JM_ Posted April 4, 2019 Share Posted April 4, 2019 33 minutes ago, Warhippy said: While some of those conditions are indeed admirable, there are a number of serious inconsistencies with her accounting of things and her demands are entirely inappropriate outside of the altruistic requests. the last one - that the new AG not make their own determination on a case - is also blatantly tampering with a case for political reasons. But their hers, so its all good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Strome Posted April 4, 2019 Share Posted April 4, 2019 1 hour ago, Jimmy McGill said: the last one - that the new AG not make their own determination on a case - is also blatantly tampering with a case for political reasons. But their hers, so its all good. It's not suppose to be the AG's decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aliboy Posted April 4, 2019 Share Posted April 4, 2019 15 hours ago, Jimmy McGill said: I don't think she ever did. It was all about standing her ground and making Trudeau push her out for maximum reputation damage. Leaving on her own lets JT off the hook a little. Yeah the CPC spin is completely laughable but no one cares, its all pablum for the base. I'm expecting Singh to offer her a seat, I think the spectacle of her crossing the floor and then Singh giving her the NDPs question period time to play prosecutor will be just too much theatre for her to resist. Agree! Was all by design for maximum damage, I still say she was trying to take him down, and if she wasn't going for the leadership herself, was setting herself up as the hero, so whomever took over as PM might let her keep her dream job and/or reinstate her. She put herself way above the party, thought she was the boss, wasn't going to accept anyone, like the PM, messing with her. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted April 4, 2019 Share Posted April 4, 2019 12 hours ago, Ryan Strome said: It's not suppose to be the AG's decision. sorry - MOJAG - its the same person in Canada. Its impossible not to have political discussions with the people in that role. But as people a lot smarter than me have pointed out, its never been a problem before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted April 4, 2019 Share Posted April 4, 2019 1 hour ago, aliboy said: Agree! Was all by design for maximum damage, I still say she was trying to take him down, and if she wasn't going for the leadership herself, was setting herself up as the hero, so whomever took over as PM might let her keep her dream job and/or reinstate her. She put herself way above the party, thought she was the boss, wasn't going to accept anyone, like the PM, messing with her. well, last time I checked the Canadian Government wasn't set up to give people "dream jobs" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Strome Posted April 5, 2019 Share Posted April 5, 2019 Her demands not to hurt the Liberals kind of show she was telling the truth and there was pressure. It also shows that JT has been lying all along going back to when he claimed the story wasn't true. 2 mp's resign from cabinet positions, 1 mp quits the party and Butts and Wernick resign but JWR must be lying. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted April 5, 2019 Share Posted April 5, 2019 17 hours ago, Ryan Strome said: Her demands not to hurt the Liberals kind of show she was telling the truth and there was pressure. It also shows that JT has been lying all along going back to when he claimed the story wasn't true. 2 mp's resign from cabinet positions, 1 mp quits the party and Butts and Wernick resign but JWR must be lying. how do you figure there's no "hurt"? Fire 3 people, apologize publicly and tell the new AG not to pursue a DPA? so it comes down to "pressure" - thats pretty far from illegal or unethical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted April 5, 2019 Share Posted April 5, 2019 Well this is interesting. The government has released the memo that JWR blocked the PCO from receiving. It lays out clearly that a DPA and another option called a public interest exemption were options MOJAG had at her disposal. No kidding she wanted it blocked. Here's a link to the actual memo Wernick was blocked from receiving by JWR: http://www.ourcommons.ca/content/Committee/421/JUST/WebDoc/WD10390731/421_JUST_reldoc_PDF/421_JUST_reldoc_DepartmentOfJustice-e.pdf JWR hasn't technically lied, but she sure has manipulated her side of this. Justice department memo says Ottawa has wiggle room to allow SNC-Lavalin to bid on federal contracts even if convicted OTTAWA—The Liberal government could invoke a “public interest” exception that would allow SNC-Lavalin to avoid a 10-year federal contract ban even if it is criminally convicted, according to a justice department memo. Yet the justice department advice, which had been requested by the Privy Council Office (PCO) but never delivered, says the reasons to grant such an exemption are “narrow.” The five-page memo was written by Nathalie Drouin, Jody Wilson-Raybould’s former deputy minister, and is dated Nov. 9, 2018. It makes clear the option of a mediated settlement of the SNC-Lavalin corruption charges is one avenuue that would avoid the contracting ban because no conviction would be registered against the company. The government could also change its policy on contracting bans, or in certain “narrow” circumstances, invoke the public interest exception to continue doing business with the company. On Wednesday, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau did not rule out a mediated agreement for the company. Asked if it was still on the table for his government, Trudeau replied, “That is entirely up to the attorney general.” The justice department’s memo indicates there is also another option in law. It says that depending on the offence for which the company is convicted, it could be ineligible to bid on federal contracts for a period of up to 10 years “unless the government considered it possible and appropriate to invoke a public interest exception.” Marked “protected/solicitor client privilege,” it was quietly posted on the Commons justice committee website this week as the controversy over the Liberal government’s attempts to aid SNC-Lavalin culminated with Trudeau’s ouster of Wilson-Raybould and former cabinet Jane Philpott from the Liberal caucus. The two women had already resigned from Trudeau’s cabinet over concerns the prime minister and his officials pressured Wilson-Raybould to negotiate a settlement in the SNC-Lavalin prosecution. Trudeau acknowledged for the first time in the Commons that he did hear Wilson-Raybould’s first early warning to him on Sept. 17. She has testified she looked him in the eye and asked “Are you politically interfering with my role, my decision as the attorney general? I would strongly advise against it.” Asked directly by Conservative MP Pierre Poilievre if he heard her say that, Trudeau said in question period Wednesday, “once she said that, I responded no, I am not, it is her decision to make and she then committed to revisit and look into the decision once again.” Wilson-Raybould testified she told him that day her mind would not change. The prime minister, his former top aide Gerald Butts and former privy council clerk Michael Wernick have said they did not believe her decision was — or could be — final at that early stage, and that she ought to consider the fallout of a conviction on the company. Drouin testified her officials drew up a memo on the topic after the Privy Council requested an opinion on what the possible consequences of a criminal conviction might be for the company. SNC-Lavalin still faces one count of fraud under the criminal code and one count of corruption under the Corruption of Foreign Officials Act. But the memo does not outline any of the evidence or indicate that the company is alleged to have bribed the Libyan regime of Moammar Gadhafi between 2001 and 2011. Read more: Jody Wilson-Raybould’s supporters in her Vancouver riding would back her as Independent ‘Now it’s too late’: Former Liberal director in B.C. says Trudeau should have left, not Jody Wilson-Raybould and Jane Philpott ‘The team has to trust each other’: Trudeau kicks Wilson-Raybould and Philpott from Liberal caucus Drouin signed the memo and wrote: “The reasons to invoke the public interest exception are narrow.” She listed an emergency where any delay in contracting from a company “could harm public interest”; situations where “the contract is essential to maintain sufficient emergency stocks” or situations where “not entering into the contract with the company/supplier would have a significant adverse impact on the health, national security, safety, public security or economic or financial well-being of Canadians or the functioning of any portion of the federal public administration.” “Other than this narrow public interest exception,” Drouin writes that the federal government’s corporate integrity policy “does not afford the government any discretion to continue to contract with the convicted company/supplier.” However the memo does underline that Public Works Canada consultations were underway to change that policy to reduce the time a company would be suspended from bidding on contracts. Drouin said she never delivered the memo to Wernick at the instruction of Wilson-Raybould’s office. Drouin testified at the justice committee that “I knew my minister was not comfortable for us continuing those conversations. I felt I should test with her office before I shared the piece with the Privy Council Office, and I was instructed not to send it.” Wilson-Raybould testified she didn’t recall giving a specific instruction on the memo. But in her written brief last week she questioned why Wernick asked for the advice “in the first place having known I had already considered the matter and had decided not to intervene.” The memo essentially summarizes the general legal frameworks that cover the SNC-Lavalin case. The Star had requested the document last week, but was denied access because justice department officials said their analysis of whether it could be released was still underway. It says the biggest difference between a conviction and an outcome under the newly enacted legal regime that allows a deferred prosecution agreement or remediation agreement in cases like SNC-Lavalin’s is the “ineligibility” period during which a convicted company would be suspended from business with the federal government. “In other words, a conviction might lead to a period of ineligibility, but a remediation agreement would not,” she wrote. “Any period of suspension or debarment is likely to trigger adverse effects, such as foregone business opportunities, reputational damage, and possible reporting requirements to third parties, such as banks and other financial institutions that are the source of operating capital.” In the SNC-Lavalin case, the independent director of public prosecutions Kathleen Roussel declined as early as Sept. 4 — according to court documents — to enter negotiations with the company to mediate a settlement of the criminal trial. The company announced the prosecution decision to its shareholders and to the public on Oct. 10 and continued to aggressively lobby for a deferred prosecution agreement or DPA. A DPA could allow it to avoid being “debarred” from bidding on federal contracts for up to a decade as a result. Roussel gave formal notice of her decision to Wilson-Raybould on Sept. 4, when the former attorney general was out of the country at a conference, but Wilson-Raybould testified she provided a copy of that notice to the PMO in September, and in the Sept. 17 meeting with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau told him she would not overrule Roussel. Wernick said, in the now-infamously recorded phone call on Dec. 18 between the clerk and the former minister, that he was not aware she had shared Roussel’s notice with the PMO that he worried she and Trudeau were at loggerheads. He said the prime minister “was gonna find a way to get it done one way or another.” Trudeau told the Commons Wednesday, “I was not debriefed on that conversation between the clerk and the minister. I should have spoken directly with the minister. There was not an opportunity to do that.” Wilson-Raybould says she was finally replaced as attorney general for refusing to bend to what she called “inappropriate political pressure” by Trudeau and his officials to mediate a settlement for SNC-Lavalin. She later quit cabinet in February after the story went public and Trudeau denied pressuring her. Her replacement as justice minister and attorney general, David Lametti, says the option of a deferred prosecution agreement or DPA with SNC-Lavalin remains one that is available under the law, however Lametti’s office confirmed Wednesday he has so far not issued a directive in the matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BPA Posted April 5, 2019 Share Posted April 5, 2019 I'm confused. Why did JWR block sending out the memo? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted April 5, 2019 Share Posted April 5, 2019 3 minutes ago, BPA said: I'm confused. Why did JWR block sending out the memo? she claims she doesn't remember giving a specific order to block it, which I find hard to swallow. It shows the ego's at play quite clearly. JWR didn't want to be asked about it anymore. The memo being blocked would serve to limit the number of questions she was getting about a DPA. It does bother me though that she also blocked the discussion for a 'public interest exemption' which would have allowed prosecution to go forward but potentially allow SNC to bid on projects anyway. Maybe armed with that information Trudeau would have backed off, but we'll never know. The memo also talks about damages to employees and shareholders, which is exactly what a DPA is designed to help protect against. From the article: Wilson-Raybould testified she didn’t recall giving a specific instruction on the memo. But in her written brief last week she questioned why Wernick asked for the advice “in the first place having known I had already considered the matter and had decided not to intervene.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BPA Posted April 5, 2019 Share Posted April 5, 2019 Hmm...she "decided to not to intervene" but also denied sharing information about "public interest exemption". I understand that it's her right about the DPA thing but don't understand why she didn't want the PMO to know all available avenues at their disposal. Pretty sure the PMO doesn't know all the nooks and cranny of laws/exemption/etc. Thus they require "experts" to give them all the info and advice. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted April 5, 2019 Share Posted April 5, 2019 11 minutes ago, BPA said: Hmm...she "decided to not to intervene" but also denied sharing information about "public interest exemption". I understand that it's her right about the DPA thing but don't understand why she didn't want the PMO to know all available avenues at their disposal. Pretty sure the PMO doesn't know all the nooks and cranny of laws/exemption/etc. Thus they require "experts" to give them all the info and advice. there's a self interest side to this thing that hasn't been discussed much. The SNC case is huge, its a career-maker for people in the prosecutors office and politically for JWR. JWR could point to it as an example of her 'tough on white collar crime' stance if she wanted to use that in the future. I do think that played a part in this. Of course Trudeau had his own political motivations, but so did she imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted April 5, 2019 Share Posted April 5, 2019 20 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said: she claims she doesn't remember giving a specific order to block it, which I find hard to swallow. It shows the ego's at play quite clearly. JWR didn't want to be asked about it anymore. The memo being blocked would serve to limit the number of questions she was getting about a DPA. It does bother me though that she also blocked the discussion for a 'public interest exemption' which would have allowed prosecution to go forward but potentially allow SNC to bid on projects anyway. Maybe armed with that information Trudeau would have backed off, but we'll never know. The memo also talks about damages to employees and shareholders, which is exactly what a DPA is designed to help protect against. From the article: Wilson-Raybould testified she didn’t recall giving a specific instruction on the memo. But in her written brief last week she questioned why Wernick asked for the advice “in the first place having known I had already considered the matter and had decided not to intervene.” With that, her "demands" her refusal to accept any other cabinet position and the now growing difference in "recorded text/conversation" testimony she is looking far Far worse than what she did 2 weeks ago. This is what happens when only one side of the story is released I guess 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Strome Posted April 6, 2019 Share Posted April 6, 2019 1 hour ago, Warhippy said: With that, her "demands" her refusal to accept any other cabinet position and the now growing difference in "recorded text/conversation" testimony she is looking far Far worse than what she did 2 weeks ago. This is what happens when only one side of the story is released I guess meanwhile the Liberals keep tumbling. But I guess if you say it's true... Even Jimmy has admitted JT is finished. I guess you will go down with the ship? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted April 6, 2019 Share Posted April 6, 2019 50 minutes ago, Ryan Strome said: meanwhile the Liberals keep tumbling. But I guess if you say it's true... Doesn't mean JWR was squeaky clean in all this, she has tried to manipulate things quite a bit, whether or not someone thinks its justified or not. Blocking that memo e.g., serves no one but her. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted April 6, 2019 Share Posted April 6, 2019 1 hour ago, Ryan Strome said: meanwhile the Liberals keep tumbling. But I guess if you say it's true... Even Jimmy has admitted JT is finished. I guess you will go down with the ship? Lol what are you smoking lately bud? I just posted and you highlighted that she is looking far worse now than 2 weeks ago Your immediate jump is to say that I'll go down with the ship? You're gonna hurt yourself jumping to ridiculous conclusions like that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Strome Posted April 6, 2019 Share Posted April 6, 2019 6 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said: Doesn't mean JWR was squeaky clean in all this, she has tried to manipulate things quite a bit, whether or not someone thinks its justified or not. Blocking that memo e.g., serves no one but her. Sure Jimmy, but lets be honest the pm has been lying since day one yet you won't say it or admit it. Question... Would this even be a scandal if Jt had of just shut his mouth? He made it a scandal by constantly lying. The situation itself might not be a game breaker but we now know that jt is a liar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Strome Posted April 6, 2019 Share Posted April 6, 2019 1 minute ago, Warhippy said: Lol what are you smoking lately bud? I just posted and you highlighted that she is looking far worse now than 2 weeks ago Your immediate jump is to say that I'll go down with the ship? You're gonna hurt yourself jumping to ridiculous conclusions like that No I will be alright unfortunately I think you, toews, rupert and mattrek might self destruct if Scheer wins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted April 6, 2019 Share Posted April 6, 2019 34 minutes ago, Ryan Strome said: No I will be alright unfortunately I think you, toews, rupert and mattrek might self destruct if Scheer wins. Hardly. He's Trudeau light who was Harper flat. You keep pretending they're different Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingofsurrey Posted April 6, 2019 Share Posted April 6, 2019 So Glad we have such a strong PM in Canada right now. Our country needs effective leadership like the kind JT is giving us. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now