Jody Wilson-Raybould & Jane Philpott: Where do they go politically from here?

213 posts / 0 new
Last post
Pondering

Paladin1 wrote:

Pondering wrote:
We shouldn't sell armoured cars to Saudi Arabia.

While I agree we shouldn't, those are seperate issues.

You think bribes weren't paid to Saudi princes to get that contract? 

JKR

Paladin1 wrote:

I agree that anyone guilty of breaking the laws should be punished properly up to and including being barred from doing business in Lybia or Alberta.

You're response to me is basically saying it's okay to break the law because everyone does it. I don't buy that.

As Mr Magoo pointed out in one breath you're saying all the bad apples are gone. In the next you're pointing out how they'll go on breaking the law.  Obviously the half decade of reconstruction didn't mean anything.

How do we do business in countries were illegal bribery is the norm? Easy, we don't.

If Scheer becomes PM business as usual will continue but under a government with much more expertise at favouring the wealthy and economic elites.

Pondering

Yes the SNC Lavalin executive in Canada has been replaced and they will not be paying bribes. Yes, bribes will be paid somehow in the countries that demand them or SNC won't get the business. Do you believe otherwise?

Paladin1

Pondering wrote:

Paladin1 wrote:

Pondering wrote:
We shouldn't sell armoured cars to Saudi Arabia.

While I agree we shouldn't, those are seperate issues.

You think bribes weren't paid to Saudi princes to get that contract? 

Not really. Saudi Princes have more money than they know what to do with it so I can't really see General Dynamics buying them off to land a contract. The LAV vehicles are top of the line armored vehicles, very plausable reasons why KSA wanted them.

If there's proof of bribery then yes absolutely nail General Dynamics.

Pondering

I want bribery to stop. The only way I see that happening is if the people who pay bribes go to prison. If people are so bound and determined to have the innocent pay then fine. Let it happen. Maybe then someone will care that the actual people who do these things are laughing all the way to the bank.

Left Turn Left Turn's picture

pondering wrote:
I've read that JWR should have reported to the ethics commissioner in September. I am not sure that I agree with that but it would be impossible to even discuss the matter here because that would be construed as attacking JWR which results in everyone blindly chanting Trudeau Guilty as if I had said otherwise.

JWR might have been able to handle the situation differently than she did. I say might because trying to raise the alarm about the issue earlier may have led Trudeau to demote her earlier.

Nothing that JWR did made it justifyable for Trudeau to demote her from A-G, or to expel her from the Liberal caucus.

Pondering

Left Turn wrote:

pondering wrote:
I've read that JWR should have reported to the ethics commissioner in September. I am not sure that I agree with that but it would be impossible to even discuss the matter here because that would be construed as attacking JWR which results in everyone blindly chanting Trudeau Guilty as if I had said otherwise.

JWR might have been able to handle the situation differently than she did. I say might because trying to raise the alarm about the issue earlier may have led Trudeau to demote her earlier.

Nothing that JWR did made it justifyable for Trudeau to demote her from A-G, or to expel her from the Liberal caucus.

Correct. Trudeau is guilty. Trudeau is guilty and most likely broke the law regardless of whether or not we have actual proof of it. Trudeau is guilty of inappropriately pressuring JWR through the use of staff. That is, not just the staff are guilty, Trudeau himself is guilty. Can we agree that Trudeau's guilt is firmly established?  That is, say we discover that JWR is an ax murderer. Would that make Trudeau innocent? NO Trudeau would still be guilty of removing her in order to put a AG in place that would give SCN-Lavalin a DPA. (Although that wasn't illegal, the only illegal part was pressuring JWR)

https://www.macleans.ca/news/canada/who-may-have-broken-the-law-in-the-snc-lavalin-affair/

Given all we now know, Wilson-Raybould should have disclosed publicly that she was being pressured as soon as it happened last fall, and reported it to the ethics commissioner and the RCMP. That she didn’t go public shows the inherent conflict of interest the attorney general is in because he or she is a politician and member of cabinet.

Does that mean Trudeau is innocent!  NOOOOO Trudeau is guilty. 

I disagree that JWR should have reported in September. At that point in time I don't believe the pressure she reported at that time necessarily rose to that level. 

****Do we agree that Trudeau was speaking through staff in order to try to maintain plausible deniability even though he is guilty? ****

Misfit Misfit's picture

Pondering wrote:

Misfit wrote:

Pondering wrote:

”For example, if I ask the question "why didn't JWR complain directly to Trudeau after September?" “

How do you know that she didn’t and many times??? You were not working in the AG office and you were not working in the PMO. You are assuming far too much. No one can debate one who resorts to hypothetical assumptions. And yet you are using this imaginary issue to attack JWR.

Because she testified that that was the last conversation she had with Trudeau directly about SNC. I very much doubt she left anything out when testifying to the committee. I suppose it is possible they spoke on other issues but if so and she failed to speak to him about the inappropriate actions of his staff that suggests she didn't consider it that serious at the time. For that reason I assumed the last time she had an opportunity was in September or she would have mentioned it to the committee. 

It isn't an attack on JWR. It is an attack on Trudeau or more specifically how PMOs are run. Apparently the PMO is much larger than in the past. 

This is from JWR's letter to caucus before she was ejected:

https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2019/04/02/jody-wilson-raybould-caucus-letter_a_23704984/

We committed to break old and cynical patterns of centralizing power in the hands of a few unelected staffers, the marginalization of hundreds of Members of Parliament with expertise and insights to offer, and the practice of governing in the shadows, out of sight of Canadians. 

This is an issue JWR herself recognized but not one that she priorized.  GASP, OH MY GOD was that a criticism! Man the ramparts! TRUDEAU IS GUILTY. TRUDEAU IS GUILTY. TRUDEAU IS GUILTY. 

Serious discussion of events is impossible when politics is treated like a team sport that requires cheerleading for your side so no criticism can be acknowledged. JWR has been sanctified. Her every move is perfection itself. She is the one Holy Liberal in the history of Liberals. 

pondering,

he was told in September! Yet he harassed her through his staff. He only needed to be informed once.

you cheerlead for Trudeau better than anyone I know.

prople seeing an injustice against JWR does not make anyone a cheerleader, only you for Justin Trudeau.

Pondering

Misfit wrote:

pondering,

he was told in September! Yet he harassed her through his staff. He only needed to be informed once.

you cheerlead for Trudeau better than anyone I know.

prople seeing an injustice against JWR does not make anyone a cheerleader, only you for Justin Trudeau.

How is that in any way shape or form a defence of Trudeau. He is GUILTY. Trudeau is as GUILTY as it is possible for him to be. 

Do you not think it is also the responsibility of a Prime Minister to speak with his ministers individually more often than once every 5 months?  Is Trudeau acquainted with his other ministers or are they all practically strangers? 

cco

The impression I get, backed up by details from this scandal, is that all communications go Trudeau -> PMO or PCO -> Cabinet. Ministers get their marching orders and carry them out. It's not a dialogue.

NorthReport

They have been so quiet for awhile now, so what could Jody & Jane be up to, eh?

Pondering

cco wrote:
The impression I get, backed up by details from this scandal, is that all communications go Trudeau -> PMO or PCO -> Cabinet. Ministers get their marching orders and carry them out. It's not a dialogue.

Exactly. I really don't think that Trudeau is running the government. Unelected PMO staffers and civil servants are directing cabinet instead of cabinet directing civil servants and staffers. Wernick "worked for" both Harper and Trudeau. 

Pages