Ongoing Senate scandal

[Rerun]

Originally Posted by John Doe

How do we know Duffy is a liar? What specifically do we have proof that he lied about?

He said that his vacation cottage in PEI is his primary residence and its been proven that it isn't.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by Rerun

He said that his vacation cottage in PEI is his primary residence and its been proven that it isn't.

Stephen Harper said he'd balance budgets and...nope sure hasn't. Guess that makes him a liar doesn't it?

[Rerun]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

Stephen Harper said he'd balance budgets and...nope sure hasn't. Guess that makes him a liar doesn't it?

Good grief!!!

[John Doe]

Originally Posted by Rerun

He said that his vacation cottage in PEI is his primary residence and its been proven that it isn't.

He also said that he had asked the PMO to verify that his expenses were valid, and that he has proof (emails from them) that they said that his expense applications were in comliance with the rules.

I immediately contacted Nigel Wright, the Prime Minister's chief of staff, and explained that I was doing nothing improper. Nigel Wright emailed me back, saying he'd had my expenses checked and he was satisfied that my accounts were in order, that all was in compliance with Senate rules.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/sena...ords-1.2159561

So, Duffy's expenses came into doubt (because of the residency discrepency) and he checked with the PMO, who verified that the expenses were "in order". It is later determined that Duffy is not considered a resident of PEI (this last part is a supposition as I don't know if that determination was ever "officially" made). This makes him a liar?

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by Rerun

Good grief!!!

Would you like me to find more instances of him lying? You said you believe him to be an honest man, yet I can find you many instances of him being very dishonest. You choose to believe him because you're a hardcore CPC supporter and for no other reason. It's in your signature after all. Even if Duffy presents irrefutable proof you will find some way to dismiss it.

[Ark2]

Originally Posted by JobHopper

Seriously? I know there is a lot going on here but it sounds like Mike Duffy was claiming expenses for a place he already owned. He should have rented a place rather than just his own because it's a conflict of interest.

Would be like the mayor or councillor awarding a contract to a company they owned.

It was paid back by Nigel Wright though. I agree that it is a conflict of interest and perhaps even illegal, but it's not like the tax payer footed the bill on this one.

[Ark2]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

Would you like me to find more instances of him lying? You said you believe him to be an honest man, yet I can find you many instances of him being very dishonest. You choose to believe him because you're a hardcore CPC supporter and for no other reason. It's in your signature after all. Even if Duffy presents irrefutable proof you will find some way to dismiss it.

You seem to be equating the failure to deliver on platform promises with lying. Not sure how one equals the other. Harper promised to balance the budget and failed to do so. That speaks to his track record but not his honesty. By your standards, every politician would be considered a liar (which is probably true anyway).

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by Ark2

You seem to be equating the failure to deliver on platform promises with lying. Not sure how one equals the other. Harper promised to balance the budget and failed to do so. That speaks to his track record but not his honesty. By your standards, every politician would be considered a liar (which is probably true anyway).

Quite right. Politicians jobs aren't to be honest, its to get elected and stay elected. Bending the truth, misrepresenting facts, and outright lying are just par for the course. What annoys me is when one side thinks they're side isn't doing it while the other side is. No, everyone does it.

[Rerun]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

Quite right. Politicians jobs aren't to be honest, its to get elected and stay elected. Bending the truth, misrepresenting facts, and outright lying are just par for the course. What annoys me is when one side thinks they're side isn't doing it while the other side is. No, everyone does it.

You promise your child you will take her to the fair next Saturday.

Something comes up (car broke down, car is in repair shop, big repair bill). You can't afford to take her now.

Are you now a liar?

[Slava]

I'm not going back pages to reply. Its pretty simple. First Harper says he has no knowledge of this. As of yesterday though, that seems like a bold-faced lie. I have no idea how you can twist that into him telling the truth because he plainly did not.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by Rerun

You promise your child you will take her to the fair next Saturday.

Something comes up (car broke down, car is in repair shop, big repair bill). You can't afford to take her now.

Are you now a liar?

If you knowinlingly make a promise you can't keep, you are a liar. Anyone who looked at the CPC platform knew balancing the budget wasn't happening. A nice sounding bit of political bull####, but reality dictated that a balanced budget required a lot of things to go right that they probably knew wouldn't. So perhaps liar is the wrong word, intellectually dishonest is a better one.

You also conveniently ignore my larger point about how it doesn't matter what proof comes out about Harper, as a staunch, unwavering CPC supporter there's nothing that will change your mind. But if this was Trudeau being accused there would be likewise be nothing to change your mind that he's in the wrong. You are pretty much what is wrong with politics, you pick a team and choose to defend them because thats what homers do. Even when your team is doing things horribly, you have to keep defending them. Its really sad quite frankly.

[Ark2]

Originally Posted by Slava

I'm not going back pages to reply. Its pretty simple. First Harper says he has no knowledge of this. As of yesterday though, that seems like a bold-faced lie. I have no idea how you can twist that into him telling the truth because he plainly did not.

Isn't that still his story though? He's saying that he didn't know Wright loaned Duffy the money. As far as I am aware, no proof of the contrary has surfaced to the public. If Duffy's email trail ends up being all that he says it is, then I'll be right beside you condemning Harper as a liar. Until then, we will just have to wait and see.

[Ark2]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

You also conveniently ignore my larger point about how it doesn't matter what proof comes out about Harper, as a staunch, unwavering CPC supporter there's nothing that will change your mind. But if this was Trudeau being accused there would be likewise be nothing to change your mind that he's in the wrong. You are pretty much what is wrong with politics, you pick a team and choose to defend them because thats what homers do. Even when your team is doing things horribly, you have to keep defending them. Its really sad quite frankly.

Talk about the pot calling the kettle black...

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Ark2

Isn't that still his story though? He's saying that he didn't know Wright loaned Duffy the money. As far as I am aware, no proof of the contrary has surfaced to the public. If Duffy's email trail ends up being all that he says it is, then I'll be right beside you condemning Harper as a liar. Until then, we will just have to wait and see.

I'm just going by what Rerun and I think happened. That's why earlier in the thread I specifically asked Rerun if he thought that Harper told him to pay the money back. WE both think that he did...he can't both have no knowledge of the situation and tell he has to pay the money back!

[Rerun]

Originally Posted by Slava

I'm just going by what Rerun and I think happened. That's why earlier in the thread I specifically asked Rerun if he thought that Harper told him to pay the money back. WE both think that he did...he can't both have no knowledge of the situation and tell he has to pay the money back!

Timeline is the key. Of course he knew... the question is when did he learn of Duffy's misdeeds and when did he learn of Wright's loan to Duffy.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Rerun

Timeline is the key. Of course he knew... the question is when did he learn of Duffy's misdeeds and when did he learn of Wright's loan to Duffy.

Any evidence of it being a loan? I've not seen that.

Do you have any answers to these things I wonder about? Why did Wright just cut a cheque for $90k? Out of the goodness of his heart? It just doesn't make sense.

Doesn't it reflect terribly on the PM regardless of how this is dealt with? He appointed these three senators and all three have been abject failures in the sense the PMO now wants all of them suspended without pay. Of course he also hired Nigel Wright, and (if you believe the PM) he made a decision to pay a sitting senator $90k to deal with his issues. In return, the PMO (again with no involvement from the PM...if ypou can believe it!) would make the potentially embarrassing audit with Deloitte disappear. At best I guess you can say that all these people that Harper handpicked and appointed did everything without his knowledge, but in all sincerity its terrible judgement shown by Harper.

[KelVarnsen]

Came in to this thread looking for Dion or Rerun defending Harper, leaving satisfied.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by KelVarnsen

Came in to this thread looking for Dion or Rerun defending Harper, leaving satisfied.

Clicked on this tread to see my name posted, left satisfied.

[Dion]

But Duffy's effort to recast himself from villain to victim is having an impact.

First, it guarantees the prime minister will be back on his feet again Wednesday, presumably to deny he knew anything about the deal, and to sidestep questions about why he insisted in May that Wright acted alone.

Second, it creates a credibility contest between Harper and Duffy. For the first time, the senator's version of the story is being given a full public airing, and, for the time being at least, he's casting doubts about the government's version of events.

Canadians already knew from RCMP documents that Nigel Wright did not act alone as the prime minister first suggested. At least three other former members of his office were aware of the repayment scheme.

The government's own talking lines — that Wright acted alone — morphed long ago into claims that Harper's former chief of staff accepted sole responsibility.

These are the kinds of shifts in messaging the opposition continues to highlight when challenging the credibility of the government's claims.

Duffy's first public comments on the scandal has given them new ammunition, even if the Conservative-dominated Senate endorses the government's efforts to suspend him and the others without pay.

It's now Duffy's word against the prime minister's. A battle for credibility that only one of them can win.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/sena...-war-1.2159732

[Rerun]

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2...ike_duffy.html

Thursday, October 24, 2013

Harper stood in the Commons repeatedly Wednesday, took most questions directed to him, and flatly denied Duffy's explosive allegation that he’d helped orchestrate a “monstrous” political scheme to repay Duffy’s expenses and whitewash an audit once they became political dynamite.

Neither Duffy nor his lawyer had produced direct proof of that. But Harper denied the damning allegation anyway.

He went on the offence to scorn Duffy’s claim of being a “victim” of a political vendetta and donned the mantle of guardian of taxpayers’ money.

“Mr. Duffy now says he is a victim because I told him he should repay his expenses. You’re darn right I told him,” Harper said

In moving to shield Novak, Wright’s successor as chief of staff, Harper admitted for the first time that Wright “did seek permission or consultation with others” over the Duffy repayment — an admission that the circle of people who knew of the plan to repay Duffy’s expenses was much broader than previously acknowledged.


Harper denied it was as broad as 13 people, reported by CTV, and noted Wright has not said Novak was among them, nor was he: “One of those people was not me because I obviously would never have approved such a scheme.”

“Any assertion that I was in any way consulted or had any knowledge of Mr. Wright’s payment to Mr. Duffy is categorically false. Had I known about it, I would not have permitted it. As soon as I knew about it, on May 15, I revealed it to the public.

I will continue to believe Stephen Harper's statements until irrefutable proof is presented that they are false.