Total Pageviews

Sunday, March 31, 2019

A must read: What was Jody Wilson-Raybould's reasoning for withholding information from the PMO?

So here's my thinking: there is not a word on that tape where JWR explains why SNC isn't deserving of a DPA. Not one. Except that it might look like it was a partisan decision. In other words, SHE's the one introducing politics into the decision. 1.
Does she say, they don't qualify because of their past actions, or because they haven't changed their corporate ethics or because of their past history? No. She says it's because it could hurt the government. That is the wrong test. 2.
In fact, by saying that she wants to protect the PM, she's making the decision as AG to ignore the merits and make a decision that is purely political. 3.
Wernick keeps saying: the PM wants to know why you aren't willing to use this tool, and that's the explanation she gives him, that she wants to protect JT from accusations of political interference. Does she ever mention the criteria to apply to a decisions like this? No. 4.
He suggests an outside opinion from McLachlin. And she pretends she'll do it (I'll call her right away) when it's clear she has no intention of doing so. Why is he asking? Because she has put forward NO BASIS FOR HER DECISION except not wanting to interfere in a prosecution. 5.
And then he finds out for the first time that there was a DPP memo in September about s. 13 with their reasoning. Has he seen it? He doesn't even know it existed. Meaning she didn't share it with the Clerk or the PM. Are they supposed to be mindreaders??? 6.
Recall also from the Deputy Minister's testimony that Wernick asked for a legal opinion from DOJ setting out options and one was prepared. Did Wernick ever see it? No, because JWR told the DM not to give it to him. Why was that? 7.
I hear on audio a woman who is unethical (she is surreptiously taping Wernick after all); who has withheld pertinent information from the Clerk of the PCO and thereby the PM deliberately, and who is determined that no one is going to challenge her authority. 8.
And all of this -- I'm warning you, you are dangerous ground here, etc. -- jall the veiled threats are coming from HER, if you ask me. He's just trying to figure out what the hell is going on. 9.
I listen to this and all I can do is shake my head. There is a defence lawyer who posted on Twitter about how he had worked with her when she was a Crown and she just didn't *get* the law. This is the clearest display I can see of that. 10.
A good lawyer who is confident of their opinion doesn't hide information from their clients. And they sure as hell don't tape them. She claims that the *political* pressure on her wasn't illegal but was unethical. Well, pot. Kettle. Black. -end.
PS. This call was December 19th. Meaning she had withheld the section 13 memo written by the DPP to justify its decision from Wernick for months. Unbelievable.

No comments:

Post a Comment