Thursday, June 10, 2010

RailGate For Real....Day 5 Preview


There is nothing specific in the public prints, and according to Mary the court registry is not entirely clear, but Bill Tieleman did mention that court should be in session today, presumably with Gordon Campbell's chief-of-staff Martyn Brown on the stand (again!).

Wonder if these two little items, from the May 2004 Talking Points that that were entered into evidence yesterday, will come up:

Potential Question for Premier Campbell: "We know that numerous people, including the Chief of Staff and the Premier himself, have details of the legislative 'raids' that are not public. Will the Premier admit he does know information that is not public and when will the public be informed of what the Premier knows."

Suggested Answer from the Premier as proposed by the Flack-Hackery: "This question has been canvassed repeatedly. Let me state again, 'I know no more than the general public and I will not in any way shape or form interfere in an ongoing investigation by engaging in speculation."


Follow-Up Potential Question for Premier Campbell: "Can the Premier confirm this, the information obtained by Mr. (Chief-of-Staff Martyn) Brown did play a role in his decision to fire Mr. Basi and place Mr. Virk on suspension (rather than firing him)?

Suggested Answer from the Premier as proposed by the Flack-Hackery: " My answer is the same as when this matter came up. My Chief of Staff made a recommendation on this matter that I concurred with. Mr Basi had a fundamentally different position as MA to the House Leader and that led to the decision to fire Mr. Basi."

Please note that, at the very least, the flack-hackery's suggested response to the follow-up question is a non-denial denial. However, as GWest points out in the comments, events that occurred and statements that were made prior to the writing of these talking points, it could also be considered to be a deliberate attempt at obfuscation based on omission.

Regardless, as I said in the previous post.....You couldn't make this stuff up even if you wanted to!

Talk to you all later with a Day 5 round-up.....



G West said...

I think it's more than a 'non-denial', the very question - when combined with the suggested answer is a DELIBERATE LIE.

The Premier has had (and has implicitly acknowledged that he had) specific knowledge of the 'RAIDS' that are NOT AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC.

Saying that he did not and does not have that knowledge is a deliberate falsehood....

Suggesting anything else is silly.

We not only have a drunk driving premier with have a premier who is as self-confessed LIAR.

On that basis, nothing he or his staff say or have said can be regarded as the truth - whether they say it under oath or not.

RossK said...

Excellent point GWest - will edit the post.