Wednesday, January 30, 2008

Duff to be called to the Ethics Committee?

Mike Duffy announced on his show yesterday that he may be asked to appear in front of the Ethics Committee to provide information regarding CBC-gate.

Liblogger Yappa Ding Ding has declared this to be a "subversion of the committee process" and is urging readers to contact various politicians including the Ethics Committee chairman Paul Szabo. She applied a "corruption" label to the post.

Where to begin with this incredible piece of irony and hypocrisy? Well, for starters she's misquoted both Graham Richardson and Mike Duffy (interesting that the clip isn't on the CTV website. Always record the show.)

It was actually Greg Weston who said the following:
"... this is the most trumped-up, ridiculous pandering to the Conservative core who believe the CBC is part of the enemy... Unfortunately it's politicking with somebody's reputation, and that's really the worst... thing."
(Can you believe it?)

Graham Richardson
chimes in:

"...Well publicized mistakes have been made - it's on the website.... It sounds like the opposition is going to vote this down. It appears to be a maneuver much like Greg was saying to try to keep this thing alive..."

Duff attempts to interpret Graham's meaning:
"..try to embarrass the Liberals and the CBC - Get a twofer."


Details aside, the main argument here seems to be, 'Well everyone does it'.

Everyone? Not likely. Anyway, a lot of people cheat on their taxes. Does that make it ethical?

And has it happened before in an Ethics Committee hearing?

And is there a difference when it comes to the publicly-funded CBC, which admits themselves that they should be held to a higher standard?

And if the alleged collusion between the LPC and the CBC reporter was an attempt to sidetrack the process and go on a fishing expedition to fling as much mud as possible at a former PM and anyone he may have had contact with, who really deserves that 'corruption' label?

* * * *
Related: Excellent post here - The Black Rod: The Cruickshank Redemption.

SDA - What did Szabo know and when did he ask it?


Jeff Davidson said...

i'm not sure if del maestro thought of this all by himself, but it sure smacks of stupidity.

duffy has laughed at the feeble attempts of lugs like del maestro to portray the CBC as openly anti-conservative. it's a sideshow, a distraction from the main event, the questionable dealings of brian mulroney.

i suppose you shrug off suggestions that conservative MP's colluded with the CBC and other networks when they were investigating ADSCAM?

Jeff Davidson said...

for the record, duffy hasn't been called to the ethics committee, it has to be voted on by the members.

Anonymous said...

Everybody does it?????

Wel, recall that when LaPierre disclosed this on Duffy HE said that in all of his years in government this NEVER happened to his knowledge and for sure NEVER with him and HE IS a journalist. Liberal to boot.

LaPierre was shocked! He also said that he was SHOWN the questions by "a SENIOR Liberal" - which would mean someone other than Pablo Rodriguez who is NOT a SENIOR Liberal. And Pablo said that he worked on the questions in Ralph Goodale's office. Ralph IS a SENIOR Liberal.

I would bet the 2nd Liberal in the CBC collusion is Ralph Goodale.

What do you think?

Gabby in QC said...

"... duffy hasn't been called to the ethics committee, it has to be voted on by the members."
IF Duffy is called to appear, it would not necessarily be because of the machinations of the Conservatives, but rather because the committee members - WHERE THE OPPOSITION IS THE MAJORITY - have decided that the person's testimony is relevant.
Paul Hunter yesterday informed Don Newman that the committee had met 'in camera' and that Stevie Cameron had once again been put on the list of 'witnesses.' No mention of Duffy.

"i suppose you shrug off suggestions that conservative MP's colluded with the CBC and other networks when they were investigating ADSCAM?"
Actually, the investigative reporting on ADSCAM was done by the G&M’s Daniel Leblanc.
The article I link to is adapted from his French-language book, "Nom de Code: MaChouette," released in Oct. 2006.
Since I haven’t read the book, I don’t know if MaChouette’s identity was finally revealed in the book.

Anonymous said...

Jeffy, Jeffy, Jeffy - the fact that you cannot see the hypocrasy of this happening at an "ethics" committee hearing speaks to how out of touch you really are.

The fact that Weston and Richardson poo-pooed this as something that "happens all the time" speaks to how corrupt our media really are.

They make assertions that this has happened with Conservative MP's yet they produce no examples - do you not think they would be bringing up names, dates, questions etc. if there were any.

This does not "smack of stupidity" as you put it - this is every bit as "relevant" as the question that CBC admits they got Hair-boy to ask.

jad said...

For an update of the CBC position, check out "What Did Szabo Know, And When Did He Ask It? " at, and "The Cruickshank Redemption" at
(sorry I haven't figured out how to do links yet !)

Gabby in QC said...

"sorry I haven't figured out how to do links yet !"

Ditto! I tried using HTML tags, with no success.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

for the record, duffy hasn't been called to the ethics committee, it has to be voted on by the members.

Ah, thanks for pointing that out. I'll make a few small changes.

Alberta Girl said...

Does anyone else note how often the media make statements that the Tories are "playing to their core".

This, of course, plays to the media's audience of left wing readers and says - "pay no mind to this silly little game they are playing - it is only for their knuckle-dragging base."

maryT said...

Even if Duffy does not appear, the fact he has been mentioned will cause him trouble, and if he isn't called, why not, what would he tell that liberals fear.
Regardless, he is tarred with this.
And Weston's stmt, tarring reputations-the cbc and globe have done that to themselves.
Who wrote Codere's questions yesterday, a cbc reporter, or one of the people he marched with.

wilson said...

Is this the link?
h/t nationalnewswatch

...'Cruickshank published a lengthy apologia on his blog where, in a much less belligerent tone, he gave out a few more details as he tried to protect the battered reputation of the CBC.

"When, as in the present instance, it is revealed that a reporter has been collaborating, even if only obliquely, with one party or another, an appearance of partisanship emerges that cannot be dispelled by claims that this is how political reporters interact with their sources.

In this case, our reporter provided questions to two Liberal MPs using her BlackBerry in the hope that these would be put to the former prime minister during the committee hearings...'

Joanne (True Blue) said...

Thanks, Wilson. I added it at the end of this post.

Anonymous said...

One major reason why Mr Harper won the last election was his refusal to blame the CBC, G$M and the Star for bad press, because whining about bad press is like waking up in Kelowna mid February and whining about the cold...its useless. The Cons, and all Cons have to put this crap behind them, being in government means getting your ass kicked on a daily basis by the press and somehow rising above it all with good policy and good government. Mr Harper and the Conservatives can do alot better then this. BillG

maryT said...

Steven Taylor has the letters from Brian's lawyer to Szabo.
Szabo said today that KS will not testify tomorrow. Wonder why. Also, all documentation requested from Brian has been submitted.
Funny, it verifies everything he testified to.
Has KS submitted all his papers. Maybe that is what he discussed at that meal in Montreal.
How ethical is it for a person being sued by someone, to visit and collaborate with a wanted criminal, to smear a former PM of Canada. Then that same person gets to question the person suing him.
This committee is turning out to be worse than a kangaroo court.
Notice Pablo is very quiet in the HofC, not asking questions, and neither is Scott.
When will Scott get rid of his blackberry, seems to just get him into trouble.

Anonymous said...

if "everyone does it" then lets drag the whole bunch of them into an Szabo non-ethics panel stuff either....lets see just how deep this goes and lay every media/gov't collusion from the present way back to Trudeau.

The very fact that LaPierre disclosed this on air on MDL and MDL at the time says it all. Go with the gut Duff!

JR said...

Good one Joanne. I've only got one thing to add. "Yappa Ding Ding" is sure a fitting name for a Liberal.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

Go with the gut Duff!

Interesting that you should say that. I got a hit from CTV this afternoon.

Anonymous said...

I think Harper's smarter than all of the MSM put together. He's got a secret all right. He knows that Canadians love to support the underdog. The longer the MSM continue to paint Harper in a bad light, and try to back him into a corner the more voters and everyday Canadians can identify with him being picked on and the more they grow to dislike the media who continue to keep him in his underdog place.

I have relatives who used to be diehard Liberals....not any more.
Keep up the great strategy MSM because add that to the fact that Canadians....of all stripes are not that unhappy with the job Harper's doing and it spells another Harper win at the ballot box.

Underdogs always surprise....and if I recall correctly the media pundits and polls were wrong, VERY wrong last federal election. So much so that they tripped over their tongues making up excuses for their bad guesswork.

Blue Magic said...

Gred weston is spinning.

a no-spin rule is that you don't justify bad behavior by pointing to other bad behavior.

By doing that weston proves he is not very bright, and that he is not telling the truth and is only spinning the story.

When ever you see this argument from the media about this issue, they are just trying to cover it up. And it proves that they are not worth listening to, and are no diferent from the people on MDL strat panels.

liberal supporter said...

I have relatives who used to be diehard Liberals....not any more.
Sure. Some folks are tired of the constant stream of abuse from the fright wingers. They just can't be bothered giving you the opportunity to poop on them anymore. They will, however, exercise the secret ballot and show up at the next election.

Keep up the great strategy MSM
They will. It's working.

because add that to the fact that Canadians....of all stripes are not that unhappy with the job Harper's doing
True. He's been a great caretaker.

and it spells another Harper win at the ballot box.
So say you.

Underdogs always surprise
Yes, what with the steady stream of "not a leader", "not worth the risk", "wants to invade Pakistan(!)", "wants to bankrupt the economy", "talks funny", you have indeed created an underdog!


OMMAG said...

The addicted Personality ..
Consider the following common manifestations:
Denial - Cognitive dysfunction - Self Imposed isolation from other groups - Delusion - Dependence on Enablers - Self Reinforcing behaviours - Emotional Outbursts - Manic Episodes - Violent Episodes - Disregard for the Safety of Others and so on.......