NDP MP Pat Martin used donations from unions to pay off debt from defamation law suit
31 Replies to “Move over Mike Duffy”
Add to that the considerable bobbing and weaving the NDP are still doing over funding their satellite offices in Montréal from the public purse!
How that big jerk keeps getting himself re-elected is hard to comprehend. Oh wait, unions. And I still don’t get that Duffy thing.
I expect the MSM to be all over this… yeah, right.
What you have to understand is that Mr. Martin is “for the common good” and is therefore exempt from any law or criticism (Much like Ms. Clinton) Mr. Harper, of course, is the embodiment of evil and must be subject to the minutest scrutiny as he may further his (hidden) agenda of destroying gay marriage, ending reproductive rights, kicking kittens, demanding accountability on reserves, etc.
Okay, sarcasm/off.
I really don’t understand this whole Duffy thing: Duffy, being the self-entitled member of the media party that believes his flatulence is fragrant, ripped off the taxpayers on his expense account. Nigel Wright, made a personal loan to Duffy to make it go away because the aforementioned Duffy (who was always after Chretien to get him appointed to the Senate but suddenly turned Conservative when it didn’t happen) felt that he was “entitled to his entitlements” You would think from the wailing and gnashing of the media party, that Harper was on the grassy knoll!
It’s good to see Paddy in the news again! I was beginning to miss him and his ‘Bidenisms’!
As a former Union member,this type of thing really pi**es me off! The dues belong to the members, not the Union officials who seem to think they have the right to waste dues on their pet projects or pet politician. No bloody wonder the NDP and Unions are so against the Union transparency Bill!
Nigel Wright spent HIS OWN money, the Union spent their members money, but that’s typical of all socialists,isn’t it?
If you click on the link, you will see that the story dates back from 23 Sep, 2013. That news did not raise any outrage whatsoever among the easily outraged crowd. I’m not trying to excuse Pat Martin, who IMO has been allowed by the Speaker of the House far too much leeway in venting his rants. I’m simply pointing out that, as usual, a conservative doing anything at all, becomes fodder for the MSM for weeks, whereas “progressives” misbehaving — it’s here today, gone tomorrow.
When socialists do it … it’s okay … this will blow over and no one will notice. Other than the mentally challenged outraged with Harper derangement syndrome, no one even cares about the Mike Puffy fiasco.
Martin’s affair will receive very little coverage.
WTF? The Martin item is two years old ….. is it relevant at this point? Does anyone care?
Relevent? Not if you’re a communist.
There was no loss of taxpayer money involved in either case. What the taxpayer is on the hook for is all the political reprecussions, which exceed by many multiples the original alleged crime.
Nigel Wright repaid the crown with his cheque, not Duffy.
In Martin’s case, it was union membership who paid off a debt resulting from a lawsuit through the union dues, their own form of enforced taxation.
Really can’t understand how Duffy is on trial accused of accepting a bribe when Wright’s cheque was written to the crown.
But then, I guess if politics is the art of the possible, the possible can be fulfilled through deception … in many cases.
That’s why I’ve always voted for the party that promises to spend the least amount of my money … after making the mistake of voting for Trudeau The First.
It still boils down to the fact that Wright made the conscious decision to use his own money to get the insufferable Duffy off the hook and reimburse Canadian taxpayers. In Martin’s case, union dues were used to save his ass without the approval or knowledge of union members who provided the funds in the first place. Huge difference.
CUPE contributed to Martin so taxpayers did get stiffed.
That was a joke right? …’move over Duffy’?….
cuz that is old news and Lisa LaFlemme is not talking to Bob Fife about it and has not raised Craig Oliver’s ostrich neck to talk about it…so it did not happen!
There are no University of Trawwna ethics experts being consulted so clearly it is not a sin against Canada.
No former Liberal or RedTory has been a guest on Power and Polly’s to blame Harper…
Oh never mind…
Indeed, this is now an ancient story.
“Martin was upfront about his gifts, he sought and received approval from the ethics commissioner and seemingly played by the rules.”
How could any supposed “ethics commissioner” possibly think a politician receiving large cash gifts from unions was OK? That is where any investigation was needed. The fact money supposedly went into a trust fund strictly for the lawsuit is of little consequence.
Martin is untouchable on this anyways, I hear he has already blamed the entire situation on his underwear.
This sure looks like the unions expect something in return. Why doesn’t it occur to the RCMP to investigate this for potential bribery? I am having trouble figuring out how the Duffy case could possibly be bribery. Duffy fought tooth and nail against repaying the money because he was convinced he was innocent.
This sure looks like the unions expect something in return. Why doesn’t it occur to the RCMP to investigate this for potential bribery? I am having trouble figuring out how the Duffy case could possibly be bribery. Duffy fought tooth and nail against repaying the money because he was convinced he was innocent.
Although some union members may be quite alright with the handout to Martin, it will leave a bad taste in the mouths of many. The unions have some ‘splainin’ to do.
In Wright’s case, no justification required. Well maybe to his wife or the beneficiaries of his estate.
I was wondering when Mac Harb’s trial was starting,so I googled it. Turns out it has already started, turns out he has had a change of heart and has decided to pay the $231,000 back.Where did he get the money you ask, turns out there is some very generous businessmen/lawyers in his former riding who happen to have some extra cash lying around for exactly such a purpose. Bribe, payoff, influence pedalling,we may never know, unless the media party takes a break from the Duffy trial to follow the money. I’m not holding my breath!
And to think I was kicked out of a local presidency and suspended by the PSAC for three year (they knew I was retiring in one) for daring to criticize the national president and complaining of my dues going to the NDP.
I don’t like the new pussy Pat. I want the perpetually angry Pat wearing a turtle neck and screaming about social injustice in Canada, land of oppression. Funniest guy in the House.
I was wondering when Mac Harb’s trial was starting,so I googled it. Turns out it has already started, turns out he has had a change of heart and has decided to pay the $231,000 back.Where did he get the money you ask, turns out there is some very generous businessmen/lawyers in his former riding who happen to have some extra cash lying around for exactly such a purpose. Bribe, payoff, influence pedalling,we may never know, unless the media party takes a break from the Duffy trial to follow the money. I’m not holding my breath!
If you take all these “improprieties” attributable to our political wonder dogs, remove the offending names of those who caused them and throw them into a big pile for sorting from most to least offending, how does a $90,000 payment cover-up beat a former deputy education minister on child porn charges for media coverage importance?
It is shameful.
Mac Harb’s trial was supposed to start August 10 but his lawyer begged of so as not to embarrass the Liberals. I instead we get Duffy Part II. Duffy Part II was not scheduled until after the election. I am not sure what the optics of Duffy tried during the campaign instead of Harb is all about.
Remember that the media are like a fish that only bites at lures that have a blue color………. they won’t even nibble at orange or red ones….
Just goes to show how little coverage there is on Mac Harb, CTV had article on trial about to start,but nothing on postponement. They did however report on his repayment and the fact that he “borrowed” the money from local businessmen.
It’s ‘Lisa La Phlegm’ actually. I have been calling her that even back when she had a giant hedge for a hairdo.
Considering the teachers union got Winn re-elected with all their money a few bucks here or there should not surprise anyone.
So where is all the money coming from that funds the PAC that trumpets Turdeau’s virtues? No limits there!
His payments calculate a personal loan in the range of 175000 meaning the union also paid an equal amount .
Where is the outrage CBC ?
In case you guys missed it:
“According to the Ottawa Citizen report, Martin did get approval from federal ethics commissioner Mary Dawson prior to accepting the union donations. But while he must recuse himself from voting on legislation that “affect his donors specifically” he is free to vote “on legislation that affects labour unions generally.” Martin was upfront about his gifts, he sought and received approval from the ethics commissioner and seemingly played by the rules.”
See the difference? No backroom sneaking around. He did everything by the book. This in no way resembles the Duffy affair, but nice try!
Add to that the considerable bobbing and weaving the NDP are still doing over funding their satellite offices in Montréal from the public purse!
How that big jerk keeps getting himself re-elected is hard to comprehend. Oh wait, unions. And I still don’t get that Duffy thing.
I expect the MSM to be all over this… yeah, right.
What you have to understand is that Mr. Martin is “for the common good” and is therefore exempt from any law or criticism (Much like Ms. Clinton) Mr. Harper, of course, is the embodiment of evil and must be subject to the minutest scrutiny as he may further his (hidden) agenda of destroying gay marriage, ending reproductive rights, kicking kittens, demanding accountability on reserves, etc.
Okay, sarcasm/off.
I really don’t understand this whole Duffy thing: Duffy, being the self-entitled member of the media party that believes his flatulence is fragrant, ripped off the taxpayers on his expense account. Nigel Wright, made a personal loan to Duffy to make it go away because the aforementioned Duffy (who was always after Chretien to get him appointed to the Senate but suddenly turned Conservative when it didn’t happen) felt that he was “entitled to his entitlements” You would think from the wailing and gnashing of the media party, that Harper was on the grassy knoll!
It’s good to see Paddy in the news again! I was beginning to miss him and his ‘Bidenisms’!
As a former Union member,this type of thing really pi**es me off! The dues belong to the members, not the Union officials who seem to think they have the right to waste dues on their pet projects or pet politician. No bloody wonder the NDP and Unions are so against the Union transparency Bill!
Nigel Wright spent HIS OWN money, the Union spent their members money, but that’s typical of all socialists,isn’t it?
http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/canadian-politics/mp-pat-martin-received-loan-from-ndp-donations-from-unions-to-help-fund-robocalls-defamation-suit
If you click on the link, you will see that the story dates back from 23 Sep, 2013. That news did not raise any outrage whatsoever among the easily outraged crowd. I’m not trying to excuse Pat Martin, who IMO has been allowed by the Speaker of the House far too much leeway in venting his rants. I’m simply pointing out that, as usual, a conservative doing anything at all, becomes fodder for the MSM for weeks, whereas “progressives” misbehaving — it’s here today, gone tomorrow.
When socialists do it … it’s okay … this will blow over and no one will notice. Other than the mentally challenged outraged with Harper derangement syndrome, no one even cares about the Mike Puffy fiasco.
Martin’s affair will receive very little coverage.
WTF? The Martin item is two years old ….. is it relevant at this point? Does anyone care?
Relevent? Not if you’re a communist.
There was no loss of taxpayer money involved in either case. What the taxpayer is on the hook for is all the political reprecussions, which exceed by many multiples the original alleged crime.
Nigel Wright repaid the crown with his cheque, not Duffy.
In Martin’s case, it was union membership who paid off a debt resulting from a lawsuit through the union dues, their own form of enforced taxation.
Really can’t understand how Duffy is on trial accused of accepting a bribe when Wright’s cheque was written to the crown.
But then, I guess if politics is the art of the possible, the possible can be fulfilled through deception … in many cases.
That’s why I’ve always voted for the party that promises to spend the least amount of my money … after making the mistake of voting for Trudeau The First.
It still boils down to the fact that Wright made the conscious decision to use his own money to get the insufferable Duffy off the hook and reimburse Canadian taxpayers. In Martin’s case, union dues were used to save his ass without the approval or knowledge of union members who provided the funds in the first place. Huge difference.
CUPE contributed to Martin so taxpayers did get stiffed.
That was a joke right? …’move over Duffy’?….
cuz that is old news and Lisa LaFlemme is not talking to Bob Fife about it and has not raised Craig Oliver’s ostrich neck to talk about it…so it did not happen!
There are no University of Trawwna ethics experts being consulted so clearly it is not a sin against Canada.
No former Liberal or RedTory has been a guest on Power and Polly’s to blame Harper…
Oh never mind…
Indeed, this is now an ancient story.
“Martin was upfront about his gifts, he sought and received approval from the ethics commissioner and seemingly played by the rules.”
How could any supposed “ethics commissioner” possibly think a politician receiving large cash gifts from unions was OK? That is where any investigation was needed. The fact money supposedly went into a trust fund strictly for the lawsuit is of little consequence.
Martin is untouchable on this anyways, I hear he has already blamed the entire situation on his underwear.
This sure looks like the unions expect something in return. Why doesn’t it occur to the RCMP to investigate this for potential bribery? I am having trouble figuring out how the Duffy case could possibly be bribery. Duffy fought tooth and nail against repaying the money because he was convinced he was innocent.
This sure looks like the unions expect something in return. Why doesn’t it occur to the RCMP to investigate this for potential bribery? I am having trouble figuring out how the Duffy case could possibly be bribery. Duffy fought tooth and nail against repaying the money because he was convinced he was innocent.
Although some union members may be quite alright with the handout to Martin, it will leave a bad taste in the mouths of many. The unions have some ‘splainin’ to do.
In Wright’s case, no justification required. Well maybe to his wife or the beneficiaries of his estate.
I was wondering when Mac Harb’s trial was starting,so I googled it. Turns out it has already started, turns out he has had a change of heart and has decided to pay the $231,000 back.Where did he get the money you ask, turns out there is some very generous businessmen/lawyers in his former riding who happen to have some extra cash lying around for exactly such a purpose. Bribe, payoff, influence pedalling,we may never know, unless the media party takes a break from the Duffy trial to follow the money. I’m not holding my breath!
And to think I was kicked out of a local presidency and suspended by the PSAC for three year (they knew I was retiring in one) for daring to criticize the national president and complaining of my dues going to the NDP.
I don’t like the new pussy Pat. I want the perpetually angry Pat wearing a turtle neck and screaming about social injustice in Canada, land of oppression. Funniest guy in the House.
I was wondering when Mac Harb’s trial was starting,so I googled it. Turns out it has already started, turns out he has had a change of heart and has decided to pay the $231,000 back.Where did he get the money you ask, turns out there is some very generous businessmen/lawyers in his former riding who happen to have some extra cash lying around for exactly such a purpose. Bribe, payoff, influence pedalling,we may never know, unless the media party takes a break from the Duffy trial to follow the money. I’m not holding my breath!
If you take all these “improprieties” attributable to our political wonder dogs, remove the offending names of those who caused them and throw them into a big pile for sorting from most to least offending, how does a $90,000 payment cover-up beat a former deputy education minister on child porn charges for media coverage importance?
It is shameful.
Mac Harb’s trial was supposed to start August 10 but his lawyer begged of so as not to embarrass the Liberals. I instead we get Duffy Part II. Duffy Part II was not scheduled until after the election. I am not sure what the optics of Duffy tried during the campaign instead of Harb is all about.
Remember that the media are like a fish that only bites at lures that have a blue color………. they won’t even nibble at orange or red ones….
Just goes to show how little coverage there is on Mac Harb, CTV had article on trial about to start,but nothing on postponement. They did however report on his repayment and the fact that he “borrowed” the money from local businessmen.
It’s ‘Lisa La Phlegm’ actually. I have been calling her that even back when she had a giant hedge for a hairdo.
Considering the teachers union got Winn re-elected with all their money a few bucks here or there should not surprise anyone.
So where is all the money coming from that funds the PAC that trumpets Turdeau’s virtues? No limits there!
His payments calculate a personal loan in the range of 175000 meaning the union also paid an equal amount .
Where is the outrage CBC ?
In case you guys missed it:
“According to the Ottawa Citizen report, Martin did get approval from federal ethics commissioner Mary Dawson prior to accepting the union donations. But while he must recuse himself from voting on legislation that “affect his donors specifically” he is free to vote “on legislation that affects labour unions generally.” Martin was upfront about his gifts, he sought and received approval from the ethics commissioner and seemingly played by the rules.”
See the difference? No backroom sneaking around. He did everything by the book. This in no way resembles the Duffy affair, but nice try!