Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums
Sign in to follow this  
nicky10013

Guergis Resigns from Cabinet - RCMP Investigation into Alleged Miscond

Recommended Posts

The actions of the husband are a matter of public record. Her actions will soon become a matter of public record. She may or may not have done something wrong, however at the moment we have not a shred of information surrounding any accusations made, or why the RCMP was called in. Until such time as we know, its all speculation and nothing more.

This is the most relevant post on the thread. Speculation and opinions are fuel for the board, but there's nothing substantive yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the most relevant post on the thread. Speculation and opinions are fuel for the board, but there's nothing substantive yet.

Like I said, I don't understand the issue of the mortgage. It's a big one, to be sure, but not outrageously so. Obviously Harper knows more than we do. But, as unfair as it may seem, her position had become untenable the minute Jaffer's own actions were revealed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems that organized crime has no problem getting into the feds no matter who the government is and so now the Star is reporting that the guy Jaffer was with is connected to organized crime. Both, Jaffer ans his wife have been out with this guy just recently for dinner. So I guess this would explain the RCMP being called in since she was a member of the government and Jaffer had excess to the Hill. http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/crime/article/793269--financier-boasted-of-his-ties-to-bikers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Speculation and opinions are fuel for the board, but there's nothing substantive yet.

I'd be very surprised if anything particularly substantive ever is proven... but absence of hard proof only equals 'not proved guilty'... very different from 'innocent'. I live in her riding. It has been interesting to listen to local gossip and conversation, and the shift in tone over the last few months. I can't imagine her being re-elected, and even find it doubtful that another Conservative will replace her.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd be very surprised if anything particularly substantive ever is proven... but absence of hard proof only equals 'not proved guilty'... very different from 'innocent'. I live in her riding. It has been interesting to listen to local gossip and conversation, and the shift in tone over the last few months. I can't imagine her being re-elected, and even find it doubtful that another Conservative will replace her.

Someone I know first encountered her at an all-candidates meeting in Trinity-Spadina. I believe she was running for the Harris Tories who weren't popular. There were some boos from the crowd towards her at some point, and her reported response was to go ballistic on the crowd.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd be very surprised if anything particularly substantive ever is proven... but absence of hard proof only equals 'not proved guilty'... very different from 'innocent'. I live in her riding. It has been interesting to listen to local gossip and conversation, and the shift in tone over the last few months. I can't imagine her being re-elected, and even find it doubtful that another Conservative will replace her.

I am pretty sure that the RCMP will make a decision one way or another. Once called in its hard to call them off. Harper is in a bad position to be sure, but even so he cannot really be faulted for the way he has handled the situation. She is gone only after he is convinced that there is something worthy of investigation. He stood up for his people, nothing wrong there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Her constituents won't give a tinker's damn what the police find (except for the festival of schadenfreude), and won't be influenced by the mutual party loyalty, either. (She has been an extremely loyal Harperite. Embarrassingly so.) They have the local take- what they choose to believe, as opposed to what has been proven by police.

She was elected on the basis of party, much more than personal merit, and has been chalking up a mixed record ever since (regardless of the greater perception of 'rising star'. The local view has been much more cynical and less flattering.), cuminating in this spectacular flameout, and very busy, very uncomplimentary gossip mills.

In this riding Mr. Harper is suffering from the association.

Edited by Molly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I wonder what the new allegations are.

This column from Don Martin indicates that Jaffer may have used her government e-mail address and phone to do business.

If that's the case, then that's extremely bad: the only possible reason for Jaffer to do that would be as an attempt to convince his clients that he's "in" with the government.

If Guergis knew he was doing that, then she's either a complete moron or a complete doormat, or maybe some of both.

-k

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Her constituents won't give a tinker's damn what the police find (except for the festival of schadenfreude), and won't be influenced by the mutual party loyalty, either. (She has been an extremely loyal Harperite. Embarrassingly so.) They have the local take- what they choose to believe, as opposed to what has been proven by police.

She was elected on the basis of party, much more than personal merit, and has been chalking up a mixed record ever since (regardless of the greater perception of 'rising star'. The local view has been much more cynical and less flattering.), cuminating in this spectacular flameout, and very busy, very uncomplimentary gossip mills.

In this riding Mr. Harper is suffering from the association.

it's as anecdotal as all hell, but to see the CTV 'person-on-the-street' interviews from your riding... one older gent spoke about not voting for the CPC again... that he'd have to give the Libs another go. It's always illuminating to see what level of heightened "concern" actually motivates any voter to change their political allegiance. In this case, rather than chalk it up to the actual and alleged failings of an individual, it appears the more easily swayed will simply shift their vote over political/policy/ideological leanings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am pretty sure that the RCMP will make a decision one way or another. Once called in its hard to call them off. Harper is in a bad position to be sure, but even so he cannot really be faulted for the way he has handled the situation. She is gone only after he is convinced that there is something worthy of investigation. He stood up for his people, nothing wrong there.

I keep getting the feeling that the delays in her resignation were hers alone. I cannot think of any reason to fault Harper, who was well and truly between a rock and a hard place. Toss her out prematurely, and you look heavy-handed to your own party, which makes your caucus think you'll just dispense with any of them if it seems politically expedient. Wait too long and if she really is a rogue, you risk the party accruing some of the damage that should really be reserved for her alone. Obviously with an RCMP investigation, a leader has to be decisive and get her out ASAP. This isn't even a resignation from cabinet (here in BC our Solicitor General, Kash Heed, is resigning from his cabinet post over election irregularities and possible improper conduct with a lobbiest, but remains in caucus), this is an outright exile, for a minister not only to lose their place in cabinet but, in one fell swoop, to get the boot from caucus, well you can tell there's some sort of royal stink.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it's as anecdotal as all hell, but to see the CTV 'person-on-the-street' interviews from your riding... one older gent spoke about not voting for the CPC again... that he'd have to give the Libs another go. It's always illuminating to see what level of heightened "concern" actually motivates any voter to change their political allegiance. In this case, rather than chalk it up to the actual and alleged failings of an individual, it appears the more easily swayed will simply shift their vote over political/policy/ideological leanings.

The worst part for the riding is that she's still their MP until the next election, which judging by the polling, may be some time to come. The Tories may have disassociated themselves from her, but a lot of voters, every time they drive past her constituency office are going to be making the association anyways. Properly, I think, she should step down so a byelection can be triggered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Michael Ignatieff feels terrible:

"I take no pleasure in this," Ignatieff said. "This isn't fun because it casts aspersions on the political class and I'm a member of the political class. I don't think Canadians want us to get in a bear pit over this because basically everybody gets ended up being tarred by this brush. That's the problem here."

And then he strapped his party hat back on, poured himself a Screwdriver, and resumed

-k

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Toadbrother, that makes me laugh. As one of her more thoroughly jaundiced, never impressed constituents- one who would have injured myself rather than vote for her in the first place- I ask why?

She's as much our 'representative' today as she was a week ago. (Acknowledging that I'm being snarky, I'd say she's exactly as effectual today as she was a week, a month, a year ago, too.)

If her continuing her job happens to be inconvenient or embarrassing for Mr. Harper, oh well, eh? There's no particular reason why the Tories should have a special right to have their laundry shoved under the cushions and out of sight.

..........

Kimmy -If Guergis knew he was doing that, then she's either a complete moron or a complete doormat, or maybe some of both.

A third alternative is 'or completely complicit'.

Truth be told, though, the more comes out, the more of a joke it all becomes... Even if every element of inuendo is true, it still comes off like a non-violent remake of 'Fargo'.

Edited by Molly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

this will end they conservative moral high ground in regards to the sponsorship issue, corruption abounds

The Conservatives lost the high ground quite some time ago. Perhaps the ideologues on both sides need to take a sobering step backwards and spend more time holding their own beloved party leadership accountable for their actions...or inactions as the case may be.

Guergis should have been told to set down once the story about her actions became clear. Harper's loyaly to her was misplaced and showed poor judgement on his part.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Conservatives lost the high ground quite some time ago. Perhaps the ideologues on both sides need to take a sobering step backwards and spend more time holding their own beloved party leadership accountable for their actions...or inactions as the case may be.

Guergis should have been told to set down once the story about her actions became clear. Harper's loyaly to her was misplaced and showed poor judgement on his part.

The initial event; the outburst in the airport, hardly seemed to warrant any kind of discipline to my mind. To yank a minister simply because of some rude behavior seems a frightful overreaction. Kicking her out because of her husband's misdeeds also seems to be a case of damning by association. It wasn't like all of this happened at once, so it wasn't until some (apparently) damaging accusations came to Harper's attention that he decided to take action. I really can't fault him for it. Sadly, there are miscreants out there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Public perception becomes reality very quickly. I think something smells about this pair ,but then again it might be my perception. Meanwhile ,I don`t think anyone can honestly connect Harper or his governments honesty in this case. Of course that could just be my perception again. As an old Reformer I am not happy with Harper. I think he surrounded himself by the wrong people long before he merged the CA and the Torys .He could have had a majority I believe if had stuck to principals that he espoused when he was part of the Reform Party. I am now homeless politically. My party was shanghied.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

this will end they conservative moral high ground in regards to the sponsorship issue, corruption abounds

Never let a little thing like a fact get in your way.

I have yet to see the slightest evidence of corruption involving anyone in the Tory government. Nor have you - the private information your toaster sends to your brain when your skull isn't enveloped in tinfoil notwithstanding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Conservatives lost the high ground quite some time ago.

Yes, by being conservatives, apparently.

At least to some.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's not forget that the CPC Minister of Foreign Affairs Bernier also had ties to organized crime, via his girlfriend who belonged to motorcycle gangs. Harper said that was "none of your business".

Not that I usually feel the need to correct a "conservative" even one who doesn't seem to know what the term means, but in fact there is zero evidence Bernier ever did anything for anyone which was corrupt or improper. Nor were there ever even any allegations that he did. He simply made the very poor choice of dating a whore, and even worse choice of showing the whore off in public.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not that I usually feel the need to correct a "conservative" even one who doesn't seem to know what the term means, but in fact there is zero evidence Bernier ever did anything for anyone which was corrupt or improper. Nor were there ever even any allegations that he did. He simply made the very poor choice of dating a whore, and even worse choice of showing the whore off in public.

No, he lost some kind of important government document at her apartment. That seems kind of improper. We never got to know what was in the document, because it was "secret".

Sure, you may point out that he was never charged with a crime, so he can hide his transgressions behind that fact. But thats what all Liberals like to say. We real conservatives say, there's the law, and then theres doing whats RIGHT.

:angry: :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The opposition is smelling blood and will use it to their political advantage, regardless of truth and good gov't.

It is obvious that the couple are having marital problem, but should an ex politician's wife pay for her husband's actions? If yes why we do not hear about male politicians and their wives private lives? Are they all angels!!! Harper has acted wisely in forwarding the matter to RCMP to stop the opposition from spreading their lies at the end.

Personally I will reserve judgement until the results are out.. I personally believe that the opposition is out for more blood.... they did it with Gurmant Grewal before and he was cleared by the RCMP, they are doing it again attempting to shake the trust in the CPC party. Obviously, if she is found personally wrong in any way... she should go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is obvious that the couple are having marital problem, but should an ex politician's wife pay for her husband's actions?

By your own words, we do not know what the real problem is, but evidently the Prime Minister found it serious enough to remove her. I doubt it has to do with her husband alone. THe problem must be directly tied to her.

Personally I will reserve judgement until the results are out.. I personally believe that the opposition is out for more blood.... they did it with Gurmant Grewal before and he was cleared by the RCMP, they are doing it again attempting to shake the trust in the CPC party. Obviously, if she is found personally wrong in any way... she should go.

She is already gone, booby. Read the news

Edited by Sir Bandelot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By your own words, we do not know what the real problem is, but evidently the Prime Minister found it serious enough to remove her. I doubt it has to do with her husband alone. THe problem must be directly tied to her.

from what I understand Jaffer claiming he could pedal his influence with the government is a crime(I've never heard that before)so he conducting his business through his wife's office using publically paid funded communictions makes her guilty as well as should would have obviously known and approved of it...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...