Thursday, August 15, 2019

Amid Corruption Scandal in the PMO....People's Party Leader Bernier denied right to debate

People's Party Leader Maxime Bernier
not allowed to participate in Leader's Debate

This morning I was going to write about the strange decision made recently by the PTB in the media not to allow the People's Party Leader to participate in the upcoming Canadian Federal Election Leaders Debates.  Here is the headline that appeared in News1130.  Please read and I will have more comments to follow:

Five parties invited to televised leaders' debates, Bernier left out for now


OTTAWA — The leaders of Canada’s five main political parties have been invited to take part in televised federal election debates this October, but the newly formed People’s Party of Canada has been left out for now.

Leaders of the Liberals, Conservatives, NDP, Bloc Quebecois and Green party have all been invited by the Leaders’ Debates Commission, the group responsible for organizing two televised debates.

The parties all met at least two of the three criteria for participation established last year by the federal government.

The commission says the People’s Party, founded and led by Quebec MP Maxime Bernier, met one of the criteria, but it did not yet have sufficient evidence to conclude the party had met a second.

To participate, Bernier will have to convince the commission through further submissions of evidence that his party has a “legitimate chance” of winning multiple seats this fall.

The deadline to file additional evidence is Sept. 9, and the debates are set for Oct. 7 and Oct. 10.

Why have the political parties and the media connived to prevent Maxime Bernier from participating in the debate?  You might well ask, in the extreme dearth of decent politicians to vote for in the upcoming October election.  Wouldn't it be nice to have at least one more to compare and choose from?  Hey, perhaps THAT is the reason.  Canadians must be shoehorned into choosing between a paltry group of half-baked and overbaked politicians.

I'm not saying that I'm going to vote for Maxime Bernier but I would like to hear what he has to say...particularly about why he fled the Conservative Party of Andrew Scheer and what he would have done differently had he won the leadership of the Conservative Party a few years ago.  Hey!  I forgot.  He DID win the Conservative leadership, but was denied victory due to last minute fraud in the counting of votes.  But, anyhooooo...I would like to hear what he has to say and particularly, what questions he would ask Scheer and Trudeau.  A man like him, with nothing or little to lose would certainly bring some uncomfortable but delicious "truthiness" to the debate forum.

Speaking about uncomfortable truthiness...the Canadian political scene is still shaking from the bomb blast yesterday resulting from the release of the Ethics Commissioners' report on the SNC Lavalin corruption scandal.  This report unequivocally found Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau "guilty" of unethical conduct in his attempts to lobby for the mega corporation SNC Lavalin against the legal decisions of his own Attorney General.  Now, beginning with his non-apologetic response to the report yesterday, we have Trudeau attempting to foist his corrupt and ignorant interpretation of ((((justice))) onto our legal institutions as a stinking precedent...if he can get away with it. 

But wait.  In reading from Andrew Coyne's editorial in today's National Post  I do spy with my little eye a glimmer of hope...right in the last paragraph.  Please read this snippet and I will have final comments to follow:

.....At times, the “options” they [former Supreme Court Judge Beverly McLaughlin, the PMO and lawyers for SNC Lavalin] discussed bordered on the surreal. Serious consideration was apparently given to having the attorney general intervene in the judicial review — in which her own prosecutorial service was already a participant.

Even stranger were the attempts, apparently unsuccessful, to involve the retired chief justice of the Supreme Court — and Iacobucci’s former colleague — Beverley McLachlin. At one point SNC-Lavalin floated a plan whereby the government would ask McLachlin to mediate a settlement between the company and the DPP, as if the DPP were just another wing of the prime minister’s office.

More often her name was invoked as someone who could provide external advice to the presumably ill-informed AG and her equally hapless team of top legal advisers. The possibility was always carefully put to Wilson-Raybould as involving “someone like” McLachlin. As Dion writes, “she did not know until I mentioned it to her … that preliminary discussions between the former chief justice and SNC-Lavalin’s legal counsel and a senior advisor in the Prime Minister’s Office had already taken place.”

All of this cries out for further inquiry, not least because even the ethics commissioner, despite his best efforts, found himself repeatedly stonewalled by the prime minister’s office. It took 49 days to deliver the first batch of documents he requested; 108 days to deliver the second. The prime minister and his officials suffered a number of convenient memory lapses.

And: “nine witnesses informed our office that they had information they believed to be relevant, but that could not be disclosed.” Why? Because of cabinet confidence — the same cabinet confidence that was supposedly waived in February. So, starting in March, the ethics commissioner raised the matter with both the prime minister and his deputy, the Clerk of the Privy Council, asking that the witnesses be allowed to testify, with a promise that the information they provided would not be disclosed publicly.

His request was denied.

Conflict of interest, frankly, is the least of the concerns raised by this affair. There is a strong whiff, rather, of abuse of power and, possibly, obstruction of justice."

Greencrow says:  Yesterday the RCMP released a statement that they were "carefully" considering the Commissioner's Report [with a view to laying charges?]. Perhaps the Prime Minister denying access to the Ethics Commissioner to evidence of his own activities in the relentless attempts to pressure the Attorney General [attempted corruption] to change the decision of the DPP...might yet lead to a charge of "obstruction of justice"?

Should this be the case...how all the more important could it become to have another candidate like Maxime Bernier fill the empty podium space...left by the disgraced (((former))) Prime Minister Justin Trudeau!

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

i have never been so excited about politics since the connie fogal days. i really like what maxime has been saying. he is more subtle than connie, but i read what is in his mind. there is a reason they don't want him in the public light. the loudest barking dog is usually the guilt of the pack. oh leery, slime worse than you could find in the muck of the conroy marsh. 20,000 is pocket change for oleary, if i were a bettin man my money would be on him for the same ip members knowing they were untraceable. really, why do i find that hard to believe? mic jagger says it best,"i can't get no" credit card without id nor do i want to. i'm old fashioned, in god i trust, everyone else pay cash.

greencrow said...

Hi Anonymous

I am one of those observers who believes that the last Conservative leadership convention was stolen from Bernier. That's why I want him to participate in the upcoming Federal election debates.