|
RCMP launch a criminal investigation against Liberals (Yet another scandal)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Jayx1 |
So yet another scandal involving the Liberals. Of course innocent until proven guilty, but the evidence mounting by some very credible sources is not looking promising for the Liberals.
Apparently they tipped off some well connected friends in advance of an announcement on income trusts resulting in profits being made from insider trading.
And people still want to vote Liberal? Why???? |
|
|
| Transmotion |
| What you dont understand that in case Conservatives win,we're all going back ot "ice age" . its not about their agenda or something ,its about how they deal with problems,and i'm pretty much sure that you will be the first one to whine about new rules regarding clubs and bars that might come in if conservatives win. |
|
|
| Scot @ SJIRadio |
| quote: | Originally posted by Jayx1
So yet another scandal involving the Liberals. Of course innocent until proven guilty, but the evidence mounting by some very credible sources is not looking promising for the Liberals.
Apparently they tipped off some well connected friends in advance of an announcement on income trusts resulting in profits being made from insider trading.
And people still want to vote Liberal? Why???? |
Again, it is important to note that generalization of "Liberals" is only being used by media and other anti-Liberal individuals, I'm sure if you read the actual press releases by RCMP you'll find that the ALLEGATIONS are being made against particular individuals of the Liberal party. If we really wanted to generalize like that, we can say Mulroney was part of the conservatives and they'll never change after him... which is obviously not the case.
Its sad that the Conservatives are only able to critisize the Liberals based on items that are irrelevant to the current election and have no future effect on Canada, but I guess you really can't expect more than that from this party. |
|
|
| daves |
| quote: | Originally posted by Jayx1
the evidence mounting by some very credible sources is not looking promising for the Liberals. |
so... the RCMP are conducting an investigation into a possible inside trading info leak , and they are making the evidence collected public knowledge as they get it?
is there anywhere you have found yet that outlines the details of this evidence? |
|
|
| Fir3start3r |
Apparently (according to Liberal inside sources) it should be Martin being investigated...
[there are several links within the article, you may want to click the source link]
| quote: |
December 30, 2005
The Income Trust Scandal: The Mounties should start by asking Paul Martin some questions
Angry in T.O. at 08:14 AM
In the case of the Income Trust Scandal, the focus has been on Ralph Goodale and his office.
Senior Ottawa Liberals are telling me the focus is misplaced.
First, check out these quotes captured from the CTV newscast tonight at M K Braaten:
* Don Drummond, VP/Chief Economist: CTV said that Drummond told them he first heard about the announcement via email, 4 hours in advance of announcement. Also, stated that Liberal strategists in Ottawa were the source of email. CTV quoted Drummond as saying "Alot of people seemed to know there was an announcement coming and a few people seemed to know what it was."
* Jim Leech, Teachers pension fund - CTV said that Leech received emails at about 2 pm stating that the announcement was guaranteed. CTV Quoted Leech "I got a bunch of emails around 2pm saying for sure Goodale was making an announcement after the close."
* Sandy Mcintyre, Sentry Select Capital: CTV reported he sent the following email: "There is a strong rumor out of Ottwa that Goodale is going to pronounce after the close today his trust solution…hope my sources are right!" Mcintyre said his sources were quoting 'well connected Liberals'.
Note that the source is ill-defined. Just well-connected Liberals.
Not well-connected finance ministry officials.
Just well-connected Liberals.
Recall that Ralph Goodale's original plan was to announce the decision in January. Suddenly the timeline was moved up. By Ralph Goodale?
Mr. Goodale said in September that the government would consult with a variety of industry and stock market players before announcing any policy change. Industry observers immediately began speculating that the government might consider reducing taxes on corporate dividends as a way of levelling the playing field with income trusts.
On Tuesday, Nov. 22, Mr. Goodale indicated that he would provide direction on the income trust issue because of the impending collapse of the government, effectively ending the consultation process. That night, department officials began discussing the possibility of taxing income trust, sources have said.
The next day, Mr. Goodale's office confirmed that he would be making an announcement and just moments before his scheduled news conference, his parliamentary secretary, Toronto MP John McKay, gave a television interview suggesting the government planned to levy a modest tax on income trusts. Shortly after 5 p.m., Mr. Goodale said there would be no tax on income trusts and that dividend tax credits would be increased starting in 2006.
Pat Breton, a spokesman for Mr. Goodale, said yesterday that Finance officials met on the night of Nov. 22 for two or three hours and came up with the plan that became the next day's announcement on income trusts. He also said that the Prime Minister's Office was told after that Nov. 22 meeting — either later that night, or the next day — about the decision. The policy development was “entirely an internal Finance” effort, he added.
However the media is reporting today that the focus is starting to shift (via Bourque):
Aides to the Prime Minister were told about a taxation change for income trusts "some time immediately before" Mr. Goodale made the announcement after markets had closed on Nov. 23, Pat Breton, a spokesman for Mr. Goodale, said yesterday.
While it is not unusual for the PMO to be informed of high-profile policy announcements, this indicates that the list of officials who had advance knowledge of the pending change went beyond the Finance Department and Mr. Goodale's office.
Well, I know some well-connected Liberals as well, and they've let me know what really happened. As reported in the Globe and Mail, Paul Martin's aides are insisting that Paul Martin was told "some time immediately before" November 23.
It's getting closer to the truth, but still not quite there. It has the date wrong. It also has the direction of the decision-making reversed.
The decision to close of the consultations and deliver the good news not to tax income trusts, probably in response to an election campaign that imminent, was made not by Ralph Goodale, who by all accounts is too honest to be making decisions like this based on election calculations, and who intended to stick to his timetable of accepting submissions on tax policy until December 31. It was not an entirely internal effort, as spokesperson Pat Breton insists. The major decisions were being taken outside of the finance department.
The decision was made by Paul Martin himself.
Paul Martin told Ralph Goodale on Friday, November 18 to bring the consultations to a close and to make an announcement on income tax trusts.
Paul Martin and his immediate PMO staff would have known for five days prior to the announcement how the decision was shaping up.
Paul Martin and his staff were dictating the pace of the work, and possibly the decision itself.
Paul Martin and his immediate PMO staff are as likely suspects as the source for the leak as Ralph Goodale and his office.
When Ralph Goodale stresses that Paul Martin knew nothing, you know he's trying a bit too hard to deflect attention from where the attention should be.
When I read about John McKay's flub on November 23, I wonder whether the finance department was really in the loop. It helps explain McKay's confusion if the PMO was more deeply involved in the decision making.
Where you see Paul Martin standing by Ralph Goodale, I see Paul Marting standing behind Ralph Goodale, keeping him up front and centre not out of a commitment to his minister and a firm belief in his basic honesty and his innocence, but in order to have a shield to hide behind.
Paul Martin made the call on Friday, November 18, not Ralph Goodale on November 22...that's the way it happened, or so well-connected Liberals are telling me.
|
>>Source<< |
|
|
| MarkT |
this isn't new...and didn't the RCMP already exonerate Goodale and are now investigating others?
Funny that the other parties were/are calling for him to step down, simply because there is an investigation...innocent until proven guilty, indeed :rolleyes:
we don't allow circumstantial evidence in court...but it seems to be sufficient for the other parties to call for people's resignations...lame. Investigate the out of this, THEN let the appropriate heads roll. |
|
|
| Scot @ SJIRadio |
This so called source happens to be a blogger running his mouth off of hear say.... Not to mention this site is an anti-Liberal site.
| quote: | | that's the way it happened, or so well-connected Liberals are telling me. |
Perhaps when someone is confident enough in their allegation to name names, we'll take their statements with some merit. |
|
|
| MarkT |
what a dumb comment from Harper too (from today's Toronto Star):
| quote: | | Any explanation is possible, but quite frankly this government, with its record of scandal, corruption, its attitude of entitlement, its failure to accept accountability, ... has not earned the right to the benefit of the doubt," Harper said. |
sorry dumbass, but that right is not "earned"...it's a *RIGHT*.
yes, I know he's more making a point than explicitly meaning what he's saying, but perhaps he should more carefully choose his words and focus on the facts before opening his mouth.
If someone is implicated, they should be fired (and prosecuted, if warranted). Until then, Harper should STFU and let the RCMP do their job. |
|
|
| Fir3start3r |
| quote: | Originally posted by Scot @ SJIRadio
This so called source happens to be a blogger running his mouth off of hear say.... Not to mention this site is an anti-Liberal site.
Perhaps when someone is confident enough in their allegation to name names, we'll take their statements with some merit. |
A blog with some actual merit you mean...
I seriously doubt one becomes a finalist by 'running ones mouth off'; any dolt could do that.
The fact that it's anti-Liberal was besides the point anyways.
Chew on this then from CTV if right-wing websites 'bother' you.
>>CTV News Report<<
The very fact that the RCMP concluded that there was reasonable grounds to even start an investigation should be enough for Goodale to step down at least while the investigation is in progress and concluded.
Anything Goodale does from this point on can be used against him; he's better off just to back away. |
|
|
| Jayx1 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Scot @ SJIRadio
Again, it is important to note that generalization of "Liberals" is only being used by media and other anti-Liberal individuals, I'm sure if you read the actual press releases by RCMP you'll find that the ALLEGATIONS are being made against particular individuals of the Liberal party. If we really wanted to generalize like that, we can say Mulroney was part of the conservatives and they'll never change after him... which is obviously not the case.
Its sad that the Conservatives are only able to critisize the Liberals based on items that are irrelevant to the current election and have no future effect on Canada, but I guess you really can't expect more than that from this party. |
yes only against the finance dept headed by the finance minister who happens to be second in charge.
How is this irrelevent and how does this have no effect on canada? Do you even realize what you are saying???
If our top financial institution cant be trusted by investors we are in BIG BIG trouble. |
|
|
| Jayx1 |
its amazing how even after scandal after scandal, people will still defend these guys.
Has no one ever heard the term "where there is smoke there is fire"?
And the conservatives will not make clubs close early. Those are things that provincial and city governments have control over. AND it was the harris conservatives that increased last call from 1am to 2 am. |
|
|
| DigiNut |
| quote: | Originally posted by Transmotion
What you dont understand that in case Conservatives win,we're all going back ot "ice age". |
Uh... what?
| quote: | | its not about their agenda or something ,its about how they deal with problems,and i'm pretty much sure that you will be the first one to whine about new rules regarding clubs and bars that might come in if conservatives win. |
Wow, talk about FUD. This isn't in the CPC's agenda anywhere. What in the world are you basing this on? |
|
|
|
|
