Beyond The Commons

 Beyond The Commons

Aaron Wherry covers all the goings-on in and around Parliament Hill. Follow Aaron on Twitter: @aaronwherry

Categories: Beyond The Commons, Capital Read

This early evening in Guergis

by Aaron Wherry on Wednesday, April 14, 2010 5:36pm - 23 Comments

Ms. Guergis has retained Mr. Jaffer’s lawyer. Mr. Rubel says the Prime Minister’s Office has not informed him or his client about the “serious allegations” in questions. The Prime Minister’s Office says Ms. Guergis was told on Friday. Mr. Rubel maintains he and his client have not been so enlightened. And, finally, the following artist’s interpretation of the alleged private investigator’s alleged involvement in this matter has been released.

Tags: , , , , ,

Bookmark and Share
  • http://intensedebate.com/people/madeyoulook madeyoulook

    The Prime Minister’s Office says Ms. Guergis was told on Friday. Mr. Rubel maintains he and his client have not been so enlightened.

    Both parties may be telling the truth. The PMO may have informed ex-Tory-MP Guergis that there are serious allegations, without actually sharing any details. From the Vancouver Sun report linked by Mr. Wherry:

    "The Conservative party lawyer last Friday — the day that Ms. Guergis resigned — spoke with Ms. Guergis and informed her of the allegations the Prime Minister's Office referred to (the) ethics commissioner and the RCMP," Soudas said.

    There may just be enough wiggle room in that choice of words that the suspect under investigation is indeed unaware of the specific allegation being investigated.

    • Sigh

      They seem to be keeping this a closely guarded secret. I hope they at least told the RCMP what it was about.

      • Lord Kitchener's Own

        I'm sure the PMO sent a full enumerated list of accusations to the RCMP.

        I'm also sure that by the end of the summer, the RCMP will be successful in their legal battle to uncover the nature of accusations 3, 5, and 8, which were redacted from their copy of the list for reasons of national security.

        • Sigh

          The PMO will argue that Justice Department lawyer Alain Préfontaine has had access to the un-redacted document. He doesn't see there anything that is missing or crucial or important. However, he cannot reveal what was redacted to the RCMP because disclosure would be injurious to either national defence, international relations or national security.
          But, he will assure the court, at the end of the day, the RCMPis going to be asked to pass judgment on the actions of some on the basis of this material.
          That’s why.

    • Dot

      So why would she resign?

      PM: We have received some unfounded allegations.
      HG: I resign as Minister.
      SH: Well, since you resigned as Minister, I'll need your HofC seat for the cameras. You're banished to the back benches and out of caucus.
      HG: You're fat, and you have a cowlick.

  • chet

    How quickly the evil villain "Bonnie" turns to a poor victim…when Harper takes an apparent adverse position.

    You can almost see the narrative, instantaneously turning 180 degrees right before our eyes,

    with the objective, always, always to attack Harper.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/LaxAtlDfwYow LaxAtlDfwYow

      Who is suggesting she's a victim? I think the consensus would be closer to dufus.

      Nevertheless, undisclosed allegations, RCMP investigations, private investigators, PMO refusal to disclose, suggestions of drug use, etc. etc. amount to a game loaded against someone who is presumed to be innocent. No?

  • Saskboys Homeboy

    I am still a little unclear on the proper procedure for a situation like this, should we stone her, or hang her first before we give her a fair trial. Just wondering………………..

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/madeyoulook madeyoulook

      Fear not. I am sure the OLO is working on it. Please stand by…

    • E.B.

      Scarlet 'A', for all to see and scorn. Shun her.

  • Jen

    Watching Jane Taber scrambling for any news to write on her gossip column is amusing " did you" did you know? why weren't we told, why are they not telling us blah blah blah?
    Beware guys if you just waved to Rahim, you might be called to the committee, your life will turn upside down because you gave Rahim a friendly wave, therefore a 'secret' deal must be there. You know how it is .

    The media goes after Guergis like vultures yet they stay far away or lets say don't care whether the LPOC gives back our $40milllions which the liberals will not give back to us.
    Do you know that the liberals took 56 billion dollars from the E.I funds and never replaced and do you know the liberals raised the premiums so you me all of us have to repay the 56billions and do you know there was no recession at that time. Apparently we canadians are worth the time nor the investigations into the findings and whereabouts of our money but Guergis is. Spare me, the media knows who to manipulate and you are it.

    • frobisher

      Thanks for the reminder of insidious media manipulation. Oh, and Adscam, too. Forgot all about that.

      Also, 'Do you know' is most often framed as a query. Try it sometime.

      • Fay

        Aaron Wherry is the leader of the cyber bullys.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/madeyoulook madeyoulook

    According to CTV tonight:

    [Controversial businessman] Gilliani boasted that he had cellphone photos of Guergis and Jaffer "partying" with cocaine and high-priced hookers, [Private Eye] Snowdy said.

    Uh-oh. All the PI has on Guergis is Gilliani's boasts? Let us look at the line just above the one I quoted from CTV, shall we?

    Both Gillani and [former CFLer and business partner] Mihelic are facing fraud charges on an unrelated matter.

    I hope the RCMP gets through this as quickly as possible. How the PM can call this source of info "credible" is beyond me. Maybe Guergis was in on the action, maybe not. But credible info? Hoo boy…

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

    It was interesting to observe the media frenzy as it progressed over the last three weeks: All those giddy #guergis tweets, the frenzied speculation, the collective #bustyhookers pile-on, and the bacchanalian excess of it all.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Gaunilon Gaunilon

    This is like watching a car accident in slow-motion.

    must…..look….away…

  • chet

    I'd like to portray Harper as a chessmaster, watching him as he gets his opponents to now side with, and express deep sympathy/affinity with, the woman portrayed by that group as a witch-like for the previous two weeks,

    but it doesn't take a genius to make such moves knowing with certainty the other side – being a group of reactionaries who will advocate the opposite of whatever your position is, whatever the issue.

    • Dave

      You have the ex-minister and the PMO now publicly disagreeing over whether she has even been told about the nature of the allegations against her, and you think this will make the *opposition* look bad?

      Boggle.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/LaxAtlDfwYow LaxAtlDfwYow

    Allow me to suggest what will likely be an unpopular hypothetical….

    Suppose it turns out there is no substance to the "secret" PMO allegations against Ms Guergis, Suppose further she is given an absolutely clean bill of ethical and criminal health – so to speak. Suppose, she then demands she be accepted back into the Con caucus.

    Might public opinion turn in her favour and against the PM? The latter may well be seen to have gone nuclear on Ms Guergis without cause.

    I'm not defending her PEI tantrum, nor the general lameness of her political career to date. Just sayin' that this could backfire on the Master Strategist. Might this downside (to the PM) also be behind the PMO gamesmanship on revealing the allegations?

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/madeyoulook madeyoulook

    From the off-the-record rumblings, I am not at all convinced that CAUCUS wants her back, even with the clean bill of ethical & criminal health. If such is true, I suspect the bigger downside would be to invite her back.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/LaxAtlDfwYow LaxAtlDfwYow

    Yeah, I understand that she's not particularly popular on the Hill. My question is however, if this turn out to be much ado about nothing (which is what I'm expecting, frankly), will it not look like the PM went postal on an innocent (and somewhat inept) Guergis?

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/madeyoulook madeyoulook

    Read the comments just around here. Being married to Rahim appears to be enough of a capital crime all by itself. While not claiming to have any useful barometer, I am reasonably confident that a complete clean slate from the RCMP will not detract from Rahim / PEI-airport / sock-puppet letter-writing staff / etc., in the court of public opinion.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Jenn_ Jenn_

    Yeah, but so what? Can the leader of a party really kick someone out of the party because "we don't like you"? Or, do you have to be Prime Minister for that?

    Having said that, I don't think public opinion will swing her way, even if no charges are ever laid and she and Jaffer are given a clean bill of health from the RCMP. And that would be a shame because it means strictly attitude can ruin a promising political career. On the other hand, perhaps attutude adjustments will be seen as important by politicians. Same with Ruby Dhalla.

Previous

Next

From Macleans