More Fun With 'Deceivin' Stephen'

H/t Theo Moudakis

And this from Star letter-writers:

Re: Duffy scandal dogs Harper, Aug. 17

Liars.

There are many types, just as there are many kinds of lies – white, boastful, malicious, and the Big Lie. This last kind can perhaps be used successfully only by one class of liar – the Big Man or CEO type.

The method is familiar, probably taught at MBA schools. Appear calm and subdued. Begin by saying “Look,” or “Let’s be clear,” or “I’ve said this before.” Slump your shoulders as a visible sigh of exasperation. Use a somewhat rote, very slightly sing-song style of delivery, like one who is patiently taking up valuable time to re-explain something that the listener, disappointingly, lacked the perception to grasp the first time.

Then unleash the Big Lie. The black economy is actually white. Saving the climate is good, but taking any suggested step to that end is bad. Canadians are in imminent danger of terrorism, and bombing Syria will prevent lone-wolf attacks here.

Past tanker, railway and pipeline disasters have taught us so much that future incidents are impossible. Breaches of election spending rules and Parliamentary conduct are normal, nothing new, conform to past practice, nothing to see here, folks. The Senate scandal was rare, contained, and completely divorced from the practices of the party and PMO. If one didn’t use certain quoted exact words, therefore nothing of the kind was said.

The punctiliously polite Tom Mulcair, Justin Trudeau and Elizabeth May seem to think that on the debating podium they are still hamstrung by the Parliamentary rule against flagging an untruth. Well, Stephen Harper himself has killed the current Parliament, so those rules don’t apply, and good heavens, surely somebody has to bell the cat.

If they absolutely can’t bring themselves to use the word, how about witty references to lengthening noses, or: “Mr. Moderator, do we need to call 911? There seems to be a smouldering odour in here of pants on fire.”

Or how about simply looking at the camera and asking Canadians directly: “On the economy, who are you going to believe – this guy or your own eyes?”

J.A. McFarlane, Toronto

For years we’ve known that Lyin’ Brian Mulroney earned his sobriquet; now we know that Deceivin’ Stephen Harper has earned his monicker, too.

Bernie Smith, Parksville, B.C.

If Nigel Wright believed that his $90,000 payment to Mike Duffy was a good deed, then why would he not have told the Prime Minister? Is there anyone in Canada who still believes that he didn’t?

Paul Axelrod, Toronto

Too Good Not To Share

H/t Michael de Adder

Fun With Stephen

As a Facebook wag described the above, Harper's caucus room post-election.





I have always respected Smokey's advice. At this critical juncture, Canadians would be foolish to ignore him.

The Evolving Harper 'Narrative' On The Duffy Scandal

Of course, I am using the word narrative quite euphemistically here.

The Wheels On The Bus....

have been very busy of late:

More On Duffy

Like many others, I have been trying to fathom how Nigel Wright has escaped without charges for the cheque he wrote to Mike Duffy, while the latter has been charged with accepting a bribe. I have also been attempting to get video of two programs, Power and Politics and last Thursday's At Issue Panel, which discuss this mystery in some detail. Unfortunately, CBC no long seems to offer the embed code for their shows, but you can watch the P&P show by clicking here. I was able to find the second show on You Tube, and you can view it below.

Perhaps, like me, you will find the proffered explanations for Wright's 'get-out-of-jail-free card' less than edifying.

UPDATE: Things Should Really Start To Get Interesting Now

As just reported by the CBC, the RCMP has decided to lay charges against disgraced Senator Mike Duffy. Let's hope the 'fat lady' sings loudly:


UPDATE: The Puffster is facing 31 charges.

CPC slogan 2015: “No grounds for criminal charges.” *

* H/t Dan Gardner

In the twisted morality of the Harper universe, it will be claimed and conveyed as a complete vindication of the Prime Minister.

That the RCMP has found no grounds upon which to lay criminal charges against Nigel Wright in the $90,000 payoff-to-Mike-Duffy-scandal does nothing to dissolve the deep and abiding suspicions about Harper's influence-peddling machinations was not lost on the At Issue panelists last night:

Guest Post: The Salamander

Responding to a post I wrote this morning commenting on a Lawrence Martin article, The Salamander offered the following trenchant assessment of what he predicts will be the Harper 'legacy.' Enjoy:

.. I find the fading tiger analogy problematic.. maybe its just me ..

Having a background in social work, with criminals, mood disorders,
addiction, maximum security prisons etc, I tend to adapt to new terminology,
diagnostic criteria, and trust evidence based medicine..
More and more I trust natural consequence .. history and observation..

Tom Flanagan, a man with his own issues, demons and fallacies
glorifies his apt pupil Harper.. as a 'predator' ? Some sort of animal ?
He could better have compared Harper to a pudgy 'jail house lawyer'
ie an incarcerated felon other felons recognize as adept at gaming the law.
So there's an analogy to consider

When considering the blight that The Harper Party & its conjoined and comorbid Harper Government represents.. I keep seeing and feeling a prison connection.
No.. I doubt Harper or any of his flawed partisans will end up in jail..
Its more that the so-called Harper 'Legacy' is actually the prison and 'record' that Harper himself is building each and every day.. cementing himself in

Harper seems to have no idea on how to back down or shut the whole flawed corrupted runaway train down.. Instead he employs ludicrous inept shallow characters to double down, defend the undefendable policies or ideologies. There is not a single' Minister' in the Harper Government that can actually rationalize or coherently defend what they are doing, enacting or obstructing or making up as they go.. or are told to go. Leona on Environment ? Laughable.. pitiful. Poilievre ? Canadians love this Act?

History won't be kind at all, won't be sparing...
Harper will be vilified by every associate, MP, robo geek he 'used' or abused
And those who called out Harper for betrayal, obstruction, deceit & arrogance
will pile on.. and take some revenge.. It won't be pretty
But that's the yard, cellblock and prison range Stephen Harper operated in.

Read Garth Turner 'Sheeple' .. to catch a polite and mild but wicked reflection ..
imagine the venom and ferocity from a Soudas, or Del Mastro
the polite damning testimony of a Nigel Wright.. defended by Guy Giorno who stunningly also represents The Harper Party now (What ?!?)
How about a jilted RCMP lover.. No.. not of Stephen ...
or what if Ray Novak goes renegade.. or Stephen Lecce.. ??

Whew.. !!

Welcome to your 'Legacy' Mr Harper
It was never Fight or Flight ..
It was never fair or honest in any damn way
certainly not Canadian.. as if .. !
Nope .. it was always Blight

Slip Slidin' Away

Slip sliding away, slip sliding away
You know the nearer your destination, the more you're slip sliding away
- Paul Simon

I know, by his public efforts to appear reasonably normal, that Stephen Harper is a Beatles' fan. Whether he has ever listened to or crooned any of Paul Simon's songs is less certain. Yet I couldn't help but think of Simon this morning as I read Lawrence Martin's latest piece in The Globe and Mail.

Entitled The Harper machine is in disarray, Martin reflects on the many obstacles that have emerged to obstruct what I presume is Dear Leader's destination, not only to win the next election but to become Canada's long-serving prime minister. (Put aside for the moment that he seems to have blighted our political landscape for far too long already.)

Like an aging tiger, Harper seems to be losing some of his truculence. As Martin notes,

Few expected this. The bet would have been that the Prime Minister would have gone to the wall to protect Dimitri Soudas, as he has many other loyalists after acts of folly.

But just four months after having been appointed, the Conservative Party’s executive director is out the door. He joins a lengthening list. In recent months, Stephen Harper has also lost his chief of staff, his finance minister and a Supreme Court nominee, plus several senators as a result of the expenses scandal.

Dimitri Soudas' dismissal, suggests Martin, may mark an act of Harper deference to the rank and file who are becoming increasingly restive chafing under their leader's storied iron grip on all facets of the operation. Why? Matin cites several reasons:

-His party has been trailing the Liberals in the polls.

-He presided over a scandal he claimed to know little about, but should have known a lot about.

-Rebellious caucus types have confronted him, demanding some freedom of speech.

-Former finance minister Jim Flaherty contradicted him on income-splitting, a major policy plank.

One could certainly add to this list considerably, but perhaps the most egregious example of trouble has to be the almost universal repugnance with which his current favourite puppet, Democratic Reform Minister Pierre Poilievre, is being met over the misnamed Fair Elections Act. I won't be surprised if loyalist Pierre is soon invited to sit in the party ejection seat as well.

Martin points out that similar problems of resistance and bickering have beset past prime ministers as they approach the 10-year mark, including Mulroney, Chretien and Trudeau, at which point it becomes a situation of fight or flight.

However unlikely, let us hope that Stephen Harper chooses the latter option.

I Guess Sometimes It Doesn't Pay To Have Friends In High Places

Although I have no sympathy for those who work, either directly or indirectly, for the Harper regime, there is a story in Toronto Life entitled, With Friends Like Harper: how Nigel Wright went from golden boy to fall guy which made for some interesting reading.

Part profile of Wright and part portrait of a cold, calculating and ruthless Prime Minister willing to jettison even those closest to him, the article revealed things I was quite unaware of. For example, I did not know that Wright and Tom Long were instrumental in luring Harper back into politics after he left following his three-year stint in the House as a Reform member:

In 2000, Wright, Long and then–provincial Tory minister Tony Clement helped found the Canadian Alliance—a new party conceived to bring east and west together. This party was led by Stockwell Day, whose leadership was to be contested the following year.

Although for a long time resistant to the notion, Harper eventually decided to make a leadership run, largely through the importuning of Wright. And of course the falling year, thanks to Peter Mackay's betrayal of his promise not to merge the Progressive Conservatives with the Alliance Party, the party became its current dark incarnation, The Conservative Party of Canada.

But Wright did much more than give Harper his unreserved support:

With his deep business connections and capital market experience, he gave Harper some much-needed Bay Street cachet, making the western reformer palatable to the Ontario wing of the party.

In 2003, Wright, along with Irving Gerstein, the former president of Peoples Jewellers, and Gordon Reid, founder of the Giant Tiger discount chain, established the Conservative Fund Canada. The CFC would become Harper’s greatest weapon in his war to eviscerate the Liberal party. Gerstein revolutionized the way Canadian political parties raise money—soliciting small individual donations, at the grassroots level—and the Conservatives became far and away the wealthiest party.

The article goes on to discuss how Wright left his high-paying position with Onex to become Harper's chief of staff in 2010 - in its boy-scout portrayal of Wright, we are told he took a significant pay cut and paid for all of his expenses out of his own pocket. He believed he shouldn’t charge taxpayers for expenses if he could afford to cover them himself.

The piece paints Wright as something of a living saint - he regularly helps out at an Ottawa homeless shelter and is contemplating going to Africa to do missionary work after resolution of his current legal problems arising from his $90,000 cheque to Mike Duffy. But that portrayal seems at odds with one curious fact:

His allegiance to the Prime Minister, we are told, is due to the fact that Harper's "...values align with [his] in every conceivable way.”

While we humans are a mass of contradictions, that one in particular is very difficult to reconcile.

Few Escape The Bruce Carson Taint

Nigel Wright to Bruce Carson in 2011 as the latter conducted his allegedly illegal lobbying:

“I’ve heard a lot of good things about you. Feel free to give me a call at any time.

You can read all about it here.

Plausible Deniability?

After watching the Prime Minister's ongoing repetitive and wholly unconvincing responses to Thomas Mulcair's incisive questions during Question Period, and after reading the latest details of the RCMP investigation into the scandal engulfing his government, I couldn't help but wonder if Stephen Harper, as a youngster, was unduly influenced by Hogan's Heroes and perhaps identified with the always charming Sgt Schultz:

Time For Pushback From The Public

Despite the fact that Stephen Harper is 'toughing it out' in The House of Commons under the relentless grilling of Thomas Mulcair, probably believing that the majority of Canadians are either incapable of or unwilling to follow the byzantine path of the Senate scandal, a wealth of letters in today's Star calls into doubt such a cynical assessment. I encourage you to personally check them out, as well as a link I place at the end of the post. I reproduce a few of the highlights below:

Scrappy PM denies role in Duffy coverup, Oct. 24

Stephen Harper now acknowledges that he told Duffy “he should repay his expenses” and that “It is not appropriate for people to claim an expense that they really did not incur even though they think they can technically argue it is somehow within the rules.”

By this statement, Harper is saying that Duffy lives in Ottawa and could only use a technicality to claim living expenses. Then is Harper not guilty of using the same technicality that Duffy owns a cottage in P.E.I. to appoint him as the senator representing P.E.I., when the Constitution says a senator appointed for a province must be a resident of that province?

The real scandal is that the prime minister acts as if he is above the law.

Charles Shrybman, Brampton

With his long foreshadowed and theatrical speech in the Senate, Mike Duffy has basically given voice to what many Canadians already believed was the truth. Stephen Harper’s reputation as prime minister is that of a control freak. Public perception is that elected officials are not allowed to speak without permission and then must restrict their remarks to PMO-approved talking points. Keeping underlings on message is a Harper tactic and he is not above micromanaging their portfolios. To believe that this prime minister could have senior staff in his office conducting affairs of this magnitude without him having the least inkling strains credulity.

Rory McRandall, Bancroft

Stephen Harper claimed that he had no knowledge of the plan concocted in his own office and carried out by Nigel Wright to repay Mike Duffy’s questionable expenses, because “I obviously would never have approved such a scheme.” Then why did Harper so vigorously defend Wright for this action for days after it became public? Why did he send Pierre Poilievre to the political talk shows to defend Wright’s writing of this cheque out of his own pocket, claiming that it was an almost heroic thing to do and that he was saving the taxpayers a lot of money? People don’t usually defend a scheme they wouldn’t approve of.

Margaret Perrault, North Bay

This pithy missive is perhaps the best one to end with:

Stephen Harper came into power promising to get rid of the Senate. It might just be the Senate that gets rid of Stephen Harper.

Edward Carson, Toronto

By the way, for more about how Stephen Harper and his ilk regard the general public, The Star's Susan Delacourt's piece is well-worth reading.

A Smoking Gun?

Oh, what a tangled web they weave.

If the Prime Minister Obstructs Justice, Isn't It Still A Criminal Offence?

CTV reports the following:

The Prime Minister’s Office has been withholding from the RCMP an email about the $90,000 cheque Stephen Harper’s former chief of staff wrote to Sen. Mike Duffy...

RCMP investigators have been trying to obtain the email ever since CTV News first revealed its existence two months ago.
The prime minister’s communications director, Andrew MacDougall, confirmed that the email exists.

The story, with accompanying video, goes on to reveal that one of the key architects behingd the deal to silence Duffy and pay off his debts, Harper’s former legal counsel Benjamin Perrin, has not made himself available to be interviewed by our federal force.

Liberal MP Rodger Cuzner has suggested that the RCMP obtain warrants to get the email, but Robert Fife reports that the Mounties would prefer to see the PMO voluntarily provide all of the relevant information and require anyone with knowledge of the Wright-Duffy deal to come forward.

Fat chance of that happening.

Star Readers Opine On Harper's Self-Reported Ignorance (I Didn't Do It) And Mike Duffy's Avarice

Some days, all I have to do is open my newspaper for my blog post. Today is one of those days. Enjoy.

Harper kept public in dark, July 6

When the stuff hits the fan, “plausible deniability” allows politicians to say, “I didn’t know; no-one told me.” This is what our Prime Minister would have us believe about Mike Duffy’s bailout with Nigel Wright’s cheque.

But now we hear from the RCMP that at least three others in his office, besides Wright, knew about it. This contradicts the Prime Minister’s claim that it was all Wright’s doing.

By all accounts, Stephen Harper is a control freak, so his denials stretch credibility to the breaking point. The real question is not what he did or didn’t know, but rather: how could he not have played a role in this comedy?

Perhaps this is a case of “implausible deniability.”

Salvatore (Sal) Amenta, Stouffville

In the best case scenario — gross negligence and incompetence — Mr. Harper expects us to believe that there is this big conspiracy going on right under his nose and he is wilfully blind to it.

In the worst, he is part of a criminal conspiracy and cover up.

Thomas Wall, Whitby

Senator Mike Duffy’s alleged use of taxpayers money to increase his wealth is only the symptom of a culture of entitlement by politicians of all parties. Politicians use our money as if no one owns it. The average Canadian citizen is becoming more mistrustful of politicians for that very reason. The government wants every penny that they can get from taxpayers of this country and this how they spend it.

It is unfortunate that Senator Duffy appears not to have learned a simple rule: “The pig that remains at the trough longest gets slaughtered first.”

Calvin Lawrence, Ottawa

Just Because ...

...he deserves all of the ridicule and contempt we can muster.

Rather Apt, Don't You Think?

H/t The ChronicleHerald

Cheques and Balances

I guess they really are the key to maintaining both fiscal and democratic health.

But to ensure such a salutary state, people need to get their 'narratives' straight. Perhaps they need some outside assistance?