12 thoughts on the Duffy scandal in the wake of Nigel Wright’s resignation

In the comments, readers debate: ‘Is this really a story?’


Politicians and pundits weigh in on Nigel Wright’s resignation and what comes next:

Tim Harper
The Toronto Star

“Mike Duffy is radioactive. The one-time Conservative cheerleader is now the poster boy for the filth which envelops the party brand. The man holed up on Friendly Lane in Cavendish, P.E.I., has brought down one of the most powerful men in Canada, shaken the Stephen Harper government to its core and blown a hole in the confidence the increasingly skeptical Conservative base has in the party.”

Vern White, Conservative Senator and former Ottawa police chief
Interview in the Ottawa Citizen

“Loyalty can never override integrity. And I hope everyone else in the Senate starts to get their head around that. Now, some have that, but I hope everybody starts understanding that integrity’s all we have, that loyalty can’t be more important than integrity.”

Dan Leger
The Chronicle Herald 

“I’m almost ashamed to admit this now, but I once considered Mike Duffy a friend.”

Tim Powers, VP Summa Strategies
Interview in the Hill Times

“I think there are Senators who make immense contributions, whether it be on the mental health front like Marjory LeBreton, or Hugh Segal, and Romeo Dallaire, when it comes to advocacy around combat issues and child soldiers All of that is obscured by the actions and behaviour of a few—but it is not just obscuring, it’s almost becoming an eclipse.”

Michael Taube
The Ottawa Citizen

“The loss of Nigel Wright is also Canada’s loss. As I mentioned in a Citizen op-ed last September when he was being attacked by opposition parties for his business connections, “his firm commitment to public service — in this case, politics — has never been a mystery.” Very few people of his stature and experience would ever take a significant pay cut and come to Ottawa. Sure, his position at Onex was always secure — and my guess is he’ll go back there. But the fact still remains that he didn’t have to come, and he was never forced to stay. Unfortunately, Wright made a huge tactical error and paid the ultimate price.”

Norman Spector, former chief of staff to Brian Mulroney
Interview in the Hill Times 

“There are a lot less consequential matters that a chief of staff would seek direction on or inform the Prime Minister about. I can’t imagine doing anything of this consequence without informing the Prime Minister, and I can’t imagine doing anything like cutting a cheque when I was a chief of staff—a personal cheque at a time when a Senator is being investigated.”

Lawrence Martin

“The chief of staff’s resignation means that the Senate scandal registers high on the Richter Scale — the highest since Harper almost lost his government in the 2008 coalition crisis over a fumbled budget statement. It has now reached “gate” status. It is now Duffygate.”

Michael Den Tandt

“These are the questions facing the prime minister Tuesday, as he sits down with 163 Conservative MPs (there are 164 in total, including him) whose collective reputations have been tarnished to an as-yet unknown degree by this affair: How much did you know? If you knew, what on Earth were you thinking?”

David Climenhaga

“Surely the wrong man has quit!”

A sampling of what’s being said on Twitter:




12 thoughts on the Duffy scandal in the wake of Nigel Wright’s resignation

  1. OK, now it’s time for this to go away. Is there real news out there to cover?

    • This is real news to many; just listen to phone in shows, Cross Country Checkup, yesterday for one; full of people discussing this. If this isn’t ‘real news’ then what is…. Possible fraud,lying, influencing an inquiry. Did the PM influence this? What did he know? Was he covering up? Yeah, it’s real news that real ‘ordinary’ Canadians what to know.

      • Guess I’ll disagree with you. This is one dude with some misappropriated cash and general stupidity. There are huge issues in this world; one arrogant, dopey senator in Canada doesn’t make the grade, as far as I’m concerned. (And I’m NOT a Conservative supporter, in case anyone’s wondering.)

        • What an incredibly short-sighted view. Did you actually vote in the last election?

          • Yes, I did vote. Federally, provincially and municipally. I refuse to get caught up in spending scandals with a few people when there are REAL issues affecting millions of people around this world. If that makes me short-sighted, then I happily wear that title. :-)

          • There are issues that affect millions as you say, but the integrity of our Parlement and our officials are at stake in this affair. If they are allowed to lie or defraud then how do you trust them to act in our best interests when they can benifit from, say, selling our secrets to Foriegn powers? What example is it to other citizens if Government officials are permitted commit crimes? Why should i, for example, not be allowed to cheat on my taxes? Is it now acceptable to steal from your employer? That is what Duffy did. Should these things now be no big deal?
            This is big news and how it is resolved IS important and justice needs not only BE done but be SEEN to be done. So this story deserves to be prominent.

        • That’s fine; you can disagree and keep on having Duffy paid out of your tax dollars for the rest of his life, and pay for the RCMP currently outside his house to keep reporters away… bearing in mind that it sounds to most people that he’s been in an illegal position and tried to influence a gov’t inquiry (which is illegal).

          Of course there are bigger issues, but then there are bigger issues than the Playoffs and most of what’s in the papers today. There are always ‘bigger issues’, but that doesn’t negate this possible illegal act, that even CPC MPs and Senators are questioning.

          • Unfortunately, Duffy isn’t the first in this position and he won’t be the last. Governments and police should deal with it and get on with more important issues.

          • Well yes, the RCMP is apparently considering this to see if they can lay charges. Remember Duffy tried to get out of the investigation into his expenses…. So yes, it would be nice if he’d cooperate and let the committee do its thing. It would also be nice if the Senate Leader did not say the matter is closed… ‘cos it’s not.

          • Well, no one has claimed that it’s as important as Demi Moore or Kirstie Allie. Still, to the more provincial types who hang out here, it’s fairly important. Surely you’ll excuse those of us with an interest if we carry on discussing it anyway? Feel free to move on to the larger topics that are more worthy of your time and wisdom.

          • Uh, Demi Moore, Kirstie Alley and all that other Hollywood stuff is even more of a waste of time and trees than misspending senators. Sorry if you think I’m arrogant; I just get tired of our media (and the rest of us, often me included) getting caught up in first world “issues”.

          • Government corruption and bribery is often considered a third world issue.

            Move on to issues that interest you….

          • If you look at your own profile, you’ll find that Kirstie Alley and Demi Moore, and similar “infotainment” figures large in your previous commentary. Talk about whatever you like, Frank. If you’re not interested in this issue, search the web for the latest on Justin Bieber.

          • You call it ” misspending” as a way to trivializing, but it is fraud and Breach of Trust and I view that as serious, not just foe the misdeed but for what it symbolizes.

          • But does Jesus love him, that`s the real question, right Frank?

          • Seriously? Not newsworthy? The people running the country right up to the PMO are corrupt and running like rats to cover up misdirect this. I pay taxes here – and they are “misappropriated” by those whom feel entitled to more than their entitlements. Unless three giant meteorites are going to hit us before the day is over, no news is more important than to uncover the rot that has infested us for too long.

          • Running a clean government requires it be peopled by those who treat their position and the public’s money they spend as a sacred trust. What’s so hard about being fair to the taxpayers that some senators and MP’s can’t do the right thing?

            It’s a story because if some in power can’t manage a simple thing like expenses without violating the public trust, imagine what harm they can do with legislation or appropriations that affect millions or billions spent.

    • The reason this is news:

      1) The PMO used cash to try to buy its way out of a political jam.

      2) Nobody believes Harper did not know Wright was working on the Duffy file trying to make the problem go away. He may well have been kept insulated from the details, which simply means everyone including Harper knew it was sleazy.

    • So did you post this comment on all the stories Macleans is covering today, or is this the only story that isn’t “real news”.

    • This is one “dude” Frank? Nigel Wright – Managing director of Onex – who is on Onex’s board? The Chairman of SUN MEDIA GROUP. Mike Duffy interfered with the CRTC board to ensure that the SUN MEDIA channel was included in basic cable tv packages — ensuring a stream of revenue for SUN MEDIA. No, Nigel Wright is not just SOME DUDE.

      • Excellent post! I find it very frustrating that there is so little, well, speculation about the motives and reasons for this Wright-Duffy kerfuffle; maybe a Canadian thing :) or maybe few neutrals actually know anything. I realize that rumors and speculation are often not desirable. But here, I would like people who are somewhat connected or knowledgeable to start identifying the list of potential reasons why this happened. If this was a bribe, then what is the underlying action/favour that Duffy could have been asked to perform? Let’s identify the options so that then we (the public) can identify the most likely ones and start asking pointed questions (not jump to conclusions).

        I believe that it is useful. Effectively, it is brainstorming or
        inductive thinking; and that is in line with the scientific method: form
        a hypothesis and prove/disprove them through facts.

        On the other hand, there are lots of speculative comments on the good intentions of Wright’s actions, based on Wright’s conduct in the past from heavy weights like David Frum, Peter Munk, and others. While there may be some basis for these comments, since character assessment is a valid argument even in legal trials, let’s not forget that this is speculation too (albeit safe one, since it is hard to get sued for saying someone is a “stand up guy”)

        I am not an expert on Canadian law, but I hope that it is legal to speculate on both sides (assuming that the speculation is labeled clearly and conditional language is used) and not subject oneself to libel suits.

        • So let’s compile a list of reasons. We have 3 so far:

          1. Wright could have felt compelled to help the distraught senator in the latter’s financial need, while Wright is/was in a good
          financial position.

          2. Wright could have been trying to retard the potential fallout to the Conservative party and its leadership from the senator’s accounting fraud.

          3. This could be payback or suppression of further leaks of information from Duffy’s interference with CRTC on the inclusion of Sun Media Channel in the basic cable package (Wright being the chairman of Sun Media Corp.) if such interference indeed took place.

    • You mean like the sponsorship scandal?

    • Short attention span?

    • Harper is still in office, Duffy and the three other Senators are still in the Senate living off MY taxes. Why should this just go away? Because the least guilty in the whole affair resigned? There is several heads yet to roll and until they roll, this should be front page news!

  2. I think Nigel Wright had clear instructions from Harper to make the Duffy problem go away
    I don’t think he is honest as people are claiming.

    • All people are “claiming” that Nigel Wright had a great reputation. He was well liked, he is a subdeacon in the Anglican church and he is heavily involved as a philanthropist in 3 major charities. What they are saying is that in 48 years, this is his first misstep. You don’t have to believe it but there is no “dirt” to report.

      • One heckuva misstep, though, you have to admit. And big and ugly enough to make people wonder – it it really the first time he has done something like this? Or is it just the first time he was caught?

        • I don’t know about that at all. There is only one other person I can think of in politics that you here such really positive things about and that is Jimmy Carter and they slaughtered him.

      • Regardless of all the good he MAY have done, this was pretty bad and Nigel paid the price. I believe he did so in order to protect Harper and Duffy. But those little piggies are still at the trough and if Nigel is as you describe him, that just makes Duffy and Harper all the worse.

  3. It’s almost like the Conservatives have found their own Jesus in Nigel Wright. While no-one has yet claimed he is the product of a virgin birth, all seem to agree that he was an uncommonly virtuous man – a kinder, gentler version of Chuck Norris – who died for the sins of Mike Duffy.

    Duffy is the ugly id of the Conservative party. He’s been denounced and condemned for the same ugly, grasping, amoral behaviour that has marked the CPC from the very moment of it’s birth. His behavior was not the exception to the rule, his behaviour is the rule in the Harper CPC. From the In&Out Scandal, to the contempt findings, to Robocalls, to 10% flyers, They are consistent and relentless in pushing at the boundaries of what is merely contemptible, constantly striving for lower lows and dirtier tricks. They use public money to further their private interests, they have always done it, they will always do it, and anyone who watched the hockey game last night saw them doing it again.

    Mike Duffy is the CPC’s original sin and Nigel Wright has died for his sin but there can be no absolution because there has been no repentance, and none is forthcoming. The CPC will not change, it can not change, it can only be evicted.

    • Small correction: I believe Peter MacKay is the CPC’s original sinner. Isn’t he the one who bit the apple of merger and, in doing so, ceded the conservative Garden of Eden to the evil Alliance?

      Duffy is more like Cain, who slew his virtuous brother.

      • Or Mackay is like Judas Iscariot . . . he kissed the PC party so Harper and his goons would know who to take prisoner

        • More like Joseph whose brothers sold him into slavery…..if you believe his is actually virtuous. I believe that as a chief advisor to Harper, he is involved in all the misdeeds of the government over these past years and he lived by the sword so died by the sword.

    • Beautifully said, friend. Here`s what we`ll get in the coming days….Look for Parliament to be swiftly prorogued. Stevie will need time to duck and run, and his handlers will need some precious tranquility in order to develop the talking points that will be nauseatingly and baldly repeated between now and the next six months. We are now all too familiar with a `government` that never fails to obfuscate, avoid, justify and minimize. If I didn`t thoroughly loathe this man and his gang of thugs so much I would be utterly dismayed at the consistent lack of ethical process which has been on display for the last six and some years. As it stands, I am instead THRILLED to hear the fat lady finally singing her lovely ass off!!!!!!

  4. A national radio program yesterday had on an NDP MP. The topic was Duffy. When the host put it to the MP that there should be disclosure requirements on all parliamentarians for expenses like Britain has, he stammered away panicked at the suggestion and trying to divert the subject back to Duffy specifically.
    Parliamentarians juicing up their expense accounts is considered par for the course by a cynical public. Looking at the issue more broadly strikes fear into the hearts opposition members who are terrified that the taps may be shut. What the public wants is reform. What the opposition wants is political hay, and no more. The public knows this. The largely left leaning media can play this story a thousand fold more, but it won’t change this basic dynamic.

    • This has to be one of the better statement I’ve seen in a while.

    • The taps would be turned off for all parties in that case, wouldn’t they? This tp is almost good enough for Poilivere to run with, it’s that moronic.

    • Is it too much to come up with the name of the program and the name of the NDP MP. Liberal Senator Baker has called for all Senate expenses to be available to the public. You really think it’s the opposition that’s rattled right now?

  5. Re Norm Spector’s problem was what Brian Mulroney didn’t tell him (the reverse of Nigel Wrights problem). I am surprised that Mr. Spector has forgotten the AIRBUS Spectre – Brian Mulroney declaring monies from the AIRBUS bribery affair years after the event. We know what Brian Mulroney’s price was $300,000 and now we know what Harper’s price was $90,000. See WIKIPEDIA: Although there
    is no evidence that Mulroney accepted kickbacks while prime minister, he
    acknowledged in 2003 that shortly after stepping down in 1993 that he
    accepted $225,000 over 18 months from Schreiber, in three cash payments
    of $75,000 each. Mulroney was still a member of the Canadian House of
    Commons when one of the payments was made. Mulroney claims that this
    money was paid to him for consulting services he rendered to help
    promote a fresh pasta business, and to develop international contacts
    for Schreiber. Mulroney had previously not admitted accepting any
    commissions from Schreiber during his lawsuit against the Canadian
    government, and later under oath specifically denied any business
    dealings with him. Mulroney has not yet provided evidence of any work he
    performed for that money, and declared it as income to Revenue Canada
    only years later, when Schreiber had come under criminal investigation
    in Germany. Schreiber ridiculed their dealings in pasta-macaroni as
    nothing more than being sent a single flyer, and has stated that the
    three separate payments were actually $100,000 each in $1000 bills, a
    total of $300,000.

  6. ref: article tweets. Hold on a second; the man pays blood money to suppress a possible fraud investigation and people laud his contributions? No matter what he did previously, this alone cast a pall over his entire career.

    Can folk think straight?

    • But he’s a gentleman doncha know.

    • There has been no proof at this point as to what Nigel Wright’s motives were in giving Duffy $90K to pay off his bill to the taxpayer. Without proof you cannot just ‘libel’ a person by saying that he was “paying blood money to suppress a fraud investigation”. Any journalist that does that can be sued and Nigel Wright would win. Are you not familiar with the Brian Burke situation where he sued a blogger, like yourself for making claims that had no substantive proof and were ultimately, false. Until there is a RMCP and ethics commissioner investigation, Nigel Wright is not guilty of anything except bad judgement. The fact that the man has a stellar reputation as a person and businessman, only makes journalist more reluctant to say anything about his motives without some sort of proof.

    • I guess to them the first one is a mulligan.

  7. You know…For the first time since the beginning of this mess, I’m actually thinking that Harper just may resign. He was already facing challenges to his authority within his caucus. This scandal may just tip the balance and create a full fledged revolt.

    • I was listening to the Current this morning, Tim Powers was the CPC panelist; he mentioned that the CPC will have a caucus meeting tomorrow at which (he said) that Harper will be reading the Riot Act. Shouldn’t it be the other way around? His caucus of mushrooms should be saying enough is enough and they should keep him on a very short leash from now on.

      • They’ve behaved like complete sheep to date. Let’s see if they develop a spine this time.

    • He will step aside once Keystone gets approval in the US
      It will be a my work is done and the future prosperity of Canadians is assured… kind of thing

  8. Where the hell were the hypocrites that are now making political hay over Duffy, when, 20 years ago Harper and Manning were calling for a an equal, elected, and effective Senate? I know where you were—you were voting for Chretien and blindly watching them appoint 92, mostly useless twits to the Senate.

    You said nothing.

    You said nothing when Harper delayed in appointing Senators in 2006, in the hope that someone could convince the Liberals and the Premiers that the Senate should be reformed.

    You said nothing when Senators Keith Davey, and Jim Munson and Michael Kirby and David Smith were openly leading campaigns for the Liberals over the past 50 years.

    Did they use their Senate privleges to help their Liberal friends ? Who knows.—Nobody checked.

    The hypocrites you find on these pages and on most media don`t care about a Triple e Senate. The opportunity to jump on a useless turd like Duffy is one of political gain for you—-a chance to slam Harper. As much as Duffy sickens me, hypocrites sicken me more.

    • So it’s this or the ‘we’re so honourable’ approach? Really?

      • I have never understood anything you have ever said.

        • It’s called situational stupidity.

    • Whatever changes one may wish to the upper house (and there are a number of reasonable options including leaving it alone), this does not excuse corruption nor guarantee any set of changes would end corruption.

      A child could understand this, and yet you do not. This reflects extremely poorly on you.

      • I am not certain whether you are a child or not but if you do not understand that an appointed Senate is by it`s very nature, corrupt, then i can`t help you.
        Maybe you`re one of the hypocrites.

        • Would you care to flesh that one out for us?

          • Let me help you with this one Jan——-if the make up of the Senate is always determined by the government and not by the people, there is a very good chance that the government will choose it`s friends as Senators—-I think that is corrupt.

          • So elected people are less corruptible than appointed people in your version of reality?

            You are peddling a red herring which is not even fresh fish, it is old and stinky and crawling with maggots. Duffy’s low-rent expense padding is only the surface of this cesspool, the real filth lies below the surface where the PMO and Mr. Harper himself are scheming and plotting to buy off that useless appendage (Duffy) to control the damage and hide the wide-scale abuse of taxpayer’s money to benefit the CPC.

            You want to compare it to the sponsorship scandal? By all means, let’s do that. The Liberals did the exact same thing in that debacle as the Conservatives were doing – and are doing – with their systemic abuses of the public treasury for their private partisan interests. It’s a new skin on an old, old scam. In the Liberals case, a few idiots got too greedy and spoiled the party for everyone. In the current case, the exact same path has led to the exact same destination. The only real difference between the two is the fact that the Liberals managed to work their system a little longer with a more intelligent group of greedheads. People who could actually steal on a larger scale because they were capable of sustaining the thing for a couple of years before it collapsed under the weight of their collective greed. As is typical of anything the CPC touches, you folks can fu*k it up in a third of the time it takes a Liberal to do it.

          • Well abolishing the senate isn’t likely to happen. However, if the senate was elected like it is in the US, we would see some NDP senators and maybe green senators. We could oust a corrupt person at least within 4 years. As it stands now, it is very very difficult to get anyone out of the senate. As long as they attend once per session and have a doctor’s note saying they are ill (with stress, etc.) they don’t even have to go to the hill. There is nothing anybody can do to get them out until they retire at age 75.
            Yes the Conservatives are bad but as you pointed out, the Liberals were also arrogant, entitled and corrupt. So here were are with two out of the three national parties mired in corruption and Mr. Mulclair now being asked about Laval. Then we come on here and we have everyone denying that what their party did is “as bad” as what another party did. How are we ever going to get good government if people are so blinded by partisanship that they can’t even get together and demand a certain standard of ethical behavior from each and member of each and every party?

          • then you have no idea what you are speaking of and should be quiet.

            there are many criticisms of the senate which are reasonable. “corrupt – by it’s nature” is simply not one of them.

          • Denying people the right to express their opinion is not right. Andrew has different views than you do. It makes the conservation at least a little varied.

          • Nonsense. He does not know the difference between “corrupt” and “unaccountable, in my opinion”. This is very germane to the conversation at hand.

            I cannot stop him from speaking, I can advise him that doing so makes him look foolish.

          • Listen, if you and gar and thwim want to play with words then fill your boots—call the Senate unaccountable if you don`t like my corrupt word. But, stop and think for a minute. The history of Senate appointments has shown that the most important prerequisite to get a Senate job is not one`s education, or experience, or expertise in any field—it`s one`s closeness to the governing Party and ability to convince the Leader that appoints.

            In my democracy, that is corrupt.

            If you guys want to protect this 18th century method of rewarding government friends, then you do a disservice to our democracy.

            Go out on the street and ask a recent immigrant if they believe that we should not refer to government only appointing friends as a corrupt practice—-then report back to me your findings,

          • An idiot yelling about his toy truck would make the conversation a little varied.

            Personally, I prefer contributions that make the conversation *better*

          • A little politeness would be appreciated. Thank you.

          • I appreciate your reasoned, and rational approach here.
            My contributions here are less frequent and less subtle than yours.
            I think it is important to remind the large group here who dislike today`s government that they are not representative of the larger Canadian people who have neither the time or inclination to spar with these chronic on-line ranters.

            The fact that they choose to lash out at me occasionally is not unexpected. They would rather not be subjected to the truth.

            The fact that they would choose to defend a, by it`s nature, corrupt institution like the Senate tells me they either have no concept of a true democracy or they don`t care.

          • Well as you might have read, I am done with any personal loyalty to ANY political parties, federal or provincial. I will continue to hope that these people do a good job in running our province and country and the corruption ends but I have NO faith that will occur. It is completely freeing to challenge oneself and lose your own partisanship. We aren’t on “different teams” here. We should all want the same thing…good governance, no matter what political party happens to be in power. These politicians aren’t your family members for goodness sakes. You don’t need to turn a blind eye or defend their indefensible acts because you happen to vote for them. It might be your first instinct but get ahold of yourself. It is the wrong one because as one very smart MP said, we need integrity over loyalty.
            As for senate reform, it is a LONG time coming but with the environment in Ottawa, I hold out NO hope that it will occur anytime soon.

    • The NDP has consistently called for abolishing the Senate (for decades) so where were you? Into their third mandate, your guys have done diddly squat to reform the Senate let alone present an option for achieving Triple E.

      By the way, Triple E doesn’t address what most of us are concerned about Canadian politics, which are chained to permanent and hyper-partisan campaigning, fraught with election financing scandals, short term “management” in the place of effective policy and a first past the post attitude, in which the “winners” from whatever party, do what they want to us until we pull the plug on them.

      • Hey, at least you CAN pull the plug on them. With the senate the way it is now, there is almost no way to pull the plug on anybody. If Mr. Duffy’s physician decides that all this stress is too much for Mr. Duffy’s bad heart, Mr. Duffy doesn’t even have to go to work for years, except one time per sitting. He can be just like Andrew Thompson and attend 12 times in 7 years with a medical certificate.

        The reality is that Harper said he would reform the senate. He had 18 vacancies and then he pulled the most idiot move of his career (until now) and tried to get rid of the per vote subsidy when he had a minority government. The coalition happened and NDP leader Jack (abolish the senate) Layton says he is going to put Liz May in the senate. Harper freaked and made 18 appointments in short order. Ideas of senate reform were shot to sh*t just like that.

        • I like the idea that Harper moved to eliminate the per-vote subsidy.
          And I don`t think he had a chance to reform the Senate as long as the Liberals still controlled the majority there and the provinces saw nothing to gain by doing the right thing.

          You may lack faith in today`s politicians but as much as you will see the venom on these pages towards Harper, I`m convinced he is providing much better governance than any combination of alternative that may be out there.

      • Oh, if I really thought that the dippers would find a way to kill the Senate, and maybe if they wouldn`t completely trash the economy, I would go their way rather than support an unprincipled, hypocritical bunch like the LPC.

        But you know very well that with the way the Senate is structured, the only way to get rid of it is to have three-quarters of the left-handed plumbers of Ukranian vote on a Friday to eliminate the useless institution.

        And yes, I know what you are concerned with in Canadian politics—-in your mind everything will be blissful if only you could get rid of Harper.

  9. Who needs the senate? Nobody but the corrupt officials who need to give a rich, undeserved gift to “helpers”.

  10. Thanks, Macleans, for quoting my blog. Not to be churlish, but it’s David, not Daniel, Climenhaga.

  11. It’s a story because one or more high-level Conservatives decided it was better to try to cover for Mike Duffy than let him face any music and repercussions he may deserve.

    For weeks now I’ve wondered if anyone but the most rabid partisan actually believed Mike Duffy was innocent of wrong doing. Now even his “friends” won’t back up up.

    After using Mike “you can trust the Duffster” Duffy as one of the election poster-boys for Conservative ideals and probity, it’s easy to see why the Conservatives would try to obfuscate Duffy’s alleged wrongdoings. How’d that work out? Not well, and now Duffy is a poster boy for hypocrisy. He’s become a symbol for what people fear of politics and politicians: “Trust us” means “we only look honest until we are caught”. It turns out, all election time protestations aside, Conservatives are just like all the others.

    Who but the most rabid of partisans hasn’t wondered how much Stephen Harper has known all this time? The public revelation of Nigel Wright’s $90,000 gift means speculation can, deservedly, run rampant now. What decisions were made and by who to try to protect Duffy’s brand and by extension the Conservative’s brand?

    Does anyone in Canada really believe Harper knew nothing? Anyone?

    • Probably not but I never believed Chretien was out of the loop either and Mulroney “sued” when people called him on his antics without proper proof. Allan Rock paid Mulroney 6 million dollars of taxpayer money in damages. I will tell you what I do think. I think that Stephen Harper wears a teflon suit and they spray it with “Pam” cooking spray so NOTHING sticks to him. I don’t think we will be finding any “tapes’ ala Watergate here and Nigel Wright will swear up and down that Harper was out of the loop. The Conservatives still have two years in office and Harper will use that time to try to turn things around. Jean Chretien NEVER accepted responsibility for ad scam and Harper will NEVER accept responsibility for this.

      • True that, but I would point out that Wright’s resignation said that Harper wasn’t aware of the “means” of the settlement. That would suggest that Harper was on board with a strategy of “making it go away”. By hook, or as the case seems to be, by crook.

        • This obviously needs to be fleshed out. Did Harper say, “can you look after Duffy” and Wright LOOKED after Duffy in the way Wright looks after others…gave him his own money. Who knows but I am telling you right now, that Nigel Wright protected Harper and he isn’t going to throw him under the bus and Duffy probably can’t throw Harper under the bus.
          Do you know that Mr. Chretien went so far as to take the Gomery report to federal court because he didn’t like the way he was “misrepresented” in it and the taxpayer got nailed with his legal fees for the whole fiasco. Brian Mulroney sued for slander and got 6 million dollars from the Canadian taxpayers when everything that was said about him appears taking money from Karl Heinz Schreiber appears to have been the truth.
          Men like Harper, Chretien and Mulroney have convinced themselves they ARE righteous. They don’t feel responsible and they certainly don’t feel the need to take the blame for what see as other people shortcomings. It is arrogance and entitlement in the extreme.

Sign in to comment.