....And if they don't, will they use the Unfair Elections Act as an excuse.
What am I going on about this time?
Well, it all started when Alison alerted us to the endnote to a McMaher postMedia story we talked about a few days ago.
That endnote went this:
...A national investigation into allegations of dirty political calls has been under way for more than a year. Elections Canada had planned to wrap up that investigation by March 31. On Thursday, spokeswoman Diane Benson declined to say whether it is ongoing.
That report has been postponed until after the 2015 election because of the introduction of the Conservatives’ election bill.
The agency would not say when if ever it will report on the national robocalls investigation...
But.
Here's the thing, seems that the story has since changed, both in the diverging Maher and McGregor updates to the story and a Tweet from Mr. Maher himself.
Gosh.
Is somebody, somebody, perhaps, who hates what Sheila Fraser has to say, messing with our democracy?
_____
Go have a look at Alison's entire post, it is just one more example of her most excellent, and thorough, illumination of what is really going down.
.
6 comments:
Something's not right. The whole world thinks this bill is bad. Yet the Conservatives doggedly keep defending it.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/scholars-denounce-conservative-governments-proposed-fair-elections-act/article17561354/
the unfair election act or Canadian's version of voter suppression is doing the job the Cons want it to do. Will we have a report prior to 2015? Of course not. That is the whole point of the Act.
Thanks for this, RossK.
The Lady Alison's done a LOT of heavy lifting on this topic.
Sure hope it pays off . . . .
Thank you very much for giving this a push, Ross.
It's past offensive that the Elections Canada spokesey could state that their report on election fraud will not be publicly released before the next election and this receives one paragraph at the end of a tangentally related article and no other big media attention.
I have a half-baked conspiracy theory carefully wrapped in tinfoil for you to file away somewhere...
The reason Soudas got fired instead of just getting a frowny face is because the riding Eve Adams wants to jump to complained they had their CIMS data accessed to do Eve Adams mailouts into their riding.
And at the Oakville North Burlington Conservative Association board meeting she crashed, she allegedly threatened to look up the president, who is not in her riding, on CIMS and he complained about this in a letter to Harper :
“For myself, she pointedly asked me how much money I donated to the party annually, and said that she would use her access to CIMS data to look that up for herself.”
Did she have clearance to access CIMS info on someone in another riding? Not according to other Con MPs and ops. So did Soudas in his capacity as head Con Party honcho do it for her or did she just have grounds to assume he would do it?
So now we begin to see why Steve fired his top gun four months after hiring him - because Soudas' behavior was about to start reminding people of possible connections between top party ops and the Guelph robocalls made from the CIMS database in 2011.
Alison--
Half-baked.
I'm not so sure.
After all, didn't that fine young fellow named Michael Sona go to work for the good Ms. Adams after the 2011 election?
.
Good eye.
If Soudas' canning is defensive, there must be an offence. Fair Elections Act's so awesomely shocking, getting hard to tell if all this stamping out spot-fires is tactically defensive or if the whole thing is designed to reoffend. Could be both razzle AND dazzle.
If the job-site dumpster is filled with thousands of tubes of Big Stretch caulking, the whole project will soon be shrouded in blue tarps: leaky Con-doh-minion syndrome.
Post a Comment