Discussion:
Mike Duffy
(too old to reply)
l***@fl.it
2017-08-24 21:22:14 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
My god Harper has a lot to answer for appointing that slug of a man to
the Senate. Now he's decided we should pay him some more. Lying,
cheating mother fucker.
Jake
2017-08-25 00:44:14 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by l***@fl.it
My god Harper has a lot to answer for appointing that slug of a man to
the Senate. Now he's decided we should pay him some more. Lying,
cheating mother fucker.
What part of NOT GUILTY don't you understand, Bitch ??
Jack
2017-08-25 11:48:26 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jake
Post by l***@fl.it
My god Harper has a lot to answer for appointing that slug of a man to
the Senate. Now he's decided we should pay him some more. Lying,
cheating mother fucker.
What part of NOT GUILTY don't you understand, Bitch ??
Me twin brother Jake is calling the Duff a bitch???!! Oh, i gets it now.
Duff ain't a gay rightie likee we are and he's not grovelling over Pres.
Trump,. likes we are. So Jake is going on the attack!!!!! He dont like
straight people at all!!!!!

- A gay Republican is a 'tremendous' addition to my staff. I'm like, gay
too! - Pres. Trump
HRM Resident
2017-08-25 12:07:05 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by l***@fl.it
My god Harper has a lot to answer for appointing that slug of a man to
the Senate. Now he's decided we should pay him some more. Lying,
cheating mother fucker.
Now now! Harper's gone. Finished. D-E-F-E-A-T-E-D! No need to
call him a mother fucker. Although I heard the Alberta government has
banned him from further camping after a lot of people said he started
that Fort MacMurry fire last year.

Too bad the BC government didn't put two and two together and do the
same. Now they have fires everywhere. I heard Harper's banned from
even entering Saskatchewan. One smart move by Brad Wall. I think
Harper has a scorched earth policy, but I might be wrong.
--
HRM Resident
l***@fl.it
2017-08-25 12:31:21 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Fri, 25 Aug 2017 09:07:05 -0300, HRM Resident
Post by HRM Resident
Post by l***@fl.it
My god Harper has a lot to answer for appointing that slug of a man to
the Senate. Now he's decided we should pay him some more. Lying,
cheating mother fucker.
Now now! Harper's gone. Finished. D-E-F-E-A-T-E-D! No need to
call him a mother fucker. Although I heard the Alberta government has
banned him from further camping after a lot of people said he started
that Fort MacMurry fire last year.
Too bad the BC government didn't put two and two together and do the
same. Now they have fires everywhere. I heard Harper's banned from
even entering Saskatchewan. One smart move by Brad Wall. I think
Harper has a scorched earth policy, but I might be wrong.
Yeah, you're right but why on earth did he appoint media people to the
senate? Were they supposed to be the smile he was never capable of
giving?
HRM Resident
2017-08-25 13:51:40 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by l***@fl.it
On Fri, 25 Aug 2017 09:07:05 -0300, HRM Resident
Post by HRM Resident
Post by l***@fl.it
My god Harper has a lot to answer for appointing that slug of a man to
the Senate. Now he's decided we should pay him some more. Lying,
cheating mother fucker.
Now now! Harper's gone. Finished. D-E-F-E-A-T-E-D! No need to
call him a mother fucker. Although I heard the Alberta government has
banned him from further camping after a lot of people said he started
that Fort MacMurry fire last year.
Too bad the BC government didn't put two and two together and do the
same. Now they have fires everywhere. I heard Harper's banned from
even entering Saskatchewan. One smart move by Brad Wall. I think
Harper has a scorched earth policy, but I might be wrong.
Yeah, you're right but why on earth did he appoint media people to the
senate? Were they supposed to be the smile he was never capable of
giving?
No one knows what Harper did/does or why. It's just one of those
mysteries of the ages . . . an eternal enigma that came and thankfully
went.

A lot of people are saying he used his severance pay to buy a case
of matches. That's an oddball purchase, but I'm hearing that's what he
did. Maybe it's gossip. Go figure. :-)
--
HRM Resident
MYOB@home.com
2017-08-27 15:58:41 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by l***@fl.it
My god Harper has a lot to answer for appointing that slug of a man to
the Senate. Now he's decided we should pay him some more. Lying,
cheating mother fucker.
Now tell us how you REALLY feel <g> ! Actually. I agree. He nay have been found not guilty but that's not the same as innocent. It just means the facts weren't proven .....just like the prosecutor couldn't PROVE that OJ murdered Nicole and Ron
Jake
2017-08-27 17:08:39 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by ***@home.com
Post by l***@fl.it
My god Harper has a lot to answer for appointing that slug of a man to
the Senate. Now he's decided we should pay him some more. Lying,
cheating mother fucker.
Now tell us how you REALLY feel <g> ! Actually. I agree. He nay have been found not guilty but that's not the same as innocent. It just means the facts weren't proven .....just like the prosecutor couldn't PROVE that OJ murdered Nicole and Ron
The prosecutor DID prove OJ did it..but all the black jury focused on was a few comments by Mark Fuhrman...
MYOB@home.com
2017-08-28 22:11:05 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jake
Post by ***@home.com
Post by l***@fl.it
My god Harper has a lot to answer for appointing that slug of a man to
the Senate. Now he's decided we should pay him some more. Lying,
cheating mother fucker.
Now tell us how you REALLY feel <g> ! Actually. I agree. He nay have been found not guilty but that's not the same as innocent. It just means the facts weren't proven .....just like the prosecutor couldn't PROVE that OJ murdered Nicole and Ron
The prosecutor DID prove OJ did it..but all the black jury focused on was a few comments by Mark Fuhrman...
The defense called into question the reliability of testimony provided and evidence collected by a racist police officer. It was all they needed for reasonable doubt. Thinking or knowing that someone did something and having the evidence to prove it in a court of law are two different things. Same applies to the Casey Anthony case
HRM Resident
2017-08-27 18:15:55 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by ***@home.com
Post by l***@fl.it
My god Harper has a lot to answer for appointing that slug of a man to
the Senate. Now he's decided we should pay him some more. Lying,
cheating mother fucker.
Now tell us how you REALLY feel <g> ! Actually. I agree. He nay have been found not guilty but that's not the same as innocent. It just means the facts weren't proven .....just like the prosecutor couldn't PROVE that OJ murdered Nicole and Ron
I read an article somewhere (CBC? CTV?) from some professor of law
who said the odds of Duffy prevailing are unlikely. I'll look again . .
. here it is:

<http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/mike-duffy-8-million-not-easy-1.4262689>

The main point(s) are in this quote from the story:

"The system makes it really hard to allege a violation of the Charter
based simply on a suspension from a position, loss of pay and the mere
fact you were charged for a crime; it's hard to argue that leads to a
Charter violation when you're ultimately acquitted and your job is
reinstated," Carissima Mathen, an associate professor of constitutional
law at the University of Ottawa, said in an interview.

"The government enjoys a significant level of immunity."

I tend to agree . . . if I get a traffic ticket and fight it (and
win), the crown isn't going to give me a lot of money for beating a
speeding ticket and pay for my day off work to fight it!

I suppose if one hired Eddie Greenspan (assuming he were still
alive), Marie Henein and Donald Bayne to all work together on your
behalf, and the defence attorneys were all alcoholics, you might have a
chance . . .
--
HRM Resident
Jake
2017-08-27 19:00:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by HRM Resident
Post by ***@home.com
Post by l***@fl.it
My god Harper has a lot to answer for appointing that slug of a man to
the Senate. Now he's decided we should pay him some more. Lying,
cheating mother fucker.
Now tell us how you REALLY feel <g> ! Actually. I agree. He nay have been found not guilty but that's not the same as innocent. It just means the facts weren't proven .....just like the prosecutor couldn't PROVE that OJ murdered Nicole and Ron
I read an article somewhere (CBC? CTV?) from some professor of law
who said the odds of Duffy prevailing are unlikely. I'll look again . .
<http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/mike-duffy-8-million-not-easy-1.4262689>
"The system makes it really hard to allege a violation of the Charter
based simply on a suspension from a position, loss of pay and the mere
fact you were charged for a crime; it's hard to argue that leads to a
Charter violation when you're ultimately acquitted and your job is
reinstated," Carissima Mathen, an associate professor of constitutional
law at the University of Ottawa, said in an interview.
"The government enjoys a significant level of immunity."
I tend to agree . . . if I get a traffic ticket and fight it (and
win), the crown isn't going to give me a lot of money for beating a
speeding ticket and pay for my day off work to fight it!
I suppose if one hired Eddie Greenspan (assuming he were still
alive), Marie Henein and Donald Bayne to all work together on your
behalf, and the defence attorneys were all alcoholics, you might have a
chance . . .
--
HRM Resident
Junior and his band of fucking incompetent fools had no issue paying off a convicted terrorist....Old Duff's should be a cakewalk...
Harvey Fudd
2017-08-27 20:18:23 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jake
Post by HRM Resident
Post by ***@home.com
Post by l***@fl.it
My god Harper has a lot to answer for appointing that slug of a man to
the Senate. Now he's decided we should pay him some more. Lying,
cheating mother fucker.
Now tell us how you REALLY feel <g> ! Actually. I agree. He nay have
been found not guilty but that's not the same as innocent. It just
means the facts weren't proven .....just like the prosecutor couldn't
PROVE that OJ murdered Nicole and Ron
I read an article somewhere (CBC? CTV?) from some professor of law
who said the odds of Duffy prevailing are unlikely. I'll look again . .
<http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/mike-duffy-8-million-not-easy-1.4262689>
"The system makes it really hard to allege a violation of the Charter
based simply on a suspension from a position, loss of pay and the mere
fact you were charged for a crime; it's hard to argue that leads to a
Charter violation when you're ultimately acquitted and your job is
reinstated," Carissima Mathen, an associate professor of constitutional
law at the University of Ottawa, said in an interview.
"The government enjoys a significant level of immunity."
I tend to agree . . . if I get a traffic ticket and fight it (and
win), the crown isn't going to give me a lot of money for beating a
speeding ticket and pay for my day off work to fight it!
I suppose if one hired Eddie Greenspan (assuming he were still
alive), Marie Henein and Donald Bayne to all work together on your
behalf, and the defence attorneys were all alcoholics, you might have a
chance . . .
--
HRM Resident
Junior and his band of fucking incompetent fools had no issue paying off
a convicted terrorist....Old Duff's should be a cakewalk...
I thought I made it crystal clear to you and Jack to shut up.

Carter
Harvey Fudd
2017-08-28 08:59:56 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Harvey Fudd
Post by Jake
Post by HRM Resident
Post by ***@home.com
Post by l***@fl.it
My god Harper has a lot to answer for appointing that slug of a man to
the Senate. Now he's decided we should pay him some more. Lying,
cheating mother fucker.
Now tell us how you REALLY feel <g> ! Actually. I agree. He nay have
been found not guilty but that's not the same as innocent. It just
means the facts weren't proven .....just like the prosecutor couldn't
PROVE that OJ murdered Nicole and Ron
I read an article somewhere (CBC? CTV?) from some professor of law
who said the odds of Duffy prevailing are unlikely. I'll look again . .
<http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/mike-duffy-8-million-not-easy-1.4262689>
"The system makes it really hard to allege a violation of the Charter
based simply on a suspension from a position, loss of pay and the mere
fact you were charged for a crime; it's hard to argue that leads to a
Charter violation when you're ultimately acquitted and your job is
reinstated," Carissima Mathen, an associate professor of constitutional
law at the University of Ottawa, said in an interview.
"The government enjoys a significant level of immunity."
I tend to agree . . . if I get a traffic ticket and fight it (and
win), the crown isn't going to give me a lot of money for beating a
speeding ticket and pay for my day off work to fight it!
I suppose if one hired Eddie Greenspan (assuming he were still
alive), Marie Henein and Donald Bayne to all work together on your
behalf, and the defence attorneys were all alcoholics, you might have a
chance . . .
--
HRM Resident
Junior and his band of fucking incompetent fools had no issue paying off
a convicted terrorist....Old Duff's should be a cakewalk...
I thought I made it crystal clear to you and Jack to shut up.
Carter
Seeing as you chose not to respond, I'll take that as an apology and
assurance you won't post here again.

I protected your homosexuality while we were enlisted. I saved your
careers. Now that I have to live in an assisted living residence, I don't
want it known that I too am a homosexual. If you mention it again, you will
have to "lawyer up."

I don't think any of us want that, so do as I tell you.

Carter
l***@fl.it
2017-08-28 10:36:52 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sun, 27 Aug 2017 15:15:55 -0300, HRM Resident
Post by HRM Resident
Post by ***@home.com
Post by l***@fl.it
My god Harper has a lot to answer for appointing that slug of a man to
the Senate. Now he's decided we should pay him some more. Lying,
cheating mother fucker.
Now tell us how you REALLY feel <g> ! Actually. I agree. He nay have been found not guilty but that's not the same as innocent. It just means the facts weren't proven .....just like the prosecutor couldn't PROVE that OJ murdered Nicole and Ron
I read an article somewhere (CBC? CTV?) from some professor of law
who said the odds of Duffy prevailing are unlikely. I'll look again . .
<http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/mike-duffy-8-million-not-easy-1.4262689>
"The system makes it really hard to allege a violation of the Charter
based simply on a suspension from a position, loss of pay and the mere
fact you were charged for a crime; it's hard to argue that leads to a
Charter violation when you're ultimately acquitted and your job is
reinstated," Carissima Mathen, an associate professor of constitutional
law at the University of Ottawa, said in an interview.
"The government enjoys a significant level of immunity."
I tend to agree . . . if I get a traffic ticket and fight it (and
win), the crown isn't going to give me a lot of money for beating a
speeding ticket and pay for my day off work to fight it!
I suppose if one hired Eddie Greenspan (assuming he were still
alive), Marie Henein and Donald Bayne to all work together on your
behalf, and the defence attorneys were all alcoholics, you might have a
chance . . .
Hopefully he will not prevail - after all - everything was restored to
him.
Loading...