Ont Liberals ask Integrity Commissioner to investigate NDP Jagmeet Singh for conflict of interest

40 posts / 0 new
Last post
terrytowel
Ont Liberals ask Integrity Commissioner to investigate NDP Jagmeet Singh for conflict of interest

====

Regions: 
terrytowel

Apparently he allegedly used his constituency office to promote Thomas Mulcair rally

More details to come.

scott16

where is your proof? Any links?

I can't find anything

NorthReport

That's just absolutely shocking!  Laughing

ajaykumar

an OUTRAGE! satellite offices ought to be used to promote leaders. 

NorthReport
Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

At this point it's a tweet from someone named Mike Crawley.

Geoff

Definitely a first world issue. Any serious problems to talk about?

NorthReport

Must be right up there with gas plant scandals, eh!

You can always count on the CBC to bring things like this to your attention.

 

Debater

Mike Crawley is a CBC reporter at Queen's Park. (Although that's a common name since it's also the name of an ex-LPC President).

I can't find a full story on this, either.

Maybe there will be one tomorrow.  Doesn't sound like a huge deal to me so far.

Rokossovsky

Let me get this straight an NDP provincial member of parliament used his personal work space to promote an event with the leader of the federal New Democrats. Is that what I am hearing?

Like, he sent out email from there, instead of going down to the internet cafe or using his mothers computer from home?

 

terrytowel

Rokossovsky wrote:

Like, he sent out email from there, instead of going down to the internet cafe or using his mothers computer from home?

So according to your logic when Rob Ford did the same thing from his office, that was fine too.

I never thought I'd see the day when you would be defending Rob Ford!

nicky

This post is just another reason to believe you are just a shill for the Liberals TerryT...l despite your limp protestations that you are somehow a progressive.

terrytowel

nicky wrote:
This post is just another reason to believe you are just a shill for the Liberals TerryT...l despite your limp protestations that you are somehow a progressive.

Nicky deflecting again

Rokossovsky

terrytowel wrote:

Rokossovsky wrote:

Like, he sent out email from there, instead of going down to the internet cafe or using his mothers computer from home?

So according to your logic when Rob Ford did the same thing from his office, that was fine too.

I never thought I'd see the day when you would be defending Rob Ford!

I have defended Rob Ford plenty. It's not about people. It's about what they do. I thought many of the dogpile attacks on Ford were pretty petty. For example, I didn't think distributing fridge magnets in a parking lot was big news. I didn't think that his going to get KFC chicken when he said he was on a diet was worth a week of news stories. Using his web site to promote donations was properly sanctioned by council, but in and of itself, not a huge deal, as long as he stopped.

Combined, as a repeat offender on many minor lapses in judgement built a case for calling Rob Ford a "stupid asshole", nothing more.

On the other hand regularly consorting with cirminals, doing crack cocaine and sending out goons to intimidate people into getting a compromising video are issues on an entirely different order.

Your logic seems to be if Rob Ford did it, it must be evil.

Let me know if this turns out to be anything more than Singh sending out an email to his constituency email list.

terrytowel

Rokossovsky wrote:

I have defended Rob Ford plenty. It's not about people. It's about what they do. I thought many of the dogpile attacks on Ford were pretty petty. For example, I didn't think distributing fridge magnets in a parking lot was big news. I didn't think that his going to get KFC chicken when he said he was on a diet was worth a week of news stories. Using his web site to promote donations was properly sanctioned by council, but in and of itself, not a huge deal, as long as he stopped.

I don't think this is a big deal either.

I'm glad you wrote this because I thought people were nitpicking at Ford as well. That was my only point (to the people that were nitpicking, so not  to you Rokossovsky). You cannot point out every flaw Ford did, while at the same time say Jagmeet Singh did something rather minor.

I wanted Ford out, but not for all of his foibles or lapse of judgement. It didn't even bother me that he used crack.

His anti-LGBT viewpoint, the circus at city-hall, and his inability to build consensus on council were my reasons for supporting the heave-ho of Rob Ford.

Geoff

With Ford, it was just one more thing on top of everything else. In the case of Jagmeet Singh, that's the whole enchilada. Seems like a 'liberal' dose of feigned outrage.

Debater

nicky wrote:
This post is just another reason to believe you are just a shill for the Liberals TerryT...l despite your limp protestations that you are somehow a progressive.

Nicky, aren't you a shill for the NDP?  What's the difference?

And btw, Liberals find it patronizing when they are constantly told they aren't progressive by morally superior New Democrats.

takeitslowly

So when is Wynne going to be arrested?

Debater calling another person a shill! LMAO. Thanks for giving me a good laugh before I go to sleep. See you tomorrow.

Rokossovsky

Debater wrote:

nicky wrote:
This post is just another reason to believe you are just a shill for the Liberals TerryT...l despite your limp protestations that you are somehow a progressive.

Nicky, aren't you a shill for the NDP?  What's the difference?

And btw, Liberals find it patronizing when they are constantly told they aren't progressive by morally superior New Democrats.

That is because despite their faults, New Democrats are generally (but not always) morally superior to Liberals. That is a bar that is so shockingly low that the only reason that I can think of that some New Democrats fail the test of passage, is because they tripped over the bar accidentally.

Debater

You just proved my point.

montrealer58 montrealer58's picture

Moral superiority of the NDP over the Liberals has several aspects:

1: The Liberal idea that people won't notice if a Liberal does something wrong for the purpose of getting elected.

2: The NDP are not constantly saying "If you don't vote for us, Harper will win".

3. The general Liberal contempt for the intelligence of the electorate, especially the idea that people will not notice things or care about things the Liberals do wrong.

4: The general Liberal entitlement mentality for power, and how it is somehow some other's party's fault if they lose.

5. Adscam.

6. Paul Martin.

7. Say they are progressive and then voting with Harper, lying to and deceiving the people.

8. Campaigning to the left and governing to the right, a basic deception.

We experience this Liberal arrogance, duplicity, and condescension every day on this board. This alone is the biggest indication of Liberal moral inferiority.

ajaykumar

just to name a few NDP Scandals

1) BC Fast Ferry Scandal

2) satellite offices

3) bingogate

4) Saskatchewan Potato Utility Development Company scandal

5)Nova Scotia Parliamentary Expenses Scandal, whereby 11 ndp mlas were named, including the premier. dexter paid back " the $7,600 along with three meal claims that he said were submitted accidentally while he was also receiving a $84 per diem to pay for meals". source: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/all-mlas-named-for-excessive-e....

Jacob Two-Two

Montrealer's list was only for the federal Liberals. Obviously, if you included the Provincial Liberal parties, the list would be much, much longer. Actually, even without including the provincial parties, the list is still much, much longer.

Meanwhile the only thing on your list that is actually about the federal NDP is the "satellite offices", which is not a scandal, not a crime, not even a case of poor judgement. it's a trumped-up political assassination that will be exonerated in court without any doubt. But I understand you Liberal shills have to say something, even when the facts leave you with no real arguments. So go on and keep making stuff up. It's all you guys know how to do and I wouldn't want to take your only tactic away from you. That would just be cruel.

ajaykumar

Jacob Two-Two wrote:

Montrealer's list was only for the federal Liberals. Obviously, if you included the Provincial Liberal parties, the list would be much, much longer. Actually, even without including the provincial parties, the list is still much, much longer.

Meanwhile the only thing on your list that is actually about the federal NDP is the "satellite offices", which is not a scandal, not a crime, not even a case of poor judgement. it's a trumped-up political assassination that will be exonerated in court without any doubt. But I understand you Liberal shills have to say something, even when the facts leave you with no real arguments. So go on and keep making stuff up. It's all you guys know how to do and I wouldn't want to take your only tactic away from you. That would just be cruel.


Shills have been waiting for the ccf/NDP to form govt for 80 years so that we can start the number crunching on scandals. Satellite offices were determined by house staff, not the other parties.

Jacob Two-Two

ajaykumar wrote:
Shills have been waiting for the ccf/NDP to form govt for 80 years so that we can start the number crunching on scandals.

So let's get them in office and we'll see who's right. Since we already know the Liberals are totally corrupt and crooked, the worst the NDP could be is just as bad. And maybe they will be, but we can't know until we try it.

Pondering

The NDP has never been in power federally but that doesn't mean we have nothing to go by. It seems from the moment they became the official opposition they started looking for ways to game the system however petty. It follows that with greater opportunity they would jump at the chance. 

At the very least they don't seem to understand the concept of not mixing government and party resources. 

Pondering

Rokossovsky wrote:

Let me get this straight an NDP provincial member of parliament used his personal work space to promote an event with the leader of the federal New Democrats. Is that what I am hearing? 

Like, he sent out email from there, instead of going down to the internet cafe or using his mothers computer from home?

If he had used his personal workspace we wouldn't be having this conversation.

Jacob Two-Two

No, then they would have had to invent some other nonsense for their smear jobs and we'd be mocking the ridiculousness of that instead. But it's all the same to you, I know. If they had censured the NDP for wearing bad shoes, you'd still be 100% behind it.

Jacob Two-Two

Pondering wrote:

It seems from the moment they became the official opposition they started looking for ways to game the system however petty.

From the moment they become Official Opposition, the Lib/Con teamup started looking for ways to make it seem like they were gaming the system, however petty (and petty is certainly the word). It's necessary to deflect from the way the Libs and Cons actually do game the system.

The difference is that the NDP will be exonerated in court because it's obvious they didn't do anything wrong, while the misuses of the Cons and Libs will be definitively proven, because they're, y'know, really real.

wage zombie

Jacob Two-Two wrote:

No, then they would have had to invent some other nonsense for their smear jobs and we'd be mocking the ridiculousness of that instead. But it's all the same to you, I know. If they had censured the NDP for wearing bad shoes, you'd still be 100% behind it.

Bad shoes imply bad judgement.  Just because you love everything Mulcair and the NDP do, doesn't mean that Trudeau won't have a solid team come election who are all admirably and impressivlely shoed.</Pondering>

ajaykumar

I can only imagine what the NDP would do if they form govt after the sat office scanda (though there is a better chance of finding bigfoot than the NDP forming govt.)

Rokossovsky

And don't forget the pot... a policy that has completely lost any impact on youth voters, now that the Liberals have backed C-51, in the most cynical and bizarre manner.

Rokossovsky

wage zombie wrote:

Jacob Two-Two wrote:

No, then they would have had to invent some other nonsense for their smear jobs and we'd be mocking the ridiculousness of that instead. But it's all the same to you, I know. If they had censured the NDP for wearing bad shoes, you'd still be 100% behind it.

Bad shoes imply bad judgement.  Just because you love everything Mulcair and the NDP do, doesn't mean that Trudeau won't have a solid team come election who are all admirably and impressivlely shoed.</Pondering>

Not really. The outline of the Liberal platform is pretty much out there already, and it is as remarkably uninspiring as any fiscal conservative faux-progressive program will be. 

1) There will be no new money, and deficit reduction through "finding efficiencies" -- Trudeau.

2) Infrastructure spending will be bankrolled by leaning on the pension plan boards to invest in P3s -- Brison.

3) The Housing "strategy" will be delivered through tax cuts to developers -- Vaughan.

Yes, it will be sold in big print, as big ideas and in glossy packaging for sure but they will be so far behind by then, it wont make any difference.

They aren't even really trying to win anyway, since becoming Official Opposition will be victory enough -- the kind of ambitious thinking that has plagued Liberal since Paul Martin fell flat on his face in 2006.

Jacob Two-Two

Cynical and bizarre is a good description of the Liberals over the last decade.

ajaykumar

oh yeah I just remembered that ndp aint so progressive on pot, quebec student protests, israel, and the pipelines

ajaykumar

Rokossovsky wrote:

And don't forget the pot... a policy that has completely lost any impact on youth voters, now that the Liberals have backed C-51, in the most cynical and bizarre manner.

if youth voted ndp would have won a majority in the 1960s. 

jjuares

ajaykumar wrote:
I can only imagine what the NDP would do if they form govt after the sat office scanda (though there is a better chance of finding bigfoot than the NDP forming govt.)

Your posts are becoming nothing more than childish taunts.

Rokossovsky

ajaykumar wrote:

Rokossovsky wrote:

And don't forget the pot... a policy that has completely lost any impact on youth voters, now that the Liberals have backed C-51, in the most cynical and bizarre manner.

if youth voted ndp would have won a majority in the 1960s. 

If you knew anything you would know that youth voted a lot more in the 1960s. But you don't, and normally ignorance can be forgiven, except when presented with the voice of authority, then it is just demagoguery.

terrytowel

NDP accuse Dominic LeBlanc of inappropriately using his public office to help the Liberal party of New Brunswick.

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2015/04/02/dominic-leblanc-ndp-expenses_n_6...

So maybe the Provincial NDP can deflect attacks from the Provincial Liberals and use this story as a shield.