WestCanMan Posted April 8, 2019 Report Share Posted April 8, 2019 8 hours ago, cannuck said: Since something like 45% of the World Bank's shit list of companies barred from bidding on projects it funds consist of SNC and its subsidiaries, they genuinely lead the world in corrupt construction and engineering business practice. So, with one hand Trudeau is signing massive cheques (and piling onto our federal debt) to give aid to foreign countries to make himself look good, and with the other he's signing bills into law that protect SNC Lavalin so that they can get deferred prosecution and continue to stick it to foreign countries. I wonder if SNC Lavalin is winning bids for mega-projects in foreign countries that are being funded with money that our country gave to them. If Canada is giving away money just so that SNC Lavalin can get juicy overseas contracts then I have no doubt that those guys will find ways to grease Trudeau's palm, even if it's some kind of "deferred" payment plan. IE, SNC gets hundreds of millions of dollars worth of juicy contracts now and then when Trudeau is retired SNC will start paying him off with no ethics commissioner in sight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Owly Posted April 8, 2019 Report Share Posted April 8, 2019 22 hours ago, Rue said: Owly provide the wording in the dpa law that allows the AG to overrule the prosecutor's decision. You at this point clearly have not read the law. Stop bluffing. Read the law then go find out the role of AG and Chief Prosecutor. Unlike you I did and made an effort to discuss the actual wording and you will not and now make false statements. Either put up or shut up. Sorry I was busy with other stuff, but anyway here ya go. You can go to section 15 if you need further edification. Duties and functions (3) The Director, under and on behalf of the Attorney General, (a) initiates and conducts prosecutions on behalf of the Crown, except where the Attorney General has assumed conduct of a prosecution under section 15; Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted April 8, 2019 Report Share Posted April 8, 2019 On 4/5/2019 at 11:00 PM, Owly said: Apparently you haven't read up on how a dpa works. Quote Perhaps you need to reread what a DPA is and what it is used for....in this case granting a DPA would mean the company would face a large fine, and go about their business, still able to bid on Canadian contracts....still able to use hookers and large suit cases full of bribe money...to gain contracts.... No DPA means the company and those that are guilty will face the courts, much larger fines or convictions if found guilty ....not being able to bid on all Canadian contracts for 10 years, BUT there is a loop hole they would be able to bid on national security contracts and a few more different types of contracts....so they are not totally out of the loop.... Other than my attempt at humor with quote of still being able to use hookers and bribes , how does my definition vary from those used in my sources...... or in case you don't like this one try.....below. https://www.osler.com/en/blogs/risk/september-2018/deferred-prosecution-agreements-dpas-come-into-force-in-canada Once again how does any of this even touch the worker bees....it does not unless they took part in breaking the law....or unless the company declares bankruptcy from lack of income...once again HOW does it effect the workers again....SNC is still a very viable company, with lots of cash reserves available.... One last time , I know you can read, so why use the liberal tactics of not answering , …..Is 9000 jobs worth breaking the rule of law ? ....Yes I'm asking you this question.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted April 8, 2019 Report Share Posted April 8, 2019 On 4/6/2019 at 12:06 AM, egghead said: Stop saying 9000 jobs, please, that is not truth. The btm line is that do you think that liberal party winning the next election is worth breaking rule of law for? This is not my lie, this is the liberals Truth....they own it I was just rebroadcasting it... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Owly Posted April 8, 2019 Report Share Posted April 8, 2019 2 minutes ago, Army Guy said: Other than my attempt at humor with quote of still being able to use hookers and bribes , how does my definition vary from those used in my sources...... or in case you don't like this one try.....below. https://www.osler.com/en/blogs/risk/september-2018/deferred-prosecution-agreements-dpas-come-into-force-in-canada Once again how does any of this even touch the worker bees....it does not unless they took part in breaking the law....or unless the company declares bankruptcy from lack of income...once again HOW does it effect the workers again....SNC is still a very viable company, with lots of cash reserves available.... One last time , I know you can read, so why use the liberal tactics of not answering , …..Is 9000 jobs worth breaking the rule of law ? ....Yes I'm asking you this question.... And one last time I am telling you that a dpa is not designed to "break the rule of law" it is rather a law, which allows those responsible for illegal actions to be punished, without punishing others who have done nothing wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted April 8, 2019 Report Share Posted April 8, 2019 On 4/6/2019 at 12:20 AM, Owly said: They are eligible for a dpa and that is now in the hands of David Lametti. We shall see. If you were familiar with DPA , you'd have known they are not eligible for DPA according to experts... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Owly Posted April 8, 2019 Report Share Posted April 8, 2019 4 minutes ago, Army Guy said: If you were familiar with DPA , you'd have known they are not eligible for DPA according to experts... And if you were familiar, you would know that the AG is the final word on who gets a dpa. Doesn't mean I suggest they should get one, but simply pointing out they still could. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted April 8, 2019 Report Share Posted April 8, 2019 8 minutes ago, Owly said: And one last time I am telling you that a dpa is not designed to "break the rule of law" it is rather a law, which allows those responsible for illegal actions to be punished, without punishing others who have done nothing wrong. So directly pressuring the AG, then denying it then admitting to it.... not breaking the rule of law.... with that in mind...... Was all this pressure worth breaking the rule of law....for a few thousand jobs....also proven to be false liberal info....at least according to the CEO of SNC.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Owly Posted April 8, 2019 Report Share Posted April 8, 2019 2 minutes ago, Army Guy said: So directly pressuring the AG, then denying it then admitting to it.... not breaking the rule of law.... with that in mind...... Was all this pressure worth breaking the rule of law....for a few thousand jobs....also proven to be false liberal info....at least according to the CEO of SNC.... I would remind you that JWR herself claimed no law was broken, and also that the SNC CEO made conflicting responses as to jobs, correcting himself and saying the jobs may well have to be moved overseas. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted April 8, 2019 Report Share Posted April 8, 2019 5 minutes ago, Owly said: And if you were familiar, you would know that the AG is the final word on who gets a dpa. Doesn't mean I suggest they should get one, but simply pointing out they still could. Yes the AG has the final say....all that being said is SNC does not qualify....watch the u tube I gave you....or read the other source, SNC would have had to turn it self in, report their crimes, that never happened, their crimes came to light after some of their CEO's went to court....there are lots of other reasons why they don't qualify....So if the new AG decides to hand out a DPA, he will have to answer to the public as to why, when it it is clear known that they do not qualify under more than one stipulations of the DPA law.....They will also have to answer to the courts Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted April 8, 2019 Report Share Posted April 8, 2019 2 minutes ago, Owly said: I would remind you that JWR herself claimed no law was broken, and also that the SNC CEO made conflicting responses as to jobs, correcting himself and saying the jobs may well have to be moved overseas. So where does it state that the AG shall not be pressured into changing her decisions.....is that governmental policy or is that a parliamentary law...If not then I'm confused, why is our nation having this conversation if it is alright for the PMO or his staff to order the AG to come on line change the laws as the PM see fit.........I get it the PM is above the law, clearly demonstrated when Justin perved that reported, with "I guess she experience that encounter differently than I did" So he does have a record or past history of doing what ever he wishes... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Owly Posted April 8, 2019 Report Share Posted April 8, 2019 8 minutes ago, Army Guy said: So where does it state that the AG shall not be pressured into changing her decisions.....is that governmental policy or is that a parliamentary law...If not then I'm confused, why is our nation having this conversation if it is alright for the PMO or his staff to order the AG to come on line change the laws as the PM see fit.........I get it the PM is above the law, clearly demonstrated when Justin perved that reported, with "I guess she experience that encounter differently than I did" So he does have a record or past history of doing what ever he wishes... The best solution to this moving forward would be to not have the job of AG and MoJ given to the same person. You can pressure one but not the other and that's where it gets murky. And no, the PM is not above the law. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted April 8, 2019 Report Share Posted April 8, 2019 13 minutes ago, Owly said: I would remind you that JWR herself claimed no law was broken, and also that the SNC CEO made conflicting responses as to jobs, correcting himself and saying the jobs may well have to be moved overseas. this was the first statement released to the press.... The engineering and construction giant told federal prosecutors that its "Plan B" in the event of criminal prosecution on corruption charges is to move its headquarters south of the border and shed more than 60 per cent of its 8,700 Canadian jobs, internal documents reveal. https://www.ctvnews.ca/business/quebec-s-caisse-has-a-voice-in-snc-lavalin-s-boardroom-and-a-role-in-its-future-1.4357967 Also from the same article.... Quebec's Caisse de depot et placement holds a roughly 20 per cent stake in SNC-Lavalin, making it far and away the biggest shareholder. The pension fund also has a $1.5-billion loan agreement with SNC-Lavalin stipulating that the firm must remain rooted in Montreal until at least 2024, though refinancing may be an option. There not going any where until 2024..... Next day this article comes out.....https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/snc-lavalin-neil-bruce-1.5064432 Unlike the Trudeau government, he said the Montreal-based company has never cited the protection of 9,000 Canadian jobs as a reason it should be granted a remediation agreement to avoid a criminal trial. also Analysts have countered that argument, pointing out that more than half of those 9,000 workers are currently engaged in multi-billion dollar construction projects that are years from completion, and that it's unlikely SNC will be prevented from bidding on provincial contracts. Plus the fact there are loop holes within the DPA, even if convicted, they would still be eligible for contracts for National security reasons, plus other contracts linked to already signed contracts, plus a few more.....so the taps will not be turned off.... then this article....https://vancouversun.com/news/snc-lavalin-ceo-says-employees-will-move-to-foreign-rivals-if-it-is-debarred/wcm/8fc4afae-34e7-40a1-b7c6-d037de6ebc6a In an interview with The Canadian Press, Neil Bruce said Wednesday if the engineering firm is convicted and barred from bidding on federal contracts here at home its workers would end up working for the Montreal-based company’s foreign rivals. “There would be a reduction with us but these are talented folks. They’ll get a job,” Bruce said. “This thing that somehow they’re going to be unemployed is not true because they are highly qualified, highly experienced people.” Maybe I missing something could you provide a source that after march 20 states SNC employees will be fired and moved to US... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted April 8, 2019 Report Share Posted April 8, 2019 4 minutes ago, Owly said: The best solution to this moving forward would be to not have the job of AG and MoJ given to the same person. You can pressure one but not the other and that's where it gets murky. And no, the PM is not above the law. That solution is being looked at after Justin got his hand stuck in the cookie jar ….my question is can the AG be pressured ...and where does it state this, in law , or governmental policy...it must be stated somewhere or we would not be having this conversation....so where Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted April 8, 2019 Report Share Posted April 8, 2019 If the PM is not above the law why no perv charges , I mean the women did file a report....we heard about it in the media...then dead silence....why ? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Owly Posted April 8, 2019 Report Share Posted April 8, 2019 7 minutes ago, Army Guy said: That solution is being looked at after Justin got his hand stuck in the cookie jar ….my question is can the AG be pressured ...and where does it state this, in law , or governmental policy...it must be stated somewhere or we would not be having this conversation....so where The AG must make decisions based on law, not on potential economic concerns. The DOJ is an appointed cabinet minister and so certainly can be . Hence my suggestion to separate the two jobs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted April 8, 2019 Report Share Posted April 8, 2019 1 minute ago, Owly said: The AG must make decisions based on law, not on potential economic concerns. The DOJ is an appointed cabinet minister and so certainly can be . Hence my suggestion to separate the two jobs. Thats not the question, what rule or law did Justin break by pressuring the AG....and if he did not break any rules or policies, why is this a thing in the media....why has Justin fallen so far in the polls...why has the liberals lost Justins number one man, the senior civil servant, 3 other cabinet members, and one from the caucus...all these people fallen on their swords because nothing happened ? come on....when you smell shit , it's because the is shit some where.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Owly Posted April 8, 2019 Report Share Posted April 8, 2019 14 minutes ago, Army Guy said: If the PM is not above the law why no perv charges , I mean the women did file a report....we heard about it in the media...then dead silence....why ? Because Rose Knight dismissed her claim about something that may or may not have happened 19 years ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted April 8, 2019 Report Share Posted April 8, 2019 Just now, Owly said: Because Rose Knight dismissed her claim about something that may or may not have happened 19 years ago. Or she woke up one morning with a whole lot of zero's in her bank account..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Owly Posted April 8, 2019 Report Share Posted April 8, 2019 2 minutes ago, Army Guy said: Thats not the question, what rule or law did Justin break by pressuring the AG....and if he did not break any rules or policies, why is this a thing in the media....why has Justin fallen so far in the polls...why has the liberals lost Justins number one man, the senior civil servant, 3 other cabinet members, and one from the caucus...all these people fallen on their swords because nothing happened ? come on....when you smell shit , it's because the is shit some where.... He broke no law. At least according to JWR. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted April 8, 2019 Report Share Posted April 8, 2019 Just now, Owly said: He broke no law. At least according to JWR. It does not have to be a federal law, it could be a parliamentary rule or policy....that can not be broken.....if the PM can pressure the AG when he wants WHY is this entire news cycle about ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted April 8, 2019 Report Share Posted April 8, 2019 Why have an entire committee set up to review the fact was she or was she not pressured Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Owly Posted April 8, 2019 Report Share Posted April 8, 2019 3 minutes ago, Army Guy said: Why have an entire committee set up to review the fact was she or was she not pressured It will come down to, as it always has, a "he said, she said" situation. Scheer and Co. of course want to keep it in the headlines as long as possible. Especially as he wants to move away from his Faith Goldy friendship. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted April 9, 2019 Report Share Posted April 9, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, Owly said: And one last time I am telling you that a dpa is not designed to "break the rule of law" it is rather a law, which allows those responsible for illegal actions to be punished, without punishing others who have done nothing wrong. The only thing the so-called innocent here stand to lose is an employer. The economy won't shed jobs and contracts will still be awarded for work that needs to be done. In fact there will still be big government signs boasting how many NEW jobs their projects are creating. That said, if I was an employer hiring new staff for a project I suspect I'd be asking myself if I really wanted a person who's been happy working for such an obvious serial criminal. Is there really no point at which it's appropriate to ask if and when people should take some responsibility for who they choose to work for? 33 minutes ago, Owly said: He broke no law. At least according to JWR. That it's all been perfectly legal is actually what's most galling about all this. DPA's are downright loathsome disgusting things AFAIC. My regard for JWR pretty much went in the toilet as well when it came to light she was really only concerned about procedure here. Edited April 9, 2019 by eyeball Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yzermandius19 Posted April 9, 2019 Report Share Posted April 9, 2019 25 minutes ago, Owly said: It will come down to, as it always has, a "he said, she said" situation. Scheer and Co. of course want to keep it in the headlines as long as possible. Especially as he wants to move away from his Faith Goldy friendship. Scheer is such a lightweight. Trudeau going to smash him despite this scandal, just watch him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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.