03.10.2012 09:41 AM

March 10: your morning Robocon

You know, when I worked in government, whenever there was a protest or occupation of one of our offices or something like that, I would always tell staff the same thing: “Bring them coffee and doughnuts. Let them use the washroom. Talk to them. Be nice to them. They’ll eventually give up and leave.”

Something tells me that treating Stephen Maher like a leper isn’t a great media-management strategy.

Sort of suggests they have lots to hide, don’t it?


    • Attack! says:

      You’re pretty quick to assume & accuse the source as being from EC, there, Gordo:

      as I recall, it was Prescott who told the media that he was going to talk to EC – not vice versa.

      As for the news of the decision NOT to, more likely, it’s from the actual lawyer who’s counseled him not to appear —

      and probably not coincidentally, the only other one besides the witness & chief investigator named there is Aaron Wudrick, the lawyer for Campaign Research who’s been SLAPPing people silly on Twitter & elsewhere to stop talking ill of his client.

      • catherine says:

        Was it Prescott who first talked to the media about his EC meeting? I thought it might be Wudrick, because the Hill Times wrote:

        “I understand, one thing I have heard is that there are people in Guelph who are prepared to talk about it further,” said Mr. Wudrick, a former Conservative candidate campaign manager who also takes part in the voter-contact aspects of Campaign Research. “I assume that they are speaking with Elections Canada now, which is why they’re not speaking about it to the media or to the party, or anybody else, but I understand that, I mean there is a serious investigation underway there, so hopefully that uncovers at least some of the activity.”

        Note Wudrick claims to know whether a campaign worker is speaking to the party! I see this is also being discussed below in the comments.

  1. ottawacon says:

    The appalling thing about this is that Maher is a journalist of the type that they don’t make anymore, complete with a sense of ethics and fairness. Recall that in the Raitt recording kerfuffle, he sat on the recorder for months expecting to return it, without listening to it.

  2. William says:

    The stink grows daily with this story.

    Hell Coyne voted liberal last election and he still gets in.

    But the disconnect remains that most people don’t seem to be too riveted by this, and that’s a problem.

    Perhaps if voting was mandatory people would care more about the process but when a majority is earned through 24% of the electorate (.396 * .614) , easy to see why that’s the case.

  3. dave says:

    I just sent a message to CPAC about this. CPAC is giving free coverage to this conference (You can tune in and see how many times they are talking about ethics and morality – as if it is the new ‘talking point’ for them).
    I asked if CPAC were going to continue giving free coverage, or even report the exclusion of Maher.

  4. Geoffrey Laxton says:

    How convenient.

  5. bluegreenblogger says:

    Am I the only person who found this report very strange?


    What I think is strange is that Campaign Research, who claim to know nothing about any scandalous calls, and is the lily white service provider issued a statement about what the Guelph campaign is going to do, in the same breath as saying they do not know anything about what the Guelph campaign did.

    Campiagn research lawyers (I presume) also extracted an letter of apology from John Fryer for writing a letter to the editor. ( No retraction by the way, just an apology).

    To me, it appears that the ‘Guelph Campaign’ pushed back. Could it be that Prescott does not want to be thrown under the bus by campaign Research.. er I mean, the CPC?


    There are not very many people in the CPC who do not know what happens to people singled out as the fall guy for the Governing party. The Government narrative about ‘lone wolf’ or ‘rogue campaign worker’ needs to be supported by a scarificial victim. so they can claim they caught the rogue, story over. I am wondering if Campaign Research lawyer spoke with Prescott, and bullyragged him into coming forward. I am wondering if CR then trotted out with the missing piece of their narrative, and started issueing press releases so as to construct the sacrificial fire. I am wondering if having read the resulting media stories Prescott thought to himself: ‘Do I want to be the smoking gun, and spend 2 years in jail, and be made famous as the face of the robo-call scandal?” I suspect that prescott made a quick call to an actual real lawyer, and I suspect that lawyer told him, do NOT let somebody elses lawyer issue statements about what you are, or are not gonna do, ESPECIALLY when that lawyer is hunting for a sacrificial victim to hang out to dry.

    • MoeL says:

      Mostly conjecture, but sure seems plausible (even probable). Interesting how the prospect of going to jail influences ones thinking. Now, after being the presumptive scapegoat, he just may just feel like implicating someone higher up! Sort of what WK predicted.

      • catherine says:

        Yes, unlike prison terms, the threat of fines just doesn’t do it for getting to the bottom (or should I say top!) of things.

  6. Windsurfer says:

    Just posted at Avaaz. Toronto rally on Sunday, downtown. Please broadcast.


    Dear friends across Toronto,

    Canadians from coast to coast are only now learning that callers supporting Harper likely misled thousands of voters in the last election. But we can help undo this fraud, if we pressure Elections Canada and the RCMP to expand their investigations and get to the truth about the full extent of the election fraud.

    Over 60,000 signers are already calling on investigators to help restore Canadian democracy and now we can create an even larger outcry by taking to the streets. Avaazers will be gathering in Toronto this Sunday to join a national wave of protests. Can you join in?

    Here’s the information. Click below to RSVP so we can keep in touch before Sunday:
    Meet @ Young & Dundas Square — and then a march to Old City Hall @ Bay & Queen
    Sunday, March 11, 2012 @ 2:30 PM
    Please click here to RSVP

  7. !o! says:

    This explains why our dear leader tried to kill the story about Fantino’s campaign irregularities (http://unfuckwithable.ca/post/19029395987).

    Which by implication suggests that this 300k bank account probably funded suppression.

  8. Curt says:

    Does Lori Mac Donald from Guelph ring a bell?

  9. patrick deberg says:

    Gord! You made me laugh out loud!

    Saying “The manning centre is not affiliated to the CPC” is like saying the testicles of a bull are not related to the bovine persuaision!!

    But dammit thanks for the laugh!

  10. Sam Gunsch says:

    @Gord… re “affiliated” ?

    Uh? *affiliated*…that’s it?

    Just how could anyone limit the relationship to *affiliated* in describing what exists between the CPC and the Manning Centre? (and with the Fraser Institute, Calgary School, et al ?)

    … I thought it was obvious we a dealing with a Canadian version of a Borg.

    e.g. of basic evidence? here’s the current members of the ‘hive mind’ from the Manning Ctr. outpost. oh my, I think I see some of the Borg’s CPC’rs/Reformatories…

    Board of Directors

    Preston Manning
    Cliff Fryers
    Blair Nixon
    Rick Anderson
    Thompson MacDonald
    Gwyn Morgan
    Tasha Kheiriddin
    Tom Long
    Dan Nowlan
    Chuck Strahl

    A robo-machine like this doesn’t have ‘affiliations’. It has moving parts.

    re relations/players among the CPC head office/Manning Centre/Fraser Institute et al

    I dunno’…does this Borg have a utopian vanguard programmed with a neo-con/corporatist/false populist ethos?

    Could it be that since the 1980’s, various specialized parts of the Borg have been undermining and invading our representative system of government, and effectively displacing/suppressing citizen rule? You know that old-fashioned normal democracy stuff like popular control over government and political equality of the citizens?

    Maybe it’s just me but I could swear I’ve noticed some activities — propaganda/electoral/institutional/parliamentary — focused on uninstalling citizen-based democracy and installing the corporatism model where their elite specialized representatives of the Borg, exclusive of citizens or evidence or the public good, make/impose all decisions from an ideological or short-term political survival basis re policy, budgets, legislation, including tactics to intimidate/assimilate/neutralize the media and thus public opinion.

    You know, stuff like issuing binders on how to screw-up parliamentary committees. And those Borg objections to those silly citizens attempting to participate in environmental reviews of tarsands disasters-in-the making where they get their food. You know it’s long, long list, right Gord?

    And now the allegation that parts of the Borg collective were specializing in screwing with elections, and we get the rise of machine-like DDM’s programmed to deny,deny,deny, look over there. And oh goodness, election specialization now reported at Manning ‘hive mind’ outpost.

    And when the Borg vanguard defends false attacks by phone on I. Cotler as free speech, when precedent after precedent are compiled re the Borg’s contempt for democracy behaviors, compiled by the L. Martins and so on, it becomes quite obvious the specialized screw-with-voting parts of the machine, got their programming from the Borg’s culture of ends justify means.

    Said culture, of course, epitomized and escalated to levels radioactive to citizen-based democracy, by the current Borg CEO’s personal programming.

    (and Gord, may I suggest, re doubts of my experience with observing this type of Borg… see the archives on my AB polity for operating manual on our machine @Alberta Conservatives Inc., ideology/methods launched circa early 1990’s Klein species: source: Mark Lisac, The Klein Revolution, Chapter 9, The Corporate Province).

    • Windsurfer says:

      I vote this as the “post of the day.”

      BTW, I always thought there was something creepy about that Tarrah Kardassian woman.

    • kenn2 says:

      what’s to be gained by denying the role of Preston Manning and his namesake centre in the formation, and ultimate success of the CPC?

      At the absolute minimum, Preston’s the retired grandfather who helped raise the current CPC, and the Manning Centre is the ancestral home that they still all come home to. The CPC has no problem with using Grandad’s ranch for their training and ideological recharging.

      btw Granddad’s clearly spoken out against unethical behaviour; will the grandkids listen?

  11. Philip says:

    I found the text of Coyne’s “Not that party” speech to be pretty interesting reading.


    He is on to something. Whatever this Conservative Party is, it certainly isn’t conservative.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.