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

joemurt wrote: »

You don't understand how Varadkar would or could benefit personally, professionally or politically for being seen to negotiate a government contract successfully?



Strange.



If the GP's had rejected the contract and went on national strike would this benefit or damage Varadkar and Fine Gael?



This is a criminal matter.

Gas really how you conflate with the government trying to get the other side to agree to a new agreement, by simply providing it to them, is somehow a criminal matter because it could benefit the Government. Of course giving the agreement to the other side would benefit the Government. That's the point.

How is that criminal? Repeatedly saying it's a criminal matter doesnt make it so, unless you back it up. Even if you type it in bold.

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Why do you think Leo didn't just email the agreement to his mate from his official email address?

If the deal was done and made public as the Leo supporters are saying then why didn't Leo just tell his mate where to go to get them or why didn't varadkar just instruct one of his many advisors, aids or civil servants to have his mate sent the details through the proper channels? This defence that they deal was done and was public is not washing then why all this back channel crap?

THE_SHEEP wrote: »

Ah , the problem is , you don't understand the situation .

His behaviors are excusable as he's gay , and the son of an immigrant !!

( Wink wink , Nod Nod !! )

Or that its FG and because its FG the rules do not apply to them.

Banana Republic 1 wrote: »

When you joined FG was there a complicated hazing process or just a straight forward animal sacrifice.

I am usually a FG voter, does that make my arguments less valid than a FF, SF or any other parties? I’m undecided if there was an election tomorrow on who I would support as I don’t agree with lockdown as a strategy to control Covid long term. The money will just run out.

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Of all the things to finish varadkar,never taught it would be plain old-fashioned corruption and cronyism in the end


He's burnt too many bridges and now other than the most deluded...noone is defending this......even harmless timmy dooley stuck the knife in last night


Has a single elected member of FG come put publically to back him??

Intriguing actually, how quite FG TD'S have been, it also let slip (I wonder from whom), that Simon Harris, the actual Health Minister at the time & current "wannabe" health Minister, knew nothing about the offending documents sent to Leo's medical buddy.

Me thinks Leo has single handily and quite bizzarely burned a lot of bridges, both in his own party and elsewhere, he's clearly on his own in this latest debacle albeit a tiresome pile of nonsense, but yet strangely quite gratifying to see Smug Leo on the defensive.

[Deleted User] wrote: »

TD paul murphy of all people :eek: outlines this v.well in a statement last night

Section 7,criminal offences act 2018....an irish offial who uses confidemtial info obtained in course of their office to benefit themselves,or another person is breaking the law

He’s such an upstanding citizen of this country, encouraging protestors to barricade in Joan Burton into a Garda car and all sorts of non peaceful ‘protests’, I wonder did he support people protesting outside Simon Harris’ house when they had a new baby.

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

I don't see how this fits here, given what was provided? I think the likes of Paul Murphy and others need to take a step back here and separate Varadkar from the chain of events. Review the facts in isolation without bringing their opinion of the man into it.

Leo's response was the act refers to Public Servants, Elected representatives of Dail Eireann are apparently exempt as are not public servants. Whilst possibly correct, quite a Bizzare excuse. I would have thought, albeit not always the case, TDS are supposed to be public servants.

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

Ask Leo.

Perhaps that's the only final version he had. Not everything needs to have a sinister reason by default.

You'd think that he would have explained that in his very long press release yesterday, if there was a non sinister explanation, given that he's had a few days to get his story straight.

And even if that was the only final version, why do you think that he sent a paper version to a home address, instead of getting it scanned and sent electronically?

joemurt wrote: »

The negotiations were not complete and the deal had not been signed off on as has been highlighted repeatedly by the likes of Chambers, Oreilly, Grace Moore and others on twitter. So again you are wrong.



Golden rule - just because Varadkar says something is x doesn't actually make it x. The negotiations were still active.



Stop replying in bad faith. You need a mod warning for continually ignoring peoples replies.


Raids would be appropriate if their is a pattern of criminal behaviour regards goverment or EU documents that are confidential being mishandled. Is there a pattern of Fine Gael mishandling confidential documents? There seems to be. Is it standard practice in FG. One way to find out. Fine Gael is not above the State. Accountability needs to be seen to happen. Starting with the Garda knocking on doors.


''Did he go about it the wrong way? Yes'' Yes but no.........untouchables right?.......

You need to calm down a bit. Backseat modding won't go down well on here, so you should probably cut that out if you plan on staying around. Given you are brand new to boards, I can help you out - there is a charter in each forum that should be read and followed.

Here is the IMO statement from 5 April, confirming an agreement had been reached, prior to the document being shared:

https://www.imo.ie/news-media/news-press-releases/2019/statement-imo-reaches-210/index.xml

Want to say I'm wrong again?

Cute Hoor wrote: »

No, the real story here is that Varadkar gave an official Government document marked 'Confidential / not for circulation' to a buddy, simple as.
Do people not understand the meaning of CONFIDENTIAL
Do people not understand the meaning of NOT FOR CIRCULATION

Totally agree.

I would in normally be sympathetic to Fine Gael but this is the crux of the issue.

The conflicting accounts re the timelines needs clarification.

Leo Varadakar should not have passed on a document confidential/not for circulation irrespective of whither it was at that point in time ( his account/timeline proves correct ) commercially sensitive.

""Stephen Donnelly, then in opposition" clearly stated as opposition health spokesperson "he had no sight or copy of the offending document in the Month of April, suggesting the opposite of what Leo stated, namely the document was widely circulated and in the public domain."

The tanaiste (then Taoiseach) in addition undermined his fellow minister Simon Harris.

Perplexed as to the motivation behind the leak as NAGPI ( that appears to have folded due to clinical governance issues ) was not an official trade union/negotiating partner ?

Was this a bit of one upmanship,an internecine warfare between 2 medical respresentative bodies striving to recruit new members?

NAGPI had 40% of the membership versus 20% in the IMO.

Or simply bringing the majority of GPs on board?

circadian wrote: »

I find it interesting that many posters who would usually call fake news, complain about "leftists" etc are taking a story from a left leaning publication and running with it without questioning the accuracy as they would if it were an article about someone further to the right.

Did you not read where Varadkar admitted in his statement yesterday that he gave the official Government document marked 'Confidential / not for circulation' to his buddy, what has that got to do with left, right, centre, whatever, he admitted it

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

Are you claiming the IMO statement from 5 April has been faked?

Jaez, the losing bidder was sent the contract before the winner?
Leo got caught out here, there's no deflecting that. Not best practice would be a mild way of putting it.

Deleted User wrote: »

Yet this deal wasnt published until may 18th?

That seems to be correct.

The deal was done, it's outline was published, but the full detail wasn't published until later.

The Taoiseach decided to provide the details of the done deal to what was the largest GP representative body (or, if you're in spin mode - his mate).

I can see a possible misdemeanor here - I'm struggling to see a high crime.

A guy on TV3 this morning talking about it said that this is not the type of story that the public will be interested in. Seems like the Leo lackeys have been sent out to he media today to do their stuff.