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

tobsey

Shebean wrote: »

He wasn't health minister, involved in or a party to the negotiations between the IMO and the health department when he obtained a confidential negotiation document and passed it to his friend.
It's highly naïve to think a man under criminal investigation being actively involved with colleagues on a daily basis and a party leader in government won't stifle or hinder people coming forward fearing retribution. And that's not even accusing him of trying to.

Do you really want to live in a democracy where an elected official has to step down when a case is being investigated against them? There haven’t even been any charges brought. Can you not see how that would be a threat to democracy if the police had to act on a complaint and then a politician had to step down.

Suckit

tobsey wrote: »

Do you really want to live in a democracy where an elected official has to step down when a case is being investigated against them? There haven’t even been any charges brought. Can you not see how that would be a threat to democracy if the police had to act on a complaint and then a politician had to step down.

Nobody is suggesting that he steps down.
It is suggested that he should step aside during the investigation. It is also the right thing to do in a situation like this. Whether or not Leo does the right thing is another matter.

Fann Linn

blanch152 wrote: »

He could easily taint any investigation? What sort of nonsense is that? It is not like he is the Minister for Justice or sits on a policing board and can influence what the police do.

Was it not Varadkar who said to McEntee that Woulfe would make a good Supreme Court Judge or words to that effect?

McMurphy

tobsey wrote: »

Do you really want to live in a democracy where an elected official has to step down when a case is being investigated against them? There haven’t even been any charges brought. Can you not see how that would be a threat to democracy if the police had to act on a complaint and then a politician had to step down.

You're trying to gloss over stuff here.

It's not just a case of "a complaint having being made" against Leo, the complaint was made, preliminary investigation took place, and have since been upgraded to a criminal investigation.

Meaning the police definitely have found evidence to take the complaint seriously at least.

Let me ask you, if your elderly parent or young child made cruelty allegations against their carer, would you be happy for that carer to remain in place, being their sole carers whilst they were investigated for the cruelty allegations made by your elderly parent or young child?

Brendan Bendar

McMurphy wrote: »

You're trying to gloss over stuff here.

It's not just a case of "a complaint having being made" against Leo, the complaint was made, preliminary investigation took place, and have since been upgraded to a criminal investigation.

Meaning the police definitely have found evidence to take the complaint seriously at least.

Let me ask you, if your elderly parent or young child made cruelty allegations against their carer, would you be happy for that carer to remain in place, being their sole carers whilst they were investigated for the cruelty allegations made by your elderly parent or young child?

Veering into the realms of mysticism and bong pipes now Randal.

Try to stay in some state of reality.

McMurphy

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Veering into the realms of mysticism and bong pipes now Randal.

Try to stay in some state of reality.

I don't think I am at all, and it's not the first time it's been asked in this thread, why would anyone leave someone, who is the subject of an investigation in place at their role where they could interfere with the proceedings of that investigation?

Doesn't matter if it's a politician, or a carer, if they are technically able to interfere with the investigation, you ask them to step aside until the investigation concludes.

I think it's mainly the diehard Leoites that disagree with him being asked to step aside here btw, which is understandable as he's "there guy so to speak", but it doesn't mean it's ok.

McMurphy

McMurphy wrote: »

I think it's mainly the diehard Leoites that disagree with him being asked to step aside.

No, that would be the government
Their strategy is to ignore spurious complaints while the process that deals with them plays out
Meanwhile the complainants and their actors furiously dig up as many names who may have seen the file to keep the Gardai interviewing and lengthen the process as possible
Understandable as when the investigation inevitably ends in my opinion with no charges, there may be slander suits if Leo isn't the bigger man
I'd say he will be though

FrancieBrady

Marine Layer wrote: »

No, that would be the government
Their strategy is to ignore spurious complaints while the process that deals with them plays out
Meanwhile the complainants and their actors furiously dig up as many names who may have seen the file to keep the Gardai interviewing and lengthen the process as possible
Understandable as when the investigation inevitably ends in my opinion with no charges, there may be slander suits if Leo isn't the bigger man
I'd say he will be though

Look, I think it has been adequately pointed out that claiming it is a 'spuious claim' is a politically biased punt.

You cannot be seriously saying that you or even a government can decide that a complaint is 'spurious' before it is investigated?

You are taking a 'punt' on this, please be decent and state it with the three letter...'IMO' before your politically biased punt/bet/hope/ etc.

McMurphy

Marine Layer wrote: »

No, that would be the government
Their strategy is to ignore spurious complaints while the process that deals with them plays out
Meanwhile the complainants and their actors furiously dig up as many names who may have seen the file to keep the Gardai interviewing and lengthen the process as possible
Understandable as when the investigation inevitably ends in my opinion with no charges, there may be slander suits if Leo isn't the bigger man
I'd say he will be though

We've been over this,

Maybe you're not up to speed on the definition of "spurious", as far as I know, spurious relates to something that's not genuine, or its false/fake.

I believe I had to point this out to Maryanne before btw, but here goes again.

The guards have upgraded the preliminary investigation to the full blown criminal one.

And the elephant in the room is obviously that Leo apologised FFS. Try to keep abreast of developments marine, it's not that difficult tbh.

You may argue the toss over whether Leo commited an illegal act if you want, and that's ultimately what the DPP will look at, and a court will decide.

However, saying the complaint is "spurious" is absolutely arse biscuit stuff. See above ref criminal investigation and apology.

As for the slander..... Yeah I'm willing to take a punt Leo will stay away from that, thank you very much.

shtpEdthePlum

I wonder if I said sorry for shoplifting, would I be left off?

skimpydoo

shtpEdthePlum wrote: »

I wonder if I said sorry for shoplifting, would I be left off?

You would be sent to Botany Bay.

McMurphy

McMurphy wrote: »

We've been over this,

Maybe you're not up to speed on the definition of "spurious", as far as I know, spurious relates to something that's not genuine, or its false/fake.

I believe I had to point this out to Maryanne before btw, but here goes again.

The guards have upgraded the preliminary investigation to the full blown criminal one.

And the elephant in the room is obviously that Leo apologised FFS. Try to keep abreast of developments marine, it's not that difficult tbh.

You may argue the toss over whether Leo commited an illegal act if you want, and that's ultimately what the DPP will look at, and a court will decide.

However, saying the complaint is "spurious" is absolutely arse biscuit stuff. See above ref criminal investigation and apology.

As for the slander..... Yeah I'm willing to take a punt Leo will stay away from that, thank you very much.

The gardai investigating the matter thoroughly is independent of whether the governments opinion is that the complaints are spurious
Ultimately if there's no charge, they will be vindicated in that view.
I believe they will be
You and a cohort of anti Vradakar posters are maintaining a position here of the opposite
Whatever motive you have for that is your own and vice versa

Incidently when you say 'and a court will decide', the correct turn of phrase is 'or a court will decide' because for the latter you need charges and I think we both know our respective positions on that prospect

McMurphy

Marine Layer wrote: »

Incidently when you say 'and a court will decide', the correct turn of phrase is 'or a court will decide' because for the latter you need charges and I think we both know our respective positions on that prospect

No, I mean exactly what I said - "DPP will look at, and a court will decide".

I don't believe folk would be so pedantic on this tbh, as I said, the DPP decide whether a crime might have been committed, and a court will then decide.

Obviously charges need to be brought for the court to decide....... Hence why I mentioned the DPP. If the DPP decide not to bring forward a prosecution, then obviously there's no court involvement. Jeez you're hard work at the pedanticism.


I

Well, lads. Has Leo been jailed yet?

golfball37

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Well, lads. Has Leo been jailed yet?

SF are Ten points ahead of FG in an opinion poll tomorrow. Whatever about jail he needs to go as FG leader

ThunbergsAreGo

shtpEdthePlum wrote: »

I wonder if I said sorry for shoplifting, would I be left off?

Probably...

golfball37

golfball37 wrote: »

SF are Ten points ahead of FG in an opinion poll tomorrow. Whatever about jail he needs to go as FG leader

Maybe no harm. I think SF might want to be careful what they wish for, Coveny leading in the next election could do very well

Brendan Bendar

shtpEdthePlum wrote: »

I wonder if I said sorry for shoplifting, would I be left off?

Left off where?

JeffKenna

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Well, lads. Has Leo been jailed yet?

I'm really beginning to think that yourself and a few others are on the Sinn Féin payroll. It doesn't make any sense to resurrect a thread after 3 weeks with a comment like that.

McMurphy

JeffKenna wrote: »

I'm really beginning to think that yourself and a few others are on the Sinn Féin payroll. It doesn't make any sense to resurrect a thread after 3 weeks with a comment like that.

It does if you look at the timing.....

Barely an hour after this was posted

https://twitter.com/gavreilly/status/1403805911760637956?s=19

, up pops the distractionary stuff. It's the classic example of acting the internet rodeo clown.

McMurphy

It hasn't gone away you know..... People rightly asking questions about why moving at a snails pace....

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/questions-about-delay-in-leo-varadkar-leak-inquiry-rffsk0wzv

Varadkar is the subject of a criminal investigation into the leaking in 2019 of a draft contract between the Department of Health and the Irish Medical Organisation (IMO) to Maitiú Ó Tuathail, then president of the rival National Association of GPs. The investigation is focusing on possible breaches of the Criminal Justice (Corruption Offences) Act 2018, which makes it an offence for politicians to provide documents that bestow influence to friends. The tanaiste is also under investigation for possible breaches of data protection regulations.

Varadkar was questioned by detectives from the National Bureau of Criminal Investigation (NBCI) on April 9 about the disclosure of the draft contract.

Varadkar, who has admitted he provided a copy of the document to Ó Tuathail when he was taoiseach, told gardai he did not realise his actions might constitute an offence but acknowledged the draft contract was marked “confidential”. He has rejected any suggestion that he had anything to gain personally from its disclosure.

Ó Tuathail was also interviewed by gardai and is thought to have made certain admissions. Both men denied knowingly breaking any law.

The NBCI is said to have amassed a large quantity of information on communications between Varadkar and Ó Tuathail and other associates who received copies of the draft. Mobile phones used by Varadkar, Ó Tuathail and other witnesses were examined. The garda inquiry also examined traffic on unregistered mobile phones between people connected to the inquiry, which sources say has delayed the pace of the investigation.

Martin Kenny, the Sinn Fein spokesman on justice issues, said the public had expected this inquiry to be dealt with urgently due to public concern, and he could not understand why it has still not concluded.

“While we do understand the gardai need to investigate this matter rigorously and properly, no one expects there to be delays, especially because Leo Varadkar is a member of the government. It would reflect very badly if the accusation was to be made that it was being held up,” he said.

Catherine Murphy, the co-leader of the Social Democrats, said the public expected a file on the case to be sent as quickly as possible to the DPP’s office, given what was involved. “There were admissions made in this case which would lead everyone to suspect it would have been simple. I am surprised the file has not already been sent,” she said.

McMurphy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117723388#Comment_117723388

Varadkar, who has admitted he provided a copy of the document to Ó Tuathail when he was taoiseach, told gardai he did not realise his actions might constitute an offence but acknowledged the draft contract was marked “confidential”. He has rejected any suggestion that he had anything to gain personally from its disclosure.

I wonder if Leo ever heard of "Ignorantia juris non excusat" - nice to see he admitted knowing it was confidential though, despite the deniers on here preaching otherwise.

Yer man Dr zero craic has been keeping a very low profile in recent months. He was a media darling this time last year

mariab21

Screenshot_20210808_161900_com.twitter.android.jpg

From today's independent. Burner phones and all Leo and his not friend were using

FrancieBrady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117724113#Comment_117724113

Is the suggestion here that Varadkar was communicating on burner phones?

mariab21

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117724433#Comment_117724433

Well it seems unregistered mobiles are being investigated and burners are what they call these phones criminals used

Suckit

Unregistered phones were being used, but obviously they can't say 'who' was using them. That and other factors are what is causing the delay with the criminal investigation into this.

I can't imagine Europe will be welcoming him with open arms by the time his continuous trail of self destruction has finished coming out. Even before.

It may be time to look at plan b.

skimpydoo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117725657#Comment_117725657

Is there a plan b?

JP Liz V1

Not so nice photo of him nose picking at a UK hoopla festival doing the rounds

Floppybits

More do as we say not as we do from FFG. He has probably now put an end to the rest of the restrictions. You would think he would avoid getting caught in something like this especially after the Merrion crap