There were two people in the room, besides the Conservative operatives. One was Mr. Cadman, the other was his assistant Dan Wallace (nobody disputes this fact). Mrs. Cadman relays what happened, based on what her husband had said. Now, a journalist would look for confirmation, see if Mr. Wallace can collaborate these outlandish accusations. When asked, this was Mr. Wallace's response:
"I believe Dona Cadman as the day is long. She has no interest in fabricating anything"
The second source says you should take Dona Cadman at her word, there is no interest in lying. No clarification, no "I don't recall" any offer, no denial that it happened. All Wallace did was "recoil" at first, when questioned, then he offered support for Dona Cadman. There is no stretch in logic to say that the man in the room at the time confirms Dona Cadman's story.
Maybe Bob Fife could do his job today, instead of wondering aloud about the practicalities of a terminally ill man securing life insurance. The only question relevant, is not whether it was feasible to do so, but was that offer made, by overly zealous Conservative operatives, desperate to get Cadman on side? Fife was embarrassing today, so overt in his personal attempt to kill a story, which he himself hasn't bothered to confirm or dispute, just lazy armchair analysis, which speaks to a disturbing bias.
42 comments:
Pat Martin on CBC this morning said the Ethics Committee work on Mulroney is pretty much complete. Commenting on this story, Martin said the Committee's schedule is wide open and these allegations would move to the top of the list for consideration.
Steve,
You really must be half cut if you see Bob Fife as some conservative lackey.
In regards to the Ethics Committee, I do think Paul Szabo would love to take this for a test drive.
Tomm
tomm
Did you watch the video? Where does Fife get off saying there isn't much here, when it just broke last night and his network hasn't done any follow-up? What we saw this morning was his kneejerk disposition in full regalia.
Just as I think Susan Delacourt leans Liberal, so does Bob Fife lean Conservative.
Wow, that was unreal. You would think that an act this vile would transcend partisan notions, but clearly it doesn't for some people.
You'll note that the Blogging Tories are just completely ignoring the story right now.
"You really must be half cut if you see Bob Fife as some conservative lackey."
Yet he gets ALL the scoops from this government. I wonder why...
This is a weird story. besides the fact that Dona is now a candidate, the weird thing is with the assistant:
"There were two people in the room, besides the Conservative operatives. One was Mr. Cadman, the other was his assistant Dan Wallace (nobody disputes this fact). Mrs. Cadman relays what happened, based on what her husband had said. Now, a journalist would look for confirmation, see if Mr. Wallace can collaborate these outlandish accusations. When asked, this was Mr. Wallace's response:
"I believe Dona Cadman as the day is long. She has no interest in fabricating anything"
Wallace was there - why is his answer based on Dona's answer, instead of what he heard?
I can't wait to hear from Dona (hopefully today) and hear it from her.
If no names are named then to me it's a complete fabrication and a great way to sell a recently released book.
No scandal here folks...
Well, Fife is absolutley correct, whether you like it or not.
Lets see -
1) Cadman only ever said that he was offered an uncontested nomination.
2) These so called mysterious Conservative "officals" making the offer are never named.
3) The wife of the man himself is running for the Party who is being accused.
4) A book on the man is about to be conveniently released.
4) No real life insurance company would ever offer a $1,000,000 policy to a man dying of cancer. Said company is never named.
5) What Party stands to benifit the most from the "outing" of this "scandal" at such a crucial juncture in the life of this minority Parliament? Oh yeah. How convenient.
A whole lot of nothing. Good luck with that.
Fife: 'All Cadman said was that he was offered an uncontested nomination'
and by chance, does an MP benefit package include life insurance?
Anon has a good point. Wallace, was there, and can confirm he heard the Cons' offer, but doesn't.
This is a good story. Now some people, as seeing your comments, may say this shows no evidence that the tories did this; however no one can deny that Bob Fife was not being a journalist.
In seeing the clip you can see directly that the whole segment was to say this is not a story. No journalist creed suggests that one should report something, just to say its not a big deal.
Journalists should not give their opinions, and thats all Bob Fife did. He offerred nothing new, every word he said was tainted with bias. Seriously people should watch the clip and keep in mind journalists should present the facts and not say whether a story is not a story and who people should trust.
Again good story, I'm gonna do a video of this, but CTV will pull it on YouTube in less then 2 days.
-scott
thescottross
ps. Rick Mercer's
'Liberals are Adaptable' will out live this. but nice try Libs.
I wonder how, if stretching the imagination that this were true, this would be any different than the whole fiasco with Belinda Stronach crossing the floor to the Liberals at a likewise crucial juncture in a minority Parliament and conveniently getting a cabinet post?
Kai: You really wonder how that's different? Offering a dying man a crucial insurance policy or offering a person a job, that's not easily distinguishable? Fact is offering someone a job if they switch is based on their skill set and thus you'd want to use their skills. Offering someone only to vote a certain way for money is all wrong, especially considering in doing so you are appealing to a dying man's worries of making sure his family is okay.
-scott
Only the degree between the two is different, if either is indeed true.
Harper doesn't deny that these unnamed officials were on party business, so not sure how you can disregard that a meeting did take place, Harper confirms. As I've said before, it means nothing whether a insurance policy could be secured, what matter is if it was offered.
Cadman never acknowledged that this took place, but his wife is, are we calling her a LIAR? The assistant comments support her credibility, you can't spin that any other way.
I would add, the Cons aren't denying a meeting, they are just denying that Harper directed the tone or knowledge of what was offered. The apologists need to stay focused here, rather than trying to distract from the core issues here.
"they are just denying that Harper directed the tone or knowledge of what was offered"
If the insurance policy was offered, then you want the names of the officials, right? This is all we can do, haul Dona Cadman into the Ethics Committee and ask questions.
Then a document like the Mitchell Report gets tabled. Hey, we aren't going into election soon. Keeps the Grit backbenchers important.
"If the insurance policy was offered, then you want the names of the officials, right?"
Just ask Harper the names, he readily admits telling them not to "push" too hard. No one denies that the Harper quotes aren't completely accurate, at the very least he places himself in the conversation about what to do with Cadman, and it would seem his defence is that he didn't want to go as far as his officials apparently did, although he admits financial issues were discussed. There is PLENTY of meat here.
BTW, CTV is now covering the story like a news network now, Fife must be on lunch or having tea at the PMO.
“I can tell you that I had told the individuals - I mean, they wanted to do it - but I told them they were wasting their time. I said Chuck had made up his mind he was going to vote with the Liberals. I knew why, and I respected the decision, but they were just, they were convinced there was, there was financial issues and, there may or may not.
“They were legitimately representing the party,” Mr. Harper confirmed. “I said ‘Don't press him, I mean, you have this theory that it's, you know, financial insecurity, and you know, just, you know, if that's what you say make the case,' but I said ‘Don't press it.' “
Harper "had told the individuals", which means he knows exactly who we are talking about here. So much for disregarding this due to the unnamed operatives, Harper admits they exist, he had met them.
Cadman's wife today offered more detail:
"They had the form there. Chuck just had to sign.”
This thing stinks to high heaven.
Too funny.
Szabo lines up the witnesses:
-the grocery store clerk that heard from the delivery boy that Cadman was looking at a life insurance policy....err something offical looking....err yes, it could have been his car insurance policy.
-Wallace doesn't recall the names of the 2 Conservatives wooing Cadman to rejoin the Conservatives.
Wallace did not see what was on the list.
Wallace can not confirm that an insurance policy was offered but refers to Dona's claim it is so.
-And of course, the author of the soon to be released book (Stevie Cameron all over again) is brought in as the key 'expert' witness.
-Dona clarifies that all Conservative MPs are covered by life insurance, it would have been one of the group benefits.
-Pablo is injected into the committee. CBC wants to know if...
wilson
You're a joke. Keep flailing....
It seems that the Mound of Sound has suspects on who the two operatives are in BC that would try to buy off Cadman.
I am prodding him.
BTW Wilson, shouldn't you be offended by what happened. This represents a betrayal of the Reform party roots that the Cadmans and many of the increasingly silent MPs in Harper's caucus have been railing against in the 1990s. Yes, being in government is fun. Staying silent so one gets to feast on federal procurement projects. How is the prison that will be built in your neighbourhood?
Perhaps the Ethics Committee could call up Dion and interrogate him on what he knows about the
12 Liberal (Quebec) canadidates that received envelopes filled with cash,
totaling $120,000
from his friend Cote;
Cote testified that he was guilty, and Dion said Cote suffered enough with being exiled for the LPC, and should be welcomed back.
where's the criminal charges?
Perhaps the Ethics Committee should interrogate Chretien about Shawinigate.
Both those events cost taxpayers money. I want it back.
Its clear that the Liberals never broke this story, but they are going to try and own it as a distraction from the day to day problems that even their supporters know the Liberals are having.
Cadman never acknowledged that this took place, but his wife is, are we calling her a LIAR? The assistant comments support her credibility, you can't spin that any other way.
No one is calling her a liar. Only that the idea that the wife of the man, who knows full well the history of this, more than anyone else, would run for the very Party being accused of this is utterly ludicrous.
As I've said before, it means nothing whether a insurance policy could be secured, what matter is if it was offered.
And yet, how can anyone take the story of someone making such a silly offer like that seriously? $1,000,000 life insurance policy for a guy that could die tommorrow? C'mon!
Why not just say that they offered him a cure for cancer? It matters not that immortality could be secured, what matters is if was offered.
Ridiculous.....
Sorry, what does this particular issue have to do with the Liberals again??
'BTW Wilson, shouldn't you be offended by what happened.'
What happened Mushroom?
Did the CPC advise Cadman of the group benefits CPC members receive?
No, not offended.
I can't see any other way that an insurance company would cover a terminally ill person.
kai
You say it is hard to believe, yet there it is, she said it and she is running.
You said it is nonsense to offer the policy, and yet that is what she said, further confirmed today.
Maybe it is ridiculous, but lots of things in life are, and yet they HAPPEN.
Work the margins if you want, it doesn't really speak to the relevance of did this happen or not. Obviously people have to be careful here, but....
I find it difficult to believe anyone would be a member of a Party that was thought to have bribed her husband who was DYING, and to make her the benificiary of $1,000,000, yet STILL run as a CANDIDATE for that very Party making such a henious inducement to her dying husband.
Something is obviously missing here, which is exactly why this doesn't jive. I'm sure we'll know more by suppertime.
kai
All that she said today was that there was an actual policy presented for Cadman to sign...ouch.
Dona Cadman made the statements, and yet she is running for the Cons. There is nothing to reconcile there, because she said it, she said it's true, case closed. Maybe she wants to run for the Cons to clean up the unseemly behavior ;) Again, your problem with the logic is irrelevant to the allegation.
Lets see, two Tory "officials" that no one knows the name of, who made an "offer" that we may or may not know is legitimate or could ever be seriously accepted (and for all we know, is an alchemy formula for turning lead into gold, let alone a $1,000,000 policy for a man that could die the next day), make such a henious offer to a dying man that rather than be utterly outraged, his wife decides to run for the same Party. Uh huh.....yeah. And this is "ouch" for the Tories.........how?
Despite your assertions, logic is absolutley relevant here. How can it not be? Things aren't adding up. If the Liberals want run with this, I say all power to them; go ahead and try. We'll find out more, and even if true, may turn out to be asbolutley nothing, much to the embarrassment of those trying to make this a "gotcha" issue.
A conservative who finds reality difficult to believe - how unusual.
"Lets see, two Tory "officials" that no one knows the name of.."
Are you paying attention, or just on Con apologist auto-pilot? Harper admits to speaking with officials:
"I can tell you that I had told the individuals - I mean, they wanted to do it - but I told them they were wasting their time."
Harper admits that:
“They were legitimately representing the party,”
I'm not sure what is ridiculous here, except for your nonsensical comments. I guess we need to ask Harper who "they" are, who are these "individuals" he speaks of. Maybe these people don't exist, but then again that brings into question a whole myriad of concerns as to Harper's mental state...not sure we want to go there.
Just go put you head back in the sand.
You know what's funny, if you go to Blogging Tories it's like this story doesn't even exist. Judging by the lame excuses here, I'm not surprised...
Iggy, right between the eyes in QP:
"Is the Prime Minister saying that his candidate in Surrey is lying?"
Every answer uses the CTV Mike Duffy interview as defence, wherein Cadman didn't acknowledge any inappropriate offer.
You know what's funny, if you go to Blogging Tories it's like this story doesn't even exist.
That's because the BT bloggers are all over here trolling, under other pseudonyms.
They don't have their own ideas, but boy, can they ever hector/lecture and badger, especially when others have done the work involved in reading and analysing the reports in the media.
I hope by the time the election rolls around non-Conservative bloggers will pull the plug on the Connies who can't/won't provide one additional factoid when bothering the rest of us with their endless "reasoning."
And that is the whole point Steve. Harper may know more, even names but we don't know anything by contrast until we hear something current from the one that is running for the Tories and who is at the centre of this.
As we speak the Libloggers are hopping up and down, frothing at the mouth, and flinging their feces like agitated monkeys looking for some excitement. We can have fun speculating all we like, but until certain facts I mentioned earlier are resolved, this story will go nowhere. Trying to make it do so may just end up embarrassing the Liberals who really don't have a lot of political capital to spend right now. We all heard from the Liberals how the whole Schrieber affair was going to tie into and nail Harper, yet that has gone absolutley nowhere.
So I tell you what, Steve. I will put my head back in the sand as soon as you pull yours out.
"until we hear something current from the one that is running for the Tories and who is at the centre of this."
CBC spoke with her THIS MORNING (does that qualify as current?) and she said that not only was insurance offered, but a policy was presented at the meeting.
Now go back in the Tory hole, where you can't read the news apparently.
Just to bring this whole thing full circle, I find it hilarious that the only talking point the Cons had today in QP was reciting a interview which has ran on CTV all day. Cadman didn't tell Duffy, therefore none of it is true. Hopefully, they come up with better stuff tomorrow...
Kai, political parties are just convenient banners for related factions to rally under. Partisanship tends to obscure this, but there is nothing odd about Dona Cadman remaining under the Conservative banner, even if she thinks something is rotten with some of its factions.
The Conservatives are composed of the Reformers, a few PCs, the social conservatives, a handful of American/corporate stooges, and probably other groups I don't know about. I really wish they'd self-identify their faction because I don't have a Who's Who, but it would spoil the illusion.
Now go back in the Tory hole, where you can't read the news apparently.
All that she said today was that there was an actual policy presented for Cadman to sign...ouch.
Well apparentley, I can. And what I was referring to, if you have trouble comprehending, was to question and fathom why she would run as a candidate today for a Party that would, according to her, do this thing that you all say is so unspeakable.
But in all the Liberal flinging of monkey feces, I wouldn't expect you to get that, so I'll leave you to your particular Liberal "hole" of your own, where the concept of reading comprehension is foreign. Heave to, my good Liberals. Heave to.
Take care kai, and thanks for the forgettable spin.
Flinging monkey feces. I see I wasted three minutes of my life talking to you.
Post a Comment