Reform poster-boy Rahim Jaffer walks

[SirJosephPorter]

I'm trying hard......and soon I"ll think of a story ...to up the ante on you guys....:lol::lol::lol:

'Up the ante on you guys'? you mean up the ante on me. You are a conservative, remember? Why would you try to up the ante on another conservative? Doesn't make sense.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

The second sentence sure sounds like a presumption of guilt.

Fact is, we don't know why the charges were dropped. I admit the news makes this look bad. But the news is often wrong.

Charging somebody is not presumption of guilt. It only means that there is enough prima facia evidence to think that somebody may be guilty.

On the contrary, charging somebody implies presumption of innocence (innocent until proven guilty).

 

[SirJosephPorter]

Hey DS...it might make for a good thread. Kind of a "Who Can Bullsh!t Best?" thing. I feared my "colleague" was beginning to repeat himself a bit too much and was in danger of losing his listening audience, so I was just trying to help him keep the ratings up. :lol:

Are you referring to me, countyboy? Why should I care if I lose some or even all of my audience? My enjoyment comes from writing the posts, I would get equal enjoyment out of it even if nobody read my posts or nobody responded to me (not that there is any danger of that happening, as you may have noticed, plenty of posters want to dialog with me, I can pick and choose whom I am going to respond).

 

[Socrates the Greek]

Ladies and Gentleman please a round of applause on a typical Conservative MP who is the poster boy for the great Conservative hypocrisy. The judge was blind.:angryfire::angryfire::angryfire::angryfire:

Tory ad takes potshot at NDP

“Do as I say not as do” stupid Conservative motto…..

No......... Torie political sh!t doesn’t smell:roll::roll::roll:

 

[Colpy]

Ladies and Gentleman please a round of applause on a typical Conservative MP who is the poster boy for the great Conservative hypocrisy. The judge was blind.:angryfire::angryfire::angryfire::angryfire:

Tory ad takes potshot at NDP

“Do as I say not as do” stupid Conservative motto…..

No Torie political sh!t dont smell:roll::roll::roll:

For the THIRD time........it matters not whether the judge was Liberal, Conservative, Agnostic, Visually Impaired, Moronic, or the defendant's secret bum buddy:

The judge DOES NOT have any discretion on dropping charges.......that was done, as it can ONLY be done, by the prosecutors.......who are paid by the LIBERAL government of Ontario.

Now, I agree an explanation needs to be made, but the idea that this was done on the basis of political partisan ship is simply ludicrous.

 

[Socrates the Greek]

For the THIRD time........it matters not whether the judge was Liberal, Conservative, Agnostic, Visually Impaired, Moronic, or the defendant's secret bum buddy:

The judge DOES NOT have any discretion on dropping charges.......that was done, as it can ONLY be done, by the prosecutors.......who are paid by the LIBERAL government of Ontario.

Now, I agree an explanation needs to be made, but the idea that this was done on the basis of political partisan ship is simply ludicrous.

Good day Colpy, I don’t give a flying f about the judge, as far as I am concerned this was a f favour not justice, but what I give a f about is this,

"But Jaffer sees the ad -- which aired Thursday on 630 CHED, and targets NDP Leader Jack Layton on marijuana -- as a way to show constituents how different the two parties are when it comes to crime and justice":angryfire::angryfire::angryfire::angryfire::angryfire::angryfire::angryfire::angryfire::angryfire::angryfire:

a total f hypocrite this poster boy and the people he represents.

 

[Colpy]

Good day Colpy, I don’t give a flying f about the judge, as far as I am concerned this was a f favour not justice, but what I give a f about is this,

"But Jaffer sees the ad -- which aired Thursday on 630 CHED, and targets NDP Leader Jack Layton on marijuana -- as a way to show constituents how different the two parties are when it comes to crime and justice":angryfire::angryfire::angryfire::angryfire::angryfire::angryfire::angryfire::angryfire::angryfire::angryfire:

a total f hypocrite this poster boy and the people he represents.

Yes, Jaffer is a hypocrite, his wife is a bitch, and he got a serious break, as to why we don't know yet.......

That much I agree on.

But....Jaffer does NOT represent anyone.

 

[Francis2004]

Which makes absolutely no difference........the judge has no discretion in the matter of dropping charges, that is done by the prosecutor....in Liberal ruled Ontario.

I just listened to NDP federal Justice Critic Comartin say he does not believe anything improper happened in this case.....but the prosecutor's office needs to explain, thus clearing the air....so justice can be seen to be done.

Interesting.

Hey Colpy, did you read this from Comartin.. Just wondering :?:

Mr. Comartin, the NDP justice critic and former long-time trial lawyer, believes there is a risk that the Jaffer case will shake the integrity of the judicial system.

And so he has written two letters – to Justice Minister Rob Nicholson and Ontario Attorney-General Chris Bentley – asking that the details of Mr. Jaffer’s sentence be made public.

“I would ask you to accept the request in this correspondence in the spirit of good faith intended by me but also on behalf of all Canadians who are questioning whether Mr. Jaffer received favourable treatment,” he writes in his letter to Mr. Nicholson.

“I want to be clear that I personally do not believe that to be the case. … However, in this case I believe it is absolutely necessary that disclosure of the reasons for dropping these two charges must be made public as soon as possible.”

Earlier this week, Mr. Jaffer pleaded guilty to a charge of careless driving and was fined $500. More serious charges against him, including possession of cocaine, drunk drinking and speeding were dropped.

Immediately, questions were raised about political interference as Mr. Jaffer is a former Tory MP and is married to Helena Guergis, Stephen Harper’s minister of state for the status of women.

Among those doing the questioning is Mr. Comartin.

“Given the circumstances of the case and the high-profile stature of the accused and given the public reaction to the decision, I believe there is a risk that faith in the integrity of our justice system will be seriously challenged,” he writes.

He also notes that the drug charge against Mr. Jaffer is a federal issue. And he has asked Mr. Nicoholson to direct the Director of Public Prosecutions, who is a federal appointee, to “provide full disclosure to the public of the rationale behind the decision to withdraw the possession of cocaine charge against Mr. Jaffer.”

In his letter to Mr. Bently, the provincial Attorney-General, Mr. Comartin says he is concerned about the “lack of clarity” around the case and the “public perception of preferential treatment of Mr. Jaffer.”

Explain Rahim Jaffer sentence, ministers told - The Globe and Mail

 

[Socrates the Greek]

Yes, Jaffer is a hypocrite, his wife is a bitch, and he got a serious break, as to why we don't know yet.......

That much I agree on.

But....Jaffer does NOT represent anyone.

Say what? he does NOT represent anyone?

my friend according to this statement below he represents the Conservative party of Canada a bigot hornets nest, are you kidding me......The snow whites.............that’s who he represents..............:angryfire::angryfire::angryfire::angryfire:
"as a way to show constituents how different the two parties are when it comes to crime and justice"

 

[DaSleeper]

Hey DS...it might make for a good thread. Kind of a "Who Can Bullsh!t Best?" thing. I feared my "colleague" was beginning to repeat himself a bit too much and was in danger of losing his listening audience, so I was just trying to help him keep the ratings up. :lol:

As far as who bullsh*ts best we have no hope of winning against the Lord master:smile:
We used to have another Troll here before that might have had a chanceat it but he left for greener pasture...
While reading your post...I thought you might have made it into the iggy club.....but it seems as if I haven't made it myself.....LMAO

 

[Colpy]

Well, the details are out....

The police denied Jaffer access to his lawyer, and strip searched him without reasonable cause to do so.

Therefore there was no reasonable expectation that he would be convicted....the police screwed up royally...NO political interference.

CBC News - Canada - Details revealed in Jaffer plea deal

 

[Socrates the Greek]

Well, the details are out....

The police denied Jaffer access to his lawyer, and strip searched him without reasonable cause to do so.

Therefore there was no reasonable expectation that he would be convicted....the police screwed up royally...NO political interference.

CBC News - Canada - Details revealed in Jaffer plea deal

Hey Colpy cool, No Political Interference but huge level of hypocrisy, on Jaffer's Camp, when campaigning he told his constituency that the NDP leader is a pot head, while Jaffer is Cocaine addict. Huge deference, of moral fibber from what the guy was eluting people he was and who he turned out to be. Now would that say anything about the assembly of ministers in the Conservative party, how they claimed they were sooooooooooooooo clean and begged to be given a chance to clean up Ottawa, while 4 years latter the PM calls the cops on one of his own....and boot one of his own out off cabinet .........Big Hypocrisy on the Conservative camp.:lol:

 

[lone wolf]

Soc, do you want to debate or catcall?

 

[CDNBear]

Well, the details are out....

The police denied Jaffer access to his lawyer, and strip searched him without reasonable cause to do so.

Therefore there was no reasonable expectation that he would be convicted....the police screwed up royally...NO political interference.

CBC News - Canada - Details revealed in Jaffer plea deal

Thanx Colpy.

 

[TenPenny]

while Jaffer is Cocaine addict.

I think Jaffer is a disgrace to MPs of all parties, but I must question where you come up with the 'cocaine addict' part.

He was charged with possession of cocaine, but where is the evidence that he's an addict?

 

[JLM]

Soc, do you want to debate or catcall?

Good Luck.

 

[Socrates the Greek]

I think Jaffer is a disgrace to MPs of all parties, but I must question where you come up with the 'cocaine addict' part.

He was charged with possession of cocaine, but where is the evidence that he's an addict?

Surely you don’t think that the cocaine was in the mans pocket by accident? The reason cocaine was found was because the man is a user. Alcohol binging has saviour hang over’s the next day, in order to continue the next day with out the saviour hang over cocaine makes the hang over go away(things go better with cocaine). That is the assumption I go using the word addiction.

 

[lone wolf]

Surely you don’t think that the cocaine was in the mans pocket by accident? The reason cocaine was found was because the man is a user. Alcohol binging has saviour hang over’s the next day, in order to continue the next day with out the saviour hang over cocaine makes the hang over go away(things go better with cocaine). That is the assumption I go using the word addiction.

There is a hell of a difference between user and addict ... unless, of course, an addiction can be manipulated in for purposes of slur or propaganda....

 

[FiveParadox]

Haha, are we going to have the Conservatives now defending Jaffer’s drug habits? That’s cute.

Whether or not there was interference at a leadership-level, the fact remains that Mr. Rahim Jaffer used the offices of The Honourable Helena Guergis P.C., M.P. (Simcoe—Grey), then a minister, for entirely inappropriate reasons. Both Mr. Jaffer and Ms. Guergis would have been extremely aware of the code of ethics that applies to members of Parliament; even if there are no serious consequences for Mr. Jaffer’s drug possession and driving drunk, the House of Commons should come down on Ms. Guergis with the full weight of its authority for her transgressions.

 

[CDNBear]

Haha, are we going to have the Conservatives now defending Jaffer’s drug habits? That’s cute.

Where do you see that?

Whether or not there was interference at a leadership-level, the fact remains that Mr. Rahim Jaffer used the offices of The Honourable Helena Guergis P.C., M.P. (Simcoe—Grey), then a minister, for entirely inappropriate reasons. Both Mr. Jaffer and Ms. Guergis would have been extremely aware of the code of ethics that applies to members of Parliament; even if there are no serious consequences for Mr. Jaffer’s drug possession and driving drunk, the House of Commons should come down on Ms. Guergis with the full weight of its authority for her transgressions.

I couldn't agree more. I said the same thing to a similar post of yours elsewhere, with the addition of a humourous question.