Trudeau lying about SNC

[cannuck]

43 minutes ago, taxme said:

Harper did nothing for Canada or Canadians. Just another useless politician getting paid to screw Canada and Canadians. Harper had a golden chance to go after corrupt liberals and to change many liberal leftist programs and agendas that did nothing for Canada and Canadians. But he did not. It is for sure that Harper was not Trump. Canada needs a Trump big time. 

For the sake of debate, I would love to disagree with you, but I don't.

[PIK]

50 minutes ago, taxme said:

Harper did nothing for Canada or Canadians. Just another useless politician getting paid to screw Canada and Canadians. Harper had a golden chance to go after corrupt liberals and to change many liberal leftist programs and agendas that did nothing for Canada and Canadians. But he did not. It is for sure that Harper was not Trump. Canada needs a Trump big time. 

He did a lot. He saved soldiers lives by buying equiptmnent sole sourced so it would not take 30 yrs for delivery. He took us thru a worldwide recession that if the3  idiots took over we would have been screwed. He was a steady hand and he never embarrassed us on the world stage .He was actually respected on the world stage. Now we are heading for another big recession and guess what, because of trudeaus wild spending we will have no wiggle room. 

[Army Guy]

18 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

Let’s for a moment take JT and JWR out of the equation.  Is a DPA a reasonable resolution to SNC’s bribery in Libya?  We have no details about SNC’s wrongdoings and why or why not a DPA is reasonable, so it’s hard to assess whether JT’s team was right in pursuing one or JWR was right in refusing to apply one.  She won’t give her opinion.  JT is also short on details.  

This is just a question, as I am not a lawyer....but why can we not just charge the individuals who have committed or authorized these crimes...why must the entire company pay for the indiscretions or a few individuals...unless the owners have committed the crime and their needs to be some reparations made...But SNC is owned by stock holders is it not....so why can we not hold those reasonable for these crimes to account and let the stock holder figure out who is going to run the company next....  

[eyeball]

5 hours ago, PIK said:

Let the 9000 learn what it is like to have a government against you.

Its pretty easy to loath people when they have corrupt politicians at their back alright. That said, SNC employees aren't as loathsome as those those asshole who make LAV's for those assholes in Saudi Arabia.

[taxme]

3 hours ago, cannuck said:

For the sake of debate, I would love to disagree with you, but I don't.

If Harper was doing such a great job then why would Canadians vote him out and put in leftist liberal trudeau? Just wondering. 

[cannuck]

3 minutes ago, taxme said:

If Harper was doing such a great job then why would Canadians vote him out and put in leftist liberal trudeau? Just wondering. 

In fairness, what little Harper did, he did quite well.   It's just that he didn't really do that much, nor that much different from what the rest of the middle-of-the-road crowd would or did do.   He just managed to do it without being a slimey criminal in the Liberal mold.  Still, there was no assault on the institutions of the looney left - one of which - the CBC - is what took him down.   Canadian voters aren't that smart (I mean, shit, look at what they elected after Harper).

[egghead]

4 hours ago, Argus said:

And that is his problem. He's playing to the Left in BC who don't want pipelines no matter what, but he can't afford to be seen as being against pipelines either - not because of Alberta but because of Ontario, which doesn't much like a PM who stands in the way of business.

Then, the left in BC has no problem with the LNG project. I don't believe JT cares about the left in BC, Alb or Ont. For him, environmental is only a buzz word. He only cares Que

[taxme]

11 minutes ago, cannuck said:

In fairness, what little Harper did, he did quite well.   It's just that he didn't really do that much, nor that much different from what the rest of the middle-of-the-road crowd would or did do.   He just managed to do it without being a slimey criminal in the Liberal mold.  Still, there was no assault on the institutions of the looney left - one of which - the CBC - is what took him down.   Canadian voters aren't that smart (I mean, shit, look at what they elected after Harper).

Harper was once the president of the National Citizen's Coalition a conservative organization that believed in more freedom, less government and less taxes many decades ago. Under Harper it appeared that we got just the opposite after he became the PM. Harper had a golden opportunity to get rid of his enemy the CBC and he did not. He let them live. A real and true conservative would have got rid of that leftist liberal outfit as quickly as possible. The trouble with the conservatives is that they worry too much about what the leftist liberal media and other people may think or say and go with the wind where with lieberals they could careless as to what others think or say, especially what conservatives have to say. They just go do it dam the consequences. Harper may have done some good things but not anything that one could say was all that great for Canada and Canadians. But hey, what more can be said.  

[taxme]

15 minutes ago, egghead said:

Then, the left in BC has no problem with the LNG project. I don't believe JT cares about the left in BC, Alb or Ont. For him, environmental is only a buzz word. He only cares Que

WTH. Is that a picture of commie Mao? 

[Argus]

24 minutes ago, egghead said:

Then, the left in BC has no problem with the LNG project. I don't believe JT cares about the left in BC, Alb or Ont. For him, environmental is only a buzz word. He only cares Que

The Liberals hold about 18 seats around Vancouver, and you can bet they want to hang onto them. They don't care about AB because it's a lost cause, but they certainly care about holding onto their 78 seats in Ontario too. They can't win without holding onto at least half of those.

[egghead]

1 hour ago, Argus said:

The Liberals hold about 18 seats around Vancouver, and you can bet they want to hang onto them. They don't care about AB because it's a lost cause, but they certainly care about holding onto their 78 seats in Ontario too. They can't win without holding onto at least half of those.

Ya, Liberal needs to hold on to some of those seats. We may see that some of Liberal party 's candidates will distance themselves from JT before the election.

[scribblet]

I have to post this from the left wing U.K. Guardian, note the description of Trudeau which explains why a lot of people will still vote him (he's so gorgeous doncha know).  The Guardian really gets it.   Meanwhile, I'm looking forward to hearing what Butts has to say on Wednesday. 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/mar/01/justin-trudeau-disgrace-unicorn-political-scandal-canadian

For Canadian liberals, or indeed any of us who cling to outdated ideas such as good governance and liberal democratic values, it was like watching a unicorn get flattened by a lorry. Earlier this week, Canada’s undeniably gorgeous, halo-bound Liberal prime minister, Justin Trudeau – proud feminist, defender of minority rights, advocate for transparency, inclusivity and decency, and prince of the one-armed push-up – was morally eviscerated over four-hours of astonishing testimony by his own former attorney general and justice minister, Jody Wilson-Raybould – a woman of great integrity and a rare Indigenous Canadian cabinet minister.

 

 

[egghead]

1 hour ago, scribblet said:

I have to post this from the left wing U.K. Guardian, note the description of Trudeau which explains why a lot of people will still vote him (he's so gorgeous doncha know).  The Guardian really gets it.   Meanwhile, I'm looking forward to hearing what Butts has to say on Wednesday. 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/mar/01/justin-trudeau-disgrace-unicorn-political-scandal-canadian

For Canadian liberals, or indeed any of us who cling to outdated ideas such as good governance and liberal democratic values, it was like watching a unicorn get flattened by a lorry. Earlier this week, Canada’s undeniably gorgeous, halo-bound Liberal prime minister, Justin Trudeau – proud feminist, defender of minority rights, advocate for transparency, inclusivity and decency, and prince of the one-armed push-up – was morally eviscerated over four-hours of astonishing testimony by his own former attorney general and justice minister, Jody Wilson-Raybould – a woman of great integrity and a rare Indigenous Canadian cabinet minister.

 

 

Thanks, that is a good read. 

I love the closing paragraph 

"...It’s important to remember that Trudeau’s scandal does not cancel out the importance of his government’s project. With any luck a majority of Canadians remain unshaken in the values of liberal democracy, fair governance and the international rules-based order. Come September, my country will, I hope, find a way to persist in its sunny ways and set a clear moral example in this fractious, uncertain world...."

[bush_cheney2004]

Well, it looks like Justin Trudeau is getting his wish...the Americans are paying more attention to him and Canada:

 

Quote

Trudeau Promised a Fresh Approach to Politics. Now He’s Embroiled in Scandal.

TORONTO — Prime Minister Justin Trudeau of Canada promised a fresh approach to politics, one that was based on openness, decency and liberalism.

Now he is embroiled in a scandal involving accusations of back-room deal-making and bullying tactics, all to support a Canadian company accused of bribing the Libyan government when it was run by the dictator Muammar el-Qaddafi.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/01/world/canada/trudeau-scandal-snc-lavalin.html

 

[cannuck]

He and his entire gong show cabinet have been a horrible embarrassment for the last 3+ years.   Keeping to that standard, he will go out with a bang.  At least that MIGHT protect us from the LPC for a few more terms.   Will take that to undo the damage.

[egghead]

On 3/1/2019 at 12:18 PM, taxme said:

Why do we have to be told that she is an indigenous woman anyway? Is she suppose to be special or something because she is native? Just asking. 

To tell you the truth, I find it very very heavy irony . JT, a "feminism, minority rights, diversity inclusivity, blah blah ..." advocate, was smoking out by an indigenous woman who he appointed at first becasue of "equal governance."

[GostHacked]

23 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

Well, it looks like Justin Trudeau is getting his wish...the Americans are paying more attention to him and Canada:

And one "American" paying more attention than most Canadians.... 

[Hates politicians]

On 3/1/2019 at 7:05 PM, taxme said:

If Harper was doing such a great job then why would Canadians vote him out and put in leftist liberal trudeau? Just wondering. 

An artcle in the wpg. Sun today said it best. Most Canadians want to be abused. And lieberal politicians gave them what they wanted. The people who don't want to be abused get abused anyways because of the stupid ones who do.

[Hates politicians]

On 3/1/2019 at 2:18 PM, taxme said:

Why do we have to be told that she is an indigenous woman anyway? Is she suppose to be special or something because she is native? Just asking. 

Because it's politically correct to point out she's an indian and a woman both of which mean fxxx all.

[Rue]

I argue 8 things and explain my positions unlike the Liberal pissantes:

1.      The Prime Minister, the Privy Council head and the PMO’s office violated s.121 of the Criminal Code.

2.      The Attorney General of Canada has no power or role to withdraw a persecution based on any consideration that lends to the appearance of or is in fact a conflict of interest or based on a partisan consideration which is what Trudeau asked her to do.

3.      The Prime Minister, the Privy Council head and the PMO’s office violated s.121 of the Criminal Code.

4.      The Privy Council head admitted to acting outside his job description.

5.      The fact an action is legal does not make it ethical or acceptable.

6.      The current scandal goes to a repeated pattern of showing contempt for the law by Trudeau.

7.      The current scandal shows Trudeau is not the feminist he claims he is.

8.      Mr. Trudeau claims to understand Indigenous people but clearly shows contempt for them

 

1-The Prime Minister, the Privy Council head and the PMO’s office violated s.121 of the Criminal Code

The operative wording of the Criminal Code section on influence peddling I place in bold.

S.121(1) Every one commits an offence who (a) directly or indirectly

(i)                  gives, offers or agrees to give or offer to an official or to any member of his family, or to any one for the benefit of an official, or

 

(ii)                being an official, demands, accepts or offers or agrees to accept from any person for himself or another person, a loan, reward, advantage or benefit of any kind as consideration for cooperation, assistance, exercise of influence or an act or omission in connection with (iii) the transaction of business with or any matter of business relating to the government, or (iv) a claim against Her Majesty or any benefit that Her Majesty is authorized or is entitled to bestow, whether or not, in fact, the official is able to cooperate, render assistance, exercise influence or do or omit to do what is proposed, as the case may be; (b) having dealings of any kind with the government, directly or indirectly pays a commission or reward to or confers an advantage or benefit of any kind on an employee or official of the government with which the dealings take place, or to any member of the employee’s or official’s family, or to anyone for the benefit of the employee or official, with respect to those dealings, unless the person has the consent in writing of the head of the branch of government with which the dealings take place; (c) being an official or employee of the government, directly or indirectly demands, accepts or offers or agrees to accept from a person who has dealings with the government a commission, reward, advantage or benefit of any kind for themselves or another person, unless they have the consent in writing of the head of the branch of government that employs them or of which they are an official; (d) having or pretending to have influence with the government or with a minister of the government or an official, directly or indirectly demands, accepts or offers or agrees to accept, for themselves or another person, a reward, advantage or benefit of any kind as consideration for cooperation, assistance, exercise of influence or an act or omission in connection with (i) anything mentioned in subparagraph (a)(iii) or (iv), or (ii) the appointment of any person, including themselves, to an office; (e) directly or indirectly gives or offers, or agrees to give or offer, to a minister of the government or an official, or to anyone for the benefit of a minister or an official, a reward, advantage or benefit of any kind as consideration for cooperation, assistance, exercise of influence, or an act or omission, by that minister or official, in connection with (i) anything mentioned in subparagraph (a)(iii) or (iv), or (ii) the appointment of any person, including themselves, to an office; or (f) having made a tender to obtain a contract with the government, (i) directly or indirectly gives or offers, or agrees to give or offer, to another person who has made a tender, to a member of that person’s family or to another person for the benefit of that person, a reward, advantage or benefit of any kind as consideration for the withdrawal of the tender of that person, or(ii) directly or indirectly demands, accepts or offers or agrees to accept from another person who has made a tender a reward, advantage or benefit of any kind for themselves or another person as consideration for the withdrawal of their own tender.

The above states that neither the Prime Minister or any other government official can give an advantage to Lavalin of any kind or ask the AG to do the same.

2.The Attorney General of Canada has no power or role to withdraw a persecution based on any consideration that lends to the appearance of or is in fact a conflict of interest or based on a partisan consideration which is what Trudeau asked her to do.

I urge anyone to go and look up for themselves the AG job description because it is legal fact and public domain and that is that The Attorney General of Canada is the highest-ranking prosecuting officer in Canada and can not withhold a crown prosecution based on a political consideration.

It is true on the federal level, the Attorney General is also the Minister of Justice whereas in some of the Canada’s provinces, the attorney general’s office conducts the functions of the Solicitor General’s office as well; but in other provinces, they are separated and each of them performs different responsibilities. However  when the Ministry of Justice serves as the AG, the chief law officer of the Executive Council, the Attorney General is obliged to see that the public affairs are administered in accordance with the legal regulations in the country.

The well known principle of the rule of law requires that the Attorney General advise the Cabinet of the Government of the dayin order to ensure that the Cabinet’s actions are legal and constitutionally valid and that the rule of law is maintained.

Let’s also make this crystal clear. When the AG gives legal advise as to administering public affairs in a legal manner it can NOT be ignored.

The Attorney General is in legal factr esponsible for all criminal prosecutions in the country. However,  it is true there are certain  prosecutions conducted by the provincial Attorney General authorities under the Canadian Criminal Code (not the case at hand).

In legal fact the Attorney General of never cause charges to be laid – that ultimate decision is in the hands of the applicable police authority.

Let us  be as clear as possible., The Attorney General MUST t fulfil theircriminal prosecution duties independently of any political or government pressure precisely because these duties require fairness of the presentation of cases and does not necessarily result in a conviction. .

The Attorney General has  what is called  “Crown’s parens patriae authority” which means the AG has a constitutional responsibility to protect the public interest and public rights in the country.  Those public interests and rights necessarily mean the AG must protect the legal system from any real or appearance of non judicial independence.

Until Justin Trudeau this has never been an issue and it is so unusual that five former Attorney Generals who do not know her came out in favour of her and have commenced a legal action against Trudeau.

3.The Prime Minister, the Privy Council head and the PMO’s office violated s.121 of the Criminal Code.

All of the above have admitted on public record of having attempted to pressure the AG not to pursue a prosecution against Lavalin and felt that pressure was appropriate and legal. In  so doing they have admitted to actions that could be in violation of s.121 and they should have known lent to the appearance of violating s.121 and most certainly created a direct conflict of interest between the Prime Minister’s partisan concerns regarding alienating Quebec voters with the public interest of protecting all Canadians including Quebecers from the alleged criminal behaviour of Lavalin.

4.The Privy Council head admitted to acting outside his job description.

Again and you can look it up its public domain  the Privy Council head’s job is to advise the Prime Minister and elected Government officials in providing objective, non-partisan, public policy perspective. The Privy Council head has admitted on public record his perspective given to the AG was based not on non partisan objective considerations but partisan ones, specifically the need to treat Lavalin differently and favourably due to a fear not doing so would alienate Quebec voters. That consideration of alienating Quebec voters is not and was never the domain of the Privy Council head to discuss or mention to the AG on her role as the AG.

5.The fact an action is legal does not make it ethical or acceptable.

Liberals are now trying to argue since Trudeau did not order the AG and only pressured her its not illegal and therefore excusable behaviour. This is not logical. Something most certainly can be unethical but be legal.

To determine if what Trudeau did was  ethical one I would contend should ask, what is the purpose of criminal sentencing? Is it to allow corporations a special standard of favourable treatment (leniency in sentencing) when they commit a crime because they employ Quebecers who might if unemployed not vote for Trudeau? Is that the purpose?

Without knowing anything else does one really need to be told that if we allowed Lavalin leniency on these grounds than necessarily every criminal who runs a business that employs people should be given leniency. Is that in the best interests of the public?  Does undermining criminal law act in the best interests of the public?

Can you imagine what Liberals would say if the Tories tried to do this. We know what they said. Years ago when Jean Charest as Sports Minister in the Mulroney cabinet called up a Judge in his riding to try influence the sentence for a constituent, the Liberals demanded his resignation. Now with this Prime Minister they cheer him on although as of today a vital cabinet Minister resigned out of protect along with the AG.

This is the same Prime Minister while trying to interfere with pressure NOT to prosecute Lavalin in an on-going criminal proceeding told the government of China he can not intervene with on-going criminal proceedings under any circumstance because of the rule of law and thus could not intervene over the Hua Wei extradition matter?

Why the disconnect and utter contradiction?

Next to find out what the purpose of criminal sentencing is just go to s.718 of the Criminal Code and you will see it does NOT and has never equated a sentencing principal with partisan political considerations. Its primary purpose is to deter crime and serve a message to all citizens NOT to commit a crime.

6.The current scandal goes to a repeated pattern of showing contempt for the law by Trudeau.

In fact since Trudeau was elected he has repeated a pattern of showing contempt for the law and being above it:

i-he went on vacation paid for and hosted by the Aga Kahn knowing the Aga Kahn at the same time was lobbying Trudeau’s government for funding;

ii-rather than test in court whether Kadr was entitled to any financial compensation he chose to pay him off with $10 million dollars in a back room deal usurping the role of the AG at that time and putting the needs of Kadr before a broader policy consideration as to whether anyone committing a crime regardless of age should benefit financially from that crime and in so doing has created a legal precedent to compensate returning terrorists to Canada;

iii- knowingly violates a safe third country law that says a refugee coming from a safe third country who makes a claim for refugee status in Canada can NOT and must be sent back to the safe third party to make the refugee claim-what Trudeau has done is to openly violate the law penalizing any refugee claimant coming from the US to a legal port of entry in Canada by rejecting their claims BUT with illegal entrants who break the law and knowingly break it by entering illegally, they are rewarded with an expedited refugee process-this is a flagrant violation of immigration law and the creation of an unfair double standard;

iv-had his Foreign Minister pose for the t.v. cameras allowing privileged entry as a refugee to a Saudi Arabian young woman on the grounds and I quote “she reminds me of my daughter” which not only was absolutely completely inappropriate and a subjective bias statement undermining the objective criteria immigration entry consideration should consider but now sets a precedent that anyone who reminds the Foreign Minister of her daughter should be admitted as a refugee. This is how absurd its become

7-The current scandal shows Trudeau is not the feminist he claims he is.

Upon being elected and during the campaign, Trudeau stated if a woman claims to be harassed we must take her at her word. However when his AG told him to stop harassing her he persisted and fired her and has told the public not to believe her. He is a classic example of someone who harasses and then asks you not to believe he harassed.

In fact Mr. Trudeau et al admitted to pressuring her. Now they would have you believe repeated pressuring is not harassment.

8-Mr. Trudeau claims to understand Indigenous people but clearly shows contempt for them.

On being elected Mr. Trudeau claimed Canada’s ethical standards failed to live up to the Indigenous peoples’ expectations and he would change them to honour the ethical codes of Indigenous peoples.

Since being elected he has done absolutely nothing for aboriginals despite numerous promises and appointing not one but two Ministers neither who has achieved any new policy or implemented any new law or paid off any outstanding litigation cases for treaty violations.

The Truth Commission Trudeau created fell apart. Not only that he had the nerve on capital hill during a protest to walk in and out of a teepee of protesters declaring to the press he was and is the only Prime Minister ever to do anything for the indigenous peoples.

Then to add to this absurdity, he knowingly hired his AG stating she was Indigenous and he hired her among other reasons for her reputation as a truth seeker, i.e., an elder in her community who comes from a long line of elders who uphold a high ethical standard of integrity in any dealings. Then when she lives up to this reputation he fires her for refusing to go outside her job description and allow herself to do something unethical, i.e., be influenced by a non legal consideration to undermine a criminal trial.

Let’s be clear the charges against Lavalin came in 2015. When the officers of Lavalin knew they would be charged triggering a share devaluation they remained silent but used their insider knowledge to sell shares at a high value before the announcement was made. On the day the announcement was made that they were being charged, all officers had sold their shares and the stocks devalued from $25 to $14 dollars. Shareholders finding out about this insider trading then filed a class action law suit which is still pending and would be prejudiced by a lenient criminal sentence.

Summary

Never in the history of a ruling government in Canada has a Prime Minister acted so blatantly conflicted and in such a clumsy manner in failing to keep partisan interests detached from non partisan legal proceedings.

One only has to review the cases on influence peddling. Nowhere have we seen such behaviour. The closest to it was John A. MacDonald taking kickbacks on the rail road or Marcel Duplessis in Quebec, Joey Smallwood and Bennet in Newfoundland, and WAC Bennet in B.C. all who were accused of patronage and kick backs but never lobbied or tried to interfere with a criminal proceeding.

Not even the Irving and McCain empires in and influence in Nova Scotia or New Brunswick tried to influence an on-going criminal trial.

In fact I challenge anyone to find any Canadian government that allowed a criminal to lobby 80 times in 3 years as Lavalin has done from 2016 to 2019 with the Liberals to try influence their sentence.

Let’s also be clear. In addition to a criminal fine, officers in Lavalin face jail time AND most importantly the sentence may prevent Lavalin from being able to get any federal contract for 10 years. That is what Trudeau panicked over. He fired his AG when he could not pressure her knowing he could not order her. He now has chosen an AG who says he will consider interfering but 5 former AG’s have already challenged that and we will have if this continues probably many lawyers and law associations maybe even the Law Societies of Canada challenge Trudeau and his AG if they try interfere and force a deferred prosecution order to prevent a trial.

Let’s also get one other thing clear. In a plea bargain, any agreed plea must still be presented to the Judge for approval and the Judge will not grant it if it ignores s.718 considerations or appears in conflict with them which Lavalin considerations would.

Knowing that Trudeau sought in a deferred prosecution agreement to have the trial or proceedings stopped so a Judge could not get involved to review the appropriateness of the pleadings. It is a deliberate run around of the court’s jurisdiction and role to influence a political consideration.

Here is what makes it even more disgusting and unethical. Trudeau said in his last campaign he would never pass an omnibus bill to hide an unpopular law-he would openly discuss that law.

Trudeau since elected has demonstrated he will NOT answer questions in Parliament. He out and out refuses showing contempt for the Opposition with canned scripted answers that do not answer the question.

Not only that but the deferred prosecution agreement passed by his government was planted inside an omnibus bill in the last second to pass it through so there would be no debate on it.

His own Justice committee MP did not know it was passed and disagreed with it and said so publically!

Can it get any more ridiculous? Oh you bet.

Now Liberals are trying to claim the AG was not qualified to do her job. Yes this coming from people who have no problem feeling the PM’s qualification of being a drama supply teacher at a private high school for less than one year constitutes sufficient training to be PM of Canada.

[cannuck]

Rue, you have outdone yourself.   Excellent post.   I vote you become AG/MoJ.

What I would like to hear is your opinion of how the last AG dealt with this situation thusfar.

Edited March 5, 2019 by cannuck

[Rue]

The AG appointed after JWR has done an about face. He first openly stated he would not pursue a prosecution against Lavalin and bragged about how he had no problem with doing that but then suddenly became silent and back paddled when 5 former Attorney Generals spoke up and filed a legal action against the current gov. of the day.

Here is the interesting thing. All we lawyers have to follow our Law Society Rules of Conduct. We can not knowingly break a law or do anything we know lends to the appearance of or creates a conflict of interest or undermines the legal system.

Technically when JWR refused to be influenced she upheld the conduct of every Law Society's Code of Conduct across Canada. You will as a result not find any lawyer willing to say she was wrong. It won't happen. I think if Trudeau pushes he will NOT find a lawyer to defend what he has done. I would be surprised if it happens.

Say what you want about lawyers and we have members that of course are dishonest but when a lawyer upholds the standards JWR did we have to defend her. If we do not have people like her protecting the integrity of the legal system, our profession goes down the drain.

She could have easily been a sleeze and looked the other way. What she did took a lot of integrity. Trudeau has made this a political issue not her by forcing it as far as he has.

He should have backed off and let the Crown engage in a plea bargain and remained arms' length. His current AG is in a state of paralysis. He knows he can not implement the dpa the Liberals snuck through. It provides sentencing considerations that violate and contradict s.718 of the Criminal Code and so would be challenged at the Supreme Court of Canada and be thrown out. S.718 is an open ended list of criteria but those criteria can not be ignored or undermined. The criteria of economic fall out from a sentence is not a criminal sentencing criteria. It can't be, that would mean any criminal who employs people should get a more lenient sentence. That is absurd.

[cannuck]

1 hour ago, Rue said:

The AG appointed after JWR has done an about face. He first openly stated he would not pursue a prosecution against Lavalin and bragged about how he had no problem with doing that but then suddenly became silent and back paddled when 5 former Attorney Generals spoke up and filed a legal action against the current gov. of the day.

Here is the interesting thing. All we lawyers have to follow our Law Society Rules of Conduct. We can not knowingly break a law or do anything we know lends to the appearance of or creates a conflict of interest or undermines the legal system.

Technically when JWR refused to be influenced she upheld the conduct of every Law Society's Code of Conduct across Canada. You will as a result not find any lawyer willing to say she was wrong. It won't happen. I think if Trudeau pushes he will NOT find a lawyer to defend what he has done. I would be surprised if it happens.

Say what you want about lawyers and we have members that of course are dishonest but when a lawyer upholds the standards JWR did we have to defend her. If we do not have people like her protecting the integrity of the legal system, our profession goes down the drain.

She could have easily been a sleeze and looked the other way. What she did took a lot of integrity. Trudeau has made this a political issue not her by forcing it as far as he has.

He should have backed off and let the Crown engage in a plea bargain and remained arms' length. His current AG is in a state of paralysis. He knows he can not implement the dpa the Liberals snuck through. It provides sentencing considerations that violate and contradict s.718 of the Criminal Code and so would be challenged at the Supreme Court of Canada and be thrown out. S.718 is an open ended list of criteria but those criteria can not be ignored or undermined. The criteria of economic fall out from a sentence is not a criminal sentencing criteria. It can't be, that would mean any criminal who employs people should get a more lenient sentence. That is absurd.

I could not agree more, but my feeling is one of a layman.   Glad to hear that the professional interpretation of events and the actual law lines up with what I believe is right.  While I may strongly disagree with her politics, I did take the time to write to her constituency office, express my appreciation and encourage her to continue to stay the course.  Not often I/we get to say good things about the legal profession, but this is certainly one of its better moments.

[eyeball]

5 hours ago, Rue said:

Summary

Never in the history of a ruling government in Canada has a Prime Minister acted so blatantly conflicted and in such a clumsy manner...

...nowhere have we seen such behaviour.

We saw a far more blatant example from Justin himself when he talked about how thankful he was that his dad was able to use his influence to get a pot charge of his brother's back - Justin did this not that long after telling ordinary Canadians to expect charges if they got caught with it.  I don't I recall anyone getting very bent out of shape over how conflicted that sounded.

[bush_cheney2004]

This just keeps getting better and better....Canadian print media is turning on Justin Trudeau.

 

 

https://www.macleans.ca/politics/ottawa/justin-trudeau-imposter/