JWR and Canadian politics.

[the big wheel]

What do we know so far?

Corporations and individuals pay to influence governments for their benefit? Yes or no
There is a law for those and separate laws for the rest of us. Yes or no

Jwr was upset about Stanley verdict and wanted someone to intervene? Yes or no
Government stayed out of it and the right verdict by law was served? Yes or no

Trans mountain was approved by trudough was jwr pleased or upset about this? Yes or no

Métis leaders have come out support of trudough saying they want influence because that’s how it works and they are getting influence from trudough? Yes or no

If the deferred prosecution states that the good of the country must be considered must the ag follow the law? Yes or no
If ag does not follow the law and makes mind up and country is hurt is that illegal? Yes or no

Do we see oil companies chemical companies big ag companies etc control governments? Yes or no.
Should governments be avoiding laws to help these companies when they break the law? Yes or no.

My opinion because she didn’t get influence on the things she wanted personally she doesn’t want favourable influence shown to corporations that don’t support her causes.
I thank her for exposing how things work everywhere. For others to look at this incident and say man that trudough is gonna fry and he should are you ready for your controlled bought and paid for hero’s to fry also because if you apply the same standards they should.

[chuckChuck]

Opinion
A deferred prosecution agreement is not what you think it is
Yves Boisvert
Special to The Globe and Mail
Published 2 days ago
Updated March 1, 2019

Yves Boisvert is a columnist for La Presse.

A few months ago, Via Rail awarded a $989-million contract to Siemens to provide the 32 trainsets that will replace its fleet for Canada’s busiest rail corridor – representing at least a tacit endorsement from this Crown corporation of Canada for the German multinational. And why not? It is one of the world’s largest electrical engineering companies, after all.

But just a decade ago, this might have been far more controversial. In 2006, Siemens was accused of organizing a global system of corruption, paying more than US$1.4-billion in bribes to government officials around the world. In the end, it agreed to a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) with German prosecutors: Charges against the corporation were dropped in exchange for an agreement to pay a €395-million fine, overhaul its management, and allow its operations to be closely monitored. In the United States, the company paid fines of US$450-million to the Department of Justice and US$350-million to the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Indeed, this deal was only one of the roughly 20 to 40 DPAs that are negotiated every year in the United States. Officials there see it as an efficient tool to “impose reforms, impose compliance controls, and impose all sorts of behavioral change” in the corporate world. Many European countries have adopted the same practices, including Britain and the Netherlands. The same rules were incorporated into Canada’s criminal law, too, and 13 years later, it’s clear that this DPA was enough for Canadians to believe that Siemens had rehabilitated itself.

But when a Canadian company such as Quebec engineering firm SNC-Lavalin tries to negotiate such an agreement, it’s as if we’re talking about corruption of the highest degree. And now, pundits are acting as if Justin Trudeau’s government is operating like John A. Macdonald’s during the Pacific Scandal, which saw MPs accepting bribes from businesses hoping to build Canada’s transnational railway.

We do not know the exact legal reasons for the decision to pursue criminal charges for SNC-Lavalin instead of a DPA, only that then-justice minister and attorney-general Jody Wilson-Raybould backed up the director of the Public Prosecution Service of Canada (PPSC) in that pursuit. We do know, however, Ms. Wilson-Raybould felt pressed by the Prime Minister’s Office to reverse that decision.

Never mind that the law permits this, nor that we’ve only heard from two witnesses. Some commentators have already concluded that she was the victim of undue pressure, if not a grave assault against her constitutional independence. Andrew Scheer has even claimed that this represents a criminal attempt to obstruct justice.

It does not.

A DPA is not a way to get a crooked company off the hook: It is a way to make sure it is rehabilitated, watched, and financially punished for what it did. All of that must be judicially approved and monitored. Should one of the long list of conditions be not respected, then criminal prosecution would continue, since it is only deferred as long as the terms are complied with. Individuals involved in any scheme, too, are personally prosecuted in a criminal court. In other words, DPAs aren’t soft on corruption – they’re ways to ensure a company has cleaned up and pays the public for its misdeeds.

The dominant narrative outside Quebec is that the Liberals are trying to save a corrupt Quebec company for partisan reasons. Granted, the fact that the Prime Minister is an MP for a Quebec riding, as he himself allegedly noted, is not a legal argument. But being from Montreal does give Mr. Trudeau a better sense of what SNC-Lavalin represents to this country, just as Stephen Harper did with our oil and gas industry. But more importantly, most of SNC-Lavalin’s Canadian staff, which had nothing to do with the alleged misdeeds from its executives, actually work and live outside Quebec. Trying to use legal tools to protect strategic economic corporations from bankruptcy or foreign takeover, especially one that’s woven into cities across the country, is not in itself unprincipled.

ome pundits-turned-legal experts have decided SNC-Lavalin did not meet all the required conditions for a DPA. Without details from the PPSC, that may well be true. Maybe the independence of the A-G is harmed by conversations to convince her to legally change her mind on an issue. Maybe the people who pressed Ms. Wilson-Raybould went too far.

But until we hear from other witnesses, can we cut the grandstanding? This is not the Canadian Pacific Railway scandal. In fact, if there must be a train-related lesson to take from all this, it’s the telling fact that we’re letting a company rocked by massive scandal build our next generation of trains – with nary a peep. Forgetting that would only let the conversation around SNC-Lavalin go off the rails.

[jazz]

Huh? You two are certifiable. And I take no lessons from Quebec news papers.

The guy is totally corrupt and got caught by his own incompetence. No law was broken because JWR stood her ground. SNC is not redeemable. This isn't just a slip up. They have done it a dozen times. they have two cases in front of the courts right now.

And what about the prostitution ring for Ghadaffi's son? You gonna defend that too. Spare me the BS. Trudeau played the cynical politics card like no politician has ever done in this country. harper are you fn kidding me? The guy was a choir boy. Spent more time in the arctic and Quebec than he did in Calgary.

[sumdumguy]

What we have now isn’t even a sniff of a government. It would be comical if it wasn’t so damn destructive.

[the big wheel]

Norman Morin guilty of illegal donations to liberal and Conservative party between 2004 and 2011
if 118,000.

Those of you acting so self righteous that this is only a liberal thing. Hahahaha Tom funny.

GTH,IRRIGATION PROJECT. BYPASS LAND DEAL, carbon sequester project.

[jazz]

Norman Morin guilty of illegal donations to liberal and Conservative party between 2004 and 2011
if 118,000.

Those of you acting so self righteous that this is only a liberal thing. Hahahaha Tom funny.

GTH,IRRIGATION PROJECT. BYPASS LAND DEAL, carbon sequester project.

Wheel you are suffering from a combination of TDS and cognitive dissonance if you cant see what the liberals did here.

Let me summarize. They secretly rewrote the law that harper put in to get SNC off scott free, but they screwed that up too so that when their own law was properly applied by JWR, it again barred SNC from a DPA, so then they tried to strong arm her to overrule the prosecution, then fired her and now are trying again to refloat a new DPA or change the contracts ban law directly.

Go ahead defend it and everything SNC has done. Don't use whataboutism, defend your boy and that company. We are waiting.

[bucket]

Its interesting the amount of time spent on US politics about Trump and less time on Canadian politics than should be...

The liberals now say they have to wait for witnesses....but its important to remember that they blocked bringing Butts to committee until after JWR had spoke and he had something to say....Wernick had already talked but most had dismissed his testimony after his opening statement.....But interesting they found someone in saskatchewan that had threatened the PM....RCMP didn't wait to long to find the guy....

[the big wheel]

Wheel you are suffering from a combination of TDS and cognitive dissonance if you cant see what the liberals did here.

Let me summarize. They secretly rewrote the law that harper put in to get SNC off scott free, but they screwed that up too so that when their own law was properly applied by JWR, it again barred SNC from a DPA, so then they tried to strong arm her to overrule the prosecution, then fired her and now are trying again to refloat a new DPA or change the contracts ban law directly.

Go ahead defend it and everything SNC has done. Don't use whataboutism, defend your boy and that company. We are waiting.

Hahaha your the one dillusional in what you want to see and what is the reality. I think snc should be investigated everywhere including here where they have major deals. But you won’t agree to that only pick and chose right?

As I ve said that law is retarted but it’s a law your
Hero to the south has needed with his deal maker companies several times. Haha check it out.

They made it law because it’s been happening all along all governments all stripes.

Why did scheer go visit lavallin in the spring of 2018? To build a porch? Hahahaha. Honestly picking and choosing only what you want to see is dillusional. How do you think there were no charges in the sask deals I listed above everyone
Admits knowing there was bukkshit going on. But it’s ok if the guy is wearing your favourite type of flag I guess.

[bucket]

I think it was pointed out that a DPA could be used at any time through a prosecution....if new information came along ....SO...if the dumbass prime minister would have just kept his mouth shut along with the minions....in a few months this would have blown over.....

BUT the dumbass decided to move the AG...JWR ....which wouldn't help her cause of reconciliation....AND he didn't have to move her.....he was just ****ing stupid....sadly that isn't against the law...

[bucket]

Watching CTV question period....is Christi Clark ****ing Trudeau not literally but physically.....she is a lark for Trudeau. ..she is looking for a diplomats position....

I thought Mulcair put forward good comments....

[Horse]

If Stanley was innocent then so is Treadou
They both have a smoking gun,in the stanley case there is a body,did he have the right to kill,no unless you go with justafiable homacide,(whitch they didnt,just a case of flat out descrimination)in whitch case trodeau had a case for justly saving jobs,neither side is right but thats what we have to deal with.
As for the argument of Harper beeing just as bad,does that make any difference,they both used the power that comes with the job.

[bucket]

If Stanley was innocent then so is Treadou
They both have a smoking gun,in the stanley case there is a body,did he have the right to kill,no unless you go with justafiable homacide,(whitch they didnt,just a case of flat out descrimination)in whitch case trodeau had a case for justly saving jobs,neither side is right but thats what we have to deal with.
As for the argument of Harper beeing just as bad,does that make any difference,they both used the power that comes with the job.

The argument for jobs is valid but mentioning that he (Trudeau) was a Quebec MP for papineau is not.....nor is saying there is an election to win....that's political interference....

[burnt]

Here's an addition to this thread to help add a bit more - well, quite a bit more - relevant content; a step-by-step expose' of Butts puppet Trudeau's corruption since the day he was elected.


https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1101963324067966976.html https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1101963324067966976.html

By MP Erin O'Toole: A (somewhat) brief history of Team Trudeau and two major legal matters.

"1/23 Oct 2015 - Justin Trudeau elected Prime Minister and hires key Ontario Liberal Party advisors Gerry Butts & Katie Telford..."

And the rest of the story goes south from there, as the link will document.

Good work by Erin O'Toole.

Harper's Phrase "Just Not Ready" may have been misapplied - it now appears that Trudeau the Empty was indeed ready - ready and waiting to undo everything that is right and good and have it replaced with the corrupt ambitions of his handlers.

The Libranos needed a vacuous egomaniac to accomplish their goals and they found the perfect candidate in the privileged brat that bore P.E.T.'s name, if not his genetics.

[chuckChuck]

Jazz you hold the USA up as an example of good government under Trump and Republicans. How can this be the case if they use 20-40 Deferred Prosecution Agreements per year?

We don't know the details of the case against SNC so it is difficult to know what is appropriate in this case.

What is interesting is that Deferred Prosecution Agreements have heavy deterrents with heavy fines and strong incentives to clean up corruption otherwise they can still be prosecuted criminally if they don't comply.

[furrowtickler]

Jazz you hold the USA up as an example of good government under Trump and Republicans. How can this be the case if they use 20-40 Deferred Prosecution Agreements per year?

We don't know the details of the case against SNC so it is difficult to know what is appropriate in this case.

What is interesting is that Deferred Prosecution Agreements have heavy deterrents with heavy fines and strong incentives to clean up corruption otherwise they can still be prosecuted criminally if they don't comply.

Don’t know the details yet .... 🤣