Categories: Capital Read, Inside the Queensway

UPDATED: Wafergate-gate: It's not just ITQ — Doug Finley wants answers too!

by kadyomalley on Wednesday, July 29, 2009 1:20pm - 239 Comments

From the ITQ inbox:

Inside caucus today Doug Finley did not mince his words. He threw down the gauntlet and bluntly told Caucus that Conservatives would be asking the following question to each and every Liberal; to each and every member of the Parliamentary Press Gallery:

“Can Michael Ignatieff assure Canadians that no Liberal staffer, executive or advisor contacted Jamie Irving or Shawna Richer regarding the Prime Minister’s acceptance of communion at Romeo LeBlanc’s funeral?”

Coincidentally — well, not really coincidentally; not being a complete idiot, ITQ can, in fact, spot a party talking point just as well as anyone else — she had already submitted a very similar, if slightly less loaded question on that very subject to the OLO press office. She’ll let you know what the response is.

Oh, and in case Doug is reading this, I have no idea why you think ITQ, or any other “member of the Parliamentary Press Gallery” would have a clue what actually happened here. Contrary to some of your most cherished beliefs, we really aren’t that organized a conspiracy — and anyone who has followed my comments on this issue over the last day or so will know that I’ve got nothing but questions of my own about this whole affair.

UPDATED:

A response from the Office of the leader of the Opposition:

“This is nonsense. We didn’t record the videotape – CPAC did. And as the saying goes, a picture is worth a thousand words. Canadians need only look at the video on You Tube to see what happened.”

Tags: bring on the competing conspiracy theories!, doug finley demands answers, it's just like being in caucus!, Telegraph-Journal, this is getting downright meta, wafergate-gate

More by kadyomalley

Dakota

This really isn't that shocking coming from the lib-left media and the Liberals.
Steve

So Kady are you going to accept that pathetic response form the Liberal OLO office or are you going to demand some real answers?

Now is your chance to prove how great and objective you think you are

Steve

Dakota

Don't hold your breath. Kady seems strangely absent from this story, unlike when it first broke and she was in on every second post.

Max

As Paul Wells often quips, "the hater thing is incredibily boring, whomever it's pointed at."

http://intensedebate.com/people/KadyITQ KadyITQ

You know, it's tempting to just ignore such nakedly hostile questions, but because I'm sure there are others who would like to know as well, I can tell you that yes, I have followed up, and await the subsequent reply as we speak.

Steve

This is not about me.

My question was not hostile, you need to prove your objectiveness and get some anwers becasue alot of severely
normal Canadians are starting to get pissed off at being lied to by the Liberal MSM who have just been caught enabling a corrupt and untrue story about the Prime Minister of Canada.

You need to take my question seriuosly because we want some answers, that's your job and you should do it objectively and proffessionally

Now dig!

Stephen

what exactly is a "severely normal Canadian"?

I would hope that any Canadian, despite being severely or relatively normal, would have recognized this story right from the beginning to be entertainment news, I know I did.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Inkless Inkless

I know this terminology can be tricky, but it's not "Liberal OLO office," it's "Office of the Liberal OLO Opposition Office." Get it right.

Steve

Got it smarty pants

http://www.ontario.ca civil servant

Watching Liberals and Conservatives, as well as liberals and conservatives, hurl epithets at each other is amusing if only because otherwise it's nauseating. Kudos to ITQ for the reporting.

Max

Indeed, kudos to ITQ.

Non-story. Thin-skinned PMO.

Steve

Kady a follow up , will you provide your many readers any additional tough questions you asked the Liberal OLO to get to the bottom of this scandal and corrupt abuse of the media?

Please this is your chance to dig and get answers for us

Please don't let us down, dig , dig, dig !!!!!

pretend it a consevative scandal! Dig!

http://intensedebate.com/people/KadyITQ KadyITQ

You know, a lot of my colleagues wonder why I bother trying to reason with the utterly unreasonwithable in the comments. You are not helping me construct a compelling argument.

Steve

Kady this is how we feel , and it is not an unreasonable feeling, we do not like to be lied to, set up and made fools of by the Liberal media, we are getting sick and tired of it , we want the truth and that's all.

The Prime NMinister of Canada was set up by the Liberal Party of Canada and the Liberal media and made a fool of, I wnat to know who is responsible and what are the consequenses.

That's not unreasonable, that is your job

Bruce

Kady, what is unreasonable about wanting to know who is responsible for planting that story?

Who was the person that persuaded the young Jamie Irving to get his editor to insert those lies into that article?

http://www2.macleans.ca/category/blogs/national/inside-the-queensway/ Kady O'Malley

There’s nothing unreasonable about that at all, which is why I’m trying to find out whether that is what happened, and, if it did, how it happened, and who was responsible. What is unreasonable is to come blazing into the thread in mindless attack mode, accuse me of various and sundry perfidies of which I am entirely innocent, and then demand that I follow the orders of an anonymous commenter who has already made up his or her mind that I am nothing but a mindless automaton slave to OLO. It’s just tedious, and honestly not worth my time to defend himself against someone sticking their fingers in their ears while chanting “LALALA I CAN’T HEAR YOU EVIL LIB-LEFT MEDIA LIAR”.
Steve

Kady
I apologise, my intent was not offend you
Scott M.

Really? You may want to re-read your posts… taunting is generally considered offensive.

You may also want to consider reading her previous posts which are critical of Liberals as well as NDP and other parties as necessary. Oh, and before you wander off to Inkless' blog to accuse Paul Wells of being a conservative hater, you should read his stuff too.

BTW, no one in the world is going to take kindly to an anonymous person randomly yelling at them to "do your job!". In fact, if it were me, I would probably do the exact opposite just to piss that person off. Fortunately Kady is a better person than I am.
Bruce

I see your point Kady and I have to say that all of you Maclean's Bloggers do put up with an inordinate amount of nonsense day in and day out. Keep up the good work, I'm sure if and when Fife's source comes out you'll be all over it.

Cheers
http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

Kady, you have the patience of a saint!
http://intensedebate.com/people/john_g2708 john g

Kady,

I appreciate you following up. Mostly because I suspect you are one of the few that will do so, now that you are on the record as doing so. I think the frustration that is being expressed, which I share, is that every time stories start to look like they have "gotcha" potential to embarrass the Liberal Party, they tend to kind of…die.

I suspect this is why there are 4 or 5 commenters (myself among them) pestering you on if you will follow up…because there is little confidence that this story will be chased back to its root.

This isn't just some random guy tossing these accusations out. Fife is one of the most senior PPG people, no? One who I would hope wouldn't embarrass himself by reporting unsubstantiated gossip during the national newscast. And the OLO has had one chance to distance itself from this accusation, and has failed to do so.
http://intensedebate.com/people/KadyITQ KadyITQ

Look, I can ask the questions — and I have — but I can't promise you answers, although I really, really hope I get some. I'm not in New Brunswick, for one thing; the priest isn't responding to requests for comment, the TJ has clammed up, and to be honest, I wouldn't be comfortable going with a nameless source unless there were highly extenuating circumstances. (And yes, I'd say exactly the same thing if this was about alleged Conservative dirty trickstering.) As for other journalists, I'm not sure if any others are following this bread crumb trail, but I'd be surprised if they weren't. Heck, Fife may well be working on something with *his* source. But if I don't manage to terrier out the whole story — or if I do, and it turns out that it isn't a sordid tale of Liberal-orchestrated malevolence — I hope you'll give me the benefit of the doubt when the inevitable accusations of shilldom ring out. berried, bien sur.
From: IntenseDebate Notifications
http://intensedebate.com/people/john_g2708 john g

Well, one can already sense other journalists skittering away. Aaron usually rattles off a bunch of snarky blog posts in a row whenever the Conservatives embroil themselves in something…however, once the spotlight is turned on the Liberals…one "just the facts" post on Fife's story, and one snarky post on Finley's response to Fife…and nothing further. Move along, nothing to see here. I presume you talk to other journalists; the fact that you don't know if anyone else is chasing this tells me that Fife's story is not one that is generating much "buzz".

I know you can't promise answers. But you can promise to raise a sh!tstorm on your blog to embarrass the hell out of the OLO if you don't get answers from them, because some pretty serious allegations have been levelled here. I would point out that the Canadian Press ran a news article with their list of unanswered questions during Cadscam when they didn't get the answers they were looking for, in an attempt to embarrass the Conservatives into answering them. I hope that is not too much to ask.
http://intensedebate.com/people/KadyITQ KadyITQ

I'll do whatever seems like the right thing to do, based on what I find out. That I can promise you. But I'd suggest that an alternate explanation for the lack of followup by other journalists — including, as far as I know, the one who first made public the allegation of Liberal involvement — could be that the claim simply couldn't be confirmed or debunked. Sometimes stories do just fizzle out. It's frustrating, but it happens to every journalist far more frequently than you might think. Oh, and another random thought before I sign off for the night: did Fife say that the prime minister was \”thrilled\” by the actions taken by the paper? Did he learn that from the same person who told him that the Liberals had passed the story on to the publisher? Because that would narrow down the list of possible sources. berried, bien sur.
From: IntenseDebate Notifications

Mulletaur

First he took it in his hand, and then he was holding a piece of paper. At no time then or afterwards did he put the wafer in his mouth. The more the conbots try to deny it, the more silly they look.
http://intensedebate.com/people/KadyITQ KadyITQ

I don't need to take anything about you seriously, Steve. I'll do my job. You do whatever it is you do. I'll be the one no longer responding to your comments.

Max

Keep your chin up, Kady!
Sometimes freedom of speech is messy.

http://www.intensedebate.com/people/PolJunkie PolJunkie

Jeez… I'm having McCarthy-like inquisition flashbacks while reading this…

The Conbots are going to be unsufferable for weeks over this one. Thanks Telegraph-Journal!
Bridget

I wondered about what Harper did with the Host before the story broke in the paper. I was watching the funeral live and was astonished to see that he took the Host at all and appeared to do nothing with it. A whole bunch of Macleans posters commented on this on a blog about Harper taking a salute to which he was not entitled. So – if some Liberal told the paper to look into the story – there was some cause for confusion about what the PM did. I do think that this whole issue leaves a bad taste in my mouth (pardon the pun) originating from our PM attending LeBlanc's funeral. But, like I have said before, the Conservatives have lowered the bar so much on political debate in our country that they have encouraged, nay, forced the opposition to follow suit in order to stay in the game.
http://intensedebate.com/people/Inkless Inkless

That's "Smarty Pants Office."
CdnBlueGrit

Riiiiight. It's the Liberals fault. Give me a break. Watch the video. Unless his mouth is located in his upper thigh, then he didn't eat the wafer.

But I'm not sure where Doug Finley gets off with his moral compass… this is afterall the mastermind of every Conservative smear campaign there is.

That said, while Doug and his ilk are digging around looking for "answers" and throwing down the "gauntlet", I wonder if he might inquire about what the hell the Conservatives have done to the finances of this country. I'd sure love for someone to take responsibility — although I won't hold my breath. Harper and his minions are only interested in telling you who's to blame for something while running for cover.

Suck it up Doug and deal with it. You mastered the smear agenda and now you're upset cause a bit of crap sticks to your boss? Please.
Bruce

He ate it after the video of him cut away, the priest and others, including a former Liberal Senator, said PM Harper ate the wafer. Get a grip.

According to Bob Fife a Liberal Party operative persuaded Jamie Irving to instruct his editor to insert the out and out lies into the article without the two journalists knowledge, one journalist threatened to sue, the lies have been exposed, the editor has been fired and Jamie Irving has been suspended for thirty days.

Who is Fife's source? Who was the Liberal operative? Could it have been Jamie Irving's uncle Paul Zed who just happens to be Iggy's chief of staff? Did Iggy know or approve?

These questions need to be answered.

Running for cover? Only in your dreams.

CdnBlueGrit

Bruce… so after Doug gets to the bottom of this, will he get to the bottom of the Ruby Dhalla issue where a sitting Minister of Immigration used his political powers to smear an Opposition politician?

Bruce

In case you didn't notice the subject at hand is not "Miss Ruby", that's a quite a weak attempt at deflection.

CdnBlueGrit

Actually what's weak is:

a) your attempt to spin this as a Liberal issue in the first place… it's a political issue… Harper didn't eat the host and could have offended a Catholic voting bloc. So instead, he leaned on the Irvings during a meeting on "shipbuilding", forced a retraction and is now trying to peel the crap off himself and fling it back at the Libs

b) your failure to acknowledge the utter hypocrisy of the CPC for crying fowl when video evidence demonstrates Harper didn't eat the damn wafer, but not uttering so much as a peep of apology for tearing down not only Ruby Dhalla but anybody else who doesn't agree with them politically or otherwise (i.e. Linda Keen, Kevin Lynch etc, etc.)

c) the Harper government — what a joke. $150 billion deficit… yeah, that's not structural.

Bruce

Keep chugging that kool aid down.
Stephen

"Keep chugging that kool aid down"

oh snap!
Or I guess with a kool-aid reference, I should say "Oh Yeah!", as I break through a brick wall.

Max

Really, do we need to trounce on other's reputations?

Bruce

The damage to the reputations of the publisher and the editor were self inflicted, although helped along with a measure of persuasion by a not yet named Liberal operative.

Max

But you have offered names, Bruce.

Bruce

You're an idiot Max.

Max

Maintain your dignity.

Bruce

Could it have been Jamie Irving's uncle Paul Zed who just happens to be Iggy's chief of staff?

Did Iggy know or approve?

Those are fair questions to ask Max.
http://intensedebate.com/people/KadyITQ KadyITQ

I agree with you on the — inadequacy, to put it as kindly as possible — of the reply, and will do my best to keep digging away.

http://intensedebate.com/people/SisyphusThis SisyphusThis

You bear some heavy burdens , Kady , including , apparently , "the future credibility
of your profession".
However do you do it ?

Syncrodox

Kady

Good luck with your inquiries.

Sysyphus

How very witty. I can see how you might take my comments that way but I really am not trying to be hyperbolic. If I may explain….I wasn't suggesting that truth in journalism is the sole responsibility of Kady but rather that the state of journalistic integrity as a whole is an issue.

One would have to have been living in a cave or busy rolling stones not to have noticed that the MSM is in a state of crisis. The print media is bleeding red ink, television networks are closing smaller stations, even the government funded CBC is hacking and slashing in response to declining viewer ship and the corresponding ad revenue.

The general public is becoming increasingly cynical and tuning out. Granted many in the media blame the internet….an excuse that is basically the equivalent of my dog ate my homework. What underlies this cynicism is a growing realization that a handful of editors are and have been shaping and spinning the news according to political affiliations. People don't like being lied to and made to feel foolish. Political discourse is now open to anyone with a computer and many older citizens are not very happy now that they've realized how much has been spun over the years. Conversely the younger generations have absolutely no interest in the MSM as tradition is irrelevant and tech savvy as they are the MSM is irrelevant.

Professional journalists had better start acting a hell of a lot more professional than they have or there is going to be a lot less paid positions in the MSM than there is currently.

I was a kid when Watergate broke and view that as the acme of investigative journalism…unfortunately it's been all downhill since. Then again, considering your handle, you may not know much about the down side of the hill.

Syncro

Bruce

You are a disgusting degenerate ingrate.

CdnBlueGrit

Now THERE'S the Conservative attitude we all have come to know.

Stephen

Maintain?
CdnBlueGrit

Can Doug Finley assure Canadians that the Conservative Party of Canada did not provide funding or cover the court expenses/legal fees of Jasmine MacDonnell when she went to court to cover her butt on the issue of leaving Raitt's binder behind? Oh… right… "no comment".

Bruce

Still trying to deflect, pathetic.

Bruce

Part of what Bob Fife said;

"Well, I'm told that the Liberals passed the story to young Jamie Irving who was the publisher of the paper. He passed it to the editor who put it in the paper without checking it out, and today the editor has been fired, and Jamie's father has suspended his son for thirty days, and I'm told the prime minister is pretty thrilled with that."

http://intensedebate.com/people/SisyphusThis SisyphusThis

Yes. "I'm told".
The essence of fine reporting.

Bruce

The proverbial sh*t has not yet hit the fan.

frobisher

No, but you'll have pride of place when it does.

CdnBlueGrit

Yeh. I'm realllllly trying to deflect. Keeping crapping out those CPC approved talking points. Maybe when Doug pulls out you'll start thinking for yourself.
Bridget

I do not dispute this at all but I was just stating that I noticed the Prime Minister 1. accepting the Host and 2. appearing not to eat it 3. being surprised 4. being among posters on Macleans that day (or the day after) commenting on this surprising event before the kerfuffle (sp?) was in the newspaper that is all. I wanted this to be a part of the conversation because the whole wafergate story could not have been manufactured by the Libs if people like myself had noticed this as well and were surprised that is all! I am a Catholic and a political junkie so I was watching the funeral with great interest and I thought to myself, I wonder what the PM will do during communion and then I was so surprised with what I saw. I did not think that it was a scandal, just a protocol faux pas. I take the PM at his word, but it was just awkward is all . . .
Ken S from Ramara

Me thinks Iggy sleeps soundly with a clear conscience, while Harpo tosses and turns all night, thinking about how many more potential voters he may have offended. "If only the cameras just showed me eating the f#$king wafer!" The more Harpo's henchmen keep it in the media spotlight, the guiltier he appears!
Gabby in QC

I have neither the time nor the inclination to read through all the comments posted here, so forgive me if I ask a question which may already have been asked.

Ms. O'Malley contacted the OLO, but did she think to ask whether Ignatieff had received communion at the funeral too. Who would like to know? I would.
Lord Kitchener's Own

217 comments??? Two HUNDRED and seventeen comments?!?!!?

I know, I know, some of them are mine, but still, how depressing is that!

Single dumbest story of the year. It'll be tough to top.
http://intensedebate.com/people/SeanStok SeanStok

But I'll say it again: it was dumb to criticize Harper about this, and I still fail to see how trying to feed a story to a paper is either a)unique, or b) unusually dastardly or worth of condemnation.
William

The original story may have been dumb involving taking communion at a funeral mass, but you should never think Kady is dumb.
She`s continuing to dig with this story—-she knows that there`s elements here that if they can be tied together will make for a real nice investigative story.

Just think—–sleazy backroom political hacks conspiring with senior clergy in the Catholic Church and joined by some offspring of old K.C. Irving to smear a sitting Prime Minister with a religious scandal a week before he visits the Pope. Hey—could be a movie here somewhere.

Lord Kitchener's Own

First off, I would never even think of implying in any way that Kady is dumb, so that's just silly.

As for this vast conspiracy theory, it's good for Kady to look into it. I'll be shocked beyond belief if this turns out to be some real conspiracy, but fine, check it out. Frankly, even if Jean Chretien himself wrote every line of the newspaper story (while twirling his imaginary mustache), got Irving to publish the story by kidnapping an orphan and threatening to feed her to sharks with lasers attached to their heads if he didn't put it in the paper, and then personally delivered the papers to each and every subscriber in the nation, I still maintain: DUMBEST STORY OF THE YEAR. That's no reflection whatsoever on Kady, or her need to follow it. If anything, it's a reflection on the idiocy of Canadian politics at the moment.