03.06.2019 06:44 AM

It was a dark and #LavScam night

5 Comments

  1. Steve T says:

    This is very interesting to watch. I have to say, Butts comes across as a genuine and honest witness. His answers to questions are well-considered, and he appears to be recalling actual events (rather than trying to spin a story).

    Granted, this is still unfolding, but my initial impression is that this may be a situation that is more nuanced and complex than one party being “right” and the other “wrong”.

    And I say all of this as a card-carrying Conservative, who would love nothing more than to see the Libs go down in flames in the next election. But perhaps not for this reason? There are plenty of other things they’ve done, very deliberately (eg: Bill C-69), for which they should be penalized for.

    Still more to be learned…

    • Vancouverois says:

      He may *sound* very plausible at first blush; but no matter how reasonable his tone, his testimony is in direct contradiction to JWR’s. And no matter how much he claims that he isn’t there “to cast aspersions on colleagues”, in blunt terms he is calling JWR a liar.

      And his own testimony, such as it is, appeals to emotion rather than facts – “‘Solution?’ Oh, I don’t think I would have used that word, those of you who know me can attest to that.” – “I know these PMO staffers, it would have been completely out of character for them to do that!”

      This strikes me as a very insidious attempt to convince everyone that the PMO was innocently oblivious to JWR’s concerns – and that JWR herself is actually just miffed about being moved in Cabinet.

      (Even though they offered her Indigenous Affairs – how could she *possibly* turn THAT down? ‘Shocking’, as Boissonault says… Lord, spare me…)

  2. The Doctor says:

    Hey Gerry, if nothing happened outside of the normal course of government, then why the f@ck did you resign?

    Just askin’ . . .

  3. the real Sean says:

    When you are required to convince a Parliamentary Committee that you didn’t try to interfere with a criminal trial, it is best to wear a tie from the men’s department.

  4. I’ll speak slowly and write in small sentences so no one in the PMO has trouble getting it: Butts’ testimony can only come out as net negative — cause he’s not God and can’t save them.

    It also makes things far more troublesome, by the fact that Trudeau, Telford, Marques and Bouchard still aren’t testifying…

Leave a Reply

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


*