Leo Varadkar story in The Village??? - Mod Notes and banned Users in OP updated 16/05

FrancieBrady

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Leo's arrogance on display again. Thinks he's gotten away with it and doesn't see what the fuss was about anyway. Sure he isn't answerable to the plebs, and certainly not SF :rolleyes:

Seems he will be answerable to the Gardai now.

I wonder will he be asked to step aside now?

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Seems he will be answerable to the Gardai now.

I wonder will he be asked to step aside now?

Do you believe everything you read on Twitter?

Cluedo Monopoly

RandomViewer wrote: »

Varadkar has set back union negotiations a few decades, which might endear him with the Alan B'stard wing of FG its going to make things awkward for everyone else

That's not good because the unions have tied up any potential reform in places like the HSE and need to be tackled.

seamus

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Seems he will be answerable to the Gardai now.

I wonder will he be asked to step aside now?

Why would he be asked to step aside?

RandomViewer

costacorta wrote: »

Did you see PD going bright red on tonight show when PB said it to him ? He actually started getting very angry after and lost the plot . But there will always be stuff around for a party who associates with criminals, murderers and bank robbbers ..

More on former FG member and party goer par excellence and his connections to The General, The Monk and Cerberus?

RandomViewer

seamus wrote: »

Why would he be asked to step aside?

Common practice when politician is being investigated

Cluedo Monopoly

costacorta wrote: »

Not at all this time next week we be discussing SF and their hiding of money in NI that was meant to be in the republic . Big scandal coming down the line on SF finances and you heard it here first ..

It might astound you to learn that many of us could not care less what happens in NI.

stockshares

timmyntc wrote: »

Thats between Chay Bowes & MOT, not Varadkar.

Bannasidhe wrote: »

However, the NAGP did not sign up with the Irish Congress of Trade Unions which would have making excluding them impossible and afaik are were not a registered lobby group.

They were excluded as they did not do the paperwork required to get included. No one's fault but their own. The left the IMO as the only officially recognised group and then moaned about it and resorted to using personal friendships and unofficial back channels.

The NAGP are not the victims here of anything but their own hubris.

The real victims are the people who don't have the means to whatsapp the Teesh of the day and get a personal favour on the hush hush.
Or 'clients' as the HSE calls them.

I'm not on their side. Im trying to understand why they were excluded.

Your correct in saying it's their own fault .

I find it strange that they never registered with the ICTU. I don't know what the criteria required to register is but they seemed to know that they wouldn't meet it .

It's very hard to see Varadkar's real motive for passing this Doc was given his Party were totally against the NAGP.

The motive It wasn't to make sure all GPS are included. The Deal was ongoing and as was pointed out earlier there were 35 changes after MOT received it.

Was Varadkar passing info on these changes to IMO?

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

Do you believe everything you read on Twitter?

No, why?

blanch152

smurgen wrote: »

Seems like there is numerous changes between the draft and final draft agreed.

https://twitter.com/gavreilly/status/1324321500716040192?s=19

Didn't know that Pearse could count to 35.

FrancieBrady

seamus wrote: »

Why would he be asked to step aside?

Well it seems he has already deleted official records.

Usually it is asked for to prevent the above or any other interference.

Bannasidhe

blanch152 wrote: »

Didn't know that Pearse could count to 35.

He can count better than former FG minister for Finance Noonan.

timmyntc

RandomViewer wrote: »

Common practice when politician is being investigated

Is it though?

It's a bad idea - if a politician did nothing wrong, but has some false allegations against him, an investigation that will ultimately find no wrongdoing will mean said politician has to stand down.

(Not that I think that would be he outcome in this case - just that innocent until proven guilty should apply even to public office holders, otherwise frivolous investigations could undermine the whole system)

blanch152

seamus wrote: »

Why would he be asked to step aside?

Because some Twitter user says the Gardai are actively investigating him.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

Because some Twitter user says the Gardai are actively investigating him.

The person who made the complaint tweeted it and included the Gardai hashtag in his tweet.

Bannasidhe

blanch152 wrote: »

Because some Twitter user says the Gardai are actively investigating him.

Because the whistleblower who made an official complaint says the Gardai are actively investigating him has a different ring to it eh Blanch.

Tell me - did you dismiss McCabe as well?

seamus

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The person who made the complaint tweeted it and included the Gardai hashtag in his tweet.

The person who made the complaint said it's being "actioned".

That could mean anything from, "There is an active investigation with a codename and an investigation team", to, "The garda wrote it down in his book and said he'd be in touch".

Gatling

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The person who made the complaint tweeted it and included the Gardai hashtag in his tweet.

And that means what exactly ,

He tweeted it the other day too

blanch152

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Because the whistleblower who made an official complaint says the Gardai are actively investigating him has a different ring to it eh Blanch.

Tell me - did you dismiss McCabe as well?

Whistleblower? Not in accordance with Irish legislation.

Floppybits

McMurphy wrote: »

There's a bit of a recurring theme in Ireland to imply the whistleblower might have something to hide or fear.

Again the establishment attack Whistleblowers. We see this with Maurice McCabe where the establishment went out of their way to discredit this man. Luckily this man was smart enough to outsmart them.

The problem in this country is that we hate being exposed and yes I mean the country. We seen it in the 80's with the hepatis B scandal and poor Bridget McCole hounded to her grave by FG, then we seen it with the catholic church and mother and baby homes and I am sure there are many more instances.

It's one of the things that really annoys me about this country that rather than being brave and facing up to the past misdeeds the country would rather tear itself apart and the victims rather than face up to it.

Fann Linn

seamus wrote: »

The person who made the complaint said it's being "actioned".

That could mean anything from, "There is an active investigation with a codename and an investigation team", to, "The garda wrote it down in his book and said he'd be in touch".

It will be investigated, even if it's only to reassure Drew Harris that something is not gonna crop up and kick him in the arse further down the line.

FrancieBrady

Gatling wrote: »

And that means what exactly ,

He tweeted it the other day too

No he dodn't. He tweeted that he had made two detailed complaints.

Today he tweeted that the Gardai have informed him that one of them the first one has been actioned.

He included the Garda hashtag in his tweet so I see no reason to disbelieve him

If I am wrong, fair enough.

Bannasidhe

blanch152 wrote: »

Whistleblower? Not in accordance with Irish legislation.

Now you want to be strict about what it says in Irish legislation?

RandomViewer

Bannasidhe wrote: »

He can count better than former FG minister for Finance Noonan.

If things keep getting iffy for the leaky one the freezer might have to be defrosted, big day out

blanch152

shatners bassoon wrote: »

To definitively claim that 'a reference to a Cabinet decision that the Government should continue engagement with the NAGP...is sufficient authorisation' for Leo to send a confidential document directly to a friend in that organisation without the knowledge of the other parties involved is ridiculous.

How is it ridiculous?

Government decision to continue engagement with the NAGP. Taoiseach engages with the NAGP. All perfectly legal.

Issue around how Taoiseach engaged with the NAGP. Not appropriate the way he did it, but far from illegal.

spakman

FrancieBrady wrote: »

No he dodn't. He tweeted that he had made two detailed complaints.

Today he tweeted that the Gardai have informed him that one of them the first one has been actioned.

He included the Garda hashtag in his tweet so I see no reason to disbelieve him

If I am wrong, fair enough.

Why do you keep going on about including hte garda hashtag, sure anyone can do that - it means absolutely nothing!

blanch152

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Now you want to be strict about what it says in Irish legislation?

I have been strict about what it says in the legislation all along.

Posters having being throwing out nonsense about the Corruption Acts and the Official Secrets Act for days now, and I have been pointing out the nonsense that there was no breach of legislation.

McMurphy

spakman wrote: »

Why do you keep going on about including hte garda hashtag, sure anyone can do that - it means absolutely nothing!

The Garda # would indicate he is cocksure of his tweet and claim they're actioning it, looks to me like he's letting them know he's putting some correspondence he got from them in the public domain.

No big deal either way if Leo has done nothing wrong.

Bannasidhe

blanch152 wrote: »

I have been strict about what it says in the legislation all along.

Posters having being throwing out nonsense about the Corruption Acts and the Official Secrets Act for days now, and I have been pointing out the nonsense that there was no breach of legislation.

As the matter has not (yet) been investigated you cannot say with certainty there was no breach of legislation.
You saying there absolutely wasn't is just as much opinion as those who say there was - so by your definition 'nonsense'.

There are senior councils who say there was a breach. Personally, I consider their legal opinion to be superior to yours - no offence intended, just I do not know what legal qualifications you possess, and my experience of you is as a staunch defender of Fine Gael.

stockshares

Lads the thread is like a bad episode of the Matt Cooper show with the constant back and forth between all sides