04.30.2011 07:37 AM

KCCCC Day 36: Jack Layton, and a campaign’s end

  • I’ve been a cop reporter, a political guy, a media commentator and (am) a voter. I tried to look at this Jack Layton story from all of those perspectives.
  • As a cop reporter: I did the cops beat at the Calgary Herald and the Ottawa Citizen. At those papers – at almost any paper, then or now – we’d write about how the police periodically do sweeps at bawdy houses and places like that. If the round-ups involved a lot of johns, we’d write about that. If the operators of the prostitution operation were newsworthy, we’d write about them. And, if there was a famous person amongst the johns, we’d certainly cover it. We’d let the higher-ups, and the eggheads on the editorial boards, agonize about whether a story we filed should get published or not. Our beat was crime, and our job was to write crime stories. We did that. From a cops beat reporter’s perspective, the fact that a man has a shot at becoming Prime Minister, and was found at a place like that, is big news. Any journalist who says that it isn’t, isn’t much of a journalist, or is being dishonest. This is a legitimate cops-beat story – with one caveat: it happened in 1996, which is many years ago. All that renders it “news,” again, is the prominence of the person involved.
  • As a political guy: A Sun reporter called me about this story yesterday afternoon. Before he could even describe what it was about – he said it involved “a major political figure and the police” – I told him I already knew what it was about. In Toronto, and amongst many political people, this story has been pretty well-known for years. Someone came to me about it two years ago. I looked at what they had, thought about it for about sixty seconds, and then urged this person to forget all about it. I certainly planned to. If the story ever saw the light of day, I told this person, it would hurt the source more than it would hurt the target. I still think that. If people within a political party were ultimately behind this – and there are four political parties which would have a direct interest in getting this story out – they’d better hope to God they don’t get found out before Monday night. Right now, there isn’t a voter in Canada who doesn’t think a political party was wrapped up in this somehow. Does that hurt Jack Layton? Not with most voters. Ask that Hugh Grant actor guy, he knows.
  • As a media commentator: I’ve told people at the Sun I felt they were being used by someone with an obvious agenda, and to caution them about the story. They had weighed all of those negatives by the time they spoke to me, obviously, and they went with the story anyway. That’s their decision, and I think it’s maybe explainable by the fact that political people use media people all the time, and vice-versa. But two problems still remain, from my perspective. One, I think the Sun was indeed used by a political party during a hotly-contested election campaign, and – arguably as unhelpful – they’ve given their competitors an opportunity to also cover the story, while simultaneously slamming the Sun for going with the story. I wouldn’t have given the competition the opportunity to do something hypocritical like that. I would have let one of them go first. Two, the bigger scandal, here, remains unaddressed: at the time he was detained, Jack Layton was a city councillor on the City of Toronto’s budget committee, which has power over the police budget. The cops knew who he was, they knew the power he wielded over them. So what did they do? They walked him to the back door, and let him pedal away. Were the other men found at that place given that kind of treatment? If not, what happened here is a bona fide scandal, one that Toronto taxpayers need have probed, the passage of time notwithstanding.
  • As a voter: On the one hand, I dislike prostitution, and I particularly dislike the media’s dishonesty about it – they condemn it, and then make money out of advertising that promotes trafficking in human beings (like the Toronto Star does, in its eye weekly paper). On the other hand, I don’t particularly dislike Jack Layton (he won me over, a few years back, when he called me to ask for a copy of one of my books – the one about punk rock, not one of the ones I’ve written about politics). Does this story make me, as voter, more or less likely to vote for him? Well, I was never planning on voting for him anyway. But it reminds me that he showed appalling judgment, sixteen years ago, and that he needs to express regret for that, instead of offering up the standard-issue political bullshit. In this election campaign, he’s not alone in offering up bullshit, I guess.


  1. Bill M. says:

    They should have called the story “Jack Off” or “Tail Gate”.

    Much ado about nada.

    Carson is a Royal Flush compared to this.

    And I’m an LPC voter.

  2. Phil in London says:

    This won’t hurt his core support whatever that is but any soft leaners could be giving him a second look.

    Guess that nice guy to have a beer with might just be the nice go to have a beer with at the local peeler bar.

    I believe Warren saying this story has been around a while. That’s why whining about the smear campaign may do more damage than good for Jack. He shoud have been prepared for the possibility and looked right in the camera and said he made a big mistake 16 years ago, not more bullshit like he accuses everyone else of forking.

    If nothing else he and his people looked a little less confident last night.

    I don’t give a damn who came up with the story but I do find it a joke that this man is in within a stone’s throw of Susses Drive without anyone knowing about it. People have the right to know what their prime minister is like in both his best and worst light. If this is judged by the voter as not important so be it but it needs to be out there and shame on everyone who let is slide for 16 years, it could have been three weeks ago, two weeks ago, 1week ago, why only now?

    • Lance says:

      I agree. Although I don’t at all like the cynical way this was conveniently timed to emerge, it shouldn’t taken this long to come out. It should have been a factor before Layton was anywhere near leading a progressive party like the NDP that claims to champion the rights of women.

  3. Dr.J says:

    I am waiting for NDP MP Pat Martin to offer up one of his famous rhymes like he does at every opportunity about the CPC….or others in the left who were so offended about the Carson /hooker story…..This doesn’t affect me one bit but in the future when the NDP try to ride that high horse of morality, we all know they are full of shit. Reguarding the media getting used for a story….the CBC does this everyday for the Liberals as does the Toronto Star(Liberal HQ must have Delacourt on speed dial), it is part of the game…and this time Jacko got caught naked in a rub and tug…game changer, no…..price of gasoline going up under a NDP government..game changer, oh yes!!

  4. Nikki Sharpe says:

    Many if not most women who work in massage, parlours are exploited, coerced and forced into it through intimidation, violence and financial exploitation. Those of you who think going to one is a bit of innocent slap and tickle are talking out of your asses and if you go to them you’re contributing to organized crime and slavery. Shame on Mr. Layton. Only a complete idiot can’t tell the difference between a rub and tug and a legit massage therapist. And Jack’s no idiot.

    I’m NDP and will support my local candidate, so I doubt this will impact support much, but I have lost a tremendous amount of respect for Jack.





  5. Maxie says:

    Tsk. Tsk. Aw c’mon Warren! The most prominent city councillor in Toronto knowingly rides up to a known bawdy house on his bicycle in broad daylight, proceeds to get a sexual massage, gets busted, and rides away with impunity, on the good graces of beat cops! And his very prominent and capable wife does a submissive Tammy Wynette and “stands by her man”! You’re kidding, right? And it just so happens that the source is a leaked, anonymous, conveniently retired beat cop who took notes. Presumably from behind the grassy knoll. And he just found them when cleaning out the attic. “Now where did I leave dem dere memoire notes?” And yet… and yet, it never comes up in the eight or more elections Layton faced since? Never made it on the radar of the NDP’s internal background check of leadership candidates? Layton never disclosed it in his signed candidates’s declaration document? Until now, on the eve of an election where the support for the NDP is greater than Broadbent’s best days? I respect your opinions Warren, and I like reading/hearing your comments. But this is Jan Wong stuff. You’re above this. Perhaps you’ve heard of Robert Chisholm? He’s running for the NDP against your boy Mike Savage in Dartmouth. Chisholm happens to be, in my view, the best Premier Nova Scotia never had. His downfall? A leaked, drive-by smear in the dying days of the campaign when Nova Scotia was about to elect itd first NDP government. The relevation? Why, he was convicted of drunk driving when he was 19 years old. You’ll be hearing more from Robert Chisholm, starting May 3rd. Time to raise the journalistic bar Warren. I think you’re up for it. Lest you be unfairly judged when you put your name on the ballot. As you were.

    A respected reader in Cape Breton

    • Lilly says:

      I agree with Maxie that this story has been around since I moved to TO in 1997, so why now and not when he was up for party leadership campaigns? Hmm… So many issues at play here: I don’t want to know about Layton’s extra curricular activities unless he used party funds to pay for it. If not, it’s between him, Olivia and his bicycle. On the other hand, he was at a whorehouse, and those women are someone’s daughters. But, on my left foot, a randy Layton is still better than the arrogant Liberals who refuse to ditch McGuinty any day. And on my right foot, the local NDP guy is great, but this race is a federal, not just local, campaign. I would like to know my vote isn’t going towards a corrupt toad. A toad I could handle, but a corrupt toad? Nuh-uh.

  6. smelter rat says:

    So, Phil…do you feel the same way about Jason Kenny and John Baird?

    • Phil in London says:

      Again my point is it should have come out earlier and he should have had a better response to it then someone is smearing me. The guy has a track record of standing up. Why the hell didn’t he use his stand on such issues and simply say it was a big mistake from years ago that he had learned from.

      I don’t think I wrote anything to condemn Jack’s actions and I am not about to throw sins like some kind of purified saint but also I ain’t running for office using the moral high road as my flag. It seems I hit a nerve. Someone else’s indiscretions late in a campaign I would be happy to offer an opinion on if it is so valued.

      All I said is that those who are soft supporters may have second thought and then I made something called a joke about where to have that famour beer with Jack Layton HOAG.

      I thought it was supposed to be conservatives who were uptight and without humour.

  7. DMD says:

    Well said, all the way through. I don’t know that I can count, really, four parties, though. LPC, CPC, sure. But how much would this hurt the Dippers in Duceppe’s bailiwick? Also, given how out of the picture they are, I don’t know that the Greens would bother. The Ford people would know about this and have long memories of and enmities toward, show-boating, provocative and far more lefty Jack, a man they might wish to ensure doesn’t become PM, no? I think, though, that if it was so open a secret as it appears, the Sun may have decided to be the splashy outlet of the closing 48 hours of the campaign all on its own and to boost the new SNN. For what it’s worth, I think it’s newsworthy, and does indeed (as the facts have been left uncontested) reflect an appalling failure of judgment at least.

  8. Mike says:

    Jack’s claimed innocence through ignorance, he just didn’t know that it was a rub and tug. I think that’s almost worse than just admitting what you were really there for because everyone knows politicians lie, but now he looks like he’s completely retarded.

    • Namesake says:

      Why? the facts are that this incident took place at 9:30 or so PM, and Layton is now saying that it was probably after he’d been at the gym for a work out.

      The massage parlour’s address: 787 Dundas St. W., Toronto – Google Maps : http://urlm.in/hqau

      Turns out, that’s just a 7 minute bike ride (or 15 minute walk) from his residence, which they bought in 1993.

      Put those together, as one previously critical commenter on Maclean’s just did, when he wrote a few hours ago,

      “Now that I realize [where] Layton had moved to… the innocent version of the story makes a lot more sense. He went to a massage parlour that happened to be just by his house…in Chinatown…. [near] Spadina… He went to a place 7 minutes from his house by bike, in his wife’s ward at 9:30. Dundas West isn’t as busy as Queen or College, but I’ve walked through that way plenty of times, and there are usually people around there. There is no way a public figure would knowingly go to a rub and tug operation in those kinds of circumstances.”


  9. fritz says:

    WK’s view of the story, as expressed above, is that this is an old news story and will only hurt the leaker; but that he believes the Sun News version of the events and not the Layton version.

    This allows him to promote the worst version of the story while saying it doesn’t matter what happened 16 years ago and what Jack supposedly did was Jack being Jack. Nice spin.

    Layton has nothing to apologize for as he didn’t make a mistake 16 years ago. Calling this a smear is the correct course of action as that is what it is.

    At the moment most people (including me) believe that this is a Tory smear job. There is nothing to say this wasn’t put out by a Liberal source and as WK says they better hope that if they did they don’t get found out.

    On another subject Harper today refused to say if he would accept the ruling of the GG that the second place party should get a chance to form government if a Tory minority was defeated. Now that’s interesting.

    • WildGuesser says:

      Layton has nothing to apologize for? Just going to a rub ‘n tug establishment helps finance organizations that earn their keep from exploiting women. He should at least have the decency to say, ‘It is regrettable and if I had known…’.

      People would likely to cut him some slack, regardless of him reportedly being found naked in a bed, as opposed to towelled on a massage table, if he gave a straight answer to obvious questions. Of course, to give a straight answer to questions, you need to take questions.

      Jack needs to take a page from Iggy’s book and answer the controversial questions he should know will keep coming until answered, so he can put the issue behind him. Although, come to think of it, trying to put the coalition question to rest didn’t exactly help Iggy. Must be why I’m not in the political strategy hierarchy.

  10. Alberta Liberal says:

    Leave it to the toilet paper that is The Sun to have a cover story from something that happened 15 yrs ago (and never used in any previous campaign) instead of the Royal Wedding, this paper is a joke, I always say if I ever ran out of toilet paper I’d use the Sun because there’s already shit on it!

    • nastyboy says:

      I’m glad the Sun put anything but the royal wedding on the front cover. F*&K the Queen and her entire inbred, horse-faced family. I’m embarrassed by/for any Canadian who cares about the royal wedding.

    • Phil in London says:

      Speaking of good toilet paper substitutes, have you read / decoded the rag known as the Toronto Star? That wouldn’t be good for toliet paper becasuse it’s a piece of shit to begin with. You should try reading both sices and think there might be a place somewhere in the place formerly occupied by Liblerals (that’s the middle in case I made it too hard to figure)

  11. Mike says:

    If it came out now maybe it was because with Jack so far from the levers of power in the past, people let sleeping dogs lie. There are a lot of people out there who won’t run for political office because they fear closer scrutiny of what should be their private lives. I think that in some ways this is less about the event, than about the hubris of the man himself feeling that he doesn’t have to face up to it. Warren’s comments above are all reasonable under the circumstances. We can see variations of this everywhere, probably more in the US these days with people like John Edwards and others.

    Politicians should not have to be squeky clean. They must face up when they have to deal with issues such as this. Layton has had no scrutiny compared to Harper and Ignatieff. That is partly why he has this popularity wave right now, because the white hot light was never directed in his direction.

    I agree that this might be more dangerous for the source, but it is long since time that Jack Layton’s feet were held to the same fire as the other major party leaders.

    • Curt says:

      I was told that if you want to run for a political office you better be prepared to have all your sins published on the front page of a newspaper. The same person also told me that federal politics is a “take no prisoners Game.” That was great advice.

  12. Jeff says:

    Warren I agree with you 100% on all this. I’m a usual conservative voter and feel the same as you have expressed here. I really hope CPC didn’t start this, days after the Ignatieff Iraq mea culpa from Sun. If it does turn into something from the CPC, in the middle of a campaign, 16 years after the fact, my vote will get parked with my local Green student candidate in a very neck and neck CPC-Lib contested riding.

    I also don’t like prostitution and I agree the fact that he was allowed to leave in the manner it sounds like while holding the position he was is the scandal. I don’t mind attack ads but this is the lowest of the low as far as I’m concerned. If this was ever going to see the light of day it should have seen it years before. That it didn’t is just evidence that whom ever released this gem now really didn’t feel too strongly about it.

  13. wannabeapiper says:

    Don’t care if he (Layton) raped a goat. I still aint a gona vote fer him. Actually I do care about the goat.
    By the way me and all of my friends ( 2 ) think Sun News media is very poor and uninspiring and the only good thing about it is when you are on it.

    Don’t think the story will hurt him, he will probably pick up extra sympathy votes as well as a ton of extra press which puts his name out there even more.

    I new him as a City Councillor and he was a dud and self absorbed etc…………Ho hum and sigh.

    Just sayin………..

  14. Kephalos says:

    If you factor out the western provinces vote using weighted average, the NDP is leading the CPC in the ROC. Maybe that factor factors on this story. Who knows, eh?

  15. Craig Chamberlain says:

    “Why only now” and not three weeks ago is why this deserves to die. It’s really MORE about the finger pointers THAN JACK. Great blog though, WK.

  16. TofKW says:

    Past run ins with the law didn’t hurt Ford from becoming mayor, and likewise this won’t do any damage to Layton either. Hell this may even help him.

    The only people who look bad are SUNnews, who just firm up the image of their being part of the propaganda wing of the Harper war room.

  17. Bill Ross says:

    websters- E-Jack-U-Layton

    A sleazy ,hypocritical political operative engaged in sex acts with young enslaved prostitutes.

    Just the man we want as Prime Minister.

    • Namesake says:

      websters- Lie-Bill-Ross

      A sleazy ,hypocritical political operative engaged in torquing circumstantial evidence, innuendo, and guilt by association to outright character assassination.

      Just the man the CPC wants as a staffer.

    • JS Rothwell says:

      Websters? I didnt think people over the age of 100 were even on the internet. Was your first election for Borden, Bill Ross?

  18. kitt says:

    This story is now a positive twist for Jack. And we all know which political party plays dirty Bushite politics. And this also turns people off Sun news and the Sun papers. I already canceled my 15 daily Sun and blocked the Sun tv. How many more people have done the same? I don’t think I am alone.

  19. bigcitylib says:

    If he was not charged he was not charged. I’m not sure why Warren accepts the Sun’s implied version of events.

  20. Dave Wells says:

    Well, next time someone says Sun News is not a CPC adjuct, I plan to cite this.

  21. Bill M. says:

    Do you support the exploitation of women in brothels and do you support the John’s who enage in such exploitation?

    I guess you didn’t read WK’s fourth point did you?

  22. Ian says:

    He was allowed to walk because there was nothing to charge him with. No wrongdoing was found.

    You guys are ok with cops giving anonymous tips to the media about the private lives of politicians they don’t like, tips that are just about things the cops have seen in the course of doing their job but don’t involve criminal wrongdoing?

    If there was a crime then condemn the cops for not laying charges. Otherwise, the concern here should be about what’s happening to our democracy when the police start abusing their powers.

    Liberals should know about the dangers of this. Remember how the RCMP dumped that story about their investigation, in the middle of Paul Martin’s election campaign.

    Let’s just let Fantino and his goons run the country, shall we?

  23. Alberta Liberal says:

    This of course coming from a supporter of a party who buy black markers by the caseload

  24. Craig Chamberlain says:

    Careful, Mr. Tulk — you are commiting yourself. Not all has been likely revealed about the Harper government. Far from it.

  25. Patrick says:

    Police evidence and judgments are often wrong. That is why accused people get a trial. How reliable is a retired police officer about something that happened 15 years ago? An anonymous police officer. Shouldn’t the Sun have gotten some corroboration? What was the establishment? Were the owners or the masseuse ever convicted of anything or was their license revoked? I can’t believe this whole story is based on the conclusions of an anonymous police officer, one who seemed to be conscious of police politics

    • Michael says:

      I am not one to jump on the police bandwagon. Yes they often make mistakes, and that is why we have trials and a presumption of innocence. And I am always thankful for my rights under the Charter.

      However, Layton is not denying the story or the police officers recollection of events. What he is trying to get us to believe is that he did not know it was abawdy house. and that he was their for Shiatsu. I was born at night, it just wasn’t last night.

      Just something to ponder. At the time of the alleged incident, he was a City of Toronto councillor. Do they not have a health plan? Woouldn’t massage therapy be covered under a health plan? Did he ask for a receipt? Hmmm.

      • Patrick says:

        I don’t think Layton admitted it was a bawdy house or that he was doing something wrong there. The police officer told him it was a bawdy house and Layton went away, likes most people would if police warned them to stay away from a place. I do have a complaint with the Sun. You have a damaging allegation from one anonymous source and you run with it without other witnesses or any attempt to coroborate the officer’s spin.

        I don’t know if he would have receipts. Part of the problem with a 15 year old allegation is that it is hard to defend yourself

  26. Tourist says:

    I recently saw a Jack Layton sign in which someone had added an E and a U: e-Jack-u-Layton. That must have been what he was doing at the massage parlour!

    • Craig Chamberlain says:

      (Grow up.)

    • Philip says:

      And the Craigslist conservative shows up just in time. While the whole Jack/ E-Jack-Ulation was mildly amusing the first time it appeared here, it’s lost the funny by the third time. You should check with your shift manager because I don’t think you guys get paid for duplicate posts.

  27. Lewis says:

    Why is it okay for the media to crucify Brian Muoroney for his (legal) short comings in judgement, which were 17 years old at the time, but not Jack Layton’s of 15 years ago? We have a double standard here with many of the MSM, that should be talked about.

    • fritz says:

      “(legal) short comings”

      ^That’s one way of expressing it. 😉

    • Seriously, are you so dense that you need someone to explain why the Mulroney affair was a big story and deservedly so?

      It matted even though the story was old because it took many years to accumulate evidence and many years and legal wranglings before the final inquiry took place.

      But most of all it mattered – no matter how old the story and allegations – because Mulroney’s relationship with Schrieber both direct and indirect started before Mulroney’s march to power, continued while he *was Prime Minister*, and carried on afterwards.

      There is no double standard. Mulroney *had* to be investigated. In public.

      The effect? Before the stories started to surface about Mulroney I was on balance a fan. I happened to have had very specific issues with the FTA but wasn’t horribly fearful of it. As a manufacturer at the time, I fully approved of the GST. VATs are good policy. On balance my opinion of Mulroney’s time in power was quite positive.

      As a voter, and as a former Conservative / former Progressive Conservative supporter and organizer, the Schreiber-Mulroney saga certainly affected my opinion of the man.

      Sure he did some good things for the country, but others could have done those same good things and not left a taint behind. A PM, a former PM, is in a good position to do very well for the rest of his or her life. There’s no need to associate with seedy characters and take envelopes full of money.

      The Mulroney saga properly should be seen as a warning to all Canadians that politicians in top office *must* be held to the highest possible ethical standard and the only way to ensure that is to keep the bright light of scrutiny upon them at all times. Yet the shielded nature of the PMO – under all modern leaders and yes that clearly extends to Harper – means we are a long way from getting true transparency that Canadians deserve.

      • Candace says:

        Michael @ 2:02 “The Mulroney saga properly should be seen as a warning to all Canadians that politicians in top office *must* be held to the highest possible ethical standard and the only way to ensure that is to keep the bright light of scrutiny upon them at all times. Yet the shielded nature of the PMO – under all modern leaders and yes that clearly extends to Harper – means we are a long way from getting true transparency that Canadians deserve”

        Jack is running for PM, and according to my recollections and likely confirmed by a simple google search, has been since he became Leader of the NDP.

        Ergo: “politicians in top office *must* be held to the highest possible ethical standard”

        If you haven’t seen the pictures of the actual location of the massage “clinic” [using the term loosely as I’ve only ever been massaged by massage therapist at my chiropractor’s and my daughter was massaged at a friend’s (licensed RMT) home office, complete with receipt for insurance purposes] then you are ignoring a gazillion links to same for reasons known only to you. Whatever.

        Furthermore, if you believe for a friggin’ nanosecond that if this story were about Harper instead of Layton it wouldn’t have been 24/7 news from what, 2001? to now you are delusional.

        “Coverups” aren’t always about the implicated individual. Sometimes they are about the media looking the other way. This would be the latter, IMHO, begging the question WHY?

  28. fritz says:

    There wasn’t a crime (unless you count the leaking of police files) so there ‘s nothing to cover up.

    • Bill M. says:

      Are you saying JL purchased sexual favors?

      Please come out and say it sir.

    • Philip says:

      Now you have done it! Gord “Astro Turf” Tulk is all puffed up with manufactured outrage. About an incident with no criminal charges, leaked by Suntv the CPC adjunct, 16 years ago and with JL with in hours of torpedoing a Harper majority. Nothing like a last minute drive by smear to bring some class to the final Harper campaign. Fear and desperation are oozing from the pores of the CPC like stale whiskey.

    • Namesake says:

      “purchasing sexual favors is a crime” : um, no, Mr. Makeshitup:

      “In Canada, the buying and selling of sexual services are not illegal, but most surrounding activities, such as public communication for the purpose of prostitution, brothels and procuring are outlawed.”


      And here’s what else isn’t illegal:

      – operating a licensed massage parlor, which, although should not be equated with a bawdy house or brothel, particularly in the minds of all its customers, even if the police may have suspected it of being one

      – buying and receiving a Shiatsu Massage in a licensed neighbourhood massage parlor from a 25 year-old woman

      – opting to go naked for said massage; apparently, it’s actually quite common and recommended for both Shiatsu and Swedish, deep-tissue massages; they’re not as effective through layer(s) of clothing

      – wiping the massage oil off one’s hands with tissues to answer the door, and discarding said moist tissues in the garbage

      – or — IF this actually happened, in this case (and apparently does, in others) and would be understandably embarrassing to talk about, either at the time or at any time since —

      becoming aroused to the point of climax during such a massage, even absent ANY direct contact with the genitalia.

      Why, I’ll bet even Gord here has had the odd erotic dream and nocturnal emission over the course of his marriage which wasn’t focused on his spouse; would that make him guilty of infidelity and unsuitable to be a husband and father?

    • fritz says:

      How is there a cover-up. There was no wrongdoing and even if there was why would Layton publicise something that was no ones business but him and his family. I don’t see Harper rushing out to tell everyone his and the PMO’s secrets to avoid a cover-up. Your starting to lose it Gord.

  29. Sezme says:

    Great tweet; I don’t know who wrote it:
    “I guess all i can say is I’d rather be caught naked in a massage parlour than fully clothed working for SunNews.”

    • Namesake says:

      Andrew Coyne wrote it, to Kady’s q. on his rxn to this

      • JS Rothwell says:

        sure Gord, keep spinning.

        • Candace says:

          LOL! Did you ever read Coyne when Martin was PM? You would have SWORN he was a conservative supporter. Even when Belinda crossed.

          UNTIL Emerson did. Then it was all out war. I recall a blog post (vanished, conveniently) about “not an issue? I’ll show you an issue” and then ran column after column after column about it until it *was* considered an issue.

          So Emerson’s kids were trashed at school to soothe his ego. Nice.

          Partisanship aside (whether you choose to believe that or not, irrelevant to me), that particular escapade lowered my opinion of Mr. Coyne beyond credible. On pretty much anything.

  30. George says:

    Where is the media coverage of Harper’s fake marriage? Why is Harper’s private life off limits when Layton’s is front and center?

    • George says:

      Jack Layton was not arrested or charged so it had nothing to do with criminal activity. If our Prime Minister is willing to go as far as make appearances and hold hands with his wife that he is separated from in order to gain power, I would like to know.

    • JS Rothwell says:

      Noone was arrested Gord. They werent looking for unreported criminals and imaginary crimes back then. Now back to your world of unicorns and balloons.

  31. Loraine Lamontagne says:

    I had never realized until now that it is legal for police officers in Canada to use the notes they take in the exercise of their duty for political, or other personal purposes.

  32. Dr.Dawg says:

    You’re a clever man, Warren, I’ll give you that.

    But where is the evidence a) that the place was other than the licensed therapeutic massage clinic that Layton and Chow claim it was; b) that the raid led to any arrests; c) that Jack went there for anything other than a massage–you know, a real one?

    “at the time he was detained”

    No, Warren. He was not “detained.” He had a conversation, left his name, address and (for some reason) his weight and height, and he left.

    No story here, except how this salacious stuff ever became a story.

    Hey, you’re a journalist. Why not explore this angle:


    • Warren says:

      He was detained. The story says so, and the SCC has ruled in these circumstances people should consider they are in no position to simply walk away. He was detained.

      Anyway, what’s your point?

      • Dr.Dawg says:

        “Detained” in the sense you mean would be equivalent to “under arrest.” There’s no evidence that he was not, at any time, free to walk away.

        Jack chose to answer the cop’s questions, as many people would have. Then he indeed walked away, and bicycled off.

        My point? Two, in fact. 1) This wasn’t a news story, but a planted smear with nothing concrete to back it up, like the rumours about Laureen Harper with which you are familiar, and 2) real journalists would be exploring that “story”‘s provenance, the illegal use of a police notebook and the information it contains, whether more than one “ex-cop” was involved, and so on.

  33. James says:

    Wow!!! Never believed in a MILLION YEARS that I would see The Toronto Star break with its historical tradition and endorse JACK LAYTON AND THE NDP in today’s editorial. The Hindmarsh family must be turning in their graves!!!

    This is actually a huge gift for the Conservatives; it has now crystallized the choices in the final stretch of this election between the Conservatives and the NDP. “Blue Grits”, or right-leaning Liberals, will now flock to the Conservatives as the Liberal vote completely implodes.

  34. Domenico says:

    So no crime was committed and no charges were laid. This is not much of a story and reeks of desperation by a political party to change momentum.

    BTW I am a LPC voter. Yes, I’m going down with the ship.

    • Bill M. says:

      Don’t worry, our ship will be rebuilt.

    • JS Rothwell says:

      That’s just hypothetical nonsense. Stop being a petulant child Gord

    • Alison says:

      Oh, you mean like the highly respected – by voters and members of all parties – woman who is the former Minister of Education for the Nova Scotia Conservative government, former Chief of Staff to then Premier Dr. John Hamm, and former editor of two newspapers? Who was an addict who fought back, got clean, and has spent a lifetime contributing to society? I don’t agree with her political leanings, but to hear you, sir, ranting and raving that somehow an addiction says something about CHARACTER … that smear says far more about yours, you slimy coward.

      And to the matter at hand – you have not a scintilla of proof to back up any of your character assassination of Mr. Layton. Rest assured that, given the acrimonious relationship between him and the Toronto police of the time, that had they had the slightest ability to make anything stick to him, they would have. This is dirty, dirty politics of the worst kind – and deeply troubling given the nature of the leak, and the provision of a police officer’s notebook to the media.

      You have no ethics, Mr. Tulk. And no honour.

  35. Craig Chamberlain says:

    (Is there a side debate here where those who are in favor of a merger are saying this is an issue and those who don’t are saying, no, this isn’t?)

  36. dave says:

    Man goes for massage – now ineligible for public office!

  37. Africon says:

    I am no prude but have zero tolerance for the sex-slave, gangster run business of sexual exploitation of women.
    The Liberals also had their own little scandal on this subject a few years ago.

    Jack certainly did show bad judgment in this case but that is old news.
    After all did he not appoint that nutter Libby Davies to be his House Leader.
    Interesting isn’t it her areas of responsibility but of course will have nothing to say about this John.

    Area of Responsibility Term
    Prostitution 2006.02.14 – 2008.11.16
    Substance Abuse 2006.02.14 – 2008.11.16
    Vancouver Region 2006.02.14 – 2008.11.16

    House of Commons
    Committee Session
    Subcommittee on Solicitation Laws of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights 39th Parl., 1st Session
    (2006.04.03 – 2007.09.14)

    • JS Rothwell says:

      Is it just me or did this comment make less sense with each word?

      • Africon says:

        Try harder JS, 🙂

        Think irony and hypocrisy and the champions of the underprivileged and of women rights.

        Does every thing or indeed anything about this election “make sense”?

        • JS Rothwell says:

          Ha ha Africon,

          The last five years haven’t made sense. Then again the 21st century rarely makes consistent sense.

          Irony and Hypocrisy to me is con-trolls who think that a 16 year old story about one politician who wasnt charged (but accused by a anonymous retired cop) is something we should investigate yet whenever a conservative MP gets in trouble it’s “no big deal” Looks like different flavours of hypocrisy from different parties but the dominant colour remains blue.

          Look at Tom Likuwski and Vic Toews for perfect examples of con hypocrisy.

        • JS Rothwell says:

          Oh yeah, why dont you have a problem with a retired cop keeping notes on people? Isnt that a violation of all of our privacy rights? I know I dont want some retired flatfoot keeping a personal file on me.

          • Africon says:

            Oh but I do. And every fishy MP bothers me regardless of party.
            Like most Cons, I like my privacy from nosy census types and would prefer the right to self defense in my own home unlike squeaky clean Jacko.

            Jack and Libby in charge scares the hell out of me.

  38. Marc says:

    A Toronto mayoral candidate had sex with a prostitute during his election campaign. Is this a “stunning revelation?” Yes, if you’re hopelessly naive or a reporter for the Sun. Everyone else knows that it’s not uncommon for politicians (and off-duty police officers) to visit massage parlours and incalls. I think it’s time we stopped pretending to be scandalized by these stories.

    • Namesake says:

      “A Toronto mayoral candidate had sex with a prostitute during his election campaign”…

      um, that’s pretty much COMPLETELY unfounded if not outright libelous in this case:

      – first, although Layton had run for mayor in ’91, this was in 1996, when there was no municipal election going on, being on the eve of amalgamation, so it’s not even right to call him a mayoral candidate

      – second, there was no evidence that there’d been a sex act: being naked for a bona fide, unhappily ever after deep massage is not atypical; the ‘wet tissues’ the fully clothed masseuse was seen discarding when the police entered weren’t examined to whether it was just what one would expect on a Kleenex — mucous (as another posted noted, it was winter, it was snowing that day; maybe one or the other had a cold!); or just the massage oils from her hands she’d wiped off — nor was it ascertained that if there’d been any genital contact.

      – third, there’s no evidence that the young woman was a prostitute. She wasn’t arrested. Apparently (from the Sun’s accounts), she’d been at their previous raid, there, and wasn’t arrested then, either.

      The police visit was to see whether they had underage girls working for them; she was 25.

      • Marc says:

        So when I say that aToronto mayoral candidate had sex with a prostitute during last year’s campaign then you should assume that I’m talking about a Toronto mayoral candidate and not Jack Layton. 🙂 Sorry for not making that clear. I was pointing out that this goes on all the time in downtown Toronto.

        • Namesake says:

          Ah, well, if only you’d actually said “last year” to indicate you were talking about a whole different person than the one this entire discussion is about, then there’d be no confusion, then, would there?

          So I guess it’s my mistake for not reading your mind, and assuming you were staying on topic.

  39. guelphlove says:

    What scares me is that if Jack has knocked up them women than Guelph Conservative Candidate Marty Burke would have forced her to have the child. http://www.guelphmercury.com/news/local/article/524868–pro-life-organization-endorses-burke

  40. Cow says:

    After I saw the story breaking, I briefly had great hope that Olivia and Jack would get up, and Jack would say, hey, it was 1996, I was stupid, and have since learned how harmful and exploitative these places are; with the help of my wife and caucus, I’ve learned better, and if elected we will [insert points from the NDP platform here].

    But, of course, I knew that would never happen.

    Summer reading assignment, to everyone who doesn’t get why these places are a problem: “Invisible Chains: Canada’s Underground World of Human Trafficking” by Benjamin Perrin. Very, very eye-opening to a problem that happens right in our own country, and one which most people believe doesn’t exist.

    • Ian says:

      He might still say something like that, but after May 2. You might imagine that with two days left in an election campaign, the strategy would be to empasize that this is a smear, nothing wrong was done (i.e. nothing criminal and no infidelity), let’s stick to the issues.

      If you start trying to talk to the public about sex workers and human trafficking with two days remaining in a nailbiter in which we might, just might prevent a Harper majority… well, think about it. How do you think that will go over?

      I’m saying try to have some understanding of what’s at stake, and how you get things done in the world. There are LOTS of serious issues in the world, but Kim Campbell was right (sadly for her) when she said that an election is hardly a good time to try to talk about them.

      If you really care about the concerns of sex workers and exploited immigrants then look at the NDP Party platform and track record, I think you’ll find the NDP shares these concerns, and it’s trying to get elected in the midst of some very nasty circumstances.

      People should wear seatbelts, but you don’t badger your dad to put on his seat belt when he’s driving your car around a sharp bend on an icy road.

  41. Iris Mclean says:

    The OPP is looking into how a police officer’s notebook became a public document. This is a serious breach of the rules.

  42. Mrs. Whiggins says:

    This is Off Topic but I am hoping that one of you political experts can explain this:

    I just received a call from Trinidad Tobago 1-868-808-8407 purporting to be representing Paul Forseth of Burnaby-NewWestminster (not my riding) and exhorting me to vote Conservative.

    Why is the CPC supporting the economy of Trinidad Tobago?

  43. Mulletaur says:

    If we ever have the misfortune of an NDP led government in Ottawa, they will be pushing for the legalization of both prostitution and marijuana.

    The best line from this story is Olivia Chow’s statement : “I knew about this appointment, as I always do.”

    • Barb says:

      Didn’t know you needed “appointments” at those type of establishments… I found that a strange statement from Olivia, lacking in credibility because of the “appointment” thing…

  44. Steven says:

    Watching the predictably sanctimonious Layton/Chow express indignation about a politcal “smear” makes me want to hurl!

    Karma is a bitch, indeed!

    Has anyone forgotten the Layton / NDP smear of an truly innocent man, Ralph Goodale, in the last days of the 2006 Federal Election?

    How about the truly slimy Ontario NDP smear of the late Bob Hunter in the 2001 Provincial by-election?

    Please, Jack, spare us the wounded doe look.

    You can give it but you can’t take it!

    • Namesake says:

      Hold the phone(y):

      An alleged provincial Party dirty trick is a federal party responsibility… how? And even if there were a connection between the two, a provincial by-election incident from 2001 is to be laid at his door… when he didn’t even become a federal leader until 2003 (and wasn’t even an MP until 2004)?

      • Steven says:

        Oh, I’m sorry, I didn’t realize that the Ontariop NDP and Michael Prue didn’t have Jack Layton’s and the federal NDP’s support and help in 2001.

        • Namesake says:

          well, again, all you’ve got here is more guilt by association innuendo, without proof, but now couched as sarcasm, that:

          a) the federal party DID do whatever you’re accusing them of meddling in at the provincial level to malign another party’s candidate; and,

          b) that Layton had something to do with that, which, again, seems even more far-fetched, since there’s no evidence that Layton even had much of ANY influence within the federal party at that point, since he was still just a City Councillor in 2001, no? And he was also busy as President of the Federation of Canadian Municipalities that year.

          He didn’t even become a federal MP until three years later. So what makes you think he had so much juice in the federal party and/or was in on alleged dirty tricks at the provincial level, then, apart from your desire to malign him, now?

        • Namesake says:

          Ok, so I’ve Googled those two to find out what you were on about, and I don’t see ANY reason to link either the provincial OR the federal party to what happened there:

          – one candidate in a provincial by-election pointed out (but possibly, as you say, made far too much of) the fact that:

          – a book by another one of the candidates contains rather vivid, over-detailed descriptions of sexual tourism encounters with young girls in Thailand.

          Surely that kind of ‘oppo research’ could have easily been done by the first candidate himself, or by any of his local supporters or campaign volunteers.


          (with one detailed article on the dispute hostile to the NDP archived on this still-available article by the aforementioned Jonathan Kay: http://urlm.in/hqbd

          but a more balanced piece on whether the book in question was more of a satirical fiction or a memoir, here (but also from the Post):

  45. Joseph Kerr says:

    Ha ha ha ha don’t waste your vote on a third party kids ha ha ha

    Vote team orange ha ha ha ha ha ha HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

  46. Bill From Willowdale says:

    I think the story proves that Jack Layton is only human and that he is not a criminal.

    • Namesake says:

      well, since you’re big on POTUS, dufus, how’s these apples:

      “Grover Cleveland, President (D): During the 1884 election, Cleveland, a bachelor, paid child support to Maria Crofts Halpin, even though he may not have been the father of her son. Halpin was known to have had sexual relationships with a number of men, including Cleveland’s close friend and future father-in-law, Oscar Folsom, for whom the child was named.

      The controversy prompted Cleveland’s opponents to adopt the chant, “Ma, ma, where’s my pa?”

      After Cleveland won the election, the chant was answered by, “Gone to the White House, ha, ha, ha!” (1884)

      wikipedia: List of federal political sex scandals in the United States

  47. AndrewOpala says:

    Today is the opening of garage sale season. Plus, people like me are scrambling to get their Taxes done (and those of their wife, mother-in-law and 19 year old … oh and business). The election is just a wonder now and all the politicing is a little bit late over the weekend.

    You’ve got to wonder how much this stuff can change anything in the voter’s mind?

  48. Chris says:

    dismiss: to reject serious consideration of (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/dismiss)

  49. JH says:

    Cui Bono? As they say in Latin – who benefits? Tough question – on the surface, in Quebec the Bloc, in Ontario the Libs and out West in BC, the Tories.
    I’m just not Machiavellian enough beyond that to figure it out, but I’m waiting for all the smart guys to tell me.

    • Ian says:

      Mainly, Sun Media benefits, because now everybody’s talking about it.

      I don’t agree with Warren’s suggestion that a political party is almost certainly behind this. I’m almost certain that it was an independent decision by Sun Media. They haven’t been doing so well, haven’t had much of an impact on this election… until they did this.

      It’s made them a laughingstock among the likes of Andrew Coyne, but Sun Media isn’t trying to win over viewers like Coyne, is it?

      Maybe a political party was involved, but that’s a stretch. If I were a Conservative or a Liberal, I wouldn’t be sure how this story might affect the vote. It could go against Layton, or it could win him sympathy. And what if someone finds out it was you that did it? Your party would be toast, for a long time. Not worth it.

      (1) Toronto cops have many many axes to grind with Layton and Chow, and
      (2) Sun Media needs attention.

      Those are all the ingredients that you need, I think.

  50. Namesake says:

    So, to summarize, Duceppe, whom you’ve often vilified as a traitor to Canada, declares he believes in freedom of the press, and declines to censure it for the story.

    But you, who’s usually ardently pro-Laissez Faire and anti-gov’t interference in the private market, are simply outraged by the freedom of that particular press outlet’s taking, er, liberties in that misleading headline…

    …and, what, calling for a boycott? An inquiry? More regulations?

    and yesterday, you were ruminating again about demanding new gov’t reg’s to require political pollsters to have bigger & better polls (even though some of them are actually doing those for free, on their own dime, and giving them away, for promotional purposes for their own business).

    • smelter rat says:

      The thoughts of Dear Leader losing his grip on Monday has Gord losing his grip today.

    • Namesake says:

      I didn’t speak to that because I didn’t hear his full statement on the issue, which, note, the CBC, which also had reporters on the ground when he made it, also reported as him denying it had any relevance to the campaign since no charges were brought.

      But I noticed you didn’t speak to the ‘read between the lines’ insinuation I was making:

      you’re wishing and trying to keep it alive that Duceppe DOES think it’s significant, and are perfectly willing to make common cause with someone you regard as a traitor on something that would keep his sufferin’ ‘theparatisths alive with an important balance of power, simply to torpedo the mutual rival party, and try to salvage the precious CPC majority. Yuck.

  51. Richard says:

    Whether of not Layton was on the receiving end of a hand job 15 years ago is pretty nonsensical, and I could care less, other than the humor factor and the opportunity to make quite a few awful puns. There are a lot of politicians who would be out of a job if being a “found in” at a bawdy house disqualified them, and I’m sure we could name a few.

    The real story here is how the public at large will react and how Layton handled himself once the story once it broke. That is a big factor, and as you say, it was standard political bullshit. I’d say it had an extra dose of whinging. I’d give Layton a C or C- on his performace, which has been the first real indicator of how the guy would handle a political crisis of which he is the centre. Canada deserves a PM who can do better than that.

    I don’t know if this will make a major difference on Monday, but that Hugh Grant guy (it was a long time ago..as long as Layton’s trip to the pleasure palace) did in fact take a major career hit after his incident.

  52. Cliff says:

    “Two, the bigger scandal, here, remains unaddressed: at the time he was detained, Jack Layton was a city councillor on the City of Toronto’s budget committee, which has power over the police budget. The cops knew who he was, they knew the power he wielded over them. So what did they do? They walked him to the back door, and let him pedal away. Were the other men found at that place given that kind of treatment? If not, what happened here is a bona fide scandal, one that Toronto taxpayers need have probed, the passage of time notwithstanding.”

    Sorry, WK, but I don’t follow your logic here. If you read the story:
    “To have arrested him and charged him would have served our egos a lot more. Layton was a thorn in the side of the police, siding with the anti-poverty movement in ’96 or ’97 … Jack was anti-police,” the ex-cop said.

    “We looked at it and thought do we take advantage of this, or do we look at this like (he’s) any other person, put it away and we hope this thing dies a slow death.”

    Seems to me that, if anything, the fact that the police passed up the chance to embarrass a ‘thorn in their side’ and effectively sideline one of their harshest critics further underlines the fact that there was simply nothing to go on and that they would have looked foolish and politically motivated in charging him. Instead, they treated him like “any other person” and let him go. Again, I don’t see the logic in your argument – if Layton had been arrested and charged, would that not have been the end of his political career and thus removed him from a position of power over the police?

  53. jack says:

    What’s being missed here is that since there were no charges, privacy laws have been broken. This should be a non event just like if the police get your name and address with no charges. If its not illegal, its nobody’s business.

    As to the election, I think vote splitting is a huge issue in Ontario and that is where the majority will be determined. The youth may also have a say this time.

    Vote strategically.

  54. The Doctor says:

    If this were Iggy, or ESPECIALLY Harper, caught in a whorehouse raid, the media would be all over it. It would be a screaming boldface headline on all major national media outlets. So I don’t see why Layton should be treated any differently.

  55. JStanton says:

    … actually, it’s both gord. Should Mr. Harper go to jail for the defrauding of taxpayers out of money and for undermining Canada’s democracy, or for the lies he tells about his actions? Should he get off scott-free?

    These are real issues, gord. Whether or not Mr. Layton inhaled, or the therapeutic nature of a massage, is pretty small stuff in comparison. Unless you are Mr. Harper, or one of his groupies, who’s strategy is to keep the focus off real issues and on your usual nonsense.


  56. JH says:

    Ok now CBC says it was a community clinic. No surprise there – coming from the people’s Corp.
    If that’s the case, people asking did he go before and where are his OHIP/Extended Coverage claims receipts as a TO Councillor are somewhat justified. No?
    I’m also kind of surprised Pat Martin hasn’t commented yet. I mean he was quick enough off the mark with Jaffer and Helena right?
    You have to admit – the irony here is hilarious.

  57. Namesake says:

    Well, if it makes you feel any better, Gord, apparently the Libs DID try to get the press to look into this, back in 2008:

    As another commenter on Macleans notes, reproducing the relevant series of tweets in chronological order:

    “Jon Kay of the National Post has a very interesting revelation on Twitter:

    ‘ For those who care, someone tried to shop me the Layton-massage story 2 yrs ago (without docs). It was a Liberal fixer.

    Could have been Tories pushing the Layton-massage story this time. I dont know. But last time around, it was the Lib back office

    I didnt bite because the source wasnt talking, and I couldnt get the cop’s notebook through access-to-info, so I dropped it.

    And I mention this only because the leak itself has become the story — with many folks unfairly assuming it must have been CPC.

    Didnt pursue it because (a) source wasnt talking at the time, (b) my access-to-info request for the necessary docs was denied. ‘ ”

    Checks out; here’s one of those tweets:
    with them all up at the moment at

  58. Anthony says:

    I don’t understand why something “pretty well-known for years” but also something “Toronto taxpayers need [to] have probed” has only come out now. Is it political opportunism and an innocent John, or is it “many political people” agreeing not to call someone out on a bona fide scandal?

  59. Craig Chamberlain says:

    This is just a distraction to the question I have:

    “Mr. Harper, will you accept the decision of the Governor General should a minority Tory government again lose a confidence motion, and the next biggest party was asked to form a government?”

    • Craig Chamberlain says:

      Simple question, Mr. Tulk — yes or no: Does Mr. Harper recognize the legitimacy of the Governor General, Canada’s Head of State, to determine who can form government if the governing party loses the confidence of the House?

      Harper’s response to this question has opened a lot more.

  60. lucmenard says:

    Why would personal/private cop’s notebook be available to Toronto Sun? What is it stolen by the Toronto Sun’s journalist! Was it pure fabrication by the Toronto Sun? If the cop shared his working notebook with Toronto Sun, how come was it made available to the Toronto without the consent of the cop’s supervisor? Is this cop still a member of the Toronto Police Department? He is certainly a disgrace for the Toronto Police Department. If he did not charge Jack Layton in 1996, why is coming out now? Certainly this would not have gone unnoticed if there was a cause to charge him for criminal act. He feel this is total fabrication!

    • Philip says:

      The cop in question is currently retired, according to the Conservative Party house organ. Although he/she is retired, retaining the police notebook, is in violation of the Police Services Act. The notebooks are and remain the property of the police service that issued them to the particular constable. While not a legal document in the strictest sense, the police notebook is eligible to be entered into evidence in court and as such not the private property of the constable.
      The OPP has been asked to investigate, there is a possibilty that charges could be laid, so we will see how it all pans out in the end.

    • Namesake says:

      acc. to the Sun’s crime reporter who broke the story last night on Sun TV, he’d got a “tip” earlier this week (I think; I don’t want to watch it again), from someone else (undisclosed who), that there’d been an arrest or something, and it took him a couple of days to track down the now-retired vice cop who’d been on the scene, whom he coaxed into disclosing the details and handing over (or letting them photocopy) his notes, provided he could remain anonymous.


  61. To determine if a story is true, we need to ask, “Who would benefit from this story if indeed it was true?” Given the obvious answer, would it not be best to postpone judgement? This is obviously a last ditch distraction. The LPC is scared, the CPC is scared, so JL gets smeared. This is exactly the sort of politics that has led to the rise of the NDP in this election. And the authors of this re-cycled spin will suffer more at the polls than Jack Layton as a result. There has been a dearth of serious discussion of national issues in this election. This bizarre sideshow merely wastes our precious time and ensures that nothing real is discussed. The environment, health care, national defence, foreign policy, poverty, etc….aren’t these topics more worthy of campaign attention than this smear campaign?

  62. Daisee says:

    I fail to understand the significance of this tawdry story. Even if it is true and yeah I think Jack was a bad boy in those moments 16 years ago, I couldn’t care less. All it proves is that he is human, but my god considering the democratic deficit this country is facing under Harper I would think people should gt their priorities straight.

    We’ve got the ICC investigating Harper for war crimes and people are concerned about bad personal judgement 16 years ago? Get real.

  63. smelter rat says:

    Why won’t Stephen Harper deny that he had sex with a dead goat? What’s he hiding?

  64. patrick DeBerg says:

    All this story has done is convinced me to vote NDP.
    Acurse on both your houses…..

  65. duhaineE says:

    Stop wasting time about Jack who didn’t do any wrong doing, he was not convicted, there was no charge, that happened 16 years ago and end of the story. There is a lot of prostitutse around Bruce Carson in Ottawa who had direct access with the PMO office.

    Investigate CPC and harper for f….ck sake.


  66. Steve in Edmonton says:

    If this story had been about Stephen Harper, the uproar would be astounding. A little less so if it had been Ignatieff. Since it is Jack, so many people are willing to let it go.

  67. Namesake says:

    Harper made a super well-publicized and Youtubed appearance with the 10-year old Lady Gaga-lovin’ Youtube phenom who was fixated on the song, “Born This Way,” which celebrates: GAYS and TRANSVESTITES. (They were even going to be all over the original Lady Gaga video for it, which ended up with her prancing around in her underwear with people in voodoo masks).

    Mr. Harper is either lying about being pro-family values or was jaw-droppingly Naive for a 50+ year-old man who’s lived in the city All of his adult life. There is no other option.

    Either way this is proof that he is unfit to be the prime minister (or a cabinet minister for that matter) of this country.




  68. Matthew says:

    But for the record, perfectly suitable to be the Prime Minister’s Chief of Staff.

  69. DWMillar says:

    Jack Layton went to a whore house in 1996. I understand their speciality was hand jobs. Jack was reportedly caught naked within by the police. Due to physical damage I have lately had several massages. I was never obliged to be naked. Jack was naked at the time of the bust. His wife “knew” about it? Wtf does THAT mean? She was tired of Jack’s feckless romantic advances, and happy to have him ‘satisfied’ by another Oriental woman? Where is Jack’s first wife in all of this?

    Jack also certainly cost Toronto any chance of winning the summer Olympics, by organizing a violent protest at the Olympic committee. Certainly that helped Vancouver win their winter Olympic bid, albeit 1/4 the size of summer Olympics. He was a Toronto city counsellor at both times.

    Of course, also, wasn’t that also the time that Jack and his Jill were living in publicly subsidized housing, when their combined income was north of $120k? When caught, they didn’t ‘make up’ for their ill-gotten gains at the expense of the needy, they just agreed to pay at the actual rate w/o public subsidy, and then found the place so unattractive at the market price, they actually bought their own home and moved out?

    Whoring, abuse of office, and public fraud. If this is what you want, and more of, vote for Jack Layton.

    • Namesake says:

      That’s pretty libelous; hope that’s your own name.

      You may not have been “obliged” to be naked for your massages, but that doesn’t mean it’s not a common _option_ in a variety of massage parlours, including entirely legitimate ones. And there has been NO evidence marshaled that the 25 year-old woman WAS offering any sexual services, including in this case.

      And count your blessings: most Olympic hosts LOSE scads of money and are left paying for their white elephant venues for decades. And while some hospitality businesses may benefit while it goes on, others local businesses suffer a great deal: witness the G20.

      And if people want abuses of office and public fraud: stick with the CPC. That’s how they got into office in the first place, after all, with the In and Out election spending and rebates. And stay tuned for lots of G20 and watchdog and police reports, on how they misrepresented porkbarreling in Clement’s riding as ‘Border Infrastructure’; and blocked access to information and suppressed reports unfavourable to the government; and much more.

  70. fernstalbert says:

    All this inside Toronto beltway coverup of Jack’s behaviour is appalling. Why did no one in the media have the courage to pursue the story. Now that he is on the doorstop of Stornoway or 24 Sussex, his personal behaviour is relevant to his abiltiy to lead the country and be a player on the world stage. Who wants to be compared and dismissed like Bill Clinton, Al Gore or Silvio Berlusconi. At least French leaders have the courage to have mistresses. Shameful.

  71. Candace says:

    I guess being a “John” is or isn’t criminal depending upon the province you live in? Or maybe the city? Because in Edmonton, if you get busted for paying (or, I’m guessing, agreeing to pay) a prostitute they impound your car for 30 days plus I don’t know what else.

    That, folks, sounds like a crime to me. (Eg. Penalty) The radio ads when the law came out were all about hubby saying “what will I tell my wife? we need this to take the kids to school/soccer/hockey/etc and were pretty damn impressive (speaking as a female, I don’t know how hard they hit the male side of the pop’n)

    • Michael says:

      The criminal code is a federal statute, so a crime is a crime no matter where in the country it takes place. A province or city can not crimminalize a behaviour.

      Provinces can prohibit certain actions, ie the Highway Traffic Act in Ontario prohibits speeding. But it is not a criminal offence. And the province can not make something a criminal offence.

      Cities can pass by-laws restriction actions, but again these actions are not criminal offences.

  72. Jon Powers says:

    So, after all these years, is today the day that Jack finally gets his “Happy Ending”? Zing!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *