I'm suffering from a shortage of available hours. There's way more going on than this writer has time for. Within 24 hours this week, there have been major revelations on three different tracks of news and events in Canada's politics. FATCA came to my attention, Rob Ford's self-immolation found new lows, and today's topic, the latest round of court documents in the Senate Expenses Scandal.
First up, I want to direct readers to Michael Spratt's analysis, he points out where there may be significant concerns for the CPC and its lawyers in this unfolding debacle.
Harper has consistently played the "plausible deniability" card throughout this debacle. This card is wearing thin - fast. Not just a little bit thin - it's positively threadbare. As more comes out in this investigation, it becomes less and less plausible to believe that Harper didn't know in considerable detail what was going on, and the general shape of it, even if he didn't know "every detail".
When things are at the level of the Chief of Staff in the PMO, it is difficult to believe that Harper was not informed. It becomes even less likely in my opinion when there is a pair of e-mails from Nigel Wright saying in effect "I have to ask permission from Harper" followed by "I have permission".
Add to this, Harper's story has been changing as this scandal unfolds. At first he was completely behind Duffy, and there couldn't possibly be anything wrong; now he's thrown Duffy under the bus and is talking about him as some kind of pariah. First he reviewed Pamela Wallin's expenses himself, and it was all just fine; then when the heat gets a bit too much, she gets thrown under the bus with Duffy. Nigel Wright "resigned", and then a few months later he was "fired".
I do not think that Canadians can reasonably be expected to believe that Harper "didn't know" at this point.
First up, I want to direct readers to Michael Spratt's analysis, he points out where there may be significant concerns for the CPC and its lawyers in this unfolding debacle.
Harper has consistently played the "plausible deniability" card throughout this debacle. This card is wearing thin - fast. Not just a little bit thin - it's positively threadbare. As more comes out in this investigation, it becomes less and less plausible to believe that Harper didn't know in considerable detail what was going on, and the general shape of it, even if he didn't know "every detail".
When things are at the level of the Chief of Staff in the PMO, it is difficult to believe that Harper was not informed. It becomes even less likely in my opinion when there is a pair of e-mails from Nigel Wright saying in effect "I have to ask permission from Harper" followed by "I have permission".
Add to this, Harper's story has been changing as this scandal unfolds. At first he was completely behind Duffy, and there couldn't possibly be anything wrong; now he's thrown Duffy under the bus and is talking about him as some kind of pariah. First he reviewed Pamela Wallin's expenses himself, and it was all just fine; then when the heat gets a bit too much, she gets thrown under the bus with Duffy. Nigel Wright "resigned", and then a few months later he was "fired".
I do not think that Canadians can reasonably be expected to believe that Harper "didn't know" at this point.
No comments:
Post a Comment