ago. If that's the best counter offensive they can provide then maybe they should learn to look forward for a change.

Topaz · November 1, 2013

Any of you watching QP? What do you think of Paul Chalandra, the MP that stand up when Harper doesn't want to? He told Katherine Clark, in an interview, he's dreams of becoming PM, since childhood. All his answers show how desperate the Tories when it comes to answers and really like to see a rule, that MP's can't tell lies in the House.

jacee · November 1, 2013

Good point. All we have now is a rule that they can't call each other liars in the house ... but what if they are? :rolleyes:

Harper's desperation is showing in the polls now. Blaming and vilifying Wright just might backfire on him as Wright still has a lot of creds among the power Tories. I think party people know that Harper is the real loose cannon.

The bad news: Ekos, in a poll gathered Oct. 26-29, found the Tories garnered just 26.4 per cent support, compared with 37.4 per cent for the Liberals, and 24.9 per cent for the New Democrats. This from pollster Frank Graves: "The Conservatives have now reached the lowest levels of confidence in broad direction for a federal government seen in over 20 years." Ouch.

http://www.calgaryherald.com/touch/story.html?id=9111302

Bryan · November 1, 2013

What did harper say about the dippers doing the exact same thing for 100g's. I just caught a little of it, so what was he talking about?? And I woinder idf union memebers are happy with thier money going to pay off martin the mouth troubles???

It was Pat martin's legal bills that the NDP paid when he was sued by Racknine over his robocall allegations. Mulcair's legal bills were paid by the PQ LPC, but yeah, it was $100,000. Either way, angry Tom is a hypocrite.

jacee · November 1, 2013

It was Pat martin's legal bills that the NDP paid when he was sued by Racknine over his robocall allegations. Mulcair's legal bills were paid by the PQ LPC, but yeah, it was $100,000. Either way, angry Tom is a hypocrite.

Martin was out of line, but there was no fraud-bribery issue.

The issue with Duffy is whether Wright and the Conservative Party paid Duffy off

in return for his silence,

because that's a serious crime.

Wright is already implicated and under investigation.

Now the Conservative Party is too.

.

Edited November 1, 2013 by jacee

Bryan · November 1, 2013

Martin was out of line, but there was no fraud-bribery issue.

The issue with Duffy is whether Wright and the Conservative Party paid Duffy off

in return for his silence,

because that's a serious crime.

Wright is already implicated and under investigation.

Now the Conservative Party is too.

.

Right. Because he's being so quiet, isn't he?

Besides, how is it a crime? The worst possible scenario is "here's the money you owe, now go away and stop telling people that you don't owe it." Wow. If that's the biggest "scandal" they can pin on Harper, he must be the best leader the western world has ever seen.

cybercoma · November 1, 2013

Right. Because he's being so quiet, isn't he?

Nobody's claiming they succeeded.

Besides, how is it a crime?

Now you're just trolling.

GostHacked · November 1, 2013

http://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/outside-audits-of-senators-expenses-cost-taxpayers-more-than-520-000-1.1523724

Looks like we are getting screwed twice. Once for the expenses scandal and another to pay for the audits.

The independent audits of expense claims by four senators at the centre of a spending scandal cost taxpayers more than $520,000.

The Senate’s Internal Economy committee said in a statement Friday that the contract for audit firm Deloitte to review Sen. Pamela Wallin’s living and travel expenses cost $390,058.00, more than double what she was ordered to repay in ineligible claims.

In the end, Wallin was ordered to repay $138,969 in invalid expense claims.

Cost more to audit the money these people are wrongly claiming for expenses. Awesome.

eyeball · November 1, 2013

I was just wondering about cost of crime while watching the news about LAX this morning. There's a shot of at least 50 cops just standing around, dozens of emergency vehicles parked or stuck in traffic, flights backed up who knows how far or long. The cost must be in the range of several thousands of dollars a minute and it'll likely be hours before this winds down.

It's hard to imagine the price of gun freedom or in our case the cost of corruption ever comes out in the wash.

PIK · November 1, 2013

and yet another succinct and scathing summation on the Harper Conservative Senate scandal... pointedly at Harper's lack of responsibility... for almost anything!

Andrew Coyne - National Post: To recap, the prime minister is not responsible for almost anything

.

Coyne, LOL

eyeball · November 1, 2013

PIK, ditto.

GostHacked · November 1, 2013

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/rcmp-allege-wallin-committed-fraud-breach-of-trust-1.2325642

I F'n love this. All over a few grand.

The RCMP allege Senator Pamela Wallin committed fraud and breach of trust by filing inappropriate travel and living expenses claims, CBC News has learned from court documents.

The documents, filed by the RCMP National Division in Ottawa on Oct. 28, allege that Wallin "defrauded the Senate" between Jan. 2, 2009, and Sept. 30, 2012, in an amount exceeding $5,000 "by deceit, falsehood, or other fraudulent means."

jacee · November 1, 2013

Right. Because he's being so quiet, isn't he?

He was briefly, after the Wright payment, but circumstances have evolved.

Besides, how is it a crime? The worst possible scenario is "here's the money you owe, now go away and stop telling people that you don't owe it." Wow. If that's the biggest "scandal" they can pin on Harper, he must be the best leader the western world has ever seen.

Ask the RCMP why they are investigating Duffy and Wright. I believe it's taking a bribe and making a bribe respectively.

Ask Harper why he called in the RCMP.

.

Edited November 1, 2013 by jacee

jacee · November 1, 2013

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/rcmp-allege-wallin-committed-fraud-breach-of-trust-1.2325642

I F'n love this. All over a few grand.

Crime known as 'Fraud over $5000'.

From your link ...

Wallin has paid back $138,969 in ineligible claims.

Topaz · November 1, 2013

I watching Moore on TV go on and on about the three senators, Duffy, Wallin and Brazeau but they NEVER seem to talk about the other three senators who have a major part in Duffy's scheme. Shouldn't they be kick out of the senate too? Then there's the lawyer and Woodcock that remain on the Hill.