Don Lenihan writes that things are getting Kafkaesque in Ottawa:
Franz Kafa couldn’t script it better. The Trudeau PMO stands accused of interfering in a legal process and the former Attorney General is the only one who can clear the air; but she refuses to do so, citing solicitor/client privilege. Meanwhile, the prime minister, her client, twists in the wind yet, inexplicably, fails to waive his privilege so the former AG can rescue him.
Fortunately, late Friday night a key piece of the puzzle fell in place. Anonymous government officials confirmed to the Globe and Mail that the PMO had discussed the Lavalin issue with Jody Wilson-Raybould.
These officials go on to warn Canadians not to “conflate or confuse a “vigorous debate” in the Prime Minister’s Office or among the PMO and members of cabinet over how to handle SNC-Lavalin’s charges with an effort to put pressure on Ms. Wilson-Raybould.”
In other words, yes, there was a tense exchange between the PMO and the former Justice minister, and now the PMO is getting us ready to hear its side of the story. To help put this in focus, let’s recap developments over the last two days.
When the Globe story broke, most people took Wilson-Raybould’s silence as confirmation that the anonymous sources were right: she felt she had been pressured by the PMO. Her silence, as Susan Delacourt noted, spoke volumes.
Wilson-Raybould tried to explain away this silence through solicitor/client privilege, but it convinced no one. It only shifted attention onto the prime minister. “Why doesn’t he just waive his privilege and let her speak?” asked Conservative Deputy Leader Lisa Raitt.
Now it was the PM’s silence that was speaking volumes: presumably, he wouldn’t waive privilege because he was worried about what she might say.
This latest Globe story clarifies a lot. According to its anonymous sources, communication between the PMO and the Justice Minister on this issue is appropriate. Indeed, they believe there is nothing wrong with “vigorous debate” on such an issue, so long as it isn’t a way to apply pressure.
But therein lies the problem. People can and often do disagree about when pressure is being applied. The anonymous sources seem to be suggesting that at some point in these “debates” Wilson-Raybould felt she was being pressured, even though PMO officials believed they were “just debating.”
So was it debate or influence peddling? Stay tuned.
Image: 680 News
8 comments:
What is telling to me, Owen, is that this 'debate' seems to have resulted in Wilson-Raybould's demotion. That would appear to undermine the spin government sources are now being put on the situation.
That's what so troubling, Lorne. If it was only a debate, why was Wilson-Raybould moved out of her portfolio?
Your post inspired me to write a piece on the need to restate the role of the Attorney-General in the government. Independence, transparency, accountability, all that sort of thing. Unlike other ministries, the A-G needs a cutout from the PMO. That's supposed to be a given but these events, especially the too obvious demotion of Jody, strongly suggests the prime minister doesn't understand those red lines.
There appears to be a myth circulating these days, Mound, that the Attorney General works for the Prime Minister or the President. We need someone like you to give us a basic civics lesson.
.. having many & even strong opinions is a trademark here at home.
Two points.. (well, actually one is a link)
1) Why is the term 'demotion' or 'demoted' to Veteran's Affairs so common in all Mainstream Media re the Lavalin 'affair' that essentially everyone has adopted it? Its like the completely contagious 'um' and 'ah' that now permeates panels, news, interviews etc - or 'to tell the truth' or 'to be perfectly honest' .. I think the Minister who was 'shuffled' (ergh) from Justice will do a smashing job in Veteran's Affairs for our veterans who desperately need a strong, fierce advocate & defender with a firm grip of 'Justice'
2) http://craigforcese.squarespace.com/public_law_blog/2019/2/9/laffaire-snc-lavalin-the-public-law-principles.html
Words matter to me.. so do facts. Point #2 presents hard facts in a whirlwind of hysterical weak assed reporting. Why should a lowly house painter have to point this out to our political 'leaders' a la Scheer or Singh.. or Trudeau or salaried pundits and so called journalists. The article stands on its own.. the summary is a crisp faceslap to the Globe and Mail for shoddy wordology.. hell, 'urged' and 'attempted to press' take a well deserved shellacking.. Dancing around the term 'Directed' is speculation at this point. Summary suggests the Globe editing fails as does the vague political nonsense or silly gaps in comprehension or interest re actual Canadian Criminal Law
Yes yes, the inferences and innuendos, some as implied are clear to me as mist that, currently, but.. wordage, verbage and reality keep getting trashed via hit n run faux journalism.. funny how same folks are careful to include 'alleged' when somebody shoots and maims many..
For example, McCallum was not 'fired' - He was asked to submit his resignation, far more dignified. He did so immediately without reserve. If fired it would have been truly expensive. Perhaps not as expensive as the Omar Khadr penalty (that Andrew Scheer seems totally ignorant about.. or has suffered grievious memory loss about yet still shrieks gross mistruths about) Have none of such hystericals read Sandy Garossino on the Khadr matter or the formal investigation testimonies of senior US military officers onsite for the arial assault with laser guided 500 lb bombs, attack helicopters, Puff The Magic Dragon arial gunning, plus mortar rounds and grenades.. oh and many many Special Forces assault rifles ? That Khadr was shot twice in the back point blank while unconcious & partially buried in the rubble ? The exit wounds are astonishing.. How did Scheer among many miss or pretend not to have seen ? He was Speaker of the House for gawd's sake.. this was debated ! Hansard eh !
I'll now get back on my war pony.. and seek more windmills to tilt at..
Yes, I'm a horseman & rider from back in the way before .. no kindly donkey for me .. thanks
Your point about Veterans Affairs is well taken, sal. There is still the question of why Wilson-Raybould was moved. Perhaps it was simply because Veterans needed her expertise. At the moment, though, there is the suspicion that she was blocking the demands a powerful doner to Liberal coffers.
The truth is we really don't know what happened. But we need to find out if what the Globe story suggests is true.
It's important to understand the context behind this story and how both the Cons and Libs are involved in SNC-Lavalin's corruption. SNC's problems started in February 2015 when, under the Harper government, SNC-Lavalin execs were charged with allegedly bribing Libyan leader Gaddafi's son for construction contracts in that country.
A few years earlier, Harper had joined the US-led coalition that attacked Libya in part to protect SNC's massive prison construction contacts. But by 2015, SNC's corrupt deals around the world left Harper little choice but to charge the company. Even the UN had banned SNC and its affiliates from bidding on contracts. Worse, Harper himself was feeling the heat after his buddy Arthur Porter had fled for Panama once his corrupt dealings with SNC surrounding the construction of a Montreal hospital were exposed.
By the fall of 2015, however, Harper was gone and the party that SNC had for years lavished with donations was in power. Montreal-based SNC began lobbying the MP for the Montreal riding of Papineau, Justin Trudeau. It wanted him to establish in Canadian law the Deferred Prosecution Agreements (DPAs) that Obama had used to shield from accountability the bankers responsible for the 2008 global recession. DPAs allow corporate criminals to avoid any admission of guilt, either through the admission required in a plea deal or a court finding of guilt. The company simply promises to amend its sinful ways, something every accused criminal would gladly agree to in exchange for a Get-Out-of-Jail-Free card.
By September 2018, the Criminal Code had been amended to establish DPAs for the first time in Canadian law. Now it was time to use the concept to shut down the prosecution of SNC execs. But, the PM was faced with as indigenous justice minister who stubbornly "refused to be a team player" and go along with this travesty. On October 9, the director of public prosecutions rejected a DPA for SNC, saying it "is not appropriate in this case." SNC's share price dropped 15% that day, and 10 days later, company lawyers filed an application for judicial review.
Now, the Trudeau government would have us believe that it in no way pressured Wilson-Raybould on this issue and she was not demoted as a result of her failure to play along. No, apparently Trudeau changed Canadian law at the request of SNC, but never intended to apply the changes to the case against the company. The idea is laughable on its face.
This scandal is Trudeau's AdScam. It will kill the Libs in Quebec, just like AdScam did. And Trudeau's reconciliation with First Nations is also dead. He's attacking a native woman for daring to do her job properly. The smell of corruption, hypocrisy and white male privilege is overpowering.
Cap
What's so disappointing, Cap, is that it appears we've seen this movie before -- not that long ago.
Post a Comment