ridenrain ridenrain:
DerbyX DerbyX:
Aging_Redneck Aging_Redneck:
DerbyX, read Dona's statement, then practise what you preach!!!
Right back at you slick.
Now you will admit that you respect Chretien and Martin and acknowledge they are innocent of all corruption charges and had nothign at all to do with adscam.
Thanks for coming out.
The real trial over ADSCAM hasn't even started yet.
You better move to France for a few years while this blows over.
Maybe you can explain why paul martin didn't report this crime when he found out about it?
This is the only solid crime in this entire smear campaign.
We know martin got the manuscript early because he wrote the foreword and because the author says so.
The Liberals are setting their hair on fire, because this is such a huge crime.. but they brought it to the press instead of the RCMP.
That is a crime.
Sure.
The only blame belongs to the Liberals. That corrupt bastard Harper tries to bribe a dying man with "financial considerations" yet its the Liberals who are at fault.
You are such a pathetic blind partisan hack.
$1:
PM's story just doesn't add up
Karma is about to lay a beating on Stephen Harper.
After years of staking a high-handed claim to ethical purity, the Conservative prime minister is going to have to defend – possibly even to law enforcement – the altogether opposite reality of his Nixon-like approach to politics.
Interestingly, the fuse lighting this political bomb comes not from the Opposition but from the published words of two highly credible sources: Dona Cadman, widow of former MP Chuck Cadman, and Stephen Harper, circa 2005.
In a book to be released next month, both Ms Cadman and Stephen Harper confirm that Conservative party officials offered the ailing MP a financial benefit to win his support in that spring's crucial parliamentary vote. If true, that likely amounts to a criminal offence.
According to the book, Ms Cadman says the appeal included a $1 million life insurance policy – no doubt a tempting albeit ghoulish offer to a man who knew he was soon to die. Mr. Harper is less precise in his quoted commentary but he does characterize the overture as including "financial considerations." And he confirms both that he had foreknowledge of the offer and that the officials were legitimate representatives of the Conservative party.
Denials are now coming fast and furious but Dona Cadman has told media that she stands by her account. And the Prime Minister has stopped short of suggesting she is lying or that he was misquoted.
What's more, he claims he quietly investigated the matter 2 1/2 years ago and found nothing of concern.
Well, that's awfully reassuring.
Why did he launch such an investigation? Who conducted it and with whom did they speak? Did Ms Cadman mention a $1 million life insurance policy to them? And what of Dan Wallace, the assistant who vouches for Dona Cadman's honesty, but has become mysteriously unavailable for interviews?
It simply doesn't add up. To embrace Harper's account, one must accept an already impressive list of implausible assertions.
Yes, he was aware in advance that party officials were making an offer to Chuck Cadman. But, no, he didn't "direct" them to make an offer. Yes, he was aware that what they proposed involved "financial considerations." But, no, that doesn't amount to a bribe. Yes, he believes Dona Cadman is credible enough to stand as a Conservative candidate. But, no, her claim about an illegal $1 million bribe isn't correct. Yes, he was distressed enough to launch an investigation of the matter. But, no, he'd rather not talk about it.
It wouldn't take Columbo to pull apart the threads fraying at the edges of this story. In mounting a defence, Harper's track record on such matters will lend him little credibility.
After all, the Prime Minister denied that his party offered Alan Riddell $50,000 to step aside as a candidate in Ottawa South. But a judge ruled that's exactly what happened.
The Prime Minister denied that his party concocted a scheme to redirect a million dollars from local ridings to the Conservatives' national campaign committee in 2006. But, Elections Canada says that's exactly what happened.
The pattern of this Prime Minister has been to make self-righteous claims about his own conduct, bully all those who stand in his way and smear the name of those who openly defy him.
For a man who ran on a platform of transparency and accountability, his penchant for lowball politics grows more obvious and more odious as each day passes.
If this latest allegation is proved true, it can only be regarded as a celestial settling of the scales. Canadians will tolerate a great deal from their politicians. But they have no time for hypocrisy.
I love how you pathetic cons are bending over backwards to clear Harper of his wrongdoing even to the point of viciously attacking Chucks widow which you then hold up her (likely coerced) new statement about believing Harper.
Thats cause she is the liar, her daughter is the liar, everybody
except Harper is the liar.
Then you go and do an about face over adscam. Suddenly the burden of proof which used to be nothing less then a signed confession from Harper and video tape of him ordering his bagmen to bribe Cadman noe becomes "any rumour or innuendo is proof positive of Chretien and Martins culpability".
Just like all those Alberta cons who bitch and complain that Ontario votes only a single party are themselves the worst offenders its you guys who can't see the writing on the wall.
When Martin was accussed he ordered a full investigation and was exonerated, something that despite all evidence to the contrary you don't believe.
When Harper gets accussed he pulls out his pet lawyers in an attempt to silence the truth and head off any possible investigation. The fact that he is on record with agreeing that Cadman should be tempted with "financial considerations" is in fact evidence you will simply ignore.
Pathetic.
CKA Uber 
CKA Uber 
