Tory MPs seeking $355K in robocalls case

[Bryan]

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/breakingnews/conservative-mps-seeking-355k-from-voters-who-launched-robocalls-court-case-212799361.html

Seven Conservative MPs are seeking a combined $355,907 from a group of voters who went to court and lost their bid to overturn election results in their federal ridings because of misleading robocalls.

I'd definitely like it if people who make accusations they can't back up get sued more often. Time to turn towards the media and their "sources" now too. If they lie, make them pay.

[Keepitsimple]

When people go to court without presenting one witness who has been deprived of their vote due to a robocall - that amounts to frivolous action. It wasn't about whether misleading calls took place....it was about whether an election could be overturned because people were deprived of their vote.....and they couldn't produce even one person!

I agree that some costs are warranted.

[Topaz]

I do believe it was also sited that the Tories did little to help EC to find out the truth on the calls and went out of their way to slow the process down. Maybe the rest of voters should sued the Conservative Party for NOT being OPEN and ACCOUNTABLE!! I can't see this going anywhere except out the door.

[scribblet]

When people go to court without presenting one witness who has been deprived of their vote due to a robocall - that amounts to frivolous action. It wasn't about whether misleading calls took place....it was about whether an election could be overturned because people were deprived of their vote.....and they couldn't produce even one person!

I agree that some costs are warranted.

Seems that way to me also. The COC were simply looking to do an end run around the elections results because they can't wait for another election. Good for them, it's about time the Tories fought back.

I'm not a subscriber to the free press so can't reply to any comments but I wish I could correct the often repeated lie about what Harper supposedly said in 2006. They are repeating a Liberal attack ad from 2006 , which shows that people really do buy into those attack ads.

What Mr. Harper actually said In fact was in 2004 at a conservative convention “We can create a country built on solid Conservative values, not on expensive Liberal promises, a country the Liberals wouldn’t even recognize, the kind of country I want to lead.”

[The_Squid]

Here is the real irony:

"This is an outrageous amount to request, given that the judge found that voter suppression did occur and that the Conservative party database was the likely source of the call lists," Garry Neil, executive director of the Council of Canadians, said in a statement.

------------------------

In his nearly 100-page ruling, Federal Court Judge Richard Mosley also chided the Conservatives for holding up the robocalls court case, accusing them of engaging in "trench warfare in an effort to prevent this case from coming to a hearing on the merits."

He also took the Conservative party to task for making "little effort to assist with the investigation at the outset."

"While it was begrudgingly conceded during oral argument that what occurred was 'absolutely outrageous,' the record indicates that the stance taken by the respondent MPs from the outset was to block these proceedings by any means," Mosley wrote.

They were found to be fraudulent... the database was likely from the Conservative Party of Canada.... the judge stated that these MPs attempted to block the proceedings by any means... and yet they have the gall to demand money? They are just embarrassing themselves. These MPs better be from very safe ridings... if they aren't, they will be turfed for their arrogance next election.

[scribblet]

Really - the case was frivolous, they had no case, and again - not one case of a voter not being able to vote... etc. etc.

Even if it was from their data base and it was a conservative campaign worker, so what ? It doesn't implicate the whole party and it doesn't make their case any more worthy. You missed to part from the judge who said there was no evidence to show the party approved or condoned that use of its data. This is old stuff repeated over and over.

They are claiming that their bogus claims were filed in the "public interest". This is the same argument used by the person who tried to get Rob Ford removed from office in Toronto, as if overturning democratic elections is in the public interest.

[The_Squid]

The judge ruled that there was election fraud. I'm not sure how you could simply gloss over that statement. Truly one is a partisan hack if that doesn't raise one's eyebrows...

[scribblet]

The judge ruled that there was election fraud. I'm not sure how you could simply gloss over that statement. Truly one is a partisan hack if that doesn't raise one's eyebrows...

Truly one is a partisan hack if one glosses over the rest of it, (I'm not repeating again). Truly one is a partisan hack if one ignores that fact that no one was prevented from voting, Yes there was something going on that's all we know. Either way, it did not change the results of the election.

If someone is found they should be prosecuted, but there is no proof - nada - that the election results would be any different.

[cybercoma]

Time to turn towards the media and their "sources" now too.

Such an astonishing sense of entitlement worse than even the Chrétien era.

Oh and you want to know the media's sources? Look no further than the PMO.

[Topaz]

When people go to court without presenting one witness who has been deprived of their vote due to a robocall - that amounts to frivolous action. It wasn't about whether misleading calls took place....it was about whether an election could be overturned because people were deprived of their vote.....and they couldn't produce even one person!

I agree that some costs are warranted.

When people go to court without presenting one witness who has been deprived of their vote due to a robocall - that amounts to frivolous action. It wasn't about whether misleading calls took place....it was about whether an election could be overturned because people were deprived of their vote.....and they couldn't produce even one person!

I agree that some costs are warranted.

1% of voters didn't vote because they were told to go somewhere else, as says in the following article. You stand corrected. http://www2.macleans.ca/2013/05/31/voters-who-tried-to-overturn-2011-election-results-wont-go-to-supreme-court/

[cybercoma]

Truly one is a partisan hack if one glosses over the rest of it, (I'm not repeating again). Truly one is a partisan hack if one ignores that fact that no one was prevented from voting, Yes there was something going on that's all we know. Either way, it did not change the results of the election.

The judge didn't actually say this in the ruling. What was said was that there wasn't sufficient evidence to draw any conclusion about this. There was sufficient evidence for the judge to rule that there was widespread fraud though.

[Keepitsimple]

1% of voters didn't vote because they were told to go somewhere else, as says in the following article. You stand corrected. http://www2.macleans.ca/2013/05/31/voters-who-tried-to-overturn-2011-election-results-wont-go-to-supreme-court/

Read the article. That figure was thrown out by the Council of Canadians representative........the group that brought this frivolous action in the first place. ....the same people that can't find one person from anywhere across Canada who will step forward to say they were prevented from voting. Not one person. I stand uncorrected.

[Bryan]

1% of voters didn't vote because they were told to go somewhere else, as says in the following article. You stand corrected. http://www2.macleans.ca/2013/05/31/voters-who-tried-to-overturn-2011-election-results-wont-go-to-supreme-court/

One percent of voters is still an awful lot of people. If the CofC (and the Judge for that matter) KNEW that many people were disenfranchised, how come they were unable to find a single one? We were told they had as many as 30,000 people ready to testify, but the truth was they had ZERO. Not one.

[Topaz]

Answer the question, by didn't the Conservative Party do more to clear this up??? Well, the only reason a party would not be help to an inquiry, is that they DO have something to hide and even thought the court didn't have enough evidence, the court of public opinion does, they are the people who vote. So the Conservative may have won the war, but the people will win the battle for honesty and integrity and trustworthy!! WE (voters) do stand on guard.

[PIK]

1% of voters didn't vote because they were told to go somewhere else, as says in the following article. You stand corrected. http://www2.macleans.ca/2013/05/31/voters-who-tried-to-overturn-2011-election-results-wont-go-to-supreme-court/

Prove it. Just like the ford case, throw out the shit and hope people believe it 1st before it is ruled BS. The left has become sickening with all the courts cases tring to rewrite the election. You lost and we have a excellent fairly clean goverment, something the libs will never have.

Edited June 25, 2013 by PIK

[On Guard for Thee]

Robocalls happened. Let's have by-elections to clear the air.

[Topaz]

In Guelph, Michael Sona may have federal charges against him and apparently he became singled out by someone leaking his name. Does any one know who leaked his name to the authorities? Very interesting fact though and at the time he was working for Edie Adams.

[On Guard for Thee]

I think I heard somebody say "we have a excellent fairly clean government" What friggin rock have you been under.

[Bryan]

I think I heard somebody say "we have a excellent fairly clean government" What friggin rock have you been under.

Cleanest government in ages by far.

[On Guard for Thee]

Perhaps you haven't heard of The In and Out scandal, the F35 scandal, the senate scandal, the use of Prorougue scandal, and the all time, one time, only time, hit it out of the park scandal, Contempt of Parliament. And who knows what they have cooked up for the fall session.

[Bryan]

Perhaps you haven't heard of The In and Out scandal, the F35 scandal, the senate scandal, the use of Prorougue scandal, and the all time, one time, only time, hit it out of the park scandal, Contempt of Parliament. And who knows what they have cooked up for the fall session.

Yes I have heard of all of those phoney scandals. They really emphasize just how good this government is. There's no real dirt, so the opposition has to hang on to these manufactured ones.