NDP MP Pat Martin used donations from unions to pay off debt from defamation law suit

Corduroy

Corduroy

Senate Member
Feb 9, 2011
6,670
2
36
Vancouver, BC
The article basically describes what Pat Martin did as legal and not a big deal and says that the only problem is that propagandists can manipulate it to look bad. Or in other words, it says other parties will fool you into believing it's bad.

And it worked. Amazingly, it just warned you that you will be deceived and then you fell for it. Presumably Locutus read the article before posting it and completely missed the point that it was calling him a fool.
 
J

JamesBondo

House Member
Mar 3, 2012
4,158
37
48
Corduroy said:
The article basically describes what Pat Martin did as legal and not a big deal and says that the only problem is that propagandists can manipulate it to look bad. Or in other words, it says other parties will fool you into believing it's bad.

And it worked. Amazingly, it just warned you that you will be deceived and then you fell for it. Presumably Locutus read the article before posting it and completely missed the point that it was calling him a fool.
Click to expand...

It is not that difficult because it does look bad.
 
DaSleeper

DaSleeper

Trolling Hypocrites
May 27, 2007
33,676
1,666
113
Northern Ontario,
Corduroy said:
The article basically describes what Pat Martin did as legal and not a big deal and says that the only problem is that propagandists can manipulate it to look bad. Or in other words, it says other parties will fool you into believing it's bad.

And it worked. Amazingly, it just warned you that you will be deceived and then you fell for it. Presumably Locutus read the article before posting it and completely missed the point that it was calling him a fool.
Click to expand...
And lefties will bite on anything....
 
taxslave

taxslave

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 25, 2008
36,362
4,340
113
Vancouver Island
lone wolf said:
Actually, you're running on Morgan's herring. Typical of the easily manipulated....
Click to expand...

Not at all. I live in BC where we have been cursed with NDP governments twice in my lifetime. Both were disasters. Both times also proving dippers to be liars and thieves. Ever hear of bingogate?
 
Corduroy

Corduroy

Senate Member
Feb 9, 2011
6,670
2
36
Vancouver, BC
JamesBondo said:
It is not that difficult because it does look bad.
Click to expand...

But it isn't bad. It might look bad but it's not. At least, that's what the article says. Very clearly it says it looks bad, but it's fine, and the NDP's opponents will spin it and say it's bad. But it's not bad, see. It's fine.

You are being told that you will be lied to about this being bad up front.
 
J

JamesBondo

House Member
Mar 3, 2012
4,158
37
48
nope, the article said it was legal, but it looks bad.......and it does look bad. get over it.
 
T

tay

Hall of Fame Member
May 20, 2012
11,548
1
36
Locutus said:
hey kids, remember this 2013 tidbit?

didn't think so.


Move over Mike Duffy

For months the NDP has been railing against Mike Duffy for accepting a gift — from Nigel Wright — to pay off his debt for inappropriately claiming a Senate living allowance.

Well, it looks like one of their own has done the same thing — sort of.

According to the Ottawa Citizen, New Democrat MP Pat Martin, received cash gifts from several unions to pay off debts incurred with regard to a defamation law suit against him for accusing an Edmonton call centre of being behind the Guelph robocall scandal.
Documents filed with the federal ethics commissioner by the Manitoba MP earlier this month show he accepted contributions to a legal defence fund from the Canadian Labour Congress, the United Steelworkers and the Canadian Union of Public Employees, and 14 other unions or locals.

The donations are being used the repay a loan Martin received from the New Democratic Party of Canada to settle the legal case.

Political contributions from unions have been illegal at the federal level since 2004, but Martin says these donations to his legal defence are considered “gifts” to him personally under ethics rules, even though he will never see the money.
​
According to the Ottawa Citizen report, Martin did get approval from federal ethics commissioner Mary Dawson prior to accepting the union donations. But while he must recuse himself from voting on legislation that "affect his donors specifically" he is free to vote "on legislation that affects labour unions generally."

Certainly, this isn't the exact same thing as the prime minister's former chief of staff secretly gifting Mike Duffy $90,000 so that he could repay taxpayers. Martin was upfront about his gifts, he sought and received approval from the ethics commissioner and seemingly played by the rules.

But , according political consultant Gerry Nicholls, there's a definitely a perception of impropriety here.

"The problem for the NDP with this issue is one of perception. Yes maybe Martin did everything by the book, but that won’t stop the Liberals, the Conservatives and the media from comparing him to Duffy," Nicholls told Yahoo Canada News in an email exchange.

"That could undermine the NDP’s efforts to make political hay on the Duffy scandal. It’s hard to attack and defend at the same time."

If the Liberals and the Conservatives need some help developing some good talking points, they might want to look to Twitter:


https://ca.news.yahoo.com/blogs/can...rtin-used-donations-unions-pay-210359545.html
Click to expand...




Well I for one am glad to see the NDP'er Martin played by the rules and I thank you for refreshing our memories on this.........








According to the Ottawa Citizen report, Martin did get approval from federal ethics commissioner Mary Dawson prior to accepting the union donations. But while he must recuse himself from voting on legislation that "affect his donors specifically" he is free to vote "on legislation that affects labour unions generally."

Certainly, this isn't the exact same thing as the prime minister's former chief of staff secretly gifting Mike Duffy $90,000 so that he could repay taxpayers. Martin was upfront about his gifts, he sought and received approval from the ethics commissioner and seemingly played by the rules.
 
J

JamesBondo

House Member
Mar 3, 2012
4,158
37
48
tay said:
Well I for one am glad to see the NDP'er Martin played by the rules and I thank you for refreshing our memories on this.........








According to the Ottawa Citizen report, Martin did get approval from federal ethics commissioner Mary Dawson prior to accepting the union donations. But while he must recuse himself from voting on legislation that "affect his donors specifically" he is free to vote "on legislation that affects labour unions generally."

Certainly, this isn't the exact same thing as the prime minister's former chief of staff secretly gifting Mike Duffy $90,000 so that he could repay taxpayers. Martin was upfront about his gifts, he sought and received approval from the ethics commissioner and seemingly played by the rules.
Click to expand...

True. It isn't the same. Duffy used personal money from Nigel. Martin used the mandatory union dues of taxpayers.
 
J

JamesBondo

House Member
Mar 3, 2012
4,158
37
48
lone wolf said:
Union dues are only taxes on union members
Click to expand...

Allegedly, you have the ability to understand that the taxpayers that had mandatory dues taken off their paycheck had almost no say in the matter. Martin accepted this gifted money from union organizations under this premise.
 
petros

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
119,346
14,668
113
Low Earth Orbit
Dues are a tax credit.

Dues are bupkis compared to Assoc memberships which are basically $10,00) a year magazine subscriptions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom