Comments like the following are popping up:
Would Jim Dinning have let the Chandler episode run its course the same way Ed did?
I'm not at all sure that Stelmach could have done anything but. From a few intimations in the news, it doesn't sound like the PC party has a process that enables party brass to "vet" nomination candidates. There are some clauses that provide the final say-so on a nominee belongs to the party leadership, but that only kicks in after someone has been nominated.
Second, I suspect that few people realize the lengths that Chandler went to to ensure his nomination in Calgary Egmont. He had managed to get a number of his close allies to step forward to act as board executive for the riding association. At least four of his people were on the Egmont constituency association board, probably enough to make it difficult to shut down Chandler's campaign without generating some seriously bad optics for the party.
Stelmach had a nasty little problem on his hands the day he assumed the party leadership, and I doubt he was even aware of its existence. He actually did the best thing he could - let the game unfold however it may, and then let the uproar publicize all of the activities that have made Craig Chandler notorious in recent years. Waiting for the AHRC ruling on the Boissoin case simply made it even easier to justify refusing Chandler's candidacy, as it put one more nail in Chandler's political coffin as a PC.
The reality of it is that Stelmach had to act in the best political interests of his party given a very limited set of tools. If Stelmach had not acted as he did, he risked giving the opposition a huge array of ammunition to lob at his party during an election, and that's something Stelmach can't afford.
I see that Chandler is threatening to sue the PC party to recover the costs of his campaign. If he actually did spend $127,000 on the nomination itself, the man must have money to burn. I doubt any of his competitors spent even 10% of that amount for the nomination itself. Given that the first thing out of Chandler's mouth is almost always "I'll sue you" (followed a close second by "Christophobe" it seems these days), I don't suppose the party should be surprised.
Perhaps the greatest irony of all this is that the more Chandler lashes out viciously at those he perceives to have slighted him, the less electable he becomes.