Topic: Adscam/ Gomery Inquiry/ et al

[Aden_Gatling]

I've never really thought of beneficiaries as victims ... the Western Standard put this under "April 4, 1974:
President Nixon calls in FBI to investigate possible fraud perpetrated against Republican party.":

Liberals contact RCMP to investigate possible sponsorship-related fraud

1 hour, 40 minutes ago
   

BRIAN DALY

MONTREAL (CP) - The federal Liberal party, beset by allegations public money was funnelled into its Quebec wing, said Monday it has asked the RCMP to investigate the possibility the party was a victim of fraud.

 The announcement at the sponsorship inquiry by party lawyer Doug Mitchell comes three days after ad man Jean Brault delivered inquiry testimony said to be devastating to the minority Liberal government.

"I have been directed by my clients to contact the RCMP to ask that they investigate the possibility that the party itself may have been the target of fraud or other harmful acts by certain individuals," Mitchell told reporters.

"Using inappropriate means to gain undeserved benefit . . . is, if proven to be true, criminal action, plain and simple."

The details of Brault's testimony, delivered Thursday and Friday, are covered by a publication ban. But the testimony was said to be so serious that all federal political parties were working on election scenarios.

The Liberals launched into full defensive mode Monday, seeking and winning full standing at the inquiry that allows them to cross-examine Brault and other witnesses. ...

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=1845&ncid=737&e=1&u=/cpress/20050404/ca_pr_on_na/sponsorship_inquiry

[Brad Sallows]

What is going to be amusing is when the rationalizations begin to emerge to convince us that the costs and corruption are a small price to pay to maintain the unity of the nation and keep the vile social conservatives out of office.

[recceguy]

What is amusing is the way the LIEberals are scurrying and casting about looking for scapegoats to pin their indiscretions on, to deflect the blame, before the SHTF, in the open press.

What will NOT be amusing is how many of the Canadian sheeple will buy it.

[Aden_Gatling]

You can't make this stuff up:

"They have the gall to depict the Liberal Party as the victim of the sponsorship scandal," Conservative Leader Stephen Harper said as the daily question period got underway in the House of Commons Monday afternoon.

"Will the Government at least have the decency to simply admit that the only victim is the Canadian taxpayer whose money was stolen?"

[...]

Prime Minister Paul Martin replied to Harper by defending party workers.

"There are of thousands of men and women in Quebec and across this country who are dedicated to the Liberal Party and to their country," Martin said.

"Those members of the Liberal Party should not have to bear the rumours ... or the burden of the activities of a very small few who may have colluded against the party," he added, promising to defend them.

  I think he means "against" in the "funnelled $100 million taxpayer dollars to" sense. 

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/1112614081885_4/?hub=TopStories

[recceguy]

Ahhh, the spin has started

It shouldn't read "colluded against the party". It should read "colluded against the Canadian people" Guess he's trying to remove us as the victims and replace the LIEberals as the downtrodden masses.

BOHICA everyone!!

[Thucydides]

Although there is a Canadian publication ban, unless the Liberals can turn off the Internet, our American cousins have come on board big time. I can't provide a link, in case the owner of this site gets into trouble, but if you google onto the bigger blog sites (first letter is "I", rymes with "pundit"), you can find lots of links to start.

Funny how our neighbors to the north lose their expansive view of international law when confronted with things like this:

    Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

Unless, you know, it's embarrassing to people in power or something.

As Glenn Reynolds would say: Heh

[whiskey601]

Although there is a Canadian publication ban, unless the Liberals can turn off the Internet, our American cousins have come on board big time. I can't provide a link, in case the owner of this site gets into trouble, but if you google onto the bigger blog sites (first letter is "I", rymes with "pundit"), you can find lots of links to start.

As Glenn Reynolds would say: Heh

I went there earlier today and didn't all that much different than what the news media in Canada are indirectly alluding to. 

[whiskey601]

Disregard my last tx. Found it!! Yuk.

[SeaKingTacco]

If even half of this is true and provable in a court of law...the mind beggars at the unmitigated gall of these people.

Actually, this raises a question.  How the heck would the Dept of Justice even begin to tackle something this big?  I can't think of a similar situation in Canadian history...

Can't wait for the publication ban to come off, so we can remove the crypto...

[whiskey601]

Actually, this raises a question.  How the heck would the Dept of Justice even begin to tackle something this big?  I can't think of a similar situation in Canadian history...

Sir John  A?

[SeaKingTacco]

I thought immediately of Sir John A.

Then I realized he was bush-league compared to what is being alleged...

Sucks being a Canadian taxpayer lately...

[whiskey601]

Sucks being a Canadian taxpayer lately...

Apparently, it always has!!

[Thucydides]

Oh no, it wasn't the Taxpayers who were scammed, it was the LIBERAL PARTY! I'm not making this up either.....

http://www.damianpenny.com/archived/004113.html

Damage control

The Liberals, fearing for their political lives more than ever since 1993, are trying to portray themselves as the victims of Adscam. I swear to God, you can't make this up:

The opposition questioned the "gall" of federal Liberals Monday, after the governing party asked the RCMP to investigate the possibility it was a victim of fraud in the sponsorship program.

"They have the gall to depict the Liberal Party as the victim of the sponsorship scandal," Conservative Leader Stephen Harper said as the daily question period got underway in the House of Commons Monday afternoon.

"Will the Government at least have the decency to simply admit that the only victim is the Canadian taxpayer whose money was stolen?"

The Liberal Party called in the RCMP in apparent response to testimony last week at the Gomery Inquiry. The details cannot be made public due to a publication ban.

Prime Minister Paul Martin replied to Harper by defending party workers.

"There are of thousands of men and women in Quebec and across this country who are dedicated to the Liberal Party and to their country," Martin said.

"Those members of the Liberal Party should not have to bear the rumours ... or the burden of the activities of a very small few who may have colluded against the party," he added, promising to defend them.

Later outside the House of Commons, NDP Leader Jack Layton told reporters that he believes his party agrees with most Canadians in supporting Gomery's work to its conclusion.

"We shouldn't be trying to undermine it, trying to sidetrack it," he said. "That is what the prime minister is now trying to do with his claims that somehow the Liberal party or his organization is somehow the victim here."

Meanwhile, the publication ban could soon be lifted:

Gomery agreed to the ban for Brault and two others -- Paul Coffin of Coffin Communications and former civil servant Chuck Guite -- because the three are facing criminal charges.

Their lawyers successfully argued that testimony at the sponsorship inquiry could bias potential jurors in the criminal trial.

However, the media and the opposition may push to have the ban lifted, now that Brault's lawyers have asked to have his trial delayed until September. A decision on that is expected Wednesday.

If they could get away with it, the Liberals would call an election for Tuesday.

[smersh]

They aren't going to fool anyone in Quebec where the Liberals are probably going to plummet to record levels of non-support. 

Ontario voters may be as thick as telephone poles these days - but I predict the BQ becomes the dominant party in Quebec - leaving the Liberals as nothing more than an Allophone/Anglophone rump in Montreal.

It's richly ironic that the sponsorship program - designed to enhance the reputation of the federal government in Quebec - has been the single greatest instrument of its downfall. Not only did Chretien almost lose the country in 1995 due to his supreme arrogance and complacency about being one of the few leaders who really understood Quebec nationalism - he created this monster and let it loose on the body politic - Duplessis meets the Sopranos.

And the real question of the hour is - how much did Paul Martin really know? And when did he know it?

cheers, all, mdh

[whiskey601]

And the real question of the hour is - how much did Paul Martin really know? And when did he know it?

He can always "forget" what he knew. Maybe this would be better: "What was Paul Martin responsible or obligated for knowing, and how irresponsible was he in breaching his obligation to inform himself and in ensuring that he remain informed."

   

[Aden_Gatling]

[camochick]

Would it be illegal to put up the article from the US site? It wouldnt really be considered publishing it, would it? 

[Danjanou]

Would it be illegal to put up the article from the US site? It wouldnt really be considered publishing it, would it?  

Camochick that's a grey area and one we best stay clear of. News reports are that some sites that have posted links etc may be in bit of hot water for doing so. Lets not give Mike another potential  hassle right now. Anyone who really want's to read up on this is I'm sure computer savvy enought to find it without our help.

[dutchie]

What I find really interesting is Paul Martin's claim he knew nothing of the scam while it was occurring, and only found out about it after it broke in the media. Utter horse-shyte, I say. Here's my thoughts.....

Paul Martin is the Finance Minister, the Sr. MP in Quebec and it's Lieutenant, and he knew nothing of a major money funnelling scam directly related to BOTH POSITIONS? As Finance Minister, he should have known. As the Sr MP in Quebec and it's Lieutenant, he had to know. Especially considering this 'program' was directly related to the Province of Quebec, it's citizens, and the image of Canada within the Province. It would be different if the ad agencies happened to be located in Quebec, with no other connections to the Province, but that was not the case. This was a major program, and there is no way he knew nothing of the fraud being committed.

There are only 2 possible explanations:

1-He's lying. Very likely considering his track record and his party.
2-He was incompetent and asleep at the wheel at the time. Again, very possible.

Which is it? Either way, he should be given the boot, and charged.

[Aden_Gatling]

Gomery's publication ban backfires
 
The Gazette

Tuesday, April 05, 2005

As legal manoeuvres and political posturing accumulate around the Gomery inquiry, Canadians are in danger of losing the thread in the $100-million sponsorship scam. That would suit some interests well, but must not be allowed to happen.

One way to make sure it does not would be for Justice John Gomery to abandon his ban on the publication of testimony. The ban is damaging where it is not ineffective, and unnecessary in any case.

The sponsorship waters are being muddied at a rapid rate now. Yesterday, the Liberal Party of Canada, all injured innocence, took a step toward protecting itself against the slime that has been coming out - or not coming out - of the inquiry. The party formally asked the Royal Canadian Mounted Police to look into the possibility that someone defrauded the party itself. Everybody, it seems, is a victim.

Taxpayers, the real victims, are not allowed to hear what's being revealed. The ban springs from Gomery's concern about the fairness of criminal trials, but to many ordinary Canadians it will be seen as a cover-up all the same.

The ban has led to wild speculation. On Thursday Montreal adman Jean Brault testified under the ban, and by Saturday's newspapers, reports about what he'd said - which could not tell what he'd said - hinted at shocking, explosive revelations that would surely force an election, at the very least. There's nothing like a secret to generate half-informed speculation.

Then, during the weekend, the veil over testimony was ripped open by at least one blogger outside Canada, where Internauts are safe from Gomery's powers to punish. This recalled the bad old days of the Paul Bernardo circus, when Buffalo-area media outlets flooded Canada with information that Canadian media were ordered to suppress.

Trying to forbid Internet dissemination of news is like trying to stop the tide. And it is offensive to have a two-tier information system in which the political elite, and many in the media, know more than the very public that the pols and press are theoretically serving.

Tomorrow, Quebec Superior Court Judge Lise Cote will rule on a defence request that criminal trials for Brault and Charles Guite be pushed back from May 2 to September. If she so decides, and even if she does not, we urge Justice Gomery to reverse his publication ban.

Even with the intense public interest in the whole affair, there will be plenty of potential jurors, when the time comes for criminal trials, who will be able to render a fair verdict.

In the meantime, a foul stew of rumour, gossip, innuendo and partisan scheming must not be allowed to replace the cleansing fresh air that the Gomery inquiry had been providing so well.
© The Gazette (Montreal) 2005

http://www.canada.com/montreal/montrealgazette/news/editorial/story.html?id=70bb5244-0ad4-4afa-8c60-945d0b13d8ca

[Aden_Gatling]

What I find really interesting is Paul Martin's claim he knew nothing of the scam while it was occurring, and only found out about it after it broke in the media.

Wait until the Brault's testimony is public ...

Not even second-hand

Bookmark this quote [http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20050401.wgomery0401/BNStory/National/], from last Friday:

    Any sins committed happened under Jean Chrétien's administration and cannot be linked to Mr. Martin, said one strategist close to the Prime Minister.

     "You will not see anybody identified with the Paul Martin team involved in any of the accusations put forward," he said.

     "Because that's not how the Paul Martin team works."

Not that I've heard anything to the contrary.

http://andrewcoyne.com/2005/04/not-even-second-hand.php



Also, a buddy of mine just pointed-out that after yesterday's "we're the victims of fraud" defense, they've changed tactics.  Today it's "pointing out that we're corrupt plays into the hands of separatists.  So it's your patriotic duty as a Canadian to ignore the fact that we're corrupt & vote for us anyway."

Don't cater to separatists, Brison warns Tories

CTV.ca News Staff

The Conservative party is playing a dangerous game of "Russian roulette'' with national unity, warns Public Works Minister Scott Brison on CTV's Canada AM.

The minister was responding to questions about the apparently devastating new testimony at the sponsorship inquiry headed by Justice John Gomery.

While details of the testimony can't be revealed due to a temporary publication ban, a leaked report already has many Conservatives threatening to bring down the minority Liberals and trigger an election.

Brison says the Tories "had better be very careful" -- that they would be catering to Quebec separatists by helping force a snap election.

"What's good for the separatists is not good for Canada," says Brison.

"And what (Bloc Quebecois leader) Gilles Duceppe wants, and what the separatists want, is to tarnish the reputations of the Quebec Liberals, to tarnish the reputations of all those federalists and to do that using allegations -- using independent and specific testimony and not fact."

The minister tells Canada AM that it's important Canadians wait for the Gomery Commission's final
report before the next federal election.

"The only way we can get to the facts is for Justice Gomery to complete his work, to review all the testimony and to draw his conclusions," says Brison.

But he says the separatists would rather send Canadians to the polls based on unproven allegations, because that would hurt Quebec federalists.

"We are committed to getting to the bottom of this to defend our own reputation. But more importantly defend the reputations of Quebec federalists. It's important they be on the ground, strong to defend national unity in the government of Quebec."

In light of the damaging new testimony at the sponsorship inquiry, Conservative Leader Stephen Harper is under pressure to bring down government and run a campaign based on an anti-corruption message.

In apparent response to testimony heard last week at the inquiry, Liberal party lawyer Doug Mitchell said Monday that he's asked the RCMP to investigate the possibility his party was a victim of fraud in the sponsorship scandal.

Harper expressed anger over the government's "gall" to call depict themselves as victims, and demanded the government "at least have the decency to simply admit that the only victim is the Canadian taxpayer, whose money was stolen."

With files from the Canadian Press

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/1112704781643_196/?hub=TopStories

I wonder what tomorrow's defense might be ...

[smersh]

Looks like the Natural Corrupting Party is throwing in everything into the spin - including the kitchen sink of national unity.

As sheer unadulterated, panic sweeps the Liberal benches, we should see more and more desperate ploys like this one .  

Now Brison (Tory turncoat and opportunist) is darkly (and rather comically) warning about the BQ separatists and the Tories in an unholy alliance, while simultaneously painting the party itself as a victim - I see Martin's people are already offering up themselves up as unidentified media sources insisting they don't "work that way".

It's only a matter of time before Paul Martin has visions and starts speaking in tongues.

Although I can't speak for Ontario - I am confident that this is the end for Martin in Quebec.

Next question of the hour: Is Stephen Harper capable of driving a stake through the heart of the Liberal Party?

cheers, mdh

ps where's Stevie Cameron when we need her crusading spirit most?

[van Gemeren]

Also, a buddy of mine just pointed-out that after yesterday's "we're the victims of fraud" defense, they've changed tactics.  ..."

I would say that defense in my opinion would be true for liberal party member Joe Bloggins out in B.C that had no connection whatsoever to what happened in Quebec. However for use for Paul Martin, it doesn't hold water.

As a side note, in Alberta, the provincial Liberals are thinking of changing their name because of name association with Federal party.
    
Alberta Liberals ponder a new name
Last Updated Tue, 05 Apr 2005 09:15:26 EDT
CBC News

EDMONTON - The Alberta Liberal Party is considering changing its name to distance itself from the federal Liberals and the federal sponsorship scandal.

Party leader Kevin Taft, who has been elected twice in the riding of Edmonton-Riverview, said it's difficult enough to run under the Liberal banner in Alberta.

But if rumours emerging from the Gomery commission are true, it could "forever change the political landscape" in Canada, Taft told the Edmonton Journal.

Taft became leader last year of the 16-member Liberal Official Opposition in the Alberta legislature. He has never belonged to the federal Liberal party.

He said until now he has resisted suggestions the Alberta Liberal Party change its name. "But my resistance on that is down right now, to be honest with you. ... As the leader, I have to ask myself how long do we hang on that? I wouldn't have said that even a week ago, but my resistance to people who raise that is down right now."

The Liberal party formed Alberta's first government 100 years ago under premier Alexander Rutherford when it held 23 of the legislature's 25 seats. But the party has not fared well in most provincial elections since then.

http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2005/04/05/alta-liberals050405.html

[FSTO]

ps where's Stevie Cameron when we need her crusading spirit most?

You'll have to stick the bullhorn into the Liberal trough where her head is stuck.

[Sigs Guy]

The Liberals might still win a minority if an election were called. It seems that all the Liberals would have to do is use scare tactics, this can be done by saying that Stephen Harper is an evil Albertan and plans to eradicate medicare when elected. I think its unfortunate that Canadian's are so used to getting screwed over, that they just shrug it off.