It seems like a new twist in the Geurgis/Jaffer every hour now. It seems that those pictures the private investigator had of the couple doing cocaine and partying hard now has toned down to "may have" We have CBC now reporting the investigator had 13 million in debt and was bankrupt. A report that he offered the Liberals the story and information first and they refused to hear it (my guess is Donolo is smart enough to know this whole story is going to blow up, and not on Geurgis and is distancing himself and the Liberal Party).
It's all quite a train-wreck really. But the more twists this PI and his story take, the more I think we might be seeing Canada's version of a bubble-boy story.
Thursday, April 15, 2010
McGuinty Liberal MPP Sets New Standard In Partisan Spending
Remember the outrage from the opposition parties and media about partisan spending, referring to those photo-ops with Conservative MP's standing presenting those big cardboard cheques? It seems a member of Dalton McGuinty's caucus has one-upped his federal adversaries in quite an extreme way. Joe Dickson, my MPP here in Ajax seems to be quite photogenic. That picture is the cover of a 40 page flyer, that's right, 40 page flyer, that is being delivered throughout the riding houses in the local paper.
Now if I remember right, a certain Liberal strategist and pal of Dalton McGuinty thought the Conservative photo-ops were way over the top. Well, I counted the pictures in the flyer that contained Liberal MPP Joe Dickson and it's somewhere around 70. I also know that our local paper has quite expensive advertising rates. Just the printing costs of this flyer must be quite high. Ironically enough,Joe Dickson owns Dickson Printing here in Ajax, and it is a highly reputable company. Joe himself deserves enormous credit for his charity work throughout the years, and also that of his family.
But this flyer is one of the worst displays of partisan spending I can remember. I'm all for scrapping those ridiculous 10%ers the federal Conservatives inundate us with, but this is way over the top. Let's look at my top 10 list from this flyer of what critical updates we the people of Ajax-Pickering needed to know.
1) A Pizzeria grand opening.
2) A weight-loss clinic grand opening
3) Coyote Jack bar grand opening.
4) Hair salon opening.
5) A Muslim wedding (also attended by Dan Mcteague)
6) State Farm grand opening.
7) Italian Deli grand opening.
8) A tree planting
9) CIBC Branch opening.
10)SellOffVacations grand opening.
It's nice to see that at a time the province has a $20 billion deficit, our provincial government sees fit to blow cash on partisan spending like this.
p.s. I'll donate $100 to the charity of the persons choice who can verify what this flyer actually cost the taxpayers of Ontario.
Saturday, April 10, 2010
Helena Geurgis For Ambassador To Denmark
With Helena Geurgis career continuing to spiral down the drain it's worth noting the contrast in styles between PM Stephen Harper and former PM Jean Chretien. Our PM, having been notified of possible wrongdoing or possible ethics violations, turfed Geurgis not only from cabinet, but also from caucus. He also took the extraordinary step of calling both the RCMP and ethics commissioner to look into the matter. Suffice to say, Geurgis is getting little sympathy for what she seems to have put on herself.
The usual culprits in the opposition parties, most notably the Liberals, and the usual cast of msm journalists seem to think the PM handled this badly. It's funny though. When the Liberal Party was neck-deep in a scandal involving kickbacks to the party, then PM Jean Chretien, rather than turf Alfonso Gagliano from caucus, instead gave him the plum posting of Ambassador to Denmark. Something many in the media called a shrewd move.
So in that vain, my vote goes to Helena Geurgis for Ambassador to Denmark.
The usual culprits in the opposition parties, most notably the Liberals, and the usual cast of msm journalists seem to think the PM handled this badly. It's funny though. When the Liberal Party was neck-deep in a scandal involving kickbacks to the party, then PM Jean Chretien, rather than turf Alfonso Gagliano from caucus, instead gave him the plum posting of Ambassador to Denmark. Something many in the media called a shrewd move.
So in that vain, my vote goes to Helena Geurgis for Ambassador to Denmark.
Saturday, March 20, 2010
Friday, March 19, 2010
MSM Math: 6% Conservative Lead Is Dead Heat???
The headline re the latest Ipsos poll: Tories and Liberals still in dead heat: Poll
The story: The Conservatives have the support of 34 per cent of decided voters, down three percentage points from the last poll earlier this month, while the Liberals secured 28 per cent of voters, down one percentage point. The New Democratic Party was in third with 18 per cent of the vote; 10 per cent of Canadians would support the Green party.
The story: The Conservatives have the support of 34 per cent of decided voters, down three percentage points from the last poll earlier this month, while the Liberals secured 28 per cent of voters, down one percentage point. The New Democratic Party was in third with 18 per cent of the vote; 10 per cent of Canadians would support the Green party.
Dan McTeague Replies
Received in my inbox from Liberal MP Dan Mcteague. In fairness to Mr. McTeague I have posted his email to me to allow his statement of the facts to be available to anyone wishing to see.
WITHOUT PREJUDICE
March 19, 2010
Paul:
I am contacting you regarding the March 16, 2010 posting on your blog, A CAW Workers Voice Of Reason (located at http://paulsrants-paulsstuff.blogspot.com/), entitled: “Questions Raised Over Dan McTeague’s Education Claims”.
The information contained in the posting contains statements that are erroneous and libelous in nature, and I hereby request that you remove it immediately.
For the record, an error did occur in my campaign literature for the 1992 liberal nomination of the then-called Ontario Riding. Regrettably, it went unnoticed for some time. However, corrective action was taken and a full and very public apology was given by me personally in front of my constituents and the media.
I wish now to advise you of some additional facts:
(1). In 1992, the Liberal nomination candidate referred to in the blog did seek the party’s nod for Ontario Riding as did I. He was soundly defeated and subsequently left the Liberal Party. He ran against me in 2006 General Election as a candidate for the Canadian Action Party. Regardless, since 1992, I can assure you that the individual has used every opportunity – whether in front of the electorate, local or national media - to vociferously attack my personal integrity.
(2). On the first day of the 1997 General Election, front page news in the Toronto Sun and on CTV’s National News was devoted to the issue of my academic credentials. I convened a press conference on that day and in front of the national media and the electorate I apologized for any errors made in any campaign materials. The story ran for several days and if anyone actually believes there was “nary a peep” from the national media they are severely mistaken.
(3).The individual in question has continued to attack my character for over fifteen years but he has not stopped with just me. As court documents note, the individual has been involved in numerous legal actions and activities involving over twenty different people.
(4). In February 2005 the individual was deemed a vexatious litigant by the Superior Court of Ontario. In September 2005, that ruling was upheld on appeal to the Ontario Court of Appeal. As such, the individual was prohibited from undertaking any further legal action against anyone unless first obtaining permission to do so from a Superior Court in Ontario. The individual was also ordered by the courts to pay me substantial awards.
The legal action taken against me that was noted by you was dismissed by the courts. However, there is no reference of that in the blog. Instead, your blog merely states that: “another Liberal candidate for the riding sued McTeague…” This leaves the impression that the candidate in question may have won his case. Moreover, you failed to mention the numerous other court rulings that went against the individual - culminating in the courts deeming him a vexatious litigant and taking away his right to legal redress without prior court approval.
The selective language used in your post can leave the impression that the lawsuit taken against me by that individual was successful. That is not a true reflection of the facts. In addition, I have been advised that the following sentences: “…a Liberal who did in fact falsify his academic credentials.” And “a prominent MP of a sitting government who falsified academic credentials…”, are statements void of substantiating facts and supporting evidence. As such, they are libelous and actionable.
It is my request that you remove the offending posting at the earliest possible opportunity.
Govern yourself accordingly.
Sincerely,
Hon. Dan McTeague, P.C., M.P.
At Mr. McTeagues request, I will delete the blog posting in question. And I will also hope that in the future, members of the opposition parties will hold themselves to the same account, including Mr. McTeague, when trying to smear or sully the reputation of a Conservative MP or candidate.
To take it a step further, Mr. McTeague is free to post here on Rahim Jaffer. It seems members of the Liberal Party , not Mr. McTeague himself,have found Jaffer guilty even though he was not convicted during Question Period a few days ago. Understanding fully Parliamentry Privelage, there is no excuse for the line of questioning from some Liberal MP's.
"Hon. Anita Neville (Winnipeg South Centre, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, members of the government are always quick to comment on any court judgment that does not align with their “get tough on crime” rhetoric. They always say, “You do the crime, you do the time”. What then is the government’s comment on a dangerous driver, in possession of illicit drugs who gets off with no record and a $500 slap on the wrist?"
WITHOUT PREJUDICE
March 19, 2010
Paul:
I am contacting you regarding the March 16, 2010 posting on your blog, A CAW Workers Voice Of Reason (located at http://paulsrants-paulsstuff.blogspot.com/), entitled: “Questions Raised Over Dan McTeague’s Education Claims”.
The information contained in the posting contains statements that are erroneous and libelous in nature, and I hereby request that you remove it immediately.
For the record, an error did occur in my campaign literature for the 1992 liberal nomination of the then-called Ontario Riding. Regrettably, it went unnoticed for some time. However, corrective action was taken and a full and very public apology was given by me personally in front of my constituents and the media.
I wish now to advise you of some additional facts:
(1). In 1992, the Liberal nomination candidate referred to in the blog did seek the party’s nod for Ontario Riding as did I. He was soundly defeated and subsequently left the Liberal Party. He ran against me in 2006 General Election as a candidate for the Canadian Action Party. Regardless, since 1992, I can assure you that the individual has used every opportunity – whether in front of the electorate, local or national media - to vociferously attack my personal integrity.
(2). On the first day of the 1997 General Election, front page news in the Toronto Sun and on CTV’s National News was devoted to the issue of my academic credentials. I convened a press conference on that day and in front of the national media and the electorate I apologized for any errors made in any campaign materials. The story ran for several days and if anyone actually believes there was “nary a peep” from the national media they are severely mistaken.
(3).The individual in question has continued to attack my character for over fifteen years but he has not stopped with just me. As court documents note, the individual has been involved in numerous legal actions and activities involving over twenty different people.
(4). In February 2005 the individual was deemed a vexatious litigant by the Superior Court of Ontario. In September 2005, that ruling was upheld on appeal to the Ontario Court of Appeal. As such, the individual was prohibited from undertaking any further legal action against anyone unless first obtaining permission to do so from a Superior Court in Ontario. The individual was also ordered by the courts to pay me substantial awards.
The legal action taken against me that was noted by you was dismissed by the courts. However, there is no reference of that in the blog. Instead, your blog merely states that: “another Liberal candidate for the riding sued McTeague…” This leaves the impression that the candidate in question may have won his case. Moreover, you failed to mention the numerous other court rulings that went against the individual - culminating in the courts deeming him a vexatious litigant and taking away his right to legal redress without prior court approval.
The selective language used in your post can leave the impression that the lawsuit taken against me by that individual was successful. That is not a true reflection of the facts. In addition, I have been advised that the following sentences: “…a Liberal who did in fact falsify his academic credentials.” And “a prominent MP of a sitting government who falsified academic credentials…”, are statements void of substantiating facts and supporting evidence. As such, they are libelous and actionable.
It is my request that you remove the offending posting at the earliest possible opportunity.
Govern yourself accordingly.
Sincerely,
Hon. Dan McTeague, P.C., M.P.
At Mr. McTeagues request, I will delete the blog posting in question. And I will also hope that in the future, members of the opposition parties will hold themselves to the same account, including Mr. McTeague, when trying to smear or sully the reputation of a Conservative MP or candidate.
To take it a step further, Mr. McTeague is free to post here on Rahim Jaffer. It seems members of the Liberal Party , not Mr. McTeague himself,have found Jaffer guilty even though he was not convicted during Question Period a few days ago. Understanding fully Parliamentry Privelage, there is no excuse for the line of questioning from some Liberal MP's.
"Hon. Anita Neville (Winnipeg South Centre, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, members of the government are always quick to comment on any court judgment that does not align with their “get tough on crime” rhetoric. They always say, “You do the crime, you do the time”. What then is the government’s comment on a dangerous driver, in possession of illicit drugs who gets off with no record and a $500 slap on the wrist?"
Sunday, March 7, 2010
Is Michael Ignatieff And The Liberal Party Releasing Uncensored Documents For Partisan Gain?
Further to my previous post, it seems more than a coincidence that the two most recent stories to grace the top spot on National Newswatch for a day seem to link back to individuals involved with Michael Ignatieff.
As noted by a commenter at Joanne's blog Blue Like You, Attaran and Ignatieff can be linked back to the Carr Center at Harvard.
And now today's top story at National Newswatch links to another individual with ties to Ignatieff, Wesley Wark, of the Munk Center.
What is most disturbing is that the two individuals claim to have seen uncensored versions of security documents. Perhaps it is just a coincidence, but if I were a member of the RCMP I think I would be questioning both individuals and demanding how and who allowed them to see said documents.
As noted by a commenter at Joanne's blog Blue Like You, Attaran and Ignatieff can be linked back to the Carr Center at Harvard.
And now today's top story at National Newswatch links to another individual with ties to Ignatieff, Wesley Wark, of the Munk Center.
What is most disturbing is that the two individuals claim to have seen uncensored versions of security documents. Perhaps it is just a coincidence, but if I were a member of the RCMP I think I would be questioning both individuals and demanding how and who allowed them to see said documents.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)