, 03.23.2019 08:36 AM

Susan Delacourt gets it wrong. Again. Will she admit her error?

Several of you let me know that the Toronto Star’s Susan Delacourt was on CBC Radio yesterday.  On a panel, she said that Lisa and I “are working with Jody Wilson-Raybould and Jane Philpott.”  She also said Lisa – a card-carrying Liberal – is “actually not very Liberal.” Those are quotes.

They’re also lies. And if Delacourt possessed the journalistic skills to actually make a phone call or thumb out an email, we would have told her that.  In fact, we would have shared the exchange I had with the CBC’s Rosie Barton just this week.  Here it is.

Hello,

Hope you are doing well.

I’m sure you have been asked this question before, but I’m asking too.

Are you advising in any formal or informal or volunteer or friendly way either Jane Philpott or Jody Wilson-Raybould?

This phrase in the Wells interview struck me as something you might have said: ” And a very wise person said two things to me that helped me over that. This is someone who has been around politics for a long time. They said that politicians in general, and perhaps Liberals in particular, make mistakes when they assume that the best interests of Canadians and their own future political success are synonymous.” 

Anyway, insight welcome. Happy to chat if you would prefer.

Thanks
Rosemary


Rosemary Barton
Co-Host The National
Parliamentary bureau

See that? That’s what a real reporter does: you know, ascertain the facts before spouting off.

Here’s how I responded.

Thanks for the note, and thanks for having the forthrightness to ask. (Many have just assumed.)

Me, my wife, my firm, my staff: we do not represent or assist or counsel or help Jody Wilson-Raybould or Tim Raybould or Jane Philpott or any other player in this drama. In any way, shape or form whatsoever.

From indigenous legal work I did years ago, I met Tim. I have never met Jody.

Lisa, copied, can speak for herself. Lisa is a simply amazing advocate and lobbyist. She has met Jody because she lobbied her in respect of some of the First Nations we represent. I think Lisa would tell you they are friendly but not friends.

Speaking only for myself, I have been passionate and outspoken about this issue because, first and foremost, I am a lawyer and I believe laws have been broken. I was similarly outspoken when I felt laws were broken with past governments, of all stripes (even Chretien’s: the RCMP told me, at the conclusion of their sponsorship investigations, that nobody had provided them with as much documentation as me).

I have also supported these women because I believe they are telling the truth. I believe they are decent and honest and brave.

I apologize for the length of my answer, but I am happy you asked for one. I encourage you to speak to Lisa, Jody, Tim and Jane if you need additional confirmation.

Sincerely,

Warren

Now, Susan Delacourt  and I have never been close. Most of us Chretien folks regarded her Team Martin’s official stenographer, and we didn’t have much to do with her.  We didn’t like how she did business, and this latest bullshit is yet more evidence of that.

This week, however, she published on social media a photo of Lisa and her friend Jane Daly – with their coats on, standing, and right out in the open – talking to a table of other women at the Chateau Laurier’s restaurant on budget day.  Jody Wilson-Raybould and Jane Philpott were at the table.

Delacourt insists she didn’t take the photo, which she declared “interesting.”  It unleashed an avalanche of online Jane and Jody haters, who called it evidence of an anti-Trudeau conspiracy (seriously). I am told that the Star and the Chateau Laurier were very unhappy that Delacourt was publishing Spy-vs.-Spy photos taken by persons unknown. (I’ve been told it was taken by a Trudeau campaign team member, but he’s denied it to me.)

Anyway.  We plan to pursue Delacourt’s factual error on CBC radio with their Ombudsman and others.  The only question, however, is whether Susan Delacourt will be a reporter, just this once, and admit she made a factual error.

Will she do that? I’m not holding my breath.

14 Comments

  1. J.H. says:

    I’m not getting why Delacourt would be considered a journalist, or at least an unbiased one? Liberal Party stenographer would seem closer. And it’s not only her tears over Iggy’s departure or the close connections she and hubby Don Lenihan have to the LPC front group Canada 2020. It’s her whole body of work over the years.
    But she’s not alone. I look at these guidelines and ask the same question about many so called unbiased journos – http://caj.ca/content.php?page=ethics-guidelines
    What kind of values were these folks taught and where is their honor?

  2. Sean says:

    I’ve never appreciated Delacourt’s views on most topics. While not being as lopsided as Heather Mallick, her political driven bias is there nonetheless. I didn’t know she was a conspirator of sorts in the overthrow of Jean Chrétien ( heard him speak in our area and we thought he was brilliant) but now that I do, I have an even lower opinion of her.

  3. Ted says:

    The usual bullshit from the usual suspects.

    Susan Delacourt has struck out and Judy Sgro is at bat now.

    Full of the same shit, although she is correct in observing that it is indeed a personal attack on the PM and the people in the PMO by Jane Philpot and Jody Wilson-Raibault.

    Justin Trudeau brought these fine women on board to the Liberal Party by telling them they were being recruited to make a difference. But really, they were just window dressing and Justin Trudeau was just wasting their time. They’re pissed off because they’re not like Judy Sgro and all the rest of that bunch. They’re pissed off like so many of us who bought into Justin Trudeau’s bullshit, and if old school Liberal Party types don’t think this will be an election issue, well good luck with that one.

    People are getting totally pissed off with politics all over the western world for the very reasons we’re seeing unfold here in Canada. Some people suggest we’re more civilised in this country, immune to the populist dogma. We’d better hope so.

    No thanks to Mr Prime Minister, Ms. Telford, Mr. Butts, Ms Sgro, Ms. Copps, Susan Delacourt, etc.

    • Derek Pearce says:

      Thank you, exactly. The Liberals leapfrogged over the NDP in the last election because many of us were optimistic enough to buy into Team Trudeau’s campaign of sunny ways and not doing politics in a transparent way & not the “meet the new boss same as the old boss” style. LAVScam is just the most prominent example of how that overwhelmingly turned out to be horseshit.
      If they lose the election the blame is squarely in him & Butts for faking us out and pissing us off.

  4. Joseph says:

    So then its true.
    The Kinsella’s and the Harper’s are sharing rent free lodgings in those folks minds.

  5. Ronald O'Dowd says:

    Well, when you start going after the messenger (who isn’t even the messenger) rather than changing YOUR position, a position that is sinking this government and party, that says just about all Canadians need to know whether they go into an accelerated voting booth or not.

    These people in the PMO, lazy cabinet and quivering caucus are simply incredible and not in a way that naturally re-elects a government. This Prime Minister is foolish for deliberately doubling down on the first of two losing issues.

    And to think that MH is only warming up. That will finish them off because they will handle it at least as badly as they’ve bungled SNC-L…

    The supposed thoughtful ministers and bright-lights in this government simply nod in approval. Who is more of an idiot? A totally hapless conductor or a more than willing orchestra???

  6. Sean says:

    Must wonder if the alleged stalker, the one following JWR and JP with camera in hand, is sending his photos to Delasnort?

  7. Anthon R says:

    Thank you for your honesty in sticking up for the Rule of Law, which many partisans are forgetting is the root of this issue. Political interference in the Justice System is a slippery slop, and we can see the very thought of it happening in Canada has China pulling strings to further punish Canada because of it. Justin, like Trump, has proven to be a serial liar, it would be ironic if Justin is charged criminally before Donald Trump

    • Alex Roberts says:

      The attorney General herself stated that no laws were broken.

      • Warren says:

        I disagree with her.

        • Robert White says:

          Jurisprudence is a balance of probabilities that are based on facts collected and shared. Opinions count especially when they are well thought out and come from decades of experience but in this case we are looking at criminal intent on a qualitative & quantitative scale that ultimately eliminates opinion in the final analysis. RCMP Major Crimes Unit needs qualitative & quantitative evidence to even entertain opining a criminal case file. Without demonstrable facts that the RCMP can act on we are all just going to continue spinning our wheels figuratively.

          I’m speaking from inexperience of course but on the surface it looks like this issue will never pass criterion for RCMP involvement. And criminal intent is pretty much impossible to prove without the evidence of a smoking gun.

          RW

  8. Jim Littlewood says:

    It is refreshing to see non partisan press reports and it is long over due. In most twitter feeds one can easily read between the lines to figure out which political party is being supported. It is rare indeed to see issues addressed as issues. I think the term “fake news”is a whole lot less accurate than “biased reporting”

  9. Alex Roberts says:

    99.5% of my post has been “disappeared.”

Leave a Reply to Jim Littlewood Cancel reply

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


*