Wright not charged

[Topaz]

So the RCMP will not charged Wright for paying the money and I can only think of one reason....Wright said he didn't do anything wrong and he didn't.....why because before he gave the money to Duffy he said he HAD to go talk to the PM and after going so he came back and so "its a go". So therefore the PM gave permission to paying out the money to make this go away. So it appears the PM has lied, thinking at the time it would be another secret within his government. Before anyone says the PM doesn't lie, I know for a fact he has lied in Question Period, when answering a question.

[Big Guy]

When the RCMP says that there is not enough evidence to take somebody to court it does not mean that what they did was not "wrong". There are many things a person can do that are wrong either morally or ethically wrong but which are not a criminal act. If we accept that any behaviour by members of our government is OK because it is not a criminal act then we have lost any semblance of trust in them.

[Keepitsimple]

The Wright situation is a shame. He cannot be proclaimed "innocent" because there was never any charges. All that can be sais - is what was said......there is no evidence to even lay a charge. So in fact - all that we had was an allegation - and the RCMP made it clear that Wright and the Conservatives were totally cooperative with everything - witnesses, email - whatever was needed. Everything Wright has said - has turned out to be true. Wright's comments and testimony have always indicated that Wright would handle having Duffy pay back what he owed - but not the fact that he would do it with personal funds. It's pretty simply really - only made complicated by the Harper-haters who want so much to impune his character.

[Topaz]

Harper-haters? What about the fact that Wright said that he was going to talk to the PM BEFORE giving the money to Duffy and after having that talk, he said "It's good to go" Common sense says the PM gave them that permission and so the payment was made. IF this case goes to court because of charges to Duffy, both Wright and the PM will be called to court.

[Keepitsimple]

Harper-haters? What about the fact that Wright said that he was going to talk to the PM BEFORE giving the money to Duffy and after having that talk, he said "It's good to go" Common sense says the PM gave them that permission and so the payment was made. IF this case goes to court because of charges to Duffy, both Wright and the PM will be called to court.

That's where your logic is faulty. Wright has already said that the PM knew only the "broad strokes". To me, that means that Wright had arranged for Duffy to pay back the money and stop causing trouble. There was no need to mention that he was going to give Duffy the money. Keep in mind that $90,000 is peanuts to someone like Wright - who is one of the rare people who is truly doing the job to serve his country. It's simple when you understand what kind of person Wright is.

[Big Guy]

A member of the PMO in a democracy gives $90,000 to an unelected Senator in the same government. Both hide the transaction. Why? The Senator is kicked out of the Senate and publicly exposes the transaction. The member in the PMO then quits (or the PM fires him) and the Prime Minister denounces his actions.

There is nothing wrong with this behaviour? Is this the way you expect your government to function?

[WWWTT]

Keep in mind that $90,000 is peanuts to someone like Wright - who is one of the rare people who is truly doing the job to serve his country. It's simple when you understand what kind of person Wright is.

You got to be freekin joking!!!

Wright was in there to see exactly where the big money is going! Making sure his money is properly taken of first hand!

WWWTT

[On Guard for Thee]

A member of the PMO in a democracy gives $90,000 to an unelected Senator in the same government. Both hide the transaction. Why? The Senator is kicked out of the Senate and publicly exposes the transaction. The member in the PMO then quits (or the PM fires him) and the Prime Minister denounces his actions.

There is nothing wrong with this behaviour? Is this the way you expect your government to function?

And if you followed QP at all as this particular scandal unfolded you will recall Harper stating over and over that Wright has done nothing wrong, only to change his story 180 degrees. When the going gets tough, Harper throws somebody under the bus.

[cybercoma]

Wright has already said that the PM knew

Good of you to admit it.

It's simple when you understand what kind of person Wright is.

It's even simpler when you know what kind of person Harper is. Edited April 19, 2014 by cybercoma

[Big Guy]

Good of you to admit it.

It's even simpler when you know what kind of person Harper is.

I think Stephen Harper is a decent human being and means well. He is a very well educated man, is a good family man and believes passionately in the conservative point of view. He is an accomplished politician having won many elections and moved very quickly up the political ladder. He almost single handed maneuvered the amalgamation of the PC with Alliance and pushed this group farther to the right.

He is also a brilliant political tactician using the rules of our governance to keep his party in power. He has managed to push Canada closer and closer to his right wing vision of Canada, all with only about 40% of the popular vote.

Many people, including myself, do not like what he has done, what he is doing, what he intends to do and the methods he uses to attain his goals. It will be interesting how history will treat him.

I am a Tom Flanagan fan. While I do not share his political leanings I do enjoy how he expresses himself and believe him to be an honest political partisan. His truthfulness has caused him to disappear for a few months but he is now making a comeback. I believe the Tom knows Stephen Harper better than anyone else in politics. Tom was Stephens mentor in his formative years.

For that reason, I am concerned about Tom's most recent observations of Harper. It has been mentioned before that it is puzzling that most of the time Harper makes brilliant moves but every once in a while he does and says some very stupid things. The answer may be in Tom Flanagan's most recent book; “Persona Non Grata: The Death of Free Speech in the Internet Age.”

He writes of his former protege Stephen Harper, “He can be suspicious, secretive, and vindictive, prone to sudden eruptions of white-hot rage over meaningless trivia, at other times falling into week-long depressions in which he is incapable of making decisions,”.

That may explain some of his erratic decisions.

[WestCoastRunner]

Everyone knows Harper has taken secretive measures much further than his predecessors.

"Harper’s secretive approach to politics created an environment in which his servants did things that they couldn’t explain once they were exposed."

"The RCMP investigation into Wright’s payment to Duffy — with its dramatic court documents — pierced the PMO’s secrecy in a way that was difficult for the Harper government but good for our democracy. Democracy is only meaningful to the extent that we know what the government is doing."

Let's hope democracy prevails in the next election.

[Keepitsimple]

Everyone knows Harper has taken secretive measures much further than his predecessors.

"Harper’s secretive approach to politics created an environment in which his servants did things that they couldn’t explain once they were exposed."

"The RCMP investigation into Wright’s payment to Duffy — with its dramatic court documents — pierced the PMO’s secrecy in a way that was difficult for the Harper government but good for our democracy. Democracy is only meaningful to the extent that we know what the government is doing."

Let's hope democracy prevails in the next election.

All I can say is.....be careful what you wish for.

[On Guard for Thee]

I'd say she is being careful, and I might add smart, about what she is wishing for. After all, I think we could all appreciate having an actual "clear" answer from our government for a change.

[Topaz]

Think about this.....first Harper comes out and defends Wright.....then all of sudden if fires him and throws him under the bus, why? Could it be that Harper did give the permission to Wright, then the lawyers get talking and tell the PM you have to change your story fast because you've broken a rule by giving permission, so the PM goes to the other way and let Wright go and then comes up with his defense of "I didn't know". Please!!! IF he didn't know, then why hasn't he told the public exactly what HE and Wright talked about and what question did Wright ask the PM?? I hope this does go to court and that Wright and the PM are call to appear, maybe we could watch it on C-PAC!!!

[On Guard for Thee]

Think about this.....first Harper comes out and defends Wright.....then all of sudden if fires him and throws him under the bus, why? Could it be that Harper did give the permission to Wright, then the lawyers get talking and tell the PM you have to change your story fast because you've broken a rule by giving permission, so the PM goes to the other way and let Wright go and then comes up with his defense of "I didn't know". Please!!! IF he didn't know, then why hasn't he told the public exactly what HE and Wright talked about and what question did Wright ask the PM?? I hope this does go to court and that Wright and the PM are call to appear, maybe we could watch it on C-PAC!!!

I think your framing of the events is pretty close to what I reckon happenned. The "Good to GO" email tells us lots. And he broke more than a rule: it's a criminal offence to attempt to influence a sitting senator. Also a criminal offence to allow yourself to be influenced by a bribe. I suppose Harper can breath a small sigh because they have stopped chasing Wright, but if Duffy goes to court, Wright will be ordered to testify for sure. I'd love to have him under oath.

[Keepitsimple]

I think your framing of the events is pretty close to what I reckon happenned. The "Good to GO" email tells us lots. And he broke more than a rule: it's a criminal offence to attempt to influence a sitting senator. Also a criminal offence to allow yourself to be influenced by a bribe. I suppose Harper can breath a small sigh because they have stopped chasing Wright, but if Duffy goes to court, Wright will be ordered to testify for sure. I'd love to have him under oath.

And when Wright testifies under oath that he did not tell Harper that he would personally give Duffy the money - and that he only knew that Duffy would pay back the money and stop acting like the victim.....in other words, Harper was only aware of the broad strokes.......would you then be satisfied? Somehow I doubt it. I think we'll know soon enough.

Edited April 23, 2014 by Keepitsimple

[Peter F]

The Wright-Duffy transaction is hugely suspicious. He could have easily let Duffy suffer the consequences of his own actions. The worst that could have happened is Duffys wages get garnished.

But no....

Certainly Wright is a fool and, it seems very likely Harper too

Edited April 23, 2014 by Peter F

[Topaz]

Question..... IF Wright never told Harper that HE was giving Duffy the money, then where was the money coming from...the Conservative Party? The topic had to be money or else why said "its good to go". Was it the 30,000 the party was going to pay out? One group is asking the RCMP, why they stopped the investigate and want a report on it.

[Keepitsimple]

Question..... IF Wright never told Harper that HE was giving Duffy the money, then where was the money coming from...the Conservative Party? The topic had to be money or else why said "its good to go". Was it the 30,000 the party was going to pay out?

Who knows - let's hear from Wright. There were several scenarios in play including Duffy getting a loan from Royal Bank.....maybe the Conservative Party could have paid up to $30,0000 and Duffy the rest....maybe Wright or somebody could have co-signed a loan for Duffy......there are many ways to skin a cat so it's probably just like Wright said.....he told Harper in broad strokes that Duffy would pay it back (which he did). Why should Harper have to know anything more than that? We'll know when Wright testifies.

[On Guard for Thee]

Question..... IF Wright never told Harper that HE was giving Duffy the money, then where was the money coming from...the Conservative Party? The topic had to be money or else why said "its good to go". Was it the 30,000 the party was going to pay out? One group is asking the RCMP, why they stopped the investigate and want a report on it.

Mulcair asked Harper numerous times in QP if he would "just show us the cancelled check" Of course we know that never happenned.

[WWWTT]

What really sticks out in my mind about the individual Wright, is how he was treated by Steven Harper!

As soon as it came out the RCMP were investigating, he got thrown under the bus along with all the other senators!

Now some here may be thinking, hey big wif, lots of people to throw under the bus when those poll numbers start dropping.

Only problem with that is that there are only so many supporters with deep pockets you can throw under the blue machine before other supporters start asking questions like, hey where's Wright at this fundraiser.

Soon enough more and more supporters are less willing to right that cheque when they know who is behind the wheel and what goes on in their mind when the going gets tough.

After all, that's when you really get to know somebody, not during the good times, but during the bad times!

WWWTT