Seems like much adieu about nothing cause so far 20 of the 31 charges have been dismissed.
Printable View
Seems like much adieu about nothing cause so far 20 of the 31 charges have been dismissed.
The libranos dont really care anymore. It worked, they got a majority.
Duffy has now been acquitted of all charges and he'll back in the Senate,tomorrow. Now,let's watch the libtard's heads explode.LOL
I wonder how much all that cost us.....
Just goes to show we need a serious overhaul of the Senate and how it operates....
Should start by voting members in.
It won't happen under the Liberal's watch. I'll bet they take full advantage of the lack of "rules". Free reign with taxpayer's money........Liberal nirvana.Quote:
Originally Posted by Attila
We are now looking at hundreds of Billions in deficits for the next 10 years minimum. This waste of money was a rounding error in comparison.Quote:
Originally Posted by fratri
LIEbrals didn't want to see Duffy convicted of anything. Had he been convicted, many LIEbrals feared they would be next. This gives them free reign to belly up to the trough on the public dime.
“The political, covert, relentless, unfolding of events is mindboggling and shocking,’’ said Vaillancourt, who said Wright was moving PMO operatives and senators around like so many chess pieces.
“The precision and planning of the exercise would make any military commander proud. However, in the context of a democratic society, the plotting as revealed in the emails can only be described as unacceptable
Duffy has been found not guilty.....however the PMO has been tarred forever with this. Regardless of a given political view, it is obvious that our Senate is a mess.
I think the judge really dropped the ball. His decision was based on the assertion that "poor judgement is not a crime". How is that different from a teen's poor judgement when he steals a car for a joyride? I guess that's not a crime either.
From my limited reading of the decision, he also linked the poor judgement to the poorly written rules of the Senate.Quote:
Originally Posted by werner.reiche
We (the Canadian taxpayer) are going to be presented with Duffy's legal bill and it will be substantial. This whole, sordid affair is far from over.
People make poor judgements all the time, including me. That does not make them a crime unless a law is broken. What Duffy and the PMO did may not be good jusgement or good ethics but no laws were broken by Duffy. Whether laws are needed to prevent such behaviour is another debate.....
Well, when you've lived in Ottawa for 30+ years and then fill in expense forms claiming you lived in PEI and that you are claiming expenses for a second residence in Ottawa, that's FRAUD. And there already are laws against that - poorly written senate rules do not override that.Quote:
Originally Posted by pinepointer
Of course it's fraud. The problem is the Senate is full of fraud from both parties. They may try to portray themselves as well meaning, bumbling grandpas but Duffy is an intelligent man who made a living exposing political fraud. Once again this proves that justice is nowhere near equal for all.
The judge pretty much said the Senate is a mess with regards to expense rules and regs and that the courts are not going to fix it under criminal law. Its up to the senate to fix the problems and police itself. I am not defending Duff or the PMO and I think the whole senate needs the boots put to it.
I did find the judge's comments on how the PMO is run ridiculous. Of course it's run with an iron fist and every government has done it the same way. I doubt it will be "sunny days" in Trudoughs for very long once the honey moon and road trips slow down.
I can't help but think that the Judge's remarks regarding the PMO was a thinly veiled partisan attack. I absolutely agree,though,that politicianal expense spending rules are like a screen door on a battleship,not only with The Senate,but,with Parliamentary members,also. The Conservatives were dead right on this one. The whole thing needs an enema.
Well, judges are appointed by politicians.
I have been a road guy for most of my working life and have been submitting monthly expense reports for as long as I can remember. The rules and policies regarding travel expenses from politicians would get them all fired within months in the real world. They all do it so it's not a "party" thing but it should be fixed immediately. Likely never will though.
While I think the Harper knew more than he said he did, ultimately Duffy submitted the expenses, claimed he couldn't repay them after they were deemed ineligible, took money from Wright (claiming duress but I fail to see how he was under duress) and then when things got hot, said everyone else is doing it, why am I being punished (despite the fact other Senators have repayed expenses which had ineligible expenses).
Where is the personal responsibility of not getting yourself in this mess in the first place? Rather than take money from the PMO's Chief of Staff make arrangements to pay off the expenses over time (I can't understand how Duffy can have two houses, 1 in PEI and 1 in Ontario, with a Senator's salary and not be able to pay off $90K).
While I don't doubt the rules aren't clear on filing expenses on Parliament Hill, the fact is common sense really should have prevailed here. I know if I am not on company business, I can't claim expenses. I don't need a hard rule for that. Even if I am to claim an expense, it best be real and I should be able to readily defend it.
This entire fiasco stinks to high heaven.
Dyth
Harper tried to reform the Senate. Wanted it to be an elected body but it was blocked by the Provinces and ultimately by the Supreme Court. The Senate may have been a good idea at the time of confederation but the world has changed and it is nothing but a cesspool of patronage appointments. How many in there have any constitutional law credentials?
Fair to say that despite the ruling by the judge, most would agree that wrong was done. I have to agree with you Werner, poor judgement as an excuse is no more valid than ignorance of the law. Something is wrong here.Quote:
Originally Posted by werner.reiche
And let's not forget he will probably sue the government for defamation ... who wins here?Quote:
Originally Posted by Wahoo
The cynical answer is "the lawyers".Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkB