Nigel Wright, we are told, is a very intelligent and righteous man. He has put a lot of effort into establishing his reputation as such. But Donald Bayne, Mike Duffy's lawyer, has been shredding that reputation. Alan Freeman writes:
Nigel Wright cuts a curious figure. Ramrod-straight, athletically slim, he’s a quiet presence in the witness box — calm, never raising his voice, even when clearly irritated by Bayne’s persistent questioning. He seems thoughtful, even cerebral, as he recalls his actions in the winter of 2013 as the Duffy scandal exploded in the PMO.
Yet Wright’s actions at the time clearly demonstrate that he was single-minded — even ruthless — in doing the boss’s bidding and shutting the scandal down, using any means at his disposal.
Government resources, Conservative party funds, his own bank account — they were all interchangeable to Wright, all tools to to be used in carrying out Stephen Harper’s wish to see the Duffy problem disappear.
“I didn’t think that this was a distinction that was that significant,” Wright responded, when asked whether he saw any difference between Duffy paying back the money himself — the story the public initially was told — and being secretly reimbursed through the Conservative Party Fund.
It is Wright's inability to make distinctions which is so deeply troubling. One gets the impression that his ambition overtook his conscience. It's an old story. From Christopher Marlowe through Goethe down to Stephen Vincent Benet, it's about a man selling his soul and knowing what he was doing.
Most of the time the story ends tragically -- though in Benet's story, Jabez Stone had a good lawyer to get him off the hook. The irony is that Nigel Wright is supposed to be a very good lawyer. In the end, that may count for nothing.
15 comments:
I was talking to a friend of mine the other evening, Owen, and he pointed out that Wright, being a businessman, adopted a businessman's approach to the problem posed by Duffy: throw money at it to make it go away- a decision characterized by expediency and totally devoid of any moral or ethical considerations. Even now, it seems that Wright has no appreciation of the magnitude of what he was attempting to do: deceive the public and subvert a Senate investigation. Harper clearly picked his chief of staff well.
"The first thing we'll do..."
The cry of many populist revolutions, Dana. The blind leading the blind.
It's wise to beware of those who claim to be paragons of virtue, Lorne.
And the RCMP Band played on... not. They've got some 'splainin to do.
And the explaining can no longer be a "media line," Mound.
From what I've read Wright weaves an incredible [plausibly deniable] story and has contradicted what the emails state and Perrin's testimony to the RCMP. Nigel is in trouble he claims Ray Novak knew nothing saw nothing heard nothing [like Sgt. Shultz] but Perrin stated unequivocally to the RCMP that Novak was 'in on it'.
""Ray was in that meeting and Ray heard this," Perrin said, according to the Feb. 2014 statement read out in court by Duffy's lawyer Donald Bayne. "And I remember looking at Ray to see his reaction ... So this is black and white, OK?""
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/mike-duffy-trial-nigel-wright-testimony-day-5-1.3194569
If Ray knew Harper knew for crying out loud Ray lived [still?] in Harper's garage at 24 Sussex he ate dinner with the Harper family and knows intimate details about them. Why would he keep this from Harper when Harper was so eager to solve 'the Duffy problem'? In an other email from Novak to Wright Novak passes on Harper's request to bring a speedy end to the Duffy affair.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/mike-duffy-trial-emails-wright-novak-pmo-1.3190126
It's interesting Owen to go over Rural's Harper History from 2010 to 2013 and see all the corrupt and undemocratic things that Harper did in that period of time. This was when Wright was Harper's chief of staff.As an example in Oct.2012 the China trade agreement was signed Harper did this with no consultation or nor did he reveal any information to either parliament or to Canadian citizens.Also in the 2012 budget the Canadian Revenue Agency was given 8m then increased to 13.4m to conduct political activity audits of those charities who may have been critical of the Harper regimes policies.These are just 2 of many many examples of Harper and his regimes enforcing their will on vulnerable individuals and groups or instituting oppressive measures that would effect all Canadians. In short dismantling Canada's democracy.They were all done while Wright was Chief of Staff. My point is that there is nothing ethical about Wright. He watched the man, Harper, who he is now protecting and lying for commit any number of deceptions, mainly behind closed doors, he watched Harper lie and cheat in the 2011 election. He watched his iron fist control and bullying of people, including the muzzling of scientist. Any person of integrity who witnessed Harper's corrupt behaviour up close, would have resigned.
Each day of testimony decreases Harper's plausible deniability, Mogs.
Hypocrisy has been a hallmark of the Harper years, Pam. Wright's testimony merely underscores that fact.
" Any person of integrity who witnessed Harper's corrupt behaviour up close, would have resigned." Unfortunately Pamela, that goes for the entire Conservative caucus, those who turn a blind eye to corruption and lies are just as guilty as those who practice such deception in my view.
They wanted the problem to go away at any cost, I think, because they knew what Duffy was capable of doing.
He started doing it the last time he appeared in the Senate chamber.
I agree, Anon. They picked Duffy because they knew that his mouth could blow their enemies out of the water. And they knew what he could do if he declared war on Harper and his cronies.
Owen, I wonder how Mr. Wright feels about being 'thrown under'?
That he's 'taking it for the team'? Are he and Harper still friendly?
Imagine being equated with Duffy in the Con blame game.
You would have thought by now that Harper's people would have clued in, Loving It. Harper demands loyalty but he gives none.
Post a Comment