overthere Posted March 5, 2015 Report Posted March 5, 2015 But rest assured, if they want him to testify they will give him immunity. Otherwise they would haul him in on charges too. Now would be a good time to post your evidence that any of that happened. Wright is guilty because you really, really want him to be guilty. The police must be corrupt for failing to lay charges. Gotcha. Quote Science too hard for you? Try religion!
On Guard for Thee Posted March 5, 2015 Report Posted March 5, 2015 Duffy is charged with bribery, not Wright. Umm, that exactly my poit, why not. As I have already stated, it could well be because they would like to have Wright on the stand. Quote
guyser Posted March 5, 2015 Report Posted March 5, 2015 Now would be a good time to post your evidence that any of that happened. Wright is guilty because you really, really want him to be guilty. The police must be corrupt for failing to lay charges. Gotcha. I was replying to someone as respects Wright testifying and they thought charges could come, not me. Quote
PIK Posted March 9, 2015 Report Posted March 9, 2015 Nothing will happen top harper. IMO there is nothing new to bring out. Duffy is desperate. Now the mac harb trial is right after that, now there is a trial for tv. Imagine owning .01% of a house and then claim it. Pure liberal fraud. Quote Toronto, like a roach motel in the middle of a pretty living room.
On Guard for Thee Posted March 9, 2015 Report Posted March 9, 2015 Nothing will happen top harper. IMO there is nothing new to bring out. Duffy is desperate. Now the mac harb trial is right after that, now there is a trial for tv. Imagine owning .01% of a house and then claim it. Pure liberal fraud. And the Pamela Wallin right after that if you are waiting for some real good old con. fraud. And I dont think Duffy is all that desperate or he wouldnt have waived his pre trial hearing. Quote
PIK Posted March 9, 2015 Report Posted March 9, 2015 Duffy is not well. And yes Pamela is in big trouble IMO. Really it is pathetic, especially the ones that worked for the media , done stories of fraud and then go out and do the same. What is wrong with people. Quote Toronto, like a roach motel in the middle of a pretty living room.
The_Squid Posted March 9, 2015 Report Posted March 9, 2015 (edited) Harb/Wallin defrauded taxpayers... pretty simple cases... should go to jail. PMO bribing a Senator is much more serious.... several people should go to jail.... Edited March 9, 2015 by The_Squid Quote
PIK Posted March 9, 2015 Report Posted March 9, 2015 Was it a bribe. Or he was just helping out. Quote Toronto, like a roach motel in the middle of a pretty living room.
Keepitsimple Posted March 10, 2015 Report Posted March 10, 2015 Harb/Wallin defrauded taxpayers... pretty simple cases... should go to jail. Perhaps - but then don't forget that there's a big difference between "ineligible expenses" and fraud. With fraud, you have to prove that the individuals - with intent - tried to circumvent the rules that were in effect at that time, to their own benefit. I don't think we have all the facts to make such a judgement - and that's why they are in court, entitled to a full hearing. Quote Back to Basics
On Guard for Thee Posted March 10, 2015 Report Posted March 10, 2015 Was it a bribe. Or he was just helping out. It stinks to high heaven of bribe. Im guessing Duffy has some damning emails that will point that out. Wright of course is an experienced lawyer so Im sure he has anticipated the questions and has his answers figured out. But he also knows the problem if he is caught lying under oath. Im sure Harper is worried. Quote
LemonPureLeaf Posted March 10, 2015 Report Posted March 10, 2015 It stinks to high heaven of bribe. Im guessing Duffy has some damning emails that will point that out. Wright of course is an experienced lawyer so Im sure he has anticipated the questions and has his answers figured out. But he also knows the problem if he is caught lying under oath. Im sure Harper is worried. I don't understand how it was a bribe.He was helping out a friend. I don't see a bribe in that. Lending some cash to a friend isn't a bribe. Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted March 10, 2015 Report Posted March 10, 2015 I don't understand how it was a bribe. He was helping out a friend. I don't see a bribe in that. Lending some cash to a friend isn't a bribe. If it was just helping out a friend then it wasnt a bribe. If it was payoff to make an embarrassing problem for Harper go away, then it was. Quote
LemonPureLeaf Posted March 10, 2015 Report Posted March 10, 2015 If it was just helping out a friend then it wasnt a bribe. If it was payoff to make an embarrassing problem for Harper go away, then it was. Seems like a question of optics. No real clear cut way to determine that so I would think it would err on the side of caution. It's asking for large problems to tar a sitting PM with a crime with no evidence. A hunch isn't enough. Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted March 10, 2015 Report Posted March 10, 2015 Seems like a question of optics. No real clear cut way to determine that so I would think it would err on the side of caution. It's asking for large problems to tar a sitting PM with a crime with no evidence. A hunch isn't enough. Not sure quite what you are trying to say. But in any case, that is why they have court cases, to separate hunches from evidence. Quote
LemonPureLeaf Posted March 10, 2015 Report Posted March 10, 2015 Not sure quite what you are trying to say. But in any case, that is why they have court cases, to separate hunches from evidence. You say that yet you and the rest of the left wing are ready to hang everyone now, without trial, evidence or due process. You guys read, see or hear about the case and decide right there and then that the people involved are guilty. That's a serious problem of credibility for the left wing. It's mud slinging and nothing more, just cheap shots. Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted March 10, 2015 Report Posted March 10, 2015 You say that yet you and the rest of the left wing are ready to hang everyone now, without trial, evidence or due process. You guys read, see or hear about the case and decide right there and then that the people involved are guilty. That's a serious problem of credibility for the left wing. It's mud slinging and nothing more, just cheap shots. Maybe check your blood pressure there pal. There seems to be evidence that there may have been wrong doing at a high level of our current government. I cant see why you would have a problem with allowing that to be explored in a court of law. Unless you right wingers think that Harper could do no wrong. Quote
LemonPureLeaf Posted March 10, 2015 Report Posted March 10, 2015 Maybe check your blood pressure there pal. There seems to be evidence that there may have been wrong doing at a high level of our current government. I cant see why you would have a problem with allowing that to be explored in a court of law. Unless you right wingers think that Harper could do no wrong. My blood pressure is normal. I am not excited at all, quite calm in fact. Cup of tea on my desk, just taking a break from work to browse. I don't think we're pals as I don't know you in real life so I'd appreciate it if you didn't refer to me in the familiar. Thank you. See that word there. That's my point. We, as in the general public, don't know if any wrong doing was at hand. Be that as it is the left wing have already decided the people involved are guilty. Why not wait to see the evidence in a court of law before we pass some judgement. Everyone is presumed innocent in this country and I'd appreciate it if the left wing of this board would accept that instead of trying to forgo that and directly to the sentencing phase of the legal system. I say that the left wing of this board need to allow the legal system to work as it was intended. If any wrong doing is found I'll be the first to lead the charge to have the people involved removed from office, wherever that may be, including the PMO. I believe strongly in law and order and truly believe that justice needs to blind, without prejudice and with the presumption of innocence...Regardless of how guilty any party may appear to be, they aren't until the judge(s) declares the defendant guilty. Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted March 10, 2015 Report Posted March 10, 2015 My blood pressure is normal. I am not excited at all, quite calm in fact. Cup of tea on my desk, just taking a break from work to browse. I don't think we're pals as I don't know you in real life so I'd appreciate it if you didn't refer to me in the familiar. Thank you. See that word there. That's my point. We, as in the general public, don't know if any wrong doing was at hand. Be that as it is the left wing have already decided the people involved are guilty. Why not wait to see the evidence in a court of law before we pass some judgement. Everyone is presumed innocent in this country and I'd appreciate it if the left wing of this board would accept that instead of trying to forgo that and directly to the sentencing phase of the legal system. I say that the left wing of this board need to allow the legal system to work as it was intended. If any wrong doing is found I'll be the first to lead the charge to have the people involved removed from office, wherever that may be, including the PMO. I believe strongly in law and order and truly believe that justice needs to blind, without prejudice and with the presumption of innocence...Regardless of how guilty any party may appear to be, they aren't until the judge(s) declares the defendant guilty. Um, thats pretty much what I stated in my previous post. Quote
Topaz Posted December 18, 2015 Author Report Posted December 18, 2015 Well the Crown rested its case against Duffy and they didn't ask about the 90,000 cheque which puzzled many in the court. Of course, if they had, they probably would had to called Harper and that would have lead to the questioning by Duffy's lawyer which would be in the danger zone for Harper and the PMO. The statement that no man is above the law doesn't seems to ring true for Presidents, Prime Ministers and Premiers, at least in North America, The downside of this case for Harper is most Canadians think he is lying and did know what was going on and he'll wear that into Canadian history books. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/court-hears-duffy-tried-to-keep-some-diary-entries-secret/article27801776/ Quote
Keepitsimple Posted December 18, 2015 Report Posted December 18, 2015 Well the Crown rested its case against Duffy and they didn't ask about the 90,000 cheque which puzzled many in the court. Of course, if they had, they probably would had to called Harper and that would have lead to the questioning by Duffy's lawyer which would be in the danger zone for Harper and the PMO. The statement that no man is above the law doesn't seems to ring true for Presidents, Prime Ministers and Premiers, at least in North America, The downside of this case for Harper is most Canadians think he is lying and did know what was going on and he'll wear that into Canadian history books. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/court-hears-duffy-tried-to-keep-some-diary-entries-secret/article27801776/ ......and I guess McGuinty didn't know about the Gas Plants.......and Wynne didn't know about the Sudbury bribery.....and on and on it goes. As Scott Reid said yesterday on 1010 radio (a Liberal) - that's what Chiefs of Staffs are supposed to do - isolate their boss from messes and just clean them up. Quote Back to Basics
Big Guy Posted February 22, 2016 Report Posted February 22, 2016 Looks like the final arguments started to-day - or does anybody care? Quote Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
On Guard for Thee Posted February 22, 2016 Report Posted February 22, 2016 Looks like the final arguments started to-day - or does anybody care? Obviously not quite the impact now the election is over, however I for one would like to hear the verdict just to get a read on what may have been going on in the previous PMO after all. Quote
overthere Posted February 22, 2016 Report Posted February 22, 2016 Is Chuck Guite going to appear, just for old times sake? Quote Science too hard for you? Try religion!
jacee Posted April 21, 2016 Report Posted April 21, 2016 http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/politics/mike-duffy-trial-rulings-fraud-bribery-senate-1.3541627 Rulings read at 10 am today. Quote
Smallc Posted April 21, 2016 Report Posted April 21, 2016 Is Chuck Guite going to appear, just for old times sake? Right after Brian Mulroney. Quote
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.