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

LIBERAL MPs Show the true colors of the their Party!

Recommended Posts

12 hours ago, betsy said:

I'm still waiting for you to explain how Raybould was involved in that mess?

"Wilson-Raybould warned about the potential knock-on effect in cases like Norman's, although she suggested the government's conduct in Norman's case has been above reproach.

'The cases are not dissimilar'

"We can stand up in the House of Commons on [the case of Vice-Admiral Mark] Norman on — totally appropriately on Norman — on extradition, and we can talk about the rule of law," she said in the recorded conversation.

"The cases are not dissimilar. The principle, or the integrity, of how we act and respond to the tools we have available and what we should and shouldn't do, again ... I just don't know."

https://ca.news.yahoo.com/spectre-political-interference-linking-snc-080000953.html

She was sitting AG and this file was on her desk. 

We'll see if her incautious remarks regarding the government's involvement in this affair were simply ill-thought or a symptom of her own presumptions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/6/2019 at 6:12 PM, mowich said:

"Wilson-Raybould warned about the potential knock-on effect in cases like Norman's, although she suggested the government's conduct in Norman's case has been above reproach.

'The cases are not dissimilar'

"We can stand up in the House of Commons on [the case of Vice-Admiral Mark] Norman on — totally appropriately on Norman — on extradition, and we can talk about the rule of law," she said in the recorded conversation.

"The cases are not dissimilar. The principle, or the integrity, of how we act and respond to the tools we have available and what we should and shouldn't do, again ... I just don't know."

https://ca.news.yahoo.com/spectre-political-interference-linking-snc-080000953.html

She was sitting AG and this file was on her desk. 

We'll see if her incautious remarks regarding the government's involvement in this affair were simply ill-thought or a symptom of her own presumptions.

 

As far as I know (I may be wrong), they are free to talk in the House of Commons (which is what she seems to be telling Weckner) - at least, that's what Liberals are saying, that Raybould is free to talk in the House of Commons, did they not?

 

How, "not dissimilar?"   The background may not be dissimilar - but there is a big difference!

Was there ever a guilty verdict on Norman - unlike SNC-Lavalin?  The difference(s) arise from there. 

SNC-Lavalin was found guilty of corruption.....Trudeau tries to intervene for SNC, by applying pressure on Raybould to influence the prosecutorial justice (who'd already made the decision that SNC does not qualify for DPA)!  Raybould had also agreed with that verdict, and has already made the decision, that SNC does not qualify for DPA!   That's where we are at, with this SNC-Lavalin!

 

 

 

Edited by betsy

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...