Ms. Buckler also balked at making that kind of blanket denial – even when it was made clear that financial benefits were not being interpreted to include the campaign funds that the Conservatives admit they were prepared to give the dying MP.Buckler wasn't alone:
The Globe and Mail asked Ms. Buckler to confirm that "no representative of the Conservative Party at any time offered Chuck Cadman a financial benefit in exchange for his vote [understanding] ‘financial benefit' to mean anything but help with a possible election campaign."
She twice refused..
Ryan Sparrow, a Conservative Party spokesman, declined in six e-mail exchanges with The Globe and Mail to state that no Conservative official had ever offered a financial inducement of any kind to Mr. Cadman.
Over and over, the Conservative line has been that Cadman was only offered help with his election campaign. There are problems with this defence, namely Cadman's health, but let's give this to the Conservatives for arguments sake. If that were true, then the PMO, the Conservative Party, any representative should have no problem answering the above question. That question purposely eliminates any vague reference, it narrows the focus to the Conservative argument, it merely asks for confirmation. Why the verbal gymnastics? Why can't these people respond to a question which essentially re-iterates what Harper has said, day after day? Why the hesitation?
Something to hide?
It seems like a no-brainer to deny that a crime was committed. I guess either they have no brains, or they know evidence is out there to prove that a crime was committed, and don't want to be caught lying too.
It's a no brainer if you're innocent. Saying nothing actually speaks VOLUMES.
Let me show you how this is done. You will temporarily have to take off your red glasses though.
Go to ctv.ca and listen to the Mike Duffy Live interview with Iggy. Pay close attention at the 9:50 mark of the interview.
Duffy asks about the difference between the Paul Martin offer to Belinda. At this point that offer could have been Paul Martin getting on his knees and shining Belinda's shoes everyday before she enters the HoC as far as I am concerned.
Now listen to Iggy's reply and what the offer was. Now put the red glasses back on and start asking the same type of questions we keep hearing about Cadman.
We can all connect the dots on what Iggy said also. Just depends which side you sit on though!
I must tell you, it brings a shit kicking smile to my face watching you clowns, reduced to comparing Harper to Martin. I just love it, to be frank. So desperate, that you have to resort to the Liberals for moral cover. Absolutely priceless.
Not sure why you would stoop to calling me a clown Steve?
This is just how I look at all things. Sort of like watching a game between the Leaf's and the Senator's with a diehard fan of each team. You would think they are watching two different games.
Did you acually watch the clip or was your first response to just attack me?
I maybe stepped over the line by putting in the red glasses comment and do feel bad for saying that as it has nothing to do with what I was really trying to say. I just wanted you to be open about what was said at that one point.
:), well done Steve.
"Did you acually watch the clip or was your first response to just attack me?"
I saw it earlier today, thought it was quite funny for Duffy to bring up the lame Conservative talking point, a further indication of his embarrassing bias.
Sorry about the clown comment, but your makeup is a dead giveaway. My fault for noticing I suppose.
It looks like Sandra Buckler is too decent a person to fib to reporters.
Doesn't sound like she is tough enough for politics.
It also sounds like there may be roots to this one.
But Steve, you've got to admit, this government has considerably higher morals than what we've been use to.
Speaking of clips, did anyone catch Moore on the CBC today. Moore was getting it handed to him so bad, he actually started questioning the tape again, asking why the entire interview hadn't been released. Quite telling that after his ten second soundbite routine, the only thing he had left was to re-introduce that turd into the discussion.
"But Steve, you've got to admit, this government has considerably higher morals than what we've been use to."
You're kidding right? Actually Tomm, you don't seem to get it, when you get past the slogans, with each day passed, these guys look strangely familar. That's all I've ever asked, that Conservative supporters finally are forced into the realization that their moral pedestal was a vascade, a construct of convenience, based on year's of never actually having to govern. These guys are worse on so many levels, the hypocrisy is staggering.
You are missing the point Steve ;).
Open up your mind alittle bit. Don't be so narrow in how you look at things.
Forget about Duffy as his bias is not the point. You are taking his bias as the reason you just disregard what is said.
You don't get it, I don't give a shit about Stronach, it has NOTHING to do with whether or not Cadman was bribed. You are so narrow here, that you want to force me into a discussion about your lame, head office approved, talking point, which is 100% diversion. Who cares about Stronach, answer the freaking questions, that's all that matters.
Open up your mind, apparently oxygen deprivation is an issue here.
Actually one of the funniest parts of Moore's interview was when he denied saying the tape was edited. No, he just implied it. He does not want to make false allegations - he just wants people to believe them.
When he thought he was off camera?? Too funny.
lol..."Something To Hide" now makes sense ;)
Post a Comment