Trouble for Trudeau - Prime minister's family in receipt of huge amounts of govt funds and lucrative contracts

Tommy Monk wrote:


Paid govt money for public speaking and awarded lucrative govt contracts...


https://www.wsj.com/articles/justin-trudeau-faces-questions-after-contract-awarded-to-charity-with-links-to-family-11596026897

Original Quill wrote:That's nothing compared to Tories/Republicans.  Pay it no mind.

Maddog wrote:

Original Quill wrote:That's nothing compared to Tories/Republicans.  Pay it no mind.

Only a dumb ass says to pay no mind to government corruption.  

Throw them all in jail.  

Original Quill wrote:

Maddog wrote:

Only a dumb ass says to pay no mind to government corruption.  

Throw them all in jail.  

So, Republicans are dumb asses.  After all, they refused to convict Trump on impeachment for the same thing...corruption, use of government resources for personal gain.  Throw them all in jail...not a bad idea.

Maddog wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

So, Republicans are dumb asses.  After all, they refused to convict Trump on impeachment for the same thing...corruption, use of government resources for personal gain.  Throw them all in jail...not a bad idea.

People who defend corruption are dumb asses.  Only one poster has done that on this thread.  

Original Quill wrote:

Maddog wrote:

People who defend corruption are dumb asses.  Only one poster has done that on this thread.  

It's not about posters.  Republicans have defended corruption.  They all belong in jail.

Original Quill wrote:That's nothing compared to Tories/Republicans.  


Pay it no mind.

eddie wrote:

Original Quill wrote:That's nothing compared to Tories/Republicans.  

Pay it no mind.

Why?

Original Quill wrote:

eddie wrote:

Why?

Because Tories/Republicans see it as their right to break the law, and bring corruption into government.

Maddog wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Because Tories/Republicans see it as their right to break the law, and bring corruption into government.

Then why is this happening in a Trudeau administration?

Vox wrote:The SNC-Lavalin case predates Trudeau. But it turned into a scandal under his watch.
SNC-Lavalin is a major engineering and construction firm based in Montreal, Quebec, with operations all over the world.

In 2015, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) — Canada’s police force — alleged that SNC-Lavalin paid bribes to members of the Libyan government, including former dictator Muammar Qaddafi, to the tune of CA$48 million. Officials also alleged that SNC-Lavalin defrauded the Libyan government of nearly CA$130 million — money that was tied to construction projects in the country from 2001 to 2011.

SNC-Lavalin denied these charges, though it has a reputation for shady business practices abroad. But if found guilty in this Libyan case, the company would feel the consequences in Canada. Specifically, SNC-Lavalin would be barred from bidding on any Canadian government contracts for 10 years.

This is a big deal. SNC-Lavalin is involved in some major infrastructure projects in Canada and employs about 9,000 people in the country — a decade-long ban would be detrimental to its domestic business and could potentially result in serious job losses.

And, as mentioned, SNC-Lavalin is based in Quebec. The company is seen as the province’s “crown jewel,” according to the Canadian outlet CTV. Quebec is also a politically important state for Trudeau’s Liberal Party and for the prime minister himself (he represents a constituency there) ahead of a potentially tight federal election in October.

This is the backdrop for the scandal, which broke in February when the Globe and Mail reported that Trudeau’s office (often referred to as PMO, or the prime minister’s office) pressured Wilson-Raybould to intervene in the criminal case against the company. They allegedly pressured her to ask prosecutors to pursue a “deferred prosecution agreement,” which would result in financial penalties against the company rather than a formal prosecution — which would mean no 10-year ban.

These types of deferred-action prosecutions are becoming pretty common in the United States for big corporations, but they were introduced in Canada just last fall. Reports in the Canadian press have indicated that SNC-Lavalin lobbied for this change in the law, and very likely hoped to take advantage of it.

The report in the Globe and Mail relied on anonymous sources but implicated Trudeau and his close aides. The prime minister denied the allegation, and said that neither he nor anyone else in his office “was directed ... to take a decision on this matter.” To be clear, Trudeau didn’t deny talking about the SNC-Lavalin case with his cabinet ministers, but he said he’d never instructed anyone to interfere.

Without getting too deep into Canadian politics, it’s important to point out that in Canada, attorney general and justice minister is one position held by one person, who is also an elected member of Parliament.

So in her role as justice minister, Wilson-Raybould is a member of Trudeau’s cabinet, and it might not be out of the ordinary for the prime minister to discuss legal policy, or even a political or economic problem like the SNC-Lavalin case, among his ministers. But since Wilson-Raybould is also the attorney general, she also has the final say over the country’s prosecutorial arm, which is supposed to be independent of political influence. (This scandal has revived calls to separate the two roles because of the inherent conflict, and Trudeau brought up this conflict at his Thursday press conference.)

Trudeau has admitted he discussed the SNC-Lavalin prosecution with Wilson-Raybould, but said there was no pressure campaign executed by him or anyone close to him, and he’s said the decision on how to handle the company was “hers to make.” Also, nothing changed practically: SNC-Lavalin still faces criminal charges.

There’s a small wrinkle here, though. In early January, before the SNC-Lavalin story went public in February, Wilson-Raybould was moved in a cabinet reshuffle from the role of attorney general and justice minister — where she had served since 2015 — to the role of minister of veterans affairs, which was widely seen as a demotion. Law professor and Liberal MP David Lametti was named the new attorney general and justice minister.

Cabinet reshuffles happen. But Wilson-Raybould was a key member of Trudeau’s gender-balanced, diverse cabinet and a prominent indigenous leader in a government that promised better relations with Canada’s indigenous population. The fact that she was replaced by a white man already didn’t look great, but when reports that Trudeau and his office allegedly pressured Wilson-Raybould over SNC-Lavalin emerged, the personnel shift suddenly looked even worse.

Or at least that’s how the Conservative opposition, specifically leader Andrew Scheer, spun it. He argued that Trudeau demoted Wilson-Raybould because she didn’t give in to his demands on SNC-Lavalin, though there isn’t hard evidence of that.

The scandal spiraled from there. Canada’s independent ethics commissioner announced on February 11 that it would examine the allegations against Trudeau and his office, a probe the prime minister said he supported.

The following day, February 12, Wilson-Raybould abruptly resigned from Trudeau’s cabinet altogether. The House of Commons, Canada’s legislative body, also decided to investigate.

As the pressure intensified, Gerald Butts, a top adviser to Trudeau and a close friend and confidant of the prime minister’s, quit his job as principal secretary on February 18. Butts was implicated in the alleged pressure campaign, and though he denied any involvement in a lengthy resignation letter, he said his presence had become a distraction in government.

“Any accusation that I or the staff put pressure on the attorney general is simply not true,” Butts wrote. “But the fact is that this accusation exists. It cannot and should not take one moment away from the vital work the prime minister and his office is doing for all Canadians.”
https://www.vox.com/2019/3/6/18249949/trudeau-canada-snc-lavalin-scandal-wilson-raybould

"Each of these interactions was a conversation among colleagues about how to tackle a challenging issue,” Trudeau said. “Each came at a time when my staff and I believed that the former minister of justice and attorney general was open to considering other aspects of the public interest. However, I now understand that she saw it differently.”