![]() |
Re: Rob Ford Again
Originally Posted by jimf
(Post 10978372)
You mean the news of Harper kicking the butts of a few Senators - what most Canadians would like to do to them when they read about their expense claims.
|
Re: Rob Ford Again
Originally Posted by dbd33
(Post 10978425)
Isn't the current situation that Mr. Harper has kicked the butt of his bag man, the one he says paid the expenses, not the people who took the money?
|
Re: Rob Ford Again
Originally Posted by jimf
(Post 10978435)
Did more than one person have their expenses paid? Is there any doubt that Mr Wright paid the expenses of Mr Duffy? Is there any proof that Mr Harper knew all of this?
|
Re: Rob Ford Again
Originally Posted by Almost Canadian
(Post 10978415)
Is it right that they are? Is it right that the others aren't?
* note: while I acknowledge that alcohol is not illegal, many things that are otherwise perfectly legal become prohibited while intoxicated. Does it matter that alcohol is not illegal? I find your questions in this post rather bizarre. You seem to be bringing one hell of a red herring into the debate. What are you trying to get at - what's the point of these questions? Nobody is suggesting that Rob Ford has tried to excuse his actions because the law is wrong. |
Re: Rob Ford Again
Originally Posted by dbd33
(Post 10978425)
Isn't the current situation that Mr. Harper has kicked the butt of his bag man, the one he says paid the expenses, not the people who took the money?
|
Re: Rob Ford Again
Originally Posted by jimf
(Post 10978435)
Did more than one person have their expenses paid?
Originally Posted by jimf
(Post 10978435)
Is there any doubt that Mr Wright paid the expenses of Mr Duffy?
Originally Posted by jimf
(Post 10978435)
Is there any proof that Mr Harper knew all of this?
|
Re: Rob Ford Again
|
Re: Rob Ford Again
Originally Posted by dbd33
(Post 10978898)
Proof doesn't much matter though, the whole matter is about image, it stems from an attempt by the party to conceal a fishy looking lack of wrongdoing.
Harper is trying to have it both ways, here: I appointed you as a Senator for PEI, because you live there. But you don't live there, so you can't claim expenses for your house in Ottawa. So we'll cook up a story, pay back your legitimately-claimed expenses, and watch the whole thing blow up in our faces. Presumably now that Duffy, Wallin and Brazeau have been kicked out they have even less to lose. No longer bound by Parliamentary convention, expect the accusations to start flying. Beyond the revolving door of the PMO, I don't imagine that Marjory Lebreton, for one, will come out of this with her reputation intact. Her office seems to have been the primary source of much of the duplicity in the upper house. |
Re: Rob Ford Again
|
Re: Rob Ford Again
tasty! i love smoked salmon
|
Re: Rob Ford Again
|
Re: Rob Ford Again
Originally Posted by Almost Canadian
(Post 10978415)
Is it right that they are?
Originally Posted by Almost Canadian
(Post 10978415)
Is it right that the others aren't?
|
Re: Rob Ford Again
So here's what I've learned from our mayors.
Toronto: walking heart-attack, overweight, smokes crack, angry Vancouver: skinny, healthy, bikes everywhere, oooooommmmmm |
Re: Rob Ford Again
Originally Posted by ExKiwilass
(Post 10979551)
So here's what I've learned from our mayors.
Toronto: walking heart-attack, overweight, smokes crack, angry Vancouver: skinny, healthy, bikes everywhere, oooooommmmmm |
Re: Rob Ford Again
Originally Posted by Shard
(Post 10979578)
London, UK: messy hair, cycles, sense of humour, straight talking
|
| All times are GMT -12. The time now is 5:39 pm. |
Powered by vBulletin: ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.