, 02.14.2019 10:12 AM

The Standing Cowards on Justice and Human Rights

A bit of next week’s Hill Times column:

The cowards included the House of Commons committee that professes to be all about “justice and human rights,” but doesn’t espouse either. Last week, the Liberal members of that committee actually voted to deny you the opportunity to testify about what you know in the metastasizing SNC-Lavalin obstruction of justice scandal.  They did that, right out in the open. They voted, instead, to shield their political masters in Justin Trudeau’s office, and convene secret meetings.

These are their names: Anthony Housefather, the obsequious, sycophantic weakling who leads the committee.  Ali Ehsassi, who is alleged to be a lawyer, and said this of the alleged obstruction of justice: “there is nothing to be concerned about.”  Colin Fraser, who is thankfully quitting politics, and who also claims to have once practiced criminal law.  A nonentity named Ron McKinnon, who actually said the committee shouldn’t invite any “random people” from PMO to testify – even though the Opposition had a decidedly non-random list, ready to go.

Oh, and Randy Boissonnault and Iqra Khalid.  Those two, in particular, distinguished themselves as Nixonian exemplars.  When this sordid, sickening affair grinds to its inevitable end, in a courtroom somewhere, it is Boissonnault and Khalid who will receive special commendations for unalloyed dishonesty and cowardice.  Boissonnault, for saying out loud – like Donald Trump, who says it all the time and in what lawyers call “similar fact-situations” – that the whole affair is “a witch hunt.” 

He said that, with a straight face.



  1. Wayne Gougeon says:

    Nailed it.

  2. Better be a very lively cabinet meeting, where Trudeau is read the Riot Act. Otherwise, they are done as dinner.

  3. Will Purcell says:

    Dammit, man, you really need a “like” button.

  4. Sean says:

    They managed to keep the story going, like forest fires burning out of control. A good indicator how repugnant this scandal is, can be measured by a large number of pundits, whom usually have an adversarial relationship, who are now united in their determination to defend the rule of law.

  5. Gord Tulk says:

    This whole issue is a sideshow to a much bigger, much longer running travesty…

    In most of the ROC “Bombardier” is a four letter word. Now “SNC Lavalin” has joined its ranks.

    Sadly most in the ROC are not aware that the latter is a far more corrupt and pernicious corporate entity than the former and that it has been at forefront of the economic decline of Quebec and Montreal over the past 65 years.

    Meanwhile in Quebec many hail it as a the pinnacle of Quebec Inc. – something they consider a success.

    Nothing could be further from the truth as much of the Quebec economy is now either heavily subsidized, protected by some of the highest tariff walls in the developed world or globally notorious as being corrupt or a combination of the three.

    That this country is two solitudes is no better illustrated than this area. Quebecers seem to think it highly offensive that a company that engaged in serial, years-long criminal activity with some of the most evil people on the planet should be prosecuted or in any way harmed because “Jobs!!” “Pension exposure!!” .

    Meanwhile the ROC – and the rest of the world for that matter – see it for what it is. And that it is dragging the rest of the country and Confederation down with it.

    And here we have the LPC the party that, except for a brief interlude where the Mulroney Tories stole their playbook, has provided political cover for this Laurentian Mafia for all these decades and looks to be renewing the consigliere contract with Quebec Inc. for another 50 years…

    Many on the ROC have compared Quebec and its underperformance economically with Greece. They are wrong. The comparable is Sicily.

    The ties that bind this Confederation together have always been weak. By definition it is a reactionary construct. And it is due to its weakness and the fear of its collapse that it has been vulnerable to extortion and demands that rules be bent or broken.

    Acceding to those demands has bought short-term continuation of the Union but weakens it further still. Our leaders must either stand up to these demands at some point or this Confederation is doomed.

    Clearly the LPC and its leadership (if that is the right term) are not going to do that. So let’s be blunt. The rule of this country by the LPC is an existential threat to the future of this country.

    • Steve T says:

      Bang on, Gord. This has been one of the central problems in Canada since the 1970s. Quebec is the tail that wags the dog, and every political party lets itself be wagged.

      It was hilarious (in a bizarre sad way) to see a member of the Quebec government on TV last night, claiming that if this had happened to a company in any other province, there would be hand-wringing about lost jobs. Uh, no – if this had happened in any other province, the company would have been shut down ages ago. Quebec is where you set up shop if you have a flawed and/or corrupt business model that needs government support.

    • Jack says:


      Go breathe into a paper bag, Alex Jones.

    • Vancouverois says:

      Are the opposition parties any better?

      Andrew Scheer’s Conservatives have once again sold their souls to the separatists, promising to let them take sole control of tax collection in Quebec.

      The NDP similarly offers all financial control to the separatists, and openly opposes the Clarity Act.

      I honestly don’t know who to vote for in 2019. They’re all uniquely terrible in their own ways.

      • Gord Tulk says:

        The Ontario and west wing of the CPC would not let Scheer do something like this.

        • Vancouverois says:

          I would hope not, but it’s official CPC policy.

          Even if they don’t enact it, they’re damaging Canadian unity simply by legitimizing the idea.

          • Fred from BC says:

            My thoughts as well. I also don’t like his stand on ‘supply management’; it appears that he was bought and paid for by the dairy industry during the last leadership convention. The real conservatives left the so-called ‘Progressive Conservative Party’ for very similar reasons: Canada just doesn’t need two Liberal parties even when one pretends to be something else.

            Yes, yes, I know…Canada just isn’t a naturally ‘conservative’ country, it’s true, but you have to at least make the effort to distinguish yourselves from the other guys. Stephen Harper walked a fine line between what he wanted to do and what he actually *could* do; he didn’t always get it right, but at least he tried. Scheer, not so much.

          • Vancouverois says:

            Exactly. Scheer seems to be steering the CPC back to the Mulroneyist policies that split it so spectacularly in two in the 1993 election, and gave rise to another Quebec referendum.

            We even have Maxime Bernier playing the role of Preston Manning (which is odd, but there it is).

            I am very worried that Scheer will win the next election, and go on to revive the moribund separatist movement by catering to it in a pointless and destructive quest for votes. There is absolutely no need for him to do so, but that seems to be the track he’s on. And I’m horrified.

      • Jim R says:

        Well, the CPC’s proposal (which I do NOT support) can be best described as pandering. However, there’s nothing illegal about it, in contrast to the allegations concerning the PMO.

        Ditto for the NDP, who are apparently prepared to take the pandering to the next level.

        Having said that, I can’t disagree with them being “all uniquely terrible in their own ways”.

        • Vancouverois says:

          Nothing illegal about it? I don’t know about that.

          Is it legal for a federal government to cede its rights and responsibilities to a provincial government? Especially when that province has a separatist movement that may be invigorated by that kind of appeasement? Because to me, that sounds like treason.

    • Housevader says:

      Gore, There are great companies from Quebec that thrive without engaging in bribery in foreign lands. Startups, innovators….Quebec is vibrant. CGI is an example of Québécois success story, Gord is misinformed.

      The idea that a federal political party is weakening Canada is a misreading of reality. Your eloquence hides a shallow thesis. I hope that others will see that.

      • Gord Tulk says:

        Examples that prove the rule. I can probably name ten or more for every one you do. And the ones I would be naming are the core of Quebec’s business elite.

        Montreal and Quebec are in decline – have been for over 60 years. Montreal is a shabby shadow of itself- once a far greater city than Toronto probably in the top five in North America, now a backwater – ruined by these companies that prey on québécois xenophobia for money and legislative support.

        This is a great shame/scandal as Montreal is a beautiful place with enormous potential- squandered. Turning a blind eye to the corruption THAT EVERYONE ELSE IN THE ENTIRE WORLD SEES again proves my point and should sadden and discourage anyone who cares about the future of this Confederation.

  6. Jim Cringan says:

    The Pliumbers are back!

  7. Stephen Wood says:


    so once again our PM acts in ways not consistent with his frequently professed values.
    This is the only thing he is consistent on. I was very suspicious about the above sexual assault allegations. They were documented long before he was in politics…the comment “if I had known you were a reporter for a national paper I would have been less forward” seems unlikely to be made up….and to top it all his conclusion is she misinterpreted.”the same event can be experienced differently by two people”…she is wrong….are the women of this country going to continue to buy this crap?

  8. Patrick Brabazon says:

    Republicans on the Rideau.

  9. Harry Richardson says:

    According to Thomas Cromwell’s bio he was, in 2017, appointed by the Pierre Elliot Trudeau Foundation to be a “Trudeau mentor”. Today he has been hired by Ms Wilson-Reynauld as her advisor in the current state of affairs. How can that be? What on Earth is going on, here?

  10. Matt says:

    Have you seen this?

    Trudeau moves to shore up Liberal caucus support as SNC-Lavalin controversy continues

    Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has moved to shore up support in his Liberal caucus as the aftershocks of Jody Wilson-Raybould’s resignation from cabinet rocked both Parliament Hill and members of his own party.

    Multiple caucus sources told CBC News that Trudeau convened an extraordinary caucus meeting by telephone Tuesday evening to reassure them that nothing untoward had taken place in his office’s interactions with Wilson-Raybould over the SNC-Lavalin case when she was justice minister.

    But unlike the party’s normal caucus meetings, this was a one-way call — with Trudeau doing the talking. Caucus members were not able to ask Trudeau questions. MPs were told to follow up with the PMO or regional offices.


  11. Tori says:

    Is there any possibility that JWR did not resign right away because she saw the writing on the wall? Meaning as long as she was still AG, SNC Lavalin would not get a DPA, but if she resigned, JT would use this as an opportunity to get an agreeable AG in there.

    Good thing Brison suddenly wanted out of public life, allowing JT the opportunity to shuffle…

    • Vancouverois says:

      That might explain why she stayed on as AG – or maybe it was just personal ambition.

      Ambition could also explain why she accepted the Veteran Affairs demotion. (I’m sure she was also subjected to a lot of pressure about sticking together for the sake of the Liberal party.) While it’s slimy for Trudeau to use it against her, there’s an element of truth to the idea that she should not have continued to serve in the Cabinet of a PM she knew was so corrupt.

      I still have to admire her timing, though. ^_^

  12. Jim R says:

    As we’re into Trumpisms, looks like there’s a swamp that’s badly in need of draining.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.