Wednesday, March 12, 2008

No bribes offered

This must be the article that James Moore referenced in Question Period today - No inducements to change vote, Cadman's politicial advisor says:

...Raymond Mol, who served as Mr. Cadman's co-campaign manager in 2004, said he asked Mr. Cadman specifically about possible offers shortly after he voted to keep the Liberal government in power.

After the vote, Mr. Mol says he met with Mr. Cadman when he arrived at the Vancouver Airport after his flight from Ottawa, and later went with him to his constituency office in Surrey.

"We definitely chatted about it. I have a fairly clear recollection of that time," Mr. Mol told the Citizen.

He says he first asked his friend about possible incentives offered by then-Prime Minister Paul Martin's Liberals.

"I said, "Did the Liberals offer you a spot?' And he said, 'They know better than that."

Mr. Mol then asked about Conservative offers.

"He said, 'They offered me the same support they offered me before,'" Mr. Mol recalled. "But, no, he said, 'They didn't offer me anything specific and I didn't ask for anything.'"

Later in the article, Mr. Mol gives a possible explanation for the seeming contradiction in various versions of the story.


Reid said...

Have no fear. The Liberals will ignore that just like they ignore Chuck's very own words.

Never let the truth get in the way of a good smear.

Jeff Davidson said...

so... what was dona cadman and the rest of her family talking about?

got an answer? no. didn't think so.

Anonymous said...

perhaps they were mistaken and no one will be brave enough to suggest that to a member of the grieving family?

Ever had a member of your family die?

Thoughts aren't exactly clear, everything goes in slow motion.

why don't the liberals consider that?

no answer?

didn't think so!

Ruth said...

I could tell my family that I have a million dollar life insurance policy for them too. Chuck Cadman isn't here any more to tell his side of the story. Why can't everyone just drop the story.

Anonymous said...

Perhaps the fact the Dona Cadman and family weren't privy to any of the ACTUAL conversations might have something to do with it. If brought to court neither of their "recollections" would be admissible since they were all heresay. But that aside, who's word should be taken as definitive? Words from the man himself or the ever-so-liberally interpreted word of his wife and daughter who didn't hear any actual conversations? And no, I don't think they're lying - I'm pretty sure they believe they know what they think they know... but unless they were there to have heard any sort of inducements from either side (and you can't tell me honest-paul martin didn't try to slip him a little something for keeping his rotten to the core government afloat a little longer) then nothing that they say is of any interest.

But go ahead, simple little lefty... throw as much mud as you'd like. Your stench of desperation just gets stronger by the minute. I wouldn't be a bit surprised to see the Libs in a dead tie with the greens and the NDP after the next election...

Anonymous said...

Let it go Jeff. He's says a bribe was not offered, Mr Mol says Mr Cadman told him no bribe was offered and the other two at the meeting say a bribe was not offered...its getting painfully obvious that this was a comunication failure on behalf of Mr Cadman and his wife...and a misinterpretation of just what could and couldnt be done to help them. But hey...Kyoto and green scarves didnt work...your Afghanastan stance lasted what?..a week? Whats real scary Jeff is, after looking at all the evidence and facts the big brains in the Liberal tower still decided that this was a vote winning issue...a dead man whose widow is running for the Conservatives...if that doesnt sum up the good ship Dion then nothing will. What the hell has happened to the Liberal Party of Canada? billg

Anonymous said...

If Dona has a blog of her own, I'd be more than willing to post there and apologize for the mess the Liberals have made.

Is there a url?

Reid said...

Well Jeff. If you knew anything about stress and it's effect on memory you wouldn't ask that question.

The Liberals are framing the question as either Chuck or his family must be lying. And if the Conservatives are saying that they believe Chuck they must be calling the Cadmans' liars.

But the 2 aren't mutally exclusive. The thing of it is that the Cadmans' were under extreme stress during the time in which their memory is being called up from. Those memories have to taken with a grain of salt.

"Chronic over-secretion of stress hormones adversely affects brain function, especially memory. Too much cortisol can prevent the brain from laying down a new memory, or from accessing already existing memories."

Chuck was telling the truth, on numerous occasions, when he said nothing was offered other than help with election financing. The Cadmans' are telling, what they, believe to be the truth, what they remember from that stressfull time.

Anonymous said...

TangoJuliette sez:

Jeffie D. : why don't you just go ahead and directly ask the surviving members of the Cadman family what the blazes this is all about.

just about every married couple I know, has spells when communication is far less than perfect. As well, the recall of said communication, after the fact, and under stress, tends to get somewhat mangled.

AND, how about the one year time lag on release on the info which the libs had sandbagged? remember, IF there were any shifty deals going down, then those who knew about it and kept silent, may be equally culpable. Paul Martin, mebbe, when he wrote the preface. And how about that timing... tossing this out, JUST before a book launch? C'mon!

So, just exactly what part of the NO don't you understand, as it is epressed in Chuck Cadman's various TV interviews where he said "NO offers were made..." ?

Sounds alot like a quebec neverendum question. My kids used to behave alot like the adscammers still do. Note, my kids are all in their late thirties now, and grew up early on in life.



paulsstuff said...

Jeffy, I think it's time for a little refresher course for you. Remember this?

"A Conservative MP with the memorable name Inky Mark claims that the new Liberal survival strategy will rely on buying Tory MPs in order to undermine Stephen Harper. Mark told the Canadian media in several interviews that the Grits attempted to induce him to switch parties in exchange for an appointment to the foreign service or to the Senate:

Conservative MP Inky Mark says the Liberal party is trying to woo him by offering him an ambassadorship or Senate position.
Mr. Mark said in several interviews Tuesday that he was approached by an unnamed cabinet minister who offered him a position in a phone call last Friday.

"The suggestion was that well, maybe, well, there must be something that I want, right?" Mr. Mark said in an interview with CBC Newsworld Tuesday in Ottawa.

"The minister said this?" the reporter asked him.

"The minister said that. Perhaps I would like to be an ambassador for Canada. I said, no, I travel enough. I don't think I want to do that," Mr. Mark answered. He did not disclose who it was.
He repeatedly declined the offer, saying he was not interested, he said.

Then the Liberals implied that a Senate position could come his way, Mr. Mark told CTV Newsnet.

Of course this was not the only alleged "offer" put forth by the Liberal's at the time. Senate seat? Isn't that what was promised for Grewal's wife if she voted with the Liberal's. Stronach ring a bell? And hey Jeffy, witnesses at Gomery testified under oath Chretien, Gagliano, Martin, and others were aware of the kickback scheme. So I am sure you are willing to give their statements the same credence as what is quoted in the Cadman book, right Jeffy?

Got an answer? no. didn't think so.

By the way Jeffy, perhaps your time would be better spent taking a basic english course and learning the proper uses of capital letters, particularly when using someone's name. If your not sure which key to push just ask.

potato said...

Mr.Mol's revelation along with paulstuff's response to jeff makes this one of the most delicious posts I've read in a long time.

rations said...

What strikes me about this saga is that the person who initiated it is all but invisible. If Zytaris had anything concrete the Liberals would be parading him all over the Hill. But aside for a fragment of a tape he is selling and a book that he has already had to re-edit about meetings that didn't occur he has nothing. I still wonder why a so-called friend of Cadman as Zytaris claims to be, would have a Liberal write a forward for a bio on a Reform/Alliance/Conservative MP.

Anonymous said...

Just before my own father died from lung cancer, he commented to both my sister and I that there was nothing for us to worry about, we'd be taken care of by his life insurance which would make sure my mom was able to manage once he was gone if the worst came to worst...

Guess what... He had no life insurance policy that covered anything beyond funeral expences...

Did it put some fears to rest for his family at the bet it did...but I'd give anything to have my father back today even though it's over 20 years ago that cancer took him from us.

His "little white lie" allowed us as a family to focus on things that were more important like the here and now and time we had left with him... rather then worrying about things that were years down the road like how we were going to make ends meet? How was my mom going to help pay for part of both my sisters and my education beyond high school? The day to day crap that takes care of itself...

I don't know what was going on with my dad...was it stress, a master plan to allow us to not worry about things which would happen anyways, was it the drugs they had him on back then? Was he mistaken? Is there actually a life insurance policy he hadn't told our mom about that has never paid out sitting in a filing cabnet somewhere that should have paid out?

We don't know and at the end of the day it's not really important... it happened and we don't dwell on it.

Having lost a parent to Cancer I can understand how things can get're not eating properly or sleeping in the last few weeks/months leading up to their death. You're jumping at every phone call or door bell. Everything becomes surreal and things you'd normally blow off become important and vice short you're on pins and needles, stressed out of your mind.

At the end of the day all you can do is remember the good stuff as best you can and forget about anything anyone else might say or do to tarnish that memory or dredge up any negative stuff as a family you'd prefer to not relive again... I can't even begin to imagine what it would be like to relive it in the MSM spot light...

If you had half a brian rather then posting stupid half questions in a blog site, if you were really seriously interested in getting to an answer you'd get on a plane and come to BC, talk to the actual people involved and form an educated answer rather then contributing to a non-news story/smear campaign.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

If you had half a brian rather then posting stupid half questions in a blog site, if you were really seriously interested in getting to an answer you'd get on a plane and come to BC, talk to the actual people involved and form an educated answer rather then contributing to a non-news story/smear campaign.

Anon, I'm not sure who that was directed at, but I'm very sorry to hear about your father passing away from cancer. That must have been a very difficult time for you and your family.

Thank you for sharing such a personal story with us.

Anonymous said...

Mol mentioned that Cadman was medicated in trying to explain why the Cadman family's statements are different than his. But if Cadman was medicated, then why would Mol get the truth and three separate family members not get the truth? Mol is a Conservative trying to support his party, but undercutting the Cadman family looked bad and took away from his other statements.

paulsstuff said...

"Mol mentioned that Cadman was medicated in trying to explain why the Cadman family's statements are different than his. But if Cadman was medicated, then why would Mol get the truth and three separate family members not get the truth? Mol is a Conservative trying to support his party, but undercutting the Cadman family looked bad and took away from his other statements."

Did you even bother to read the link Joanne provided anon? Mol said he met with Cadman two days after the vote. Cadman passed away 6 weeks later, and the references to his wife and daughter and the insurance offer was made on his deathbed. As someone who lost his father to cancer, the medication given to my father in his final days and hours made him sometimes incoherent or talking about things that never made sense or never happened. And put the partisan crap aside, Mol was a good friend of Cadman's.

Accept the fact this is going nowhere, let Cadman rest in peace as he deserves and let his family remember him in peace. Perhaps if the Liberal party actually put forth some planks of their platform they might see a bump in the polls. The smears and false allegations are not and will not work.

Gayle said...

And yet Harper STILL refuses to tell us why he said what he said on that tape.

When given the chance to categorically deny any financial incentive, other than that which has already been admitted to in relation to the election, was offered to Cadman, Sandra Buckler refused.

I wonder why...

Kingston said...

Morning Gayle, I am sure the Law Suit will make it all perfectly clear if it proceeds.

Anonymous said...

Gayle, Why on earth does the Prime Minister have to "caregorically deny" anything?
If anyone has proof there was a bribe ,- bring it forward. If there is NO proof, then drop it.

Gayle said...

Lee and Paul - I know you like to ignore facts, but Cadman apparently told his wife there was a bribe. Hearsay IS admissible in specific situations, so this is evidence.

As for the little law suit trick, this is nothing more than an attempt to avoid dealing with the allegations, and the public. I do not think people will be satisfied with "no comment" on the campaign trail. And in case you did not notice, about 60% of the country agree with me on that.

I know you all want to put your collective heads in the sand and pretend this is all going to go away, but conventional wisdom suggests that this is going to hurt Harper in the long run.

Of course Art Hanger's little theatrics do not help eliminate the impression the cons have nothing to hide here.

And a categorical denial will NOT harm his lawsuit. Lying about it would.

Anonymous said...

Still dizzy gayle?

molarmauler said...

"We have nothing on you except innuendo and hearsay Mr. Harper. So stop being such a jerk and a bully and incriminate yourself for us please!"

Oops, my bad, they never said 'please'.

Gayle said...

silly molar

Apparently you missed this is politics. The court of public opinion actually counts here.

If the cons have nothing to hide, why are they trying so hard to hide it?

Not that I expect any of you to actually pull your collective heads from the sand and face the real world.

Do enjoy yourselves.

molarmauler said...

This is also the real world, Gayle, where real criminals who offer real million dollar bribes do not give confessions to every reporter who sticks a tape recorder in their face on the driveway of someone's house.

You'd think criminally-minded Liberals would understand how criminals behave. I guess they must be more criminally-stupid than criminal, however, if they expect Harper to act more stupid than criminal.

As for the incriminating snippet of tape? Google 'Glenn Beck' and 'Is Obama the Antichrist' if you want to see what the Liberal Spin Machine can do with the truth contained in tape.

I truly hope that Harper takes this lawsuit to the end.

Anonymous said...

The foundation of Liberal policy!!'ve nailed it right here!:

"Apparently you missed this is politics. The court of public opinion actually counts here."

The Libs have no policy for's all about spin and saying anything in front of the camera.
What is really sad is the numbers of the electorate that fall for it.

silly bluetech

I saved you the trouble gayle.

Anonymous said...

Well, Gayle, lets talk about evidence.
Mr. Cadman is on tape live and in person saying there was nothing offered.
No misunderstandings, no third person reports.
In his own words.

Gayle said...

Lee - and he said something else, to his family, IN HIS OWN WORDS.

For that matter, we also have Harper's voice on tape, and no "liberal media bias" spin by Glen Beck is going to change that.

But typical consevative. When all else fails, blaime the media. God forbid Harper be asked to explain his own words.

Gayle said...

Sorry - that was molar who made teh Glenn Beck comment.

molarmauler said...

I thought Harper explained his own words quite adequately. It's too bad they aren't the words you wanted to hear.

Harper tells the author of the book that he knew Cadman's mind was made up and Cadman wouldn't say yes. He says he counselled the party operatives that Chuck wouldn't say yes.
He says on tape that the offer would be for financial considerations that he would be incurred by an election. He later clarifies for us that the financial considerations were election expenses that would be handled by a loan.

Harper would know that it is a crap offer compared to Cadman staying in the House. It certainly fits the facts on tape that he told them Chuck wouldn't bite but they could try it anyways.
I'm sure if Harper knew the offer was for ... a million dollars... then perhaps he would have thought that it were plausible that Cadman might say yes.

In any event.
Harper knows he was on tape talking to an author writing a book on Cadman.
If Harper and the CPC were offering Cadman a real bribe, I can bet my last buck that Harper wouldn't be giving this guy even a sound bite.

It's such a non-sensical non-scandal.
The Liberals made the accusations outside the HoC and they don't have a shred of evidence.

What will Dion pay off first? The Liberal debt like a good leader would (according to Cherniak)? His campaign debt? His libel damages?

I feel sorry for him already. Almost.

paulsstuff said...

Gayle, would it make you feel better if a broad denial statement was made?

They have basically done that. Buckler denied any offer of a bribe was made. Her final remarks were the PMO stood by that statement. Harper and Moore have stood in the house daily and explained the financial considerations were for any upcoming campaign expenses. Gloria Galloway's fluff about how they refuse a blanket denial is just that, fluff. Who's Galloway's husband again? He works for who?

As for the tape of Harper, the book writer is selling snippets of the tape for $500, yet won't release the entire tape for analysis. The publisher has already admitted there is a part on the tape where the sound changes, but the author assured them it's ok.

And here's another reason why this denial is so useless even when made Gayle. Chretien flatly denied for two years, both in and outside the house that he interfered with the head of the BDC in securing a loan. Two years later when confronted with proof he finally changed his story. I'm surprised the media never made a bigger story of Chretien and his henchman being found guilty of trying ruin this man personally and financially for blowing Chretien's cover. Google Chretien Frances Bedouin to see just how disgusting Chretien's tactics were. And Harper's a bully.

And the biggest reason. How many Liberal's stood up and said all rules were followed in the sponsorship program, when they knew in fact members in the party were circumventing rules to avoid paper trails and get cash into riding associations.?

Hope Jeffy stops by soon and comments on the bribe offer to Inky Mark and other Conservatives.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

Paulsstuff might get the last word in here for a while because I have to put on comment moderation. Sorry guys.