jbg Posted April 6, 2007 Report Share Posted April 6, 2007 Ezra having the chance to cross-examine Holland under oath would be classic. Wouldn't it though? Ezra is right in my opinion, these files didn't belong to Holland, he knew that, why was he reading it? It only takes a brief glance at the first couple of files to understand that these weren't his documents. I don't remember Bob Dylan being being any happier when he caught reporters pawing through his trash. Holland's behavior shows as much class as those reporters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck E Stan Posted April 6, 2007 Report Share Posted April 6, 2007 I don't remember Bob Dylan being being any happier when he caught reporters pawing through his trash. Holland's behavior shows as much class as those reporters. The reporter's had more class than Holland,they waited til the garbage was put out at the curb. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Figleaf Posted April 10, 2007 Report Share Posted April 10, 2007 Holland hasn't done anything wrong. But SOMEONE seems to have paid MP Hart to resign his seat so Stockwell Day could have it, which would be against the Criminal Code. Why is Stockwell Day standing in the way of a fair investigation of this matter? Who is he protecting? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Figleaf Posted April 10, 2007 Report Share Posted April 10, 2007 Seriously, does Stock think he can simply ignore this situation? He's tainted. Serious allegations of this kind of corruption can't just be left to fester. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shakeyhands Posted April 10, 2007 Report Share Posted April 10, 2007 now what about Stockwell Day? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Figleaf Posted April 10, 2007 Report Share Posted April 10, 2007 now what about Stockwell Day? http://www.canada.com/topics/news/national...7653b90&k=37328 Former MP refuses to confirm or deny he got rich payout to vacate seat for Day ..."Seven years ago, my desire was to protect my family until I found work. I was just a grassroots guy, not independently wealthy and trying to do the right thing." TELL IT TO THE JUDGE, JIMMY! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Chriton Posted April 11, 2007 Report Share Posted April 11, 2007 There should really be a law that makes this legal. ie: If someone resigns his seat the party should be *allowed* to pay out the remainder of his term (or at least a fraction of it) or until he finds a new job. I see nothing wrong with that. I'd rather ours laws actually punish immoral/unethical activities that various politicians engage in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Figleaf Posted April 11, 2007 Report Share Posted April 11, 2007 There should really be a law that makes this legal.ie: If someone resigns his seat the party should be *allowed* to pay out the remainder of his term (or at least a fraction of it) or until he finds a new job. I see nothing wrong with that. I'd rather ours laws actually punish immoral/unethical activities that various politicians engage in. Maybe they'll get around to making that change after they decriminalize pot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted April 11, 2007 Report Share Posted April 11, 2007 now what about Stockwell Day?Now what about "Garbage Hand" Holland?ie: If someone resigns his seat the party should be *allowed* to pay out the remainder of his term (or at least a fraction of it) or until he finds a new job. I see nothing wrong with that. I'd rather ours laws actually punish immoral/unethical activities that various politicians engage in.Exactly. It would seem the crime is meant to encompass paying an official to take action of some kind. Here, the payment, if it happened, was to have some politician resign. After he receives the money and resigns, he's without power. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Figleaf Posted April 11, 2007 Report Share Posted April 11, 2007 It would seem the crime is meant to encompass paying an official to take action of some kind. Here, the payment, if it happened, was to have some politician resign. After he receives the money and resigns, he's without power. Blah blah blah. If you bothered to read the statute I referenced, you'd notice that it specifically contemplates resignations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shakeyhands Posted April 11, 2007 Report Share Posted April 11, 2007 now what about Stockwell Day?Now what about "Garbage Hand" Holland? what about him? If Holland's action needs to be investigated, so be it. I'm frankly more interested in the guy who possibly did something contrary to the Criminal Code of Canada. Day really should step aside while the RCMP investigates, then if no wrong doing is found, then he is back in. Its simple. btw, two wrongs don't make a right, however three lefts do... think about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Figleaf Posted April 11, 2007 Report Share Posted April 11, 2007 I'm frankly more interested in the guy who possibly did something contrary to the Criminal Code of Canada. Day really should step aside while the RCMP investigates, then if no wrong doing is found, then he is back in. Its simple. I don't even think he needs to leave cabinet, but he can't keep this portfolio with this allegation unresolved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Figleaf Posted May 19, 2007 Report Share Posted May 19, 2007 Even though Stockwell Day presided over the RCMP while they whitewashed the Hartgate affair and so they have now (surprise surprise) decided not to investigate, the theoretical, parliamentary practice point may be relevant some time in the near future when this degenerate-Conservative government is chased from power. Accordingly, here is an example of how honourable parliamentarians behave when the possibility of a conflict of interest arises: http://www.canada.com/saskatoonstarphoenix...6bd946c&k=68530 That's right, honourable parliamentarians don't stay on to control the outcome or the spin on an investigation into their own potential wrongdoing. And an honourable government wouldn't let them. If a minister and government don't do what is honourable, what is it that they are doing? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted May 19, 2007 Report Share Posted May 19, 2007 More Harper obsession. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Figleaf Posted May 19, 2007 Report Share Posted May 19, 2007 More Harper obsession. Well, this is more about Stockwell Day, but in any event, it seems peculiar to characterize normal citizen interest in the ethics of government as "obsession". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catchme Posted May 19, 2007 Report Share Posted May 19, 2007 Even though Stockwell Day presided over the RCMP while they whitewashed the Hartgate affair and so they have now (surprise surprise) decided not to investigate, the theoretical, parliamentary practice point may be relevant some time in the near future when this degenerate-Conservative government is chased from power.Accordingly, here is an example of how honourable parliamentarians behave when the possibility of a conflict of interest arises: http://www.canada.com/saskatoonstarphoenix...6bd946c&k=68530 That's right, honourable parliamentarians don't stay on to control the outcome or the spin on an investigation into their own potential wrongdoing. And an honourable government wouldn't let them. If a minister and government don't do what is honourable, what is it that they are doing? Have heart figleaf, as soon as the CPC are gone, they will be investigated and held accountable. But just wonderful isn't, how they are playing holier than thou and running around investigating everyone else, except for their own blatent corruption and dirty tricks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Figleaf Posted May 20, 2007 Report Share Posted May 20, 2007 I hope this gets a proper investigation eventually. It's really a disgusting scandal. One of the lowest points in Canadian governmental history -- a minister of the police not stepping down while he's potentially implicated in a criminal code political corruption offense is just unheard of. It's almost as shocking as the police dismissing the possibility of charges with evidence as clear and uncontroverted as we have in this case. Have the RCMP tendered any sort of explanation or rationale for thier choice to ignore the evidence? 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.