Patrick Brown in pictures

The collage is worth a thousand words, as they say.

There’s more of this sort of thing out there, I’m told.

After last night’s blockbuster Globe and Mail story – which suggested he had schemed to get a big payment from a man who would get a coveted PC nomination shortly thereafter – I don’t know how he can survive. His defence is that the deal never went through? Seriously?

In law, there’s something called a lesser included offence.

That may well apply here.

Did Patrick Brown scheme to sell off candidate spots?

And did he plot to put the resulting many thousands in his own pocket?

Check out this stunner Globe and Mail story. It is simply incredible. .

Former Ontario Progressive Conservative leader Patrick Brown was in talks to sell an interest in a restaurant he partially owns and some Aeroplan miles for $375,000 to a man who went on to become a Tory candidate, documents show.

An affidavit detailing a deal was sworn five months before Jass Johal was acclaimed as the candidate for the PC Party in a new riding in the suburban 905 region around Toronto. According to a copy of the affidavit shown to The Globe and Mail, Mr. Johal, a paralegal who lives in Brampton, says he agrees to purchase two million Aeroplan miles and an ownership interest in Hooligans restaurant from Mr. Brown for $375,000. “The amount is paid by certified draft from Bank of Nova Scotia,” says the affidavit dated June 11, 2016 and signed by Mr. Johal.

… Other documents The Globe has seen, including bank statements, show that Mr. Brown deposited $375,000 into his personal account at Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce one month after the affidavit was signed, on July 11, 2016. Later that month, property records show he purchased a waterfront house on Lake Simcoe’s Shanty Bay for $2.3-million. He took out a mortgage of $1.72-million from Toronto-Dominion Bank, according to public mortgage documents.

…[Mr. Brown] declined to answer a question about why the amount agreed to in the sworn affidavit was exactly the same as the deposit a month later into his personal account.

Is Patrick Brown a crook?

We shall see. But I know there is one thing he isn’t, and should never be:

A member of the legislature.

PCPO: a correspondent writes in (updated)

Just received.  Interesting.

Warren: Patrick Brown wants to play politics. Let’s play.

Let’s take a look at some of Patrick Brown’s biggest supporters.

Let’s look, too, at how the Hell this guy is funding his $1.75 million mortgage, all his trips to India and various other exotic places, the entire operation, including his first Leadership bid.

Let’s shake the tree and see what falls out, shall we?

Here are/were some of Patrick Brown’s top guys.

1. Rick Dykstra. Accused of sexual assault.

Acclaimed as President of the PC Party. Didn’t have a job. Some suggested he should get paid by the PC Party fund.

Did he? The Constitution says that he can’t. But hey, it’s just the Constitution.

He ran for the nomination to become an MPP and lost. Wasn’t doing the finest job as President? The people of Niagara didn’t want him back?

If he didn’t get paid by the Party, then where was he getting an income from?

2. Andrzej Kepinski, the big-shot casino guy.Andrzej gave $20K to Glen Murray when he ran for the Liberal leadership. Glen Murray! Almost immediately, Glen drops out. Andrzej has also given a lot to many other Liberals too. Here’s a link:

Andrzej has been described as the big money behind Patrick Brown’s first Leadership bid.

He was appointed to the PC Ontario Fund Board. A known backer of Ontario Liberals.

You can’t make this stuff up.

How did this get past the powers that be?

Andrzej is also close with Rick Dykstra. They go way back. Niagara area stuff. Dykstra was the MP down there. Andrzej has casino interests down there.

3. Brett McFarqhuar, the owner of a company called ElectRight.

He’s a full time Toronto Police Officer as well. One of the largest vendors of research and solicitation services to the PC Party riding candidates – and the PC Party Fund.

It has been said that the bond between Patrick and Brett “Trumps” everything else.  If you get my meaning.

Also, ElectRight was a vendor for Patrick Brown’s first leadership campaign. But it would seem that they didn’t make a lot of money on that campaign. Perhaps they didn’t make many phone calls? The campaign financial returns suggest they didn’t invoice the campaign for much, at all.

Also, Dykstra is super tight with ElectRight, too. One of ElectRight’s principals worked for Dykstra for a number of years.

These three boys (Brown, McFarquar and Dykstra), go way back.

4. Snover Dhillon. Google Snover Dhillon.I suspect that we are going to hear a lot more about this guy in the coming weeks.

The rumours on the street are that this guy also provides “election services.” His specialty is nomination races. High stakes, I’m told.

Big supporter of Jass Johal and Patrick Brown.

They’ve all been to India together, even.

Jag withdrew his candidacy for PC Party President.  Mangeet Gill and Kevin Gaudet withdrew their candidacies for VPs.  Then, Dykstra was acclaimed as President. Then, Jag was acclaimed as Vice-President.

Voila! One big happy family. And…who was pulling all the strings behind the scenes?

Here’s the problem: the President interprets the Constitution and ultimately decides who the candidates for leadership are.

Snover and Jag are close. Very close. I wonder how close Jag is with Jass Johal?

5. And who this this Jass Johal guy that I keep hearing about?

And how does he fit into all of this? This is one I’m looking into this week.

Warren, something else is bugging me too.

But I need your help with this one. I’m hoping that your loyal readers – who have the capacity and the resources – will look deeper into this one for me.

This story is nagging at me. I’ve got a feeling that there’s a lot more here:

“We were confident that after calling into question the integrity of the police investigation against Ms. Ali that she would be exonerated at trial.”

Stay tuned.

UPDATE: From my friend Steve Paikin, this:

Ten rules about #MeToo and crisis communications

There are lots of rules to remember about politics and public relations and the law. Here are ten.

  1.  Don’t brag about hiring private investigators. For example, in the middle of a #MeToo-type full-blown crisis, don’t have one of your people go on a radio program, and say you’ve hired private detectives to do a “forensic” investigation. Because that means you are admitting you are digging through the private lives of various people – your alleged victims, your caucus colleagues, your former staff who had the good sense to dump you – to dig up dirt. It means your strategy, basically, is to try and pull everyone down into muck with you.
  2. Don’t attack your alleged victims. In the #MeToo era, even Harvey Weinstein – the rutting pig who essentially started the movement – understood that you don’t victimize the victims twice. That is one the best things that have happened, post-Weinstein, in fact: in the court of public opinion, the balance of proof has shifted. More and more of us have a tendency to give women alleging sexual abuse the benefit of the doubt. You needed to remember that. You didn’t.
  3. After paying tribute to victims everywhere, don’t attack them. For instance, after reading off some talking points your lawyers prepared for you – like: “A safe and respectful society is what we expect and deserve. We need to move forward to eradicate sexual violence and harassment across the province – across the country. Everywhere.” – you shouldn’t then turn around, three weeks later, and disrespect your alleged victims. You shouldn’t do the polar opposite of what you exhorted everyone, “everywhere,” to do. Among other things, it makes you look like a liar.
  4. Don’t forget the reflection you see in the mirror. That is, guy whose face you shave every morning. In your essence, in your soul, you know who you are, and you know what people have been saying about you in the riding and elsewhere, for years – namely, that you have a zipper problem, and that you follow your little soldier into battle way too often. That you have been too reckless with too many young women. It’s public relations 101: don’t try and change, in 40 days, a perception that has built up over 40 years. It won’t work.
  5. Don’t attack the media who have told nothing but the truth. For instance, when the country’s biggest media organization has broadcast a story about you – and when you know they’ve been working on it for weeks, and when every word in it has been carefully lawyered, and when they have given you an opportunity to respond – it’s pretty dumb to come out, a full three weeks after you resigned, and call them names. One, they gave you a chance to respond. Two, if they were are as wrong as you claim, then why resign? If it was all a lie, like you say, why quit?
  6. Don’t be obvious. For example, don’t start bragging about how you are going to launch a public relations campaign with only select media – the ones you have been friendly with, say – and use it as a pretext to attack other media. At the end of the day, media folks will almost always stick together: when you unfairly attack one, they will see it as an unfair attack on all of them.
  7. Don’t treat a minor misstep like a major war crime. Are the media human? Yes, they are. Do they make mistakes? Yes, like all humans, they make mistakes. So, say, if one of your alleged victims gets wrong her age at the time of an alleged incident – and if that does absolutely nothing to alter the main allegation against you (to wit, acting inappropriately with a young woman) – don’t treat that like the P.R. equivalent of V Day. People understand that sexual harassment and sexual abuse are, for the victims, profoundly traumatic events: they don’t expect “forensic” clarity. When you do, you look even more like an asshole.
  8. Take advice; listen to others. Your staff and your colleagues defended you, day after day after day. They worked their tails off for you, and defended you against every criticism – including persistent allegations of inappropriate personal behaviour. When your staff all resign on you (on a matter of principle) or your caucus colleagues insist that you resign (ditto), it is bad, bad strategy to start attacking them post facto. Among other things, it’s unfair. And it says a lot more about you than it does about them.
  9. Pop culture has lessons to give, sometimes. Remember “It’s my party, and I’ll cry if I want to?” Remember that, the big hit by Lesley Gore, way back in the Sixties? That’s what you are doing now, essentially. You are essentially saying that it was my party, and I’ll destroy it if I want to. That is your strategy: if you can’t raise yourself up, you will pull everyone else down. If you can’t be the winner, you’ll make sure no one else wins, either.
  10. Put up or shut up. It’s been more than three weeks. You’ve called the allegations against you “defamatory,” over and over and over. Well, it’s time to put your money where your mouth is, big little man. Either issue a Libel Notice, or don’t. But if you don’t – and, so far, you haven’t – you are reminding everyone that, mostly, what was said about you was true.

There you go: ten PR tips, free of charge. Haven’t even mentioned your name.

Don’t have to.

The gun lobby are terrorists

Good morning, Your Honour. We appear before you this morning to argue for the proposition that the defendant, the National Rifle Association of America, hereafter referred to as the NRA, is properly classified as a terrorist organization. And, accordingly, that the NRA’s directors and officers have been engaged in a campaign of terror against civilian populations.

Our indictment of the NRA, as you know, arises out of section 802 of the USA Patriot Act, No. 107-52, which has expanded the definition of terrorism to cover “domestic,” as opposed to international, terrorism.

Therein, the Patriot Act, which was overwhelmingly supported and passed by all parties in Congress, sets out that a person has engaged in domestic terrorism if they do something that is “dangerous to human life,” which the NRA has in fact done since the earliest days of its 1871 charter in New York State.

To be successful in prosecuting a crime under the Patriot Act, it must be shown that the NRA, one, intimidated or coerced the civilian population — which they have done, ceaselessly, for generations.

Two, that they have influenced the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion — which they have done, with armies of millionaire gun lobbyists threatening elected representatives with defeat and disgrace if they do not do the NRA’s bidding.

And, three, most crucially, we must show the NRA has attempted to affect the conduct of our government by “mass destruction, assassination or kidnapping.”

We cannot state for a fact, Your Honour, that the NRA has actively engaged in assassinations or kidnappings. We can state, however, that the NRA will be shown to have energetically advocated measures that are bound to lead to mass destruction, even in the wake of the killings of 20 children in Newtown.

One of their recent advertising campaigns even offers up the former president’s own children as rhetorical fodder, and is ample evidence of the NRA’s willingness — like any terrorist organization — to terrorize children and parents to achieve its political goals.

We also take the view that at the time Thomas Jefferson and other founders ratified the Second Amendment, they did not intend it to be applied to the mass murder of six-year-olds using assault weapons. It was to be applied to flintlocks, which were what existed at the time of the amendment’s promulgation.

We are aware that the definition of terrorism is broad, Your Honour, and there is a robust debate about when it applies.

But under section 802 of the Patriot Act, we remind you that this court need only find the NRA has — within the territorial confines of the United States — engaged in a campaign of intimidation or coercion of our government, and our citizens.

You need only find that the NRA seeks to affect the conduct of government by advocating “mass destruction.”

Lobbying for guns in schools is that, Your Honour. So is openly threatening members of Congress so that they will lift bans on assault weapons. So is helping teenagers to purchase AK-47 assault weapons at gun shows. So is calling law enforcement “jack-booted government thugs.”

So is suggesting the last same president of the United States facilitates murder. So, most of all, is assassinating minimal efforts to prevent something like Newtown from ever happening again.

All these things the NRA has done, Your Honour. All of these acts of intimidation and coercion are not dissimilar to the campaigns of the Taliban or al-Qaida.

They may wear expensive suits, Your Honour, but the NRA is not much different from the terrorists. They deserve to be treated as such by this court.

Brown is kicked out of caucus – but will he run for leader again? (updated)

I’m told he plans to.

Now, Vic Fedeli did what a few of us felt he needed to do – he needed to kick out the former leader:

But get this:

Is this nuts? Yes, Virginia, it is nuts.

How can you run for leader of a party when you have been booted out of that party’s caucus?

Again: this guy is a human wrecking ball. He wants to bring everyone else down to his level.

That only works, I think, if there isn’t more damaging stuff about him out there.

And, believe me: there is.

Watch this space, folks.

UPDATE: From smart reader Robert White:

Brown can’t run for the leadership unless the official party interim leader signs his nomination papers. Brown is officially out of caucus, and cannot get his nomination papers signed for the riding of Barrie unless his pending litigation is completed by 5:00pm tonight.

Brown is officially out of the Queen’s Park legislature as a sitting MPP due to the fact that he has not signed up under independent status, and can’t sign up for PC Party nomination in his riding. Fedeli can’t commit political suicide by reneging on his vow that he would only sign the nomination papers if Brown cleared his reputation.

Bye bye, Patrick ‘the Clown’ Brown.

Politics in Ontario is fun this time round.


The Patrick Clown Show, plus bonus caucus resignation phone call tape!

ABOVE: Brown says he didn’t resign – but here’s the tape proving that he did!

Yesterday there was an Ontario PC leader debate.  You are forgiven for not noticing.

That’s because – as my friend Tasha notes in her column, here – The Patrick Clown Show™ risks eclipsing everything else.  It’s like that 1963 Lesley Gore hit, It’s My Party – you know, “It’s my party and I’ll cry if I want to.”

Well, Brown version is: It’s Still My Party, and I’ll Destroy It If I Want To.

Let’s recap yesterday, shall we?

Follow all that?  I don’t either.

Here are the possibilities, boys and girls: one, The Patrick Clown Show really is a clown show, and its principals wouldn’t know how to run a two-house paper route.

Or, two, the strategic objective is the Lesley Gore song after all: if Mr. Zipper Problem™ can’t run the party, then he’ll take down the party.  Boom.

Either way, The Patrick Clown Show has made one key, key error, folks: its brain trust – and there’s an oxymoron if there ever was one! – are assuming that nothing else is about to come out about their man.

They shouldn’t assume that. (See video, above.)