Senator Pamela Wallin next to resign.

[Durry]

you guess correctly
she's a thief and as low as they come and so is Duffy and they are just the ones who got caught...but she won't be charged because if she is charged they will all be charged and all parties will circle the wagons together because they have been sucking at the trough for so long it is considered A-okay kinda theft

don't do as they do though...you will be jailed, count on it, no need to guess

Yep, I agree, they have all been sucking at the trough, and not only on financial matters but on hours of work and a host of other things.

I guess this is what you get when you don't have transparency and public accountability,,, and no one managing the big picture of their performance.

The Senate needs a complete over haul or maybe abolishment!! Enough is enough already!!!

 

[Sal]

Yep, I agree, they have all been sucking at the trough, and not only on financial matters but on hours of work and a host of other things.

I guess this is what you get when you don't have transparency and public accountability,,, and no one managing the big picture of their performance.

The Senate needs a complete over haul or maybe abolishment!! Enough is enough already!!!

I think they might even be nervous! It is likely a first!

 

[Durry]

Yep, I agree, probably a first.

Being appointed to be a Senator was usually considered a dream cushy job till your 75. It didn't get any better than being a Senator!!

 

[JLM]

In Canada they are called indictables.

About a hundred years ago when I was in school I was taught not to use a long word when a short one will do.

 

[gerryh]

About a hundred years ago when I was in school I was taught not to use a long word when a short one will do.

I guess they also told you that you could use words that weren't right for the situation too?

Canada does not have felony's, the americans do. Therefore, Canada does not have felon's, which are those that have been found guilty of a felony. In Canada, the term indictable offense is used instead.

What Is a Felony?

 

[JLM]

Felony - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

Crook suits me, Gerry, if it suits you! -

 

[gerryh]

Felony - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

why do you insist on extending and accentuating your stupidity?

from your link

Examples of FELONY

1. The crime is considered a felony under state law.
2. He was convicted of felony murder.

Both are examples of american law, NOT Canadian. We do not have a criminal charge of "felony murder" in Canada. Neither do we have "states", we have "Provinces".




In the link I provided it clearly stated that Canada has not used the term "felony" in it's laws since 1967. Canada uses the term Indictable offense.


I know you have a problem admitting when you are wrong, but really man, grow up.

 

[taxslave]

why do you insist on extending and accentuating your stupidity?

from your link

Examples of FELONY

1. The crime is considered a felony under state law.
2. He was convicted of felony murder.

Both are examples of american law, NOT Canadian. We do not have a criminal charge of "felony murder" in Canada. Neither do we have "states", we have "Provinces".




In the link I provided it clearly stated that Canada has not used the term "felony" in it's laws since 1967. Canada uses the term Indictable offense.


I know you have a problem admitting when you are wrong, but really man, grow up.

I guess that would make them indictables then.

 

[JLM]

why do you insist on extending and accentuating your stupidity?

from your link

Examples of FELONY

1. The crime is considered a felony under state law.
2. He was convicted of felony murder.

Both are examples of american law, NOT Canadian. We do not have a criminal charge of "felony murder" in Canada. Neither do we have "states", we have "Provinces".




In the link I provided it clearly stated that Canada has not used the term "felony" in it's laws since 1967. Canada uses the term Indictable offense.


I know you have a problem admitting when you are wrong, but really man, grow up.

Yep, I might have a problem admitting when I'm wrong but I have an even bigger problem with getting hung up on semantics. If you want to get hung up with legal jargon, I suppose geography applies, but if you are just interested in word meanings I don't think meanings change when you cross the border. In legal jargon I guess I couldn't call her a b*tch either! -

 

[tay]

Oilsands Quest, Inc. was very, very good to senator Pam Wallin. Her spot as a director of the Calgary-based energy company earned her $648,000 in cash and stock options, according to The Globe & Mail.

SenPam resigned from the OilQuest board when it fell into receivership but that didn't keep her from being named as a defendant in a lawsuit that claimed the company defrauded investors with bogus claims of great bitumen wealth in Saskatchewan.

Earlier this month the now defunct company settled the suit for $10.2 million. According to counsel, it's the directors' and officers' insurers that covered the settlement.


more


Lawsuit against bankrupt company of which Wallin was director settled for $10.2-million - The Globe and Mail

 

[tay]

Pamela Wallin’s fall from grace

Maclean’s preview: A sneak peek at our investigation into Sen. Pamela Wallin




Despite her continued protestations of having done nothing wrong, Wallin has just repaid another $100K, accompanied by the following statement:


“Although I fundamentally disagree with the methodology used in arriving at that figure, particularly since the amount was calculated using newly created rules to examine past expenses, I do not want to burden the people of Canada and, in particular the people of Saskatchewan, by engaging in a protracted legal debate about the matter”.
“I wish to make it clear. I was not treated fairly by the Deloitte review, which was not conducted in accordance with generally accepted accounting principle, nor have I been treated fairly by the Senate Committee. Evidence that casts doubt on the correctness of the amounts owing was either ignored or disregarded during the review.”


Pamela Wallin’s fall from grace - Blog Central, Canada, Web Features - Macleans.ca

 

[JLM]

Pamela Wallin’s fall from grace

Maclean’s preview: A sneak peek at our investigation into Sen. Pamela Wallin




Despite her continued protestations of having done nothing wrong, Wallin has just repaid another $100K, accompanied by the following statement:


“Although I fundamentally disagree with the methodology used in arriving at that figure, particularly since the amount was calculated using newly created rules to examine past expenses, I do not want to burden the people of Canada and, in particular the people of Saskatchewan, by engaging in a protracted legal debate about the matter”.
“I wish to make it clear. I was not treated fairly by the Deloitte review, which was not conducted in accordance with generally accepted accounting principle, nor have I been treated fairly by the Senate Committee. Evidence that casts doubt on the correctness of the amounts owing was either ignored or disregarded during the review.”


Pamela Wallin’s fall from grace - Blog Central, Canada, Web Features - Macleans.ca

She's whining!

 

[taxslave]

SInce the senate committee is basically on a witch hunt it is not surprising they are using new rules on old expenses. One might say she is sacrificial lamb in the hopes that the public with a renowned short attention span will loose interest and the rest of them will get off scott free.

 

[Sal]

Pamela Wallin’s fall from grace

Maclean’s preview: A sneak peek at our investigation into Sen. Pamela Wallin




Despite her continued protestations of having done nothing wrong, Wallin has just repaid another $100K, accompanied by the following statement:


“Although I fundamentally disagree with the methodology used in arriving at that figure, particularly since the amount was calculated using newly created rules to examine past expenses, I do not want to burden the people of Canada and, in particular the people of Saskatchewan, by engaging in a protracted legal debate about the matter”.
“I wish to make it clear. I was not treated fairly by the Deloitte review, which was not conducted in accordance with generally accepted accounting principle, nor have I been treated fairly by the Senate Committee. Evidence that casts doubt on the correctness of the amounts owing was either ignored or disregarded during the review.”


Pamela Wallin’s fall from grace - Blog Central, Canada, Web Features - Macleans.ca

She didn't fall far, fast enough or land with a big enough thump for me, since she still has a job and a pension and god only knows what else.