The incredible miscalculation by Trudeau and co. One of them will need to take a fall

118 posts / 0 new
Last post
NorthReport

If Trudeau is so anxious to talk why doesn’t he start off by telling Canadians why Wilson-Raybould was removed as Minister of Justice. That would be a good place for him to start

NorthReport
Sean in Ottawa

Of course here in Ottawa we were talking about #fartcannons ... Seriously look it up if you do not believe me.

Martin N.

NorthReport wrote:

It is now full speed ahead for the Toronto Star and the CBC to try and save Trudeau’s job

https://www.thestar.com/politics/federal/2019/02/11/ethics-commissioner-to-launch-inquiry-against-prime-ministers-office-over-snc-lavalin-case.html

I love how the CBC trots out Neil Macdonald to opine how perfectly normal bribery is for correspondents but, in his case, it is 'our' money he is bribing with, not his. Charge the scofflaws at the CBC!

NorthReport
NorthReport

dp

NorthReport
NorthReport
Martin N.

Unionist wrote:

Can you believe that Jody Wilson-Raybould is leaving our glorious veterans to face the world all alone? How selfish of her! Whatever happened to that noble injunction to "take up our quarrel with the foe"??

Everyone is focusing on the wrong thing. It's about our veterans. It's about Canada's sacred mission to bring freedom, democracy, and Canadian values to the entire world, by force if necessary, though not necessarily by force.

Jody - Jody!!! - get back to where you once belonged!!!! Get back Jojo!!

 

She did "take up our quarrel with the foe".  You just don't like your swamp being drained. Jojo is back where she belongs - where integrity and ethics are more important than pandering to Quebec.

Unionist

Pondering wrote:

She has retained a lawyer to consult on what she can say.

Hilarious. She is a lawyer, since 2000. And she was the top "lawyer" in Canada for 3 years, till she quit. She doesn't understand what she's allowed to say?

Quote:
The case is still before the courts.

Could be there for years or decades - so she can make dramatic gestures like quitting, but can't say why till the Supreme Court declines to hear the last appeal, or hears it?

Quote:
She is also legally bound to confidentiality as a function of her former position.

Which law are you citing here, exactly? I'd like to go read the language and maybe some jurisprudence and make up my own mind. 

Quote:
She has to be cautious. It is stunning that she resigned from cabinet. 

Yes, it is stunning that she resigned from cabinet. And it is stunning that she won't explain why. 

Martin N.

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

Of course here in Ottawa we were talking about #fartcannons ... Seriously look it up if you do not believe me.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=9Zz8aEAg7dI#

Unionist

Martin N. wrote:

She did "take up our quarrel with the foe".  You just don't like your swamp being drained. Jojo is back where she belongs - where integrity and ethics are more important than pandering to Quebec.

You're right, Martin. I just lost it there for a minute. Don't know what came over me. Thanks for your patience.

Pondering

Unionist wrote:
  Hilarious. She is a lawyer, since 2000. And she was the top "lawyer" in Canada for 3 years, till she quit. She doesn't understand what she's allowed to say?  

 In her letter Tuesday, she said she has hired former Supreme Court justice Thomas Cromwell to advise her on “the topics that I am legally permitted to discuss in this matter.”

You are correct that I am not familiar with jurisprudence concerning legal confidentiality for cabinet ministers and for the position of Attorney General. While it's true my depth of knowledge comes from crime dramas I think it is safe to assume that lawyers are legally bound to confidentiality in matters concerning their clients. 

Like doctors, lawyers don't generally represent themselves. JWR didn't get to the position of Attorney General by being stupid. Whistleblowers are not protected. This could take Trudeau and the Liberals down for a decade. It hasn't yet but I am sure the Conservatives are ecstatic. As much as I am done with Trudeau I am positive I would not prefer Scheer. As much as I have supported Singh there are no signs at this point that he could be anything but a spoiler in 2019. Until this I was predicting another majority for Trudeau. It remains possible but my bet is now on a minority and that isn't a certainty. 

I sincerely don't understand why you are attacking her over this. 

https://www.macleans.ca/news/canada/nine-subtle-and-not-so-signals-in-jo...

Anne Kingston: The letter from the former cabinet minister is a masterclass in how to communicate volumes between the line

I am horrified at the idea of a decade of Scheer and it could happen. As a pragmatist I am not happy that Trudeau is being taken down while the NDP has such low numbers. Nevertheless I do believe that JWR is acting with integrity and will speak at the appropriate time. She is going up against people way more powerful than herself. I don't expect her to do it naked. 

 

NorthReport

Wilson-Raybould hasn’t said a word. Her silence is golden whereas Trudeau is coming across as petty and vindictive.

NDPP

Professor Craig Forcese breaks down the theoretical role of the AG, 'Prosecutorial Independence' etc. 

https://bit.ly/2N2Kxxk

"The rules in this area are nuanced..."

Martin N.

Unionist wrote:

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

Speaking from a non partisan point of view Jody Wilson-Raybould is one of those rare people now needed in public life. For the objective of justice and reconciliation it is important that she not be forced out of politics. I think it is essential that all efforts are made to make it possible for her to continue public life. To that end, it might matter a lot less which party she does that in. Of course the NDP should make it clear to her that if she wanted to leave the Liberal party she woudl be welcomed. The Liberal party, for their part, ought to do all they can to make room for her to stay.

I kind of like JWR, but I'd like her more if she actually, like, said what was on her mind. I don't care which party she's with. But I would dearly like to hear something of value from her. Yeah, I do understand the utter bullshit of "solicitor-client" privilege. But what if she just, like, talked. What's she afraid of????

Being disbarred?

WWWTT

@ Unionist pondering Martin N

I believe Unionist is correct in his doubt. 

Lawyer client confidentiality happens when u retain a lawyer and discuss things. From my understanding, this was never the case. 

This woman does have an impressive resume (from one perspective), however, it seems that many posters here are ready to crown her the prime minister of Canada. I personally don’t see what she’s done deserving?

If not being unethical is a stand alone achievement worthy the highest political position, then I think some posters should set the bar a little higher. 

NorthReport
Martin N.

Unionist wrote:

Martin N. wrote:

She did "take up our quarrel with the foe".  You just don't like your swamp being drained. Jojo is back where she belongs - where integrity and ethics are more important than pandering to Quebec.

You're right, Martin. I just lost it there for a minute. Don't know what came over me. Thanks for your patience.

No worries. It's not that federal pandering to Quebec is unimportant, it needs to be done ethically, with integrity.

NorthReport
Martin N.

WWWTT wrote:

@ Unionist pondering Martin N

I believe Unionist is correct in his doubt. 

Lawyer client confidentiality happens when u retain a lawyer and discuss things. From my understanding, this was never the case. 

This woman does have an impressive resume (from one perspective), however, it seems that many posters here are ready to crown her the prime minister of Canada. I personally don’t see what she’s done deserving?

If not being unethical is a stand alone achievement worthy the highest political position, then I think some posters should set the bar a little higher. 

Yes, I agree Canadians need to set the bar higher but that is quite difficult when the government of the day and the Ottawa political apparatus cannot reach it in its present humble position.

Canadians really need to ground themselves in ethical behaviour and personal integrity so that the goal posts are not constantly being moved on them by powerful individuals with questionable motives.

In 'no consequences' Ottawa, the screw ups, abuse of process and blatant entitlement are passed off as normal rather than prosecuted. Drain the swamp! Put the guilty in prison "pour encourager les autres".

I do not necessarily believe that JWR is doing anything deserving of higher office, it just so novel and refreshing to see someone of the political class standing on principle in Ottawa that it is difficult not to be carried away with the notion that such self-sacrifice could spread.

"If you want to build a ship, don't herd people together to gather wood, but rather teach them to long for the endless immensity of the sea" Antoine de Saint Exupery.

swallow swallow's picture

I would imagine Puglaas will speak soon. There's something to be said for a pause and reflection and not speaking in accord with other people's schedules or demands, or in response to the howling furies of the news cycle. Right now, she's mostly thanking those who have appreciated her work. I think that is OK. I think she'll speak when the din of prime ministerial contempt and condescension fades a bit and leaves space for measured words. 

As for Neil Macdonald, what a load of tripe. Paying $100 to an underpaid border guard is not the same as SNV making massive bribes to governments. It's an insult to call some countries "hopelessly corrupt" - especially insulting to those who fight against corruption in those countries, and find that their government is a foe, but multinational from Canada and other rich countries are bigger foes. 

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
Lawyer client confidentiality happens when u retain a lawyer and discuss things. From my understanding, this was never the case.

The AG is the government's lawyer, and as such, it's reasonable to claim that the government enjoys attorney-client privelege, and that such a lawyer would be bound by the same duty of confidentiality (it's separate and distinct from attorney-client privelege) as any other lawyer.

There are a few exceptions to a-c privelege, but none would appear to apply in this case.  That said, it seems there are still some grey areas.  Here's what looks like an interesting paper on the subject:  The Attorney General as Lawyer (?):Confidentiality Upon Resignation from Cabinet.

It's literally more footnotes than essay, and it looks like reading it would be the mental equivalent of pushing a full grocery cart up a sand dune, but if anyone's curious...

NorthReport

How stupid can Trudeau be? Seriously!

From ‘Star Liberal MP to ‘difficult and incompetent’.....Really!

https://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2019/02/13/Indigenous-Scholars-Character-Assassination-Jody-Wilson-Raybould/

WWWTT

@ Mr Magoo 

Ok thanks for that! I skimmed through it and it makes sense. 

But then there’s this question, if everyone’s lips are zipped shut, where did this story arise from. Who squealed?

quizzical

swallow wrote:
.. I think she'll speak when the din of prime ministerial contempt and condescension fades a bit and leaves space for measured words. 

 

ya he's sounding right Presidential.  do you think Trump is contagious? one handshake and you just can't help show your contempt of women and Indigenous?

 

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Mr. Magoo wrote:

Quote:
Lawyer client confidentiality happens when u retain a lawyer and discuss things. From my understanding, this was never the case.

The AG is the government's lawyer, and as such, it's reasonable to claim that the government enjoys attorney-client privelege, and that such a lawyer would be bound by the same duty of confidentiality (it's separate and distinct from attorney-client privelege) as any other lawyer.

There are a few exceptions to a-c privelege, but none would appear to apply in this case.  That said, it seems there are still some grey areas.  Here's what looks like an interesting paper on the subject:  The Attorney General as Lawyer (?):Confidentiality Upon Resignation from Cabinet.

It's literally more footnotes than essay, and it looks like reading it would be the mental equivalent of pushing a full grocery cart up a sand dune, but if anyone's curious...

I skimmed through that piece but it was mostly about an Attorney General saying why they resigned from cabinet. The twist in this story is that she the AG did not resign the Minister of Veteran Affairs resigned, possibly because the PM implied her non-resignation meant she was not coerced.

cco

WWWTT wrote:

But then there’s this question, if everyone’s lips are zipped shut, where did this story arise from. Who squealed?

Total speculation on my part, but Jody Wilson-Raybould herself (or someone in her office, with her knowledge and likely at her direction) would seem to me to be the most likely source for the G&M article. So far she's looking a whole lot better in this story than Justin Trudeau and his inner circle are.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

This is some of NR's jetsam that is worth a read.

The merits of participating in mainstream electoral politics are complicated for Indigenous people. Wilson-Raybould’s choice to participate in partisan politics wasn’t universally supported in Indian Country, which has little trust in and fewer reasons to support mainstream political parties and governments. Nor was her every stance supported by all Indigenous people. Her positioning in Justin Trudeau’s government was as much liability as asset in Indian Country. For we signatories, this is both a sad and proud moment. We are troubled by the rolling train of toxic federal politics and by the treatment of one of our own, an accomplished Indigenous woman who chose to contribute to mainstream politics.

https://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2019/02/13/Indigenous-Scholars-Character-Assa...

 

NorthReport

Liberal talking points on Jody Wilson-Raybould do not make sense

http://rabble.ca/news/2019/02/liberal-talking-points-wilson-raybould-do-not-make-sense

Martin N.

Trudeau is still deflecting and misinforming by asking why JWR didn't come to him with her concerns when the issue is that she had concerns in the first place. Very smelly  indeed.

Its not about her actions, it's about his.

Sean in Ottawa

Martin N. wrote:

Trudeau is still deflecting and misinforming by asking why JWR didn't come to him with her concerns when the issue is that she had concerns in the first place. Very smelly  indeed.

Its not about her actions, it's about his.

The Liberals shuld not lose much out of this story as it is due to lack of evidence but their behaviour is make it so much worse.

Liberal disease in politics is arrogance so that much is not new.

Pondering

Martin N. wrote:

Trudeau is still deflecting and misinforming by asking why JWR didn't come to him with her concerns when the issue is that she had concerns in the first place. Very smelly  indeed.

Its not about her actions, it's about his.

Nothing has been said about him so it's about her not him. As of yet he hasn't been accused of anything. The SNC Lavelin stuff is speculation. All probably true, but still speculation. She hasn't said she was pressured nor why she resigned. Unfortunately this could still blow over.  Look at all the crap Harper got away with. There are plenty of people who will be on board with the "saving 9,000" jobs line. There is no outrage over our selling miltary equipment to the Saudis. People getting away with white-collar crime is nothing new. I'm still waiting for people to demand action on tax havens. 

I keep falling for the pundit's outrage thinking it is reflective of public thinking but it isn't. Pundits are all about political theatre, entertainment, giving political hobbiests something to chat about. They need readers.

The reality is, swing voters are not paying attention at the moment. If you ask 10 people on the street if they know about this the vast majority will not. Of those that have heard there is "something going on" they might know it has something to do with Lavelin and Quebec and that Wilson woman and that's about it.  If told they bribed officials in Libya for contracts many will react with "so what else is new?".

Yesterday I was thinking this could have a big impact on the election but I have changed my mind because look at the alternatives. It is very unlikely in the extreme that the NDP will win the election. The absolute best we can even hope for is a Liberal minority with the NDP having a strong enough minority to keep them in power. 

All the media pearl-clutching is as meaningless and useless as their reporting on Venezuela. 

Unionist

Pondering wrote:

Martin N. wrote:

Trudeau is still deflecting and misinforming by asking why JWR didn't come to him with her concerns when the issue is that she had concerns in the first place. Very smelly  indeed.

Its not about her actions, it's about his.

Nothing has been said about him so it's about her not him. As of yet he hasn't been accused of anything. The SNC Lavelin stuff is speculation. All probably true, but still speculation. She hasn't said she was pressured nor why she resigned. Unfortunately this could still blow over.  Look at all the crap Harper got away with. There are plenty of people who will be on board with the "saving 9,000" jobs line. There is no outrage over our selling miltary equipment to the Saudis. People getting away with white-collar crime is nothing new. I'm still waiting for people to demand action on tax havens. 

I keep falling for the pundit's outrage thinking it is reflective of public thinking but it isn't. Pundits are all about political theatre, entertainment, giving political hobbiests something to chat about. They need readers.

The reality is, swing voters are not paying attention at the moment. If you ask 10 people on the street if they know about this the vast majority will not. Of those that have heard there is "something going on" they might know it has something to do with Lavelin and Quebec and that Wilson woman and that's about it.  If told they bribed officials in Libya for contracts many will react with "so what else is new?".

Yesterday I was thinking this could have a big impact on the election but I have changed my mind because look at the alternatives. It is very unlikely in the extreme that the NDP will win the election. The absolute best we can even hope for is a Liberal minority with the NDP having a strong enough minority to keep them in power. 

All the media pearl-clutching is as meaningless and useless as their reporting on Venezuela. 

I find myself in overall agreement with Pondering's impressions above.

I would only add this: So many pundits and the opposition parties and progressives are freaking out over the possibility that SNC Lavalin may have bribed Libyan officials and that the Trudeau government may be looking for a way not to prosecute them criminally. I'm trying to reconcile that outrage with the total lack of outrage when all the parties unanimously supported military aggression against Libya, leading to the overthrow of that government and untold violence and chaos ever since.

I would like to suggest that we acquire a sense of proportion.

quizzical

it's a big deal in BC.

it's a big deal with Indigenous persons. 

it's a big deal in AB because they hate Trudeau. 

can't speak about other places not there. just like people from QC can't speak about it being a non-event with Canadians.  

 

Pondering

So it's a big deal amongst people who already have a bone to pick. Not many lost votes there. I'm already voting NDP on the 25th. 

quizzical

it's a big deal in BC because so many of our infrastructure projects have been SNC Lavalin and were tied to federal funding. Go with them or no funding.

pietro_bcc

http://www.iheartradio.ca/cjad/news/jody-wilson-raybould-could-have-been...

Now Anthony Housefather, who is the chair of the Justice committee is claiming that Wilson Raybould may have been shuffled from her job, not because of what happened with SNC Lavalin, but because she doesn't speak french well. You can't make this nonsense up.

WWWTT

The liberals may have a point there pietro. The AG is a hi profile position. Now obviously the liberals are just making up shit as they go along. But like I said before, sometimes when u throw shit around, some of it may stick. 

Sean in Ottawa

I am sick of thread titles being changed constantly without good reason. Thread titles are titles in that they are to predictably lead you to content. It is important to change a title if issues are changed so much that it is ridiculous but constantly evolving thread titles really brings us to the point where there is not much purpose in having them at all. People should think through a thread title more carefully in the first place and only rarely revisit that. It should be clear about the content -- not this clickbait stuff or snarky political inside jokes but its job should be to identify the content clearly and be there over time in case soemone wants to come back to it. It might have been better to only allow mods to change the title like it used to be so you would ask for a change and they would rarely happen.

NorthReport
Martin N.

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

I am sick of thread titles being changed constantly without good reason. Thread titles are titles in that they are to predictably lead you to content. It is important to change a title if issues are changed so much that it is ridiculous but constantly evolving thread titles really brings us to the point where there is not much purpose in having them at all. People should think through a thread title more carefully in the first place and only rarely revisit that. It should be clear about the content -- not this clickbait stuff or snarky political inside jokes but its job should be to identify the content clearly and be there over time in case soemone wants to come back to it. It might have been better to only allow mods to change the title like it used to be so you would ask for a change and they would rarely happen.

Hear Hear. Multiple threads as well. The perpetrators take themselves way too seriously. Give it a rest.

NorthReport
Pondering

I think thread title changes are fine if the thread goes off in a different direction than the title suggested. Multiple threads can be annoying but if we post to them anyway it seems we don't mind all that much. I rarely go back beyond the first page of active topics, sometimes the second. 

I think the important topics do stay stable in title and focus. 

Also, we could stand to chill a bit. Just start a new conversation if we can't find the old one. I know there is a tradition here of keeping threads going forever on an issue so the history is there. I get the appeal. It's still a little obsessive. Not a lot. Just a tad. A quirk. 

NorthReport
NorthReport
NorthReport

It seems every time Trudeau opens his mouth on this subject he digs himself a deeper hole

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-trudeau-says-he-removed-wilson-raybould-from-justice-because-of/

NorthReport

It seems every time Trudeau opens his mouth on this subject he digs himself a deeper hole

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-trudeau-says-he-removed-wilson-raybould-from-justice-because-of/

NorthReport
NorthReport

Pages