Has Jody Wilson Raybould revealed anything shocking? has anyone heard anything?
Printable View
Has Jody Wilson Raybould revealed anything shocking? has anyone heard anything?
Depends on your political persuasion I suppose:
https://nationalpost.com/news/politi...#comments-area
I think she feels she was pressured. It will no doubt be spun like the groping thing where Trudeau will say try to he doesn't remember the interaction as negative or pressured where Wilson-Raybould seems to think it was.
Another story: https://nationalpost.com/news/politi...in-trudeau-pmo
Story alleging SNC bought prostitutes for Gadhafi's son when he was in Canada: https://nationalpost.com/news/politi...-canada-report
If this is story is true, this is the type of company that the Liberals are defending. Yet when it comes to the oil workers out west, the LIberals run and hide. Shameful.
Quebec and the maritimes live on other people’s money. They will re-elect the libranos.
I'm very impressed with her. She told it like it was,named names and outlined details enough to subpoena the characters in question. No doubt,it'll be "spun" by media,but,it remains to be seen the depth of corruption. Time will tell.Quote:
Originally Posted by jaycee
Never seen it mentioned on global news.... whats that all about..
There was quite a report on Global at 6 pm.Quote:
Originally Posted by fratri
She’s provided an awful lot of material for the CPC election campaign.
She testified that the pressure included emails and text messages...I hope she can provide them, for her credibility and Turdough’s demise.
All parties need people like her. Political parties and ideology aside she is a credit to the job and to Canada. I particularly loved her Nixon analogy.
The 30gs
They are all pigs.
I loved her line "I explained to him the law" (Justin) and that she wasn't going to interfere.... PM himself pushed for it over concerns over the election... and Morneau and Butts tried to influence her multiple times! Alot of it here in her own words... they went Cuba/China distance over the line! Butts didn't like the law and wanted to ignore it .... political interference off the scale!
https://www.facebook.com/OntarioProud/videos/271885437068633/
Just watched the “at issue” panel on CBC. Man these hacks just never quit. They are still trying to poke holes in her testimony. The reality is Wilson-Raybould dropped a bomb on Trudough and his handlers and there’s no spinning it under the carpet. Liberal supporters really need to look in the mirror and think about what they support. Trudough and Butts and the PMO have no respect for the law. How people can support them is troubling.
Not sure how but I must have missed it, I will look at the 11 news....Quote:
Originally Posted by jaycee
Agree 100%.Quote:
Originally Posted by Species8472
I stumbles on the full testimony..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MkDweZcSO-E
and the best explanation of the whole story I have seen so far....
https://youtu.be/K4Vx6kmfutc
The only thing that would make the description better would be that it ended with the RCMP arrested Butts, Trudeau and Morneau.
Yeah....that’s never gonna happen. The RCMP work for Tru-dough.
The Conservatives are pouring on the pressure calling for The Shiny Pony to resign as having lost all moral authority to govern. I doubt he's going to be able to soft shoe his way out of this one,but,Butts and Morneau will fall on their swords to protect him (actually,it looks like Butts may have,already).
I find it funny that the pm appointed her to AG and then she wouldn’t lie cheat and steal for him. The pm is a tool
This may change how Gov works. Because the crooks will always be worried that someone will blow the lid off.
If Justin runs in the fall he is going to promise us everything under the sun. Some fools will buy it again.
The comedy show is makes me giggle.
Media is circling the wagons around Trudough saying he is protecting Quebec jobs. They couldn’t care less about Alberta jobs though. Quebec and the maritimes will get Trudough a minority and Jagmeet Singh will be the king maker. If you think the last 4 yrs were bad best lock your doors.Quote:
Originally Posted by glen
I miss Harper.
Me too.Quote:
Originally Posted by terrym
People with integrity either don't become politicians or don't last. They can't abide the hypocrisy and lies.Quote:
Originally Posted by Species8472
Sad to think people actually support Trudeau....
You need to stop with this constant slander. How dare you insult the Sopranos by comparing them to the Liberals!Quote:
Originally Posted by terrym
I bet the libranos try to find a way to let illegal immigrants and other non CDN citizens to vote in October.
Also, given the recent revelation that SNC provided prostitutes to Ghadaffi’s son when he was in Canada, Trudough through his support to SNC endorses handing over CDN girls to tyrants and dictators. That kind of wears the paint off of Trudough’s “ feminist” persona eh?
Most definitely., Harper now must be smiling from ear to ear on one side, on the other he must be very pizzed off for what the lieberals are doing to this country.Quote:
Originally Posted by terrym
So Trudeau has said he completely disagrees with Wilson-Raybould's characterization of the events. Same thing he did with the groping story. Now we as an electorate have two people saying two different things. One is a former AG, who has risked her political future (Trudeau has stated he is reviewing her continuance as a Liberal) by testifying in front of the justice committee (I am not sure if she was sworn in under oath for her testimony or not), who has said she and her office was pressured by cabinet members and their office and another who completely disagrees with her assessment of the events but hasn't had the opportunity to review her entire testimony, who has been found guilty of a breach of ethics already during his government majority.
I don't think anything illegal happened; however, only because of Wilson-Raybould deciding not to meddle in the case; not because the PMO/cabinet is innocent. Something which has gotten lost in this entire thing is SNC has vigorously defended their innocence; however, if the DPA was given to them as an option, wouldn't that mean that SNC would have to acknowledge their guilt in regards to the charge. A part of the purpose of a remediation agreement is to hold the organization accountable for the wrongdoing (https://www.canada.ca/en/department-...ate-crime.html). So per the justice department's explanation of the DPA's purpose is the fact a wrong has to happen.
Sadly, Justin & crew knew they weren’t winning anything in Alberta and Saskatchewan anyway, but this does give them favour with the ever-sought voters in Quebec.
The election will be won or lost in Ontario, and specifically the 905.
Well, Ontario destroyed the Provincial liberals over mostly corruption. Hopefully some of that sentiment is still around in October.
Here's the crux of the issue. One that many Liberal supporters seem to gloss over on.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dythbringer
JWR was Minister of Justice, AND the Attorney General.
If it were the PM trying to influence the Minister of Defence about policy that he wanted to see...then no, nothing illegal at all.
It is the PMOs office attempting to coerce and manipulate the latter title (AG) regarding a criminal matter before the courts which is so egregious.
And under the strict guidelines where a DPA can be applied, SNCs case did not merit it. It failed to meet the criteria set out.
Best summary yet.
Gotta love fellow gunny Michelle Rempel.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K4Vx6kmfutc
Yea. I have thought a bit more on JWR's testimony and the more I think about it, the more I am coming to the conclusion that the PMO's attempt to get a DPA for SNC was an attempt on the AG in order to secure SNC's future in Quebec so they could look like the prize winning pig when the election came around. This matter needs to be investigated by the RCMP in order to see if any criminal wrongdoing was done by anyone eg PM & his staff, cabinet ministers and their staff and SNC as a company (if SNC lobbied as hard as they did and possibly pushed the PMO or ministers to push the AG for a DPA, could that not constitute obstruction of justice).Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluebulldog
I think if the PM had inquired about the DPA, the AG ruled and the matter dropped, then this is a dead story. The denial of sustained pressure to politically interfere in a criminal case and the demotion from Minister of Justice/AG because the government did not get what they wanted is what people don't understand is the wrongdoing here.
This situation really boxes the new AG into a corner. Any decision which he makes could be construed as partisan. Any decision he makes will need an extra layer or two of transparency in order to have the public trust the office again.
Go over her testimony:
"During Jody Wilson-Raybould’s bombshell testimony on political interference in the SNC-Lavalin case, the former Justice Minister implied that the prime minister’s chief of staff, Katie Telford, said that she would have positive “op eds” written about Wilson-Raybould if she would make the right decision.
In her statements before the Justice Committee, Wilson-Raybould claimed that there was a persistent effort from the Prime Minister’s Office and others to intervene in her decision to criminally prosecute SNC-Lavalin.
The former Attorney General quoted a conversation between her chief of staff and Katie Telford, the prime minister’s own chief of staff as evidence for the claim.
According to the transcript, Telford said that “if Jody is nervous, we would of course line up all kinds of people to write op eds saying that what she’s doing is proper.”
“We don’t want to debate legalities anymore. We aren’t lawyers, but there has to be some solution here,” allegedly said Katie Telford.
Remember when the Liberals gave $600,000,000 in a "Media Aid Package"?......wonder what it bought?
I have a few times. The more I go over it, the worse things are.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluebulldog
If you read between the lines of JWR's statements, it seems clear that the new AG already decided to go the DPA route. She basically said that she decided to stay in cabinet even after her demotion because she took the PM at his word. She then said that she would resign immediately if she saw a DPA because she would have lost confidence in cabinet. You'll notice that she then resigned suddenly. Anyway, I suppose this is speculation, but all of the pieces fit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dythbringer
The way I see it, WR has nothing to lose now by telling the truth. Trudope does, he has a lot to lose. So it's easy for me to pick sides.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dythbringer
I can't wait to see the PC election campaign ads. I just hope they focus a bit on what they're going to do, rather than on Trudope being a disaster ... because we all know that.
Oh ya, that woman just lays it out like it can be understood.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluebulldog
I think she resigned more because Trudeau said he had full confidence in her, suggested she would have resigned from cabinet on principle if she had felt anyone had tried to improperly pressure her and said her presence in cabinet should speak for itself. If I remember correctly, he said this rather late in the day. She resigned the next day. However, you could be correct. She stated she can't speak about the cabinet meetings after she accepted Veterans Affairs so we really don't know. In fact it could be both, she learned about the DPA, Trudeau made his comments and that forced her hand.Quote:
Originally Posted by rf2
The Libs are on damage control. Several have claimed her testimony is "her" truth, despite backing it up with evidence. One MP out in BC had to apologize to her in the House of Commons because while being interviewed by a BC paper said he thought her father was pulling her strings, her testimoney was just sour grapes and that she wasn't a team player (https://www.abbynews.com/news/wilson...-area-mp-says/).
Now Butts has asked to testify before the justice committee despite Liberal members blocking him from doing so. From the way they have handled this in the past couple of weeks, they sure want the dumpster fire to keep burning. However, since they didn't handle this thing correctly from the start, why should they start now? Lol. I would like the PM to appear before the committee just so he actually has to answer the questions rather than deflect like he does in question period but I think his team will not want that to happen because he doesn't do well off script.
Is the emergency cabinet meeting televised tonight?
“Doesn’t do well off script” is a bit of an understatement to say the leastQuote:
Originally Posted by Dythbringer
Those repetitive “uhhhh” ‘s must have been him waiting for his next line from Butts in the earpiece. Going to be a lot more of those going forward.
Whole statement here, key points....
http://jphilpott.liberal.ca/news-nouvelles/statement/
March 4, 2019
Dear Prime Minister,
It is an enormous privilege to be the Member of Parliament for Markham-Stouffville and to have served as Minister of Health, then Minister of Indigenous Services, then President of the Treasury Board and Minister of Digital Government. It has been an honour to play a leading role in progress that has shaped our country: bringing Syrian refugees to Canada; legislating a balanced approach to Medical Assistance in Dying; negotiating a health accord with new resources for mental health and home care; improving infrastructure for First Nations to provide clean water on reserve; and reforming child welfare to reduce the over-apprehension of Indigenous children.
However, I have been considering the events that have shaken the federal government in recent weeks and after serious reflection, I have concluded that I must resign as a member of Cabinet.
In Canada, the constitutional convention of Cabinet solidarity means, among other things, that ministers are expected to defend all Cabinet decisions. A minister must always be prepared to defend other ministers publicly, and must speak in support of the government and its policies. Given this convention and the current circumstances, it is untenable for me to continue to serve as a Cabinet minister.
Unfortunately, the evidence of efforts by politicians and/or officials to pressure the former Attorney General to intervene in the criminal case involving SNC-Lavalin, and the evidence as to the content of those efforts have raised serious concerns for me. Those concerns have been augmented by the views expressed by my constituents and other Canadians.
The solemn principles at stake are the independence and integrity of our justice system. It is a fundamental doctrine of the rule of law that our Attorney General should not be subjected to political pressure or interference regarding the exercise of her prosecutorial discretion in criminal cases. Sadly, I have lost confidence in how the government has dealt with this matter and in how it has responded to the issues raised.
...
What do you think, Non Confidence vote and early election in the hopes of saving their own butts or enough for an NDP coalition ... instead of maybe waiting till October and ending up in single digits seat count???
The above is a big oh! oh! , makes me wonder if there are any more that have the integrity to resign .
I think it is worse those two options. As Patrick Brown knows, leaders of political parties serve at the leisure of the caucus. If the caucus wants to throw out the leader, there isn't a whole lot the leader can do about it.Quote:
Originally Posted by mosquito
They won’t dump Trudough. He is only the “spokesmodel” of the liberal party. Low intellect voters who vote for looks and charisma likely don’t understand what is going on and if they do they don’t really care about it. The Maritimes would vote for dead carp if it was on the ballot as a liberal. Quebec will never support the conservatives. The libs still have a 50/50 chance of getting back in with a minority and then the NDP will be the tail wagging the dog. Bernier could very well deny the Conservatives a win just like the reform days.
I wonder how many more rats will try to get off the sinking ship.
If the rats are in ridings that are borderline.....I would expect more.
I think this will be the nastiest campaign in this country’s history.
It all depends on how hard they can chorale them... with Butts gone and one crossed the floor before this and now two of the cabinet and the SNC .... but he sure likes his talking points and Uh ... does he look/sound drunk (or something) to you in this one?
When they pull back it looks like most of the crowd was on the stage or right at the front for the camera's... I wonder if CBC will get an increase in the coming budget.... I wonder if it will pass a confidence vote....
https://twitter.com/CBCPolitics/stat...36178749423617
I stay educated on the issues and I always vote, but that clip reminds why I have not and will not ever attend a political rally and be one of the sheep that awkwardly cheers on cue. I don't care which party it is.Quote:
Originally Posted by mosquito
Just watched a bit of it. I don’t think Trudough caught the hypocrisy of the liberals forcibly removing a protester while he spews platitudes about having room for differences of opinion.
The whole channel shift attempt happening there is also laughable. Room full of senior cabinet ministers trying to divert away from the massive scandal in play. Even the French placards in the crowd are for Quebec not that MP’s riding.
I tried to watch the entire thing but McKenna's shrill voice sounds like nails running down a chalkboard.Quote:
Originally Posted by terrym
Yeah, I skipped over Barbie’s part.
Here's an interesting article:
https://www.cbc.ca/news/opinion/trud...ints-1.5044266
Butts has started to testify.
He refused to be sworn in.....
Definition of testify
intransitive verb
1 : to make a solemn declaration under oath for the purpose of establishing a fact (as in a court)
So..basically folks, I'm going to answer some questions, with non-facts, and let you sort out what are lies and what aren't.....
.....this was the Liberals strategy? Hoping that it would be omitted? Hoping that the public wouldn't be aware that he wasn't sworn in?
Liberal Bull $
The public won't be aware if the media doesnt report it? And from what I'm seeing so far, they havent? The dog n pony show continues!Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluebulldog
What sends up red flags for me is that Butts says neither he nor others who work in the PMO aren't lawyers yet insisted an accomplished lawyer, acting in the highest legal position in the country, needs an outside opinion when the AG and the AG staff had come up with an answer they did not like.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluebulldog
Here's exactly how things went.
Butts asked if he would swear in voluntarily. Butts refused.
( In Parliament, statements given are regarded as being under oath regardless. However, given the optics, he should have sworn in. The penalty for lying is being held in contempt of Parliament, whereas if lying under oath, he can be charged with perjury).
Conservatives table motion to compel Butts to swear under oath......defeated by Liberal majority government.
If no one has anything to hide....why exclude himself from swearing in? Why would the Liberal MPs not support a motion to ensure truth?
Because there is no truth to be ensured !! Better question is why did he resign, if he did no wrong ?? I figured he would throw himself on his sword to protect the village idiot !! Instead, it would appear he is just throwing JWR under the bus!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluebulldog
JWR flattened and properly discarded of, tire prints and all, then it opens the door for Butts coming back in a different title, ambassador, consultant ..... remember this is the guy that felt that laughing at Justlied's idiocy made you a Nazi .... while to me it seemed he actually acted like a real National Socialist ..... just remember it was JWR in her testimony that specifically said that Butt's didn't like the law in question.... no, truth and his goals .... any bet there is an email accident where they all get deleted if this gets pushed more?Quote:
Originally Posted by rick_iles
Why wouldn't he try to throw JWR under the bus? That is what they have been doing all along and what a wonderful job they have been doing about it, no blow back at all. Might as well keep the Titanic on course......Quote:
Originally Posted by rick_iles
In true Orwellian style Butthead would have us believe 2+2=5. Sadly the proletarians will believe it.
The Toronto Star is really banging the drum to deify Butts and trash JWR. It's really not unexpected,either,but,it's really showing the Lib left's true colors. It's also really rich that Butts chose NOT to swear the oath. That way he can lie with impunity and avoid criminal code charges of perjury or conspiracy to commit. These fckres really need to get the boot. One lies,the other won't swear to it. No credibility,whatsoever.
Trudeau has just read a prepared statement and is taking questions about this clusterfudge. He is still banging the jobs drum. Says it was a breakdown in communication between Butts and JWR and he should have been more involved.
So now Canadians are to believe the most current narrative which is he didn't know his most trusted advisor and the AG were at loggerheads over saving SNC's skin. I call bullcrap. Not just a little cowpie either, a big stinking pile of it. If this mess is because he wasn't as involved as he should have (as he stated), what kind of mess would we have on our hands if he had gotten more involved?
So far in his press conference, he is really repeating Butt's testimony from yesterday.
Some "spin doctor" wrote the PM's excuse for him. He's not smart enough to think that up by himself. FFS!! What a load of BS.
I think at this point Trudeau knows this is so bad he is sticking to the jobs excuse because he is trying to hang onto his seat in Papineau because that is what is playing well in Quebec. I think he knows this thing is probably going to cost him the majority.Quote:
Originally Posted by trimmer21
Amanda Connolly from Global News asked the best question of the press conference. She asked “Is this an apology? Will you make an apology?” to which the PM glibly answered “I will be apologizing in Iqaluit today” (about the treatment of Inuit during TB outbreaks). It is a wonderment to see his tremendous ego in action sometimes. The only reason which I can think he would think this answer was appropriate is he truly experiences interactions and events differently than everyone else.
One of the many lines is that JWR should have come to Trudeau....yet the other members of cabinet have also said that nobody gets to Justin without going thru Butts, which was the guy she was arguing with......
I haven’t seen this angle reported in the media
So yesterday Butts repeatedly said to the justice committee that he didn't think JWR could come to a decision but if she had, she should have communicated that directly. The PM confirmed that JWR told him directly that her mind was made up and asked her to revisit her decision. So she did communicate her decision to the PM directly and then he told his staff to follow up with her about her revising her decision which they obviously did which JWR viewed as inappropriate.
So if my boss comes to me and asks me to do something which will help the company but is potentially illegal and I refuse because one person can not compel another to break the law. And I tell him my mind is made up not to do said act but he then gets his executive assistants to consistently ask me to do act, this behaviour is appropriate?
The libranos are in full damage control. They will do anything to get re-elected including supporting a company that bought $30,000 of hookers for a dictators son. Because Quebec jobs are at stake right? Well I guess prostitution is a job.
Nothing is sticking for them trying to explain this mess. I wouldn't be surprised if the next explanation is The Chewbacca Defense from SouthPark: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xwdba9C2G14
I'm wait to see what excuse Liberals will come up with for Alberta oil workers and Ontario autoworkers. This is not going away anytime soon.
While I am happy that she is being a major pain in the butt for JT right now, any chance that I would ever respect this woman was lost after her twitter comments on the verdict in the Gerald Stanley trial last year. As Min of Justice and A G, she had no business commenting on it like she did. I guess in her mind, attempting to interfere in a criminal case is ok if it supports your agenda.
Yes how quickly people forget . I can remember all the names she was called and her integrity called into question when she commented on the Stanley case. But now she is above reproach. LOL.
While her tweet was off side in that circumstance (and I hardly think an inappropriate tweet after the case has been determined is interfering), it is possible for people to conclude she acted appropriately in this circumstance as they are two different circumstances. While I won't ever be a joiner to the Liberal party, they have gotten a few things correct. I don't mind praising them the times I think they get it right because I will criticize them when I think they get it wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by M_P
She was off-side on her comments. However, this is an entirely different situation than an inappropriate tweet.Quote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann
With respect to his/their insistence that if she was feeling undue pressure she was obliged to go to JT.
They keep forgetting the AG is supposed to be independent.........
Independent. And the DPP was created by the Harper Govt. to ensure that cases like this aren't influenced politically.Quote:
Originally Posted by LoR
It should also be noted that the Harper Govt. enacted the Public Prosecutions Act while holding a MINORITY government.....meaning that even the opposition parties agreed to it.