16 Replies to “Prime Minister Perjuror?”

  1. Glad you picked that up, because this IS HUGE! I saw it unfolding live on question period and couldn’t believe what I was seeing.

  2. hammer this point . .
    he is weak here . . hammer away
    Perjury is serious
    Then get Chretien for the same thing 🙂

  4. The numb masses struggling to make ends meet in their overtaxed paradise called Ontario will hear Martin’s fear-mongering and ignore his evasion of the question. Martin counts on this, because, sadly, it has worked too often before.

  5. Okay, I’ll be the one to ask:
    Kate, have you had lunch with Claude Boulay on any occasion?

  7. I think it’s safe to tell you now… every second Wednesday! We love to see a plan come together because we’re all part of the #### ##### #### ##########!
    BWWWAAHHHAAAA!!!
    [comment edited by agent “Turd Blossom”]

  8. Five letters, five letters, four letters, ten letters. Ten letters would fit nicely with “corruption” but that by definition would have to include “France” or “French” and there’s no six letter group (tho “Kofi” fits the four letters and “crime” fits the five). “Communists” also fits the ten.
    Geez – I hope the CIA is working on this, I’m lost.

  12. Letters exchanged between Martin and Boulay in 1994 while Martin was Finance minister for Chretien.
    Release of letters at Gomery Inquiry delayed by a government lawyer.
    Globe & Mail has the correspondence.
    Martin & Boulay: Lunch today? Oui.
    http://www.rightpoint.org/blogo.html

  13. I watched several newscasts last night and not one of them understood nor focused on the significance of Harper’s question.
    The media are more interested in the optics of Harper and Uncle Paulie going back and forth at each other, but not the content.
    Isn’t this scandal just crying out for some journalist to clamp onto the Gomery findings and make a name for him/herself as a journalist? I haven’t seen anyone who’s picking up the ball on this one full-time.

  14. It’s possible that some journalist has. But as is the case in major media everywhere, it has to be approved by the editors.

  15. Maybe it’s just me, but aside from dodging the lunch with Boulay question, I found it particularly disturbing that Martin would defy the will of parliament by avoiding the call for a public inquiry into the Air India fiasco. Here is the very first exchange from yesterday’s question period:
    *****
    Hon. Stephen Harper (Leader of the Opposition, CPC): Mr. Speaker, last night the House voted to hold a public inquiry into the Air-India tragedy. In fact, members representing every party in this House voted for that motion. The Prime Minister has the moral responsibility to respect the will of the House and the wishes of the families.
    Will the Prime Minister respect this vote and immediately call a public inquiry into the Air-India tragedy?
    Right Hon. Paul Martin (Prime Minister, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the Deputy Prime Minister met this week with a number of the families. She announced that she would be announcing the name of an eminent Canadian who will meet with the families. This individual will seek the answers and seek the questions that should be answered, and the government will determine its position.
    *****
    THE GOVERNMENT WILL DETERMINE ITS POSITION! Silly me, here I thought that the actions of the government were determined by parliament, not by the Prime Minister. What kind of a sham democracy do we live in?

Proudly powered by WordPress & Skyrocket Themes

MENU

Navigation