Redford Accused of Conflict of Interest

[Dion]

Originally Posted by First Lady

She really shouldn't have cancelled.

Most don't watch the Leg closely. The average Albertan has only seen her angry outburst from yesterday played out over and over on the news.

She really needed to come out today with a calm, well thoughtout and clear statement.

I was hoping that she was going to say that she is stepping down as leader of the PC party.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Plett25

They divorced over 20 years ago?

I can see it being a conflict of interest if they were still married, or maybe even divorced a couple of years ago.

But a couple of decades? This is ridiculous.

Except its clear they're still close. The guy was on her transition team and involved in her campaign

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by First Lady

She really shouldn't have cancelled.

Most don't watch the Leg closely. The average Albertan has only seen her angry outburst from yesterday played out over and over on the news.

She really needed to come out today with a calm, well thoughtout and clear statement.

I think she's incapable of that.

Right back to the debates where she slowly turned red and her head looked set to explode.

She might have worked for the UN, she might have worked as a lawyer. But as a provincial politician and as the premier, she's a complete dumba$$. But at least her arrogance makes up for that.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Dion

I was hoping that she was going to say that she is stepping down as leader of the PC party.

Not a chance, she's got her hand in the honey pot.

If she had any integrity she would step aside, she would welcome the chance to clear her partty's record on several fairly bad optic issues in the past short period of time.

[First Lady]

Originally Posted by Handsome B. Wonderful

What a chicken#### our dear leader is.

She ended up making herself available for less than 5 minutes after 4 PM

You can hear the clip here:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmont...-untruths.html

At the bottom of that same article are documents that are completely contrary to everything she says in the clip.

I'm not even upset by this. I'm actually very saddened that our Premier has chosen to stick to her story; when clearly the documents tell another version.

[Rerun]

I believe she is saying that she did not make the final decision.... which technically is true. The final decision was made 6 months later when she was no longer Justice Minister.

Of course it would have been unheard of for the new justice minister to over turn her original decision to begin negotiations with ITRL and only ITRL, particularly after negotiations had concluded and an agreement had been made, and start the process all over again.

She's playing semantics and hiding behind technicalities.

[killer_carlson]

Redford has been one problem after another since the election. I'm surprised the opposition wants her to step aside. I think any replacement would be able to stick handle the issues better than Redford.

[First Lady]

Originally Posted by Rerun

I believe she is saying that she did not make the final decision.... which technically is true. The final decision was made 6 months later when she was no longer Justice Minister.

No, 6 months later (June) is when the contract details were finalized.

The letters to the unsuccessful firms went out in Dec after Redford signed the memo selecting her ex's firm. Seems pretty clear the decision was made then and all that was left was working out the details of the contract with the successful firm.

She's playing semantics and hiding behind technicalities.

I think it's more than that, she is outright denying what is written in the emails that CBC has posted.

When they tried to question her further on it her response was; "Are there questions about anything else?"


This has gone from being a question of conflict of interest, to a case of her possibly being in contempt of the Legislature.

[Azure]

It would be pretty funny if Mason was right in the end.

[First Lady]

Originally Posted by Azure

It would be pretty funny if Mason was right in the end.

He is calling for her to step aside. I think that is pretty extreme; then again a week ago I had never heard of a Mayor being ejected from office.

[Slava]

LOL at Wild rose supporters suddenly caring about contempt in the legislature! Funny how last spring when Harper was in contempt of parliament it was a non-concern for most of the people here. Now the shoe is on the other foot and she should resign immediately. Hilarious.

[First Lady]

Originally Posted by Slava

LOL at Wild rose supporters suddenly caring about contempt in the legislature! Funny how last spring when Harper was in contempt of parliament it was a non-concern for most of the people here. Now the shoe is on the other foot and she should resign immediately. Hilarious.

For me personally, I don't follow federal as closely; so I tend not to speak out on things I'm not well versed on.

In the boarder scope though I agree; people tend to stay silent when it is their own party. Or try to twist things as being less serious than they are (read: Slava defending PC's) LOL

I have no qualms stating when the Wildrose steps in it. Just read my blog sometime. I've been pretty hard on them.

[puckluck2]

Originally Posted by Slava

LOL at Wild rose supporters suddenly caring about contempt in the legislature! Funny how last spring when Harper was in contempt of parliament it was a non-concern for most of the people here. Now the shoe is on the other foot and she should resign immediately. Hilarious.

Wildrose supporters are just the worst.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Iginla

Wildrose supporters are just the worst.

No worse then people who make blanket statements.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Slava

LOL at Wild rose supporters suddenly caring about contempt in the legislature! Funny how last spring when Harper was in contempt of parliament it was a non-concern for most of the people here. Now the shoe is on the other foot and she should resign immediately. Hilarious.

Redford has been a lot worse and more evasive then anyone in the federal government, with everything coming right in a row like this she should either open everything up to an impartial outside investigation or step aside until her name and the government's name is cleared.

but her continued I didn't know, and other excuses doesn't cut it and makes her look either incompetent or incredibly corrupt.

[return to the red]

meh never mind ill just sit on the side lines and enjoy the back and forth between the pc and wildrose supporters

[CaptainCrunch]

Maybe but I don't recall a government being hit with so many fundraising, family member profiting and what looks like influence peddling so often, but what makes this even worse is the way the gov't and the premiere are dealing with it.

[Cube Inmate]

She's being Clinton-esque in her deflection of the accusations. "I did not make the decision." Maybe not, but that depends on what your definition of "decision" is. You made a very powerful recommendation that led to negotiations with only one potential contractor and the dismissal of two other bids. It would have taken an edict from Jeebus himself to go against that "recommendation" and re-start the bid process.

You made a decision you shouldn't have, you arrogant twit. It may have been within the bounds of the law...technically...but you're too stupid to be my premier if you think it was ethically sound. AND you are lying...like lawyers are trained to do.

[killer_carlson]

Redford's problem her is not the conflict of interest, it is the denial that she made the decision in the face of documents that say she did.

The Clinton reference is appropriate: it wasn't the affair, it was the lying about it, or rather the creative interpretation around the truth.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by First Lady

For me personally, I don't follow federal as closely; so I tend not to speak out on things I'm not well versed on.

In the boarder scope though I agree; people tend to stay silent when it is their own party. Or try to twist things as being less serious than they are (read: Slava defending PC's) LOL

I have no qualms stating when the Wildrose steps in it. Just read my blog sometime. I've been pretty hard on them.

I've read your blog many times, and I do give you credit for taking issue with some of the things the Wildrose has done from time to time.

I'm not just defending the PCs here actually. I just think it interesting to watch how much people will let slide if it's a party/politician they "like" in the first place doing whatever it is. Case in point:

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Redford has been a lot worse and more evasive then anyone in the federal government, with everything coming right in a row like this she should either open everything up to an impartial outside investigation or step aside until her name and the government's name is cleared.

but her continued I didn't know, and other excuses doesn't cut it and makes her look either incompetent or incredibly corrupt.

No, Harper was having ministers skip committee meetings, and they were intentionally withholding information. They were stone-walling every attempt to find out what was necessary when questions were asked. That's not the case here. The information is there, she just didn't do a media availability (or did for a few minutes).

Honestly, that federal fiasco was far more egregious than what this situation is. Take the partisanship out of the picture and you can see that clear as day.