Will Stephen Harper resign over the Senate scandal?

[Topaz]

Income splitting would be such a benefit to me that I would probably put aside all my qualms over Harper and stick a blue sign on my lawn.

I hope you don't think incoming splitting means 1/2 because it doesn't.

[Boges]

"The results are from an online poll of Canadian respondents Oct. 25 to 28."

Interesting, I think all polling is pretty much BS but I wonder how a scientific online poll is conducted.

Edited October 31, 2013 by Boges

[Topaz]

Would Harper resign over this scandal if his base support fell?? That a good question and since brought the party together, would he resign if he thought they could end up like the PC with 2 or would he resign to keep the party together? That's a hard question to answer because he such a control freak and he may think only HE can only get things done he thinks needs to be done like the pipeline and the senate. Although, if the Mrs. said that enough I want to go back to Alberta, then he would resign. IF Harper thought he was going to lose the election, I think then he would resign.

[Boges]

He's set out a new list of tasks he wants to government to achieve before the election. I doubt this will make him give up on that.

[jacee]

Deceiving the public is what politics is all about - for all parties.

And you accept that?

[guyser]

And once Duffy and company are turfed from the Senate early next week what's the fuel for the media beyond that?

Well...if you want to be de facto on the outcome.....then tell us ok?

Maybe Nigel comes out swinging? There are a few canaries who could sing if so prodded.

[Keepitsimple]

Well...if you want to be de facto on the outcome.....then tell us ok?

Maybe Nigel comes out swinging? There are a few canaries who could sing if so prodded.

Mr. Wright has already told the RCMP that it was all his idea and that he did not tell Harper - before or after. So its pretty hard to "come out swinging".....he might possibly just come out and praise Harper for TRYING to protect his reputation by not saying anything for the longest time.

[g_bambino]

Harper's no quitter but then again, neither was Richard Nixon. Nixon ultimately chose to resign when Haig showed him the numbers of votes he could muster in the Senate.

So, short of a revolt within the Conservative caucus, the two situations are nothing alike. If the caucus maintains its support of the prime minister in the Commons and Harper remains innocent of any crime, what would compel him to resign?

[jacee]

And once Duffy and company are turfed from the Senate early next week what's the fuel for the media beyond that?

I'm betting that won't happen.

That gives all power to any PM to force dissenting people out of the Senate and fill it with sycophants.

[Boges]

I'm betting that won't happen.

That gives all power to any PM to force dissenting people out of the Senate and fill it with sycophants.

Well considering the PM appoints all Senators, that's exactly what the Senate is.

[guyser]

Mr. Wright has already told the RCMP that it was all his idea and that he did not tell Harper - before or after. So its pretty hard to "come out swinging".....he might possibly just come out and praise Harper for TRYING to protect his reputation by not saying anything for the longest time.

True.

B ut is it? Harper has thrown him under the bus, hes tried to throw Duffy under it.....political payback can be a bitch

[jacee]

Well considering the PM appoints all Senators, that's exactly what the Senate is.

Forcing people out without a conviction or public hearing is a dangerous new precedent.

[Boges]

Forcing people out without a conviction or public hearing is a dangerous new precedent.

I'm sure many, me included, would welcome it though.

The fact that you can only be turfed from the Senate if you get charged with a serious crime is pretty ridiculous.

[jacee]

Mr. Wright has already told the RCMP that it was all his idea and that he did not tell Harper - before or after. So its pretty hard to "come out swinging".....he might possibly just come out and praise Harper for TRYING to protect his reputation by not saying anything for the longest time.

We don't know what Wright may have said to the RCMP by now, and I doubt he'll be speaking publicly until trial.

[Boges]

Maybe there's a video

[g_bambino]

That gives all power to any PM to force dissenting people out of the Senate and fill it with sycophants.

Possibly. But, why would the sycophants be sycophants? What do they stand to gain from being the prime minister's toadies? All senators certainly have nothing to lose from saying 'no' to the prime minister.

[PIK]

Did chretien resign when the libs were caught with all thier real scandal?

[guyser]

Did chretien resign when the libs were caught with all thier real scandal?

Hey, didnt you hear? The PMO did all of it without Chretien knowing a thing

[Boges]

You could argue Adscam was the start of Paul Martin doing his backstabbing which made Chretien announce he'd quit in 2002.

[Keepitsimple]

We don't know what Wright may have said to the RCMP by now, and I doubt he'll be speaking publicly until trial.

The "timeline" was previously posted by Topaz....here are some excerpts that make it pretty clear that Wright has already said publicly - and to the RCMP that Harper did not know about Nigel Wright paying for Duffy's expenses. As I said - it's doubtful he'll be changing his story. It makes far more sense that they are both telling the truth - than both are lying.

May 19: Nigel Wright resigns "in light of the controversy surrounding my handling of matters involving Senator Duffy," adding he did not tell Harper of the repayment "either before or after the fact." Harper says in a statement he accepted Wright's resignation "with great regret." Ray Novak, Harper's principal secretary, takes over as chief of staff.

May 21: Prime Minister Stephen Harper allows journalists into the opening portion of a Conservative caucus meeting while he speaks to his MPs and senators. He tells them he is "very upset" about the recent conduct of "some parliamentarians" and his own office, but he does not name names and does not specifically address the Senate spending scandal. He does not take questions from reporters, who are asked to leave when he finished speaking.

June 13 - Nigel Wright's lawyer, Patrick McCann, contacts the office of lead RCMP investigator Cpl. Greg Horton to advise them that they "would be sending some information to the RCMP," which turns out to be a letter stating that, at the time Wright paid Duffy, "he was unaware of any fraudulent expense claims on Duffy's part," and noting that he "was willing to meet with investigators to provide whatever information may be required from him."

June 19 - During an initial meeting to "discuss the circumstances under which any future interview with Wright might take place," RCMP investigators inform McCann and Peter Mantas that both Duffy and Wright were being investigated, and that "a decision on whether to interview Wright as a suspect or a witness had not been made."

In response, Wright's lawyers "further advise" the RCMP of the following, as taken directly from the ITO:

a. Wright's role was to manage the Conservative Party, part of which was to deal with matters that could cause embarrassment;

b. Wright was of the view that Duffy should repay the money for the secondary housing, and had discussions with him in that regard;

c. Duffy was concerned that he did not have the money to cover the reimbursement;

d. Duffy was of the view that if he did not claim a primary residence in PEI, then his Senate seat could be in jeopardy. Wright assured him that was not the case

e. The Conservative Party was initially going to repay the money for Duffy, from a Conservative fund, when it was believed that the amount he owed was approximately $32,000. The fund is controlled by Senator Gerstein;

f. When it was realized that the cost was actually $90,000, it was too much money to ask the Conservative Party to cover;

g. Wright then offered to cover the cost for Duffy, believing it was the proper ethical decision that tax payers not be out that amount of money;

h. There was no written contract between Wright and Duffy;

i. Wright asked for two conditions from Duffy:

i. Pay back the money right away

ii. Stop talking to the media about it

j. Wright sent the money to Duffy's lawyer, surname Payne

k. The payment to Duffy was made with a bank draft on March 26, 2013;

l. Wright received no direction from anyone to make the offer;

m. Wright and Duffy knew each other, but were not friends;

n. Wright did not make similar offers to other Senators being investigated;

o. Wright does not expect any of the money back;

p. Wright obtained a copy of the letter from the Senate to Duffy, stating how much he would need to reimburse;

q. Some people within the PMO were aware of the arrangement, but Prime Minister Harper was not

r. McCann and Mantas were not aware of any involvement this deal may have had regarding the altered Senate report draft.

[PIK]

Hey, didnt you hear? The PMO did all of it without Chretien knowing a thing

Thanks for proving my point, thanks guyser. LOL

[Mighty AC]

LOL PIK you are a first class joke.

[guyser]

LOL PIK you are a first class joke.

Yup

Doesnt understand the joke. Nor the double standard.

[guyser]

Thanks for proving my point, thanks guyser. LOL

Apart from blaming the media for the sun rising in the west....you almost never have a point.

Edited October 31, 2013 by Guyser2

[cybercoma]

All senators certainly have nothing to lose from saying 'no' to the prime minister.

It's pretty interesting to see Duffy, Wallin, and Brazeau realize that.