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:

The Puffster's Senate Speech

As much as I detest Mike Duffy and everything he stands for, I have to confess that in listening to his Senate speech yesterday I was much-taken with both its content and delivery. Thundering at his erstwhile allies and colleagues, Duffy rebuked the motion of suspension pending against him and Senators Brazeau and Wallin. While undoubtedly heavily self-serving, Duffy portrayed a PMO and, by extension, a Prime Minister who abandoned him despite earlier reassurances that all was kosher with both his expenses and residency, all for the sake of political expedience.

During a meeting with Nigel Wright and Harper, the latter is alleged to have told Duffy:

"'It's not about what you did. It's about the perception of what you did that's been created in the media. The rules are inexplicable to our base' …, after which he was ordered to pay back the money.

Hardly a smoking gun, but the unfolding portrait is one that promises to further erode Harper's credibility on claims of knowing nothing about anything pertaining to Wright's arrangements to write the $90,000 cheque to Duffy. I am sure more will be revealed in the forthcoming weeks and months.

Will Duffy's words be enough to circumvent the suspension? Today may provide the answer.

If you would like to hear Duffy's speech, click here.

Abandoning Ship?

Perhaps the Puffster will receive another lifeline soon?



H/t The Globe and Mail

A Suggestion For The Wayward Woman From Wadena

A Star reader has a succinct suggestion for the errant Senator Wallin:

Re: She pays up, but Wallin's not happy about it, Sept. 14

If Pamela Wallin really wants to “unburden” the people of Canada, and in particular the people of Saskatchewan, she will do the right thing and resign from the Senate. She has brought shame and disrespect to herself and to the Senate through her outrageous behaviour.

The fact that she has agreed to repay $136,369 speaks volumes of her claim of innocence. And to blame the outside audit firm of Deloitte and the Senate’s internal investigative committee for her wrongful deeds simply exacerbates her guilt.

Donald Cangiano, Oakville

How The Mighty Are Fallen

Anne Kingston, a writer for Maclean's, offers a peek at her upcoming exposé of Wadena's Wayward Woman and her fall from grace:

Breaking News: Despite her continued protestations of having done nothing wrong, Wallin has just repaid another $100K, accompanied by the following statement:

“Although I fundamentally disagree with the methodology used in arriving at that figure, particularly since the amount was calculated using newly created rules to examine past expenses, I do not want to burden the people of Canada and, in particular the people of Saskatchewan, by engaging in a protracted legal debate about the matter”.

“I wish to make it clear. I was not treated fairly by the Deloitte review, which was not conducted in accordance with generally accepted accounting principle, nor have I been treated fairly by the Senate Committee. Evidence that casts doubt on the correctness of the amounts owing was either ignored or disregarded during the review.”

Pondering Pam Et Al.

It was a comment yesterday that The Mound of Sound (a.k.a. The Disaffected Lib) made in response to a cartoon I posted depicting the much beleaguered Senator Wallin that made me think. He reminded me of an earlier time when there was honour associated with public service, and expressed the hope that Harper's poisonous partisanship is something that we will eventually recover from.

I have been following politics for a very long time, something that no doubt partially accounts for my deep cynicism. I am well-aware that the current scandals engulfing the notorious quartet of senators under investigation cannot be seen as an indictment of the entire institution; in fact, in many ways it is a mere diversion, or at best a sensational tip of the iceberg, of much deeper problems plaguing our democracy, problems that have only worsened under the dark reign of the Harper cabal, problems that may seem irrelevant to the majority but are in fact threatening the kind of life and values that we enjoy as Canadians.

Yet my gratification at the public squirming of people like Wallin and Duffy is deep and abiding. Mound's comments set me to thinking about why. In my daily life, I like to think that I have a reasonable amount of empathy for others. Why is it totally absent when it comes to public figures who hold authority? Why does the betrayal of public trust, the abuse of power, inflame me so much? I think there are likely three reasons:

Having been 'taught' in the Catholic school systems many years ago, I and many of my fellow students were regularly subjected to both physical and verbal abuse by our teachers, abuse that began in elementary school, only to be intensified at the secondary level. It took me many many years to overcome my anger and bitterness over that mistreatment.

As a teacher, I was keenly aware of the responsibility and trust the position entailed. Almost all of the people I worked with over the years respected that trust. All of us knew that the rare instances in which it was violated reflected badly on all of us. it was a trust we did not take lightly.

Also during my teaching career, I was witness to administrative abuse of authority, decisions made that favoured students and their parents in the effort to stave off parental complaints that could impede their upward career trajectory. Once, I was myself the victim of a vindictive principal who disciplined me with an insubordination charge for the campaign I mounted to get a candy vending machine removed from beside my classroom due to the noise and distraction it caused, as well as what I considered to be the inappropriate commercialization of an academic area. It was a charge I later successfully fought and had removed from my record.

So I guess my point is a public justification for the animus I hold against people in high places who treat others, mainly the electorate, with contempt. Stephen Harper does it, his acolytes do it, as do his Senate appointees. I ardently look forward to their fall, but hope the damage they have done to people's faith is not irreparable.

For those interested, Rosie DiManno has Ms Wallin in her sights today, as does Tim Harper. As well, the Star editorializes on how all of this reflects very very badly on our Prime Minister and his abysmal judgement in appointing three of the four senators now at the receiving end of profound public odium.

He Said, She Said ....

Yesterday I wrote a post detailing a CTV report on the obstruction from the PMO over its refusal to hand over an email pertaining to the the Wright-Duffy Senate payoff scandal. The RCMP was reported as having been trying to obtain it for two months.

It seems the PMO has now moved into high propaganda gear, claiming it has not been asked for any such email:

Contrary to CTV’s reporting, our office has not been asked for this email,” spokesperson Julie Vaux said in an email statement.

“As we have always said, we will assist investigations into this matter.”

However, Vaux refused to say whether the RCMP has asked for other emails or documentation regarding the $90,000 cheque Wright wrote to Duffy or whether the Mounties have interviewed anyone at PMO.

Sounds to me likes its time for a supoena, which apparently would be a first:

Reg Whitaker, University of Victoria professor emeritus who has studied and written about the history of the RCMP .... said he’s unaware of any instance in the history of the RCMP when it had to resort to legal instruments to compel criminal evidence from a sitting prime minister or his office. Nor could he think of any justification the PMO could use for obstructing the investigation.

But then again, many sad precedents have been set by this government, the likes of which Canada has never before seen.

PMO Slush Funds, Defecting Tories, The Prime Prevaricator's Diction And Deflection Tactics

These are the main topics discussed on last night's At Issue panel:

BTW, Parliament rises in about a week. I hope the weather for Harper and his many enablers continues to be hot and uncomfortable, with heavy storms in the fall.

At Issue Panel Opines On Harper and the Scandal

I have a bit of a busy morning, so I only have time for a couple of short posts. For reasons I have indicated elsewhere, I rarely watch CBC's The National anymore. However, given yesterday's shameful and feeble refusal by the Prime Minister and his trained seals to address the rot engulfing his administration, I decided to watch a special At Issue Panel last evening.

Below, you can watch Andrew Coyne, Chantal Hebert and Bruce Anderson evaluate Mr. Harper's efforts: