Looks like Pamela Wallin has ripped off $300,000


Goober
#61
Quote: Originally Posted by Sal View Post

I love that...and the duck lips on the girls...excellent!!!


oh yes, five finger discount

Friend of mine only has 3 1/2 fingers and a thumb. Could he qualify for the discount?
Lost 1/2 his middle finger, really strange way to lose 1/2 a finger. Never heard of losing 1/2 a finger that way before. No sir, really odd way to lose it.
 
Sal
#62
Quote: Originally Posted by Goober View Post

Friend of mine only has 3 1/2 fingers and a thumb. Could he qualify for the discount?
Lost 1/2 his middle finger, really strange way to lose 1/2 a finger. Never heard of losing 1/2 a finger that way before. No sir, really odd way to lose it.

okay okay okay....you haaaaaaaaaave to tell us how he lost a finger...

tell and he will qualify
 
Goober
+1
#63
Quote: Originally Posted by Sal View Post

okay okay okay....you haaaaaaaaaave to tell us how he lost a finger...

tell and he will qualify

Well you asked.
He had a nose like none other. That nose probably weighed a good 2 lbs, and that would be empty.
Being a flatlander he was not up on the social graces on nose cleaning.
Normally blocking 1 nostril with a finger, in his case his hand, then exhale violently thru the open nostril, expunging the offending blockage.

Not him -

As I mentioned he had a huge one, hair like barb wire would grow out from it. What a sight that was.
No barber would touch that.

He had to use a special made saw to cut em back.

Well he would as they say go digging, and dig deep. So he had to use his middle finger. That being the longest one, at that time.
Well it got caught up in his nose hairs, cut the circulation off. By the time he realized he could not extricate his finger it was to late.
Infection had set in, Doc cut it off just below the nose and left the rest behind.

And I am snot BSing you.

Now I am not going to tell anyone how they got that sucker out either.
Last edited by Goober; Aug 12th, 2013 at 07:54 PM..
 
Sal
#64
Quote: Originally Posted by Goober View Post

Well you asked.
He had a nose like none other. That nose probably weighed a good 2 lbs, and that would be empty.
Being a flatlander he was not up on the social graces on nose cleaning.
Normally blocking 1 nostril with a finger, in his case his hand, the exhale violently thru the open nostril, expunging the offending blockage.

Not him -

As I mentioned he had a huge one, hair like barb wire would grow out from it. What a sight that was.
No barber would touch that.

He had to use a special made saw to cut em back.

Well he would as they say go digging, and dig deep. So he had to use his middle finger. That being the longest one, at that time.
Well it got caught up in his nose hairs, cut the circulation off. By the time he realized he could not extricate his finger it was to late.
Infection had set in, Doc cut it off just below the nose and left the rest behind.

And I am snot BSing you.

Now I am not going to tell anyone how they got that sucker out either.

you have got to be storytelling...please, please make it so ... that made me gag... I am going for water.

I take back the qualifier by the way
 
Goober
+1
#65
Quote: Originally Posted by Sal View Post

you have got to be storytelling...please, please make it so ... that made me gag... I am going for water.

I take back the qualifier by the way

To late. He is in for the 3 1/2 finger discount.
If I wanted you to gag I would tell ya how he got rid of that finger.
 
gerryh
#66
Quote: Originally Posted by JLM View Post

Anything wrong with laying a charge?


That would be up to the Crown.
 
JLM
#67
Quote: Originally Posted by Spade View Post

Ethical Conundrum #1
Suppose a man whose net worth was $10 000 stole $1000.
Suppose another, whose net worth was $5 000 000, stole $300 000.
Which was the greater crime?

Neither, they are both fricken thieves!

Quote: Originally Posted by gerryh View Post

She can't be "fired" unless she is found guilty by law. The only thing that can happen is she is made to sit in the senate as an independent.

Just heard on the 6 o'clock Global news the whole thing is being turned over to the cops!
 
gerryh
#68
Quote: Originally Posted by JLM View Post

Just heard on the 6 o'clock Global news the whole thing is being turned over to the cops!


Good.
 
JLM
#69
Quote: Originally Posted by gerryh View Post

Good.

Yes................at first glance! Could probably turn out like the Dziekanksi fiasco at Vancouver airport.
 
taxslave
+1
#70
Since they are government employees the repayment should come out of their solid gold pension plan if they cannot pay it back.
 
JLM
#71
Quote: Originally Posted by taxslave View Post

Since they are government employees the repayment should come out of their solid gold pension plan if they cannot pay it back.

I agree up to a point. There MAY be some honest employees in that pension plan, so theoretically speaking it could hurt some of their pensions. In reality probably only by a few nickels.
 
JLM
#72
If it was anyone else they'd be doing a stretch in prison.

.4 surprising things in Pamela Wallin's expense audit - Politics - CBC News.................
 
damngrumpy
#73
Senators and employees of the government are not paid from the same pension plan.
There are some differences as well when it comes to government employees here is
one example.
If you and I have a pension and we get over a specified amount there is a claw back
of the CPP portion of our pension.
When a federal employee gets their government pension they are not able to collect
government pension and CPP even though they paid into it. That is something I found
out about a few weeks ago.
I admit I don't know all the details but that was the understanding I was left with after
asking the question at a gathering.
 
JLM
#74
If it was anyone else they'd be doing a stretch in prison.

.4 surprising things in Pamela Wallin's expense audit - Politics - CBC News.................
 
JLM
#75
Apparently the cost of the audit has run past the $100 grand mark. She should be on the hook for that too.
 
Sal
+1
#76
However, Deloitte says Senate rules about residence are unclear.

That is part of the problem...lack of clarity which leaves things open to personal interpretation. What other job allows you to make the rules up as you deem fit?
 
JLM
#77
I bet young Justin has a smile on his face a mile wide! -
 
petros
#78
Quote: Originally Posted by JLM View Post

Apparently the cost of the audit has run past the $100 grand mark. She should be on the hook for that too.

When it costs me a full penny, then I'll be upset.
 
JLM
#79
Quote: Originally Posted by petros View Post

When it costs me a full penny, then I'll be upset.

Actually it's already costing you much more than a full penny. She is just the tip of the iceberg as far as white collar theft is concerned, it's beyond epidemic proportions and the theft itself is just the tip of the iceberg of other problems. This attitude of entitlement is a fast growing "cancer". You're in a good position to get a movement happening, Petros- from your place to Ottawa is just a short hike across flat ground. -
 
petros
+1
#80
Too many trees in the way once you get 15 miles East of here.

If you want results, make ALL politicians sign a contract that says they do jail time for any and all f*ck ups.
 
Sal
#81
Quote: Originally Posted by petros View Post

Too many trees in the way once you get 15 miles East of here.

If you want results, make ALL politicians sign a contract that says they do jail time for any and all f*ck ups.

you can't do that because honest human error is bound to happen, it would make coverups more certain and also 'f*ck up' is subjective, apparently according to your party leanings... the other side always sees everything as a f*ck up unless of course when their party does the same thing, then it was a brilliant move.

we are too stupid to have good government
 
petros
#82
An error can be proven as an error.
 
Dixie Cup
#83
Quote: Originally Posted by Goober View Post

Removing senators a difficult task under the Constitution | CTV News

Under the Constitution, a senator can be removed for five reasons:

If for two consecutive Sessions of the Parliament he fails to give his Attendance in the Senate;

If he takes an Oath or makes a Declaration or Acknowledgment of Allegiance, Obedience, or Adherence to a Foreign Power, or does an Act whereby he becomes a Subject or Citizen, or entitled to the Rights or Privileges of a Subject or Citizen, of a Foreign Power

If he is adjudged Bankrupt or Insolvent, or applies for the Benefit of any Law relating to Insolvent Debtors, or becomes a public Defaulter;

If he is attainted of Treason or convicted of Felony or of any infamous Crime;

If he ceases to be qualified in respect of Property or of Residence; provided, that a Senator shall not be deemed to have ceased to be qualified in respect of Residence by reason only of his residing at the Seat of the Government of Canada while holding an Office under that Government requiring his Presence there.


It could be difficult to kick Brazeau out of Senate even if he is convicted: experts | iPolitics
However, even if he is convicted of the charges laid against him last week it might be difficult to force Senator Patrick Brazeau out of his $132,300 a year Senate seat before he is scheduled to retire in 2049.

“We have rules, they can’t kick him out,” said retired Senator Jack Austin, former chairman of the Senate’s rules committee. “They need a bill to kick him out.”

According to House of Commons Procedure and Practice, the last time the section of the constitution that allows a senator to be removed was used was 1915. Experts say removing Brazeau could involve legislation as well as resorting to an archaic legal concept rooted in Ancient Rome.

In fact, the concept of committing an “infamous crime,” one of the grounds that can be used to remove a senator, is so archaic that a number of Canadian law professors contacted by iPolitics were unable to shed any light on how the term should be interpreted or what crimes would qualify. Legal dictionaries vary in their definitions but most refer to crimes that involve fraud or dishonesty.

“That phrase ‘infamous crime’ was written in another time and another context,” said Robert Marleau, former clerk of the House of Commons and co-editor of House of Commons Procedure and Practice, published in 2000. “What I would say is both the criminal law summary indictment or criminal code has evolved since those phrases were used.”

“I don’t think you’re going to find someone who can give you a specific definition of what is infamous in terms of law,” he added. “I’ve never seen one.”


If Brazeau and his ilk can't be kicked out because of their fraud, I am outraged and changes need to be made immediately. Unbelievable!

JMO

Quote: Originally Posted by Sal View Post

However, Deloitte says Senate rules about residence are unclear.

That is part of the problem...lack of clarity which leaves things open to personal interpretation. What other job allows you to make the rules up as you deem fit?


In what way is it unclear - that's what I want to know. Having to live more than 100 miles (shouldn't be KM) from Ottawa seems pretty clear to me.

JMO
 
damngrumpy
+1
#84
No trial yet to be sure but the more we hear and the more we see leads one to believe
there had better be a trail. I think the time has come to just do an audit on the whole
lot of them and find out just what the hell the Red Chamber is spending its money on.
The words of David Lewis ring true here. It is a case of Tweedle dee dee and tweedle
dee dum as there are Liberal Senators in trouble as well.
It also demonstrates what neglecting chumps we all are as we just let it go on for years
and we still chose sides and defend the institution.
 
Dixie Cup
+1
#85
Quote: Originally Posted by JLM View Post

Actually it's already costing you much more than a full penny. She is just the tip of the iceberg as far as white collar theft is concerned, it's beyond epidemic proportions and the theft itself is just the tip of the iceberg of other problems. This attitude of entitlement is a fast growing "cancer". You're in a good position to get a movement happening, Petros- from your place to Ottawa is just a short hike across flat ground. -


I agree. I think an audit should be done on all Senators and MP's and then expenses posted on the web from now on in. That's transparency!!

JMHO

Oh, forgot to add, any more dubious expenses by any one of them, (including the current ones) should be charged with fraud, loose their pensions and fired. A bit of a jail term would be good too. Then maybe these a***h***'s would get the msg.

JMHO (again).
 
#juan
+2
#86
Quote: Originally Posted by JLM View Post

I bet young Justin has a smile on his face a mile wide! -

Now that is probably right. Keep this stuff going another year and a half and Harper might as well hand over the keys to J.T... Ya gotta luv it when the opposition does most of your work for you.
 
JLM
#87
Quote: Originally Posted by #juan View Post

Now that is probably right. Keep this stuff going another year and a half and Harper might as well hand over the keys to J.T... Ya gotta luv it when the opposition does most of your work for you.

I suppose if young Justin did get to be P.M. we might see a year of fairly honest gov't.!
 
L Gilbert
+2
#88
Ya know, I bet that even before the Gliberal gov'ts set up the rules, they had already figured out the loopholes and were just a jumpin at the gates to experiment with the loopholes.
 
JLM
#89
Quote: Originally Posted by L Gilbert View Post

Ya know, I bet that even before the Gliberal gov'ts set up the rules, they had already figured out the loopholes and were just a jumpin at the gates to experiment with the loopholes.

You know damn well, none of the rotten bastards can be good for too long! -
 
Goober
#90
Quote: Originally Posted by JLM View Post

You know damn well, none of the rotten bastards can be good for too long! -

JLM, I know you are a closet Liberal.Yes I am LMAO now.

Chris Selley: Pamela Wallin’s behaviour disappointing, even in best case scenario | National Post

Let’s assume that the many thousands of dollars in travel expenses she and her staff admitted were improperly billed to the Senate were an honest mistake.

Let’s accept Ms. Wallin’s claims that auditors unfairly applied new spending rules retroactively — despite Deloitte’s claim that the basic “principles of the [travel] policy did not change; i.e., that travel costs would be reimbursed if the purpose of the travel was to carry out the Senator’s parliamentary functions.”

Let’s assume, though he denies it, that former chair of the Senate’s internal economy committee, fellow Conservative senator David Tkachuk, did indeed tell Sen. Wallin that as she was “active in the community, representing the Senate” (as Deloitte puts it), she could claim expenses for activities such as her duties serving as chancellor of the University of Guelph.

Let’s assume, though he denies it, that Sen. Tkachuk also told Sen. Wallin she should retroactively edit her Outlook calendar to include dozens of items of “Senate business” that hadn’t been there before (Deloitte had archived copies) and to polish up some other calendar items that looked distinctly partisan in nature: for example, “Saskatoon Event (4 riding fundraiser)” mysteriously became “Saskatoon Event.”

Let’s assume that Sen. Wallin genuinely believed that in addition to her chancellor duties at Guelph, she was also entitled to claim travel expenses to attend Conservative and Ontario Progressive Conservative party fundraisers, corporate functions for Porter Airlines (she had sat on the board), an event honouring Brian Mulroney, the 2011 Juno Awards, and a federal election-night television panel in Toronto where she represented the Conservatives.


Let’s assume she genuinely thought she was allowed to claim a flight to Toronto (in the words of her office) “to catch a flight the next day to Punta Cana” to speak at a women’s conference at which she had been invited to speak.

Let’s assume that she genuinely considered the following to represent legitimate “Senate business”: a meeting with the “Chair of the Board for a publishing company re: media and government relations”; a meeting with the “Executive Director of [an] awards foundation … to discuss [an] upcoming awards presentation and her role as Co-Host”; and a meeting “regarding a book project to discuss approaching leading business and political figures (herself included).”

That’s the best case scenario for Sen. Wallin now: She meant well, made a few admitted mistakes, was doing her job as she understood it and billed Canadians for what she thought was allowed.

But there has never been any rule demanding that Senators claim back every single thing they think they might be able to get away with. Deloitte, the RCMP and perhaps prosecutors will need to consult the rule book in order to judge Sen. Wallin — which explains her Hail Mary complaint about the supposedly altered rules. Ordinary Canadians don’t need the rule book in the slightest.

With apologies to Samuel Johnson, rules are the last refuge of a scoundrel

The best-case scenario above would reveal Pamela Wallin as someone who didn’t just think it was allowed, but appropriate, to ding the Canadian taxpayer on behalf of the University of Guelph, Porter Airlines, the Juno Awards and the Conservative Party of Canada; and to alter incriminating calendar entries, and update dozens of others, in order to justify travel expenses. Whatever the rules say, that’s transparently skeevy behaviour.

With apologies to Samuel Johnson, rules are the last refuge of a scoundrel. No one held a gun to Sen. Wallin’s head. And neither reimbursement nor a shrug from the RCMP can rehabilitate her reputation on its own — nor can it restore any faith in or respect for the Senate and Parliament. “Technically allowed” and “not criminal” are miserable standards to hold oneself to. We have a right to expect better from all Canadians, and a higher standard still from parliamentarians — but at this point, we would be fools to expect the latter.

Senators, either individually or en masse, need to provide concrete evidence that shenanigans from the likes of Pamela Wallin, Mike Duffy and Mac Harb really are shocking aberrations. Failing that, we’re going to need a lot more auditors.
 

Similar Threads

73
Senator Pamela Wallin next to resign.
by Vancouverite | Sep 14th, 2013
3
NEWS Consumers getting ripped off
by Karlin | Oct 26th, 2005