Dedicated to the Restoration of Progressive Democracy
My prediction for the findings of the ethics investigation: move along, nothing to seeIt's the rotten, sneaked-into-existence corporate friendly law, that the pundits and the feckless opposition should be targeting ... not the discussion and (non) use of the law.
The stock answer in QP last week was that nobody in the PMO "directed" the justice minister to go easy on SNC-Lavalin. Since the relevant legal test is the much broader question of whether anyone attempted to influence the prosecution, I'd be surprised if the ethics commissioner clears the PMO.Cap
Ooo, the ethics commissioner! Justin's in big trouble now! (not)I almost feel sorry for Justin on this one. I mean, sure, the PMO talked about what they wanted to happen in the case. Of course they did, it's a high profile case with political implications. And while I'm quite convinced Justin and Butts and many other Liberal apparatchiks are as corrupt as the Cons before them and the Libs before them and the Cons before them and . . . um, anyway, I expect they're corrupt--but even if they hadn't been, anything they said about the case around her would be pretty easy to call "influence" if they had some kind of opinion. As soon as the question is framed that way, they can't win.I don't care that much though--that's politics; parties I like better have been slimed worse with less reason.
Post a Comment