Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

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

1…119120122124125…416

Comments

  • #3632
    WicklaWolf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 47 ✭WicklaWolf


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    in fairness they would downplay it. they dont want the leaks that benefit them to dry up. they are not impartial observers.


    Agreed. Journalists are not impartial observers here. They are not quite grasping why people are so concerned with this leak.


  • #3633
    James Brown
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,013 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    blanch152 wrote: »
    You said he broke with a protocol.

    What protocol was that? Either there is one, and you can provide a link to it, or there isn't one, and you made it up.

    Simple as.

    You can quote that of course? :)

    He broke protocol, in passing confidential documentation to a pal. 'Why?' is the only unknown. You claim he didn't do it for any personal gain. You claim.

    You literally posted examples of the very thing you accuse others of in the same post.
    Get up the yard :)


  • #3634
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 73,532 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Have to say, the SF line 'sick of the politics of a nod and a wink' is going to resonate very well in this.

    We have had it all here; 'shure don't they all do it?'


  • #3635
    WicklaWolf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 47 ✭WicklaWolf


    Will future Ministers/Taoiseachs get away with leaking confidential contracts to friends by providing a weak justification and apology?


    The issue here is accountability. This cannot happen again but what will prevent it? FG are out defending him and downplaying it.



    It's not even about Leo and FG - this cannot set a precedent.



    Information must be shared through official channels.


  • #3636
    NSAman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,481 ✭✭✭NSAman


    WicklaWolf wrote: »
    Agreed. Journalists are not impartial observers here. They are not quite grasping why people are so concerned with this leak.

    People are finally getting a glimpse of the “old boys” network here.

    It is what we have ALL known for a long time, that friends are looked after in Irish politics, that inside information is freely used to others benefit if you move in the right circles, that Ireland is a basket case where the politicians freely use their knowledge for their and their friends benefits.

    Extrapolate that into other areas, building, land purchase, known deals in the making. Look back and see who has benefited despite lack of work and brain power and you finally understand the absolute corruption that Irish politics is.

    THAT is why people are jumping all over this leak. It is an example of how it all works and has been working for years.


  • Advertisement
  • #3637
    Hubertj
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,000 ✭✭✭Hubertj


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    Have to say, the SF line 'sick of the politics of a nod and a wink' is going to resonate very well in this.

    We have had it all here; 'shure don't they all do it?'

    the thing is they all do it is some form or another and to varying degrees. In this case it is more serious due to the positon Leo was in (Taoiseach) and the fact it was a confidential document. And that he is not popular with a loud minority.


  • #3638
    WicklaWolf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 47 ✭WicklaWolf


    Hubertj wrote: »
    the thing is they all do it is some form or another and to varying degrees. In this case it is more serious due to the positon Leo was in (Taoiseach) and the fact it was a confidential document. And that he is not popular with a loud minority.


    But should a precedent be set that leaking confidential contracts to a friend is justifiable?



    Will SF be able to justify the same behaviour with a similar excuse in the future?


  • #3639
    Hubertj
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,000 ✭✭✭Hubertj


    WicklaWolf wrote: »
    But should a precedent be set that leaking confidential contracts to a friend is justifiable?



    Will SF be able to justify the same behaviour with a similar excuse in the future?

    I'm not trying to justify or defend LEo. I think there should be an investigation and appropriate action taken. I'm just making the point that there are no saints in politics....


  • #3640
    WicklaWolf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 47 ✭WicklaWolf


    Hubertj wrote: »
    I'm not trying to justify or defend LEo. I think there should be an investigation and appropriate action taken. I'm just making the point that there are no saints in politics....


    Agreed.


  • #3641
    WicklaWolf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 47 ✭WicklaWolf


    The main issue here is precedent.

    Will Ministers/Taoiseach get away with similar behaviour in the future?

    I think clarity is required on this.

    A civil servant would be rightly fired for doing this. The Taoiseach undermined the work of the Department.

    If there's no protocol/law covering this, it's completely outrageous and the sitiuation needs to be rectified.


  • Advertisement
  • #3642
    1st dalkey dalkey
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 241 ✭✭1st dalkey dalkey


    VonLuck wrote: »
    This is literally what you said:



    Maybe you have a different definition of "debunked" but to my reading that means that MO'T not really being a friend and it not being illegal was proven to be a lie in the Dáil.

    I don't care what opinion you have, but please don't present it as fact.

    Debunk ; "expose the falseness or hollowness of"

    His spinners variously claimed he is not really a friend, more an acquaintance, he is a friend of a friend, he is a professional colleague. Yet there are pictures on social media of them in embrace.

    At the very least there is a hollowness in the claims.

    Equally with the 'illegality'. As I pointed out, while no legal expert I do not think it was illegal, rather unethical and wrong. Again, the claim of exemption from opprobrium on the basis it was not illegal is at the very least hollow. It clearly was both unethical and wrong, otherwise why apologise?

    Thus those claims were correctly debunked, shown to be at the very least hollow.

    The definition is from Oxford Languages. Not mine.

    I don't particularly care for your opinions either. But it doesn't matter.

    Neither of our opinions changes the facts.

    Varadker leaked a confidential report.


  • #3643
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 73,532 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Labour supporting the motion.

    https://www.rte.ie/news/2020/1106/1176410-varadkar-no-confidence/


  • #3644
    billyhead
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,623 ✭✭✭✭billyhead


    Confidential material is leaked all the time. That's how journalists get there insider information. It's that it was a leaked cabinet document which is the problem. Leo is so arrogant and obnoxious to undermine his own health minister at the time to do it behind his back.


  • #3645
    stockshares
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,760 ✭✭✭stockshares


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    Labour supporting the motion.

    https://www.rte.ie/news/2020/1106/1176410-varadkar-no-confidence/

    What way will the numbers stack up?

    Will some FFs support it?

    Any chance some of the Greens would break ranks?


  • #3646
    WicklaWolf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 47 ✭WicklaWolf


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    Labour supporting the motion.

    https://www.rte.ie/news/2020/1106/1176410-varadkar-no-confidence/

    Great. All opposition parties need to row in. This is much bigger than SF.


  • #3647
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 73,532 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    WicklaWolf wrote: »
    Great. All opposition parties need to row in. This is much bigger than SF.

    Oh to be a fly on the wall when Michael Martin asks his party to back this. :)


  • #3648
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 6,192 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    Oh to be a fly on the wall when Michael Martin asks his party to back this. :)

    I suspect the greens are a harder fish to fry.....FF are polling 11%,so chances are they'll lose 75% of their seats in a 4 seater,which would be well over half....they dont want to crash government,and will as usual with ffg put their own interests above the country


    Whereas the greens are in disarray,near daily resignations/splits.....a party leader who scraped through a leadership.challenge and members who arent whole-hearted liking having to carry the can over mother/baby homes controversy and being fcuked under bus by ffg again


    If.anywhere the dissent is going to come from.there


  • #3649
    Gatling
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    Fann Linn wrote: »
    We should let the head of the anti corruption unit decide what is or isn't a fact.

    Didn't a few boaresies already decided what laws he supposedly broke , despite not knowing a single thing about law was supposedly broke .

    And if the anti corruption unit says no nothing to investigate the same posters will be crying Garda corruption ,
    It will be nothing more than trumpisms for the next week ,i can only imagine how many thread bumps by the same 3/4 people until Tuesday
    360_F_102352090_ie3kLjDIvgrT1sxVDknWCUh8PxgMYzM7.jpg




  • #3650
    WicklaWolf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 47 ✭WicklaWolf


    Gatling wrote: »
    Bit like the various killers running in various elections ah sure it's fine if you support the oul cause

    Gatling if that's what you believe, if this precedent is set, that this behaviour can be justified, would you be happy with SF engaging in similar behaviour - leaking confidential state documents to friends?

    I certainly wouldn't.

    We need this cleared up so it cant happen with members of any party.


  • #3651
    stockshares
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,760 ✭✭✭stockshares


    Aontu have said they are backing it but SD will decide on Monday.


  • Advertisement
  • #3652
    Sierra Oscar
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 8,666 CMod ✭✭✭✭Sierra Oscar


    The no confidence motion will make the noisy FF backbenches uncomfortable. Put up or shut up.


  • #3653
    Bishop of hope
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,253 ✭✭✭Bishop of hope


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    I suspect the greens are a harder fish to fry.....FF are polling 11%,so chances are they'll lose 75% of their seats in a 4 seater,which would be well over half....they dont want to crash government,and will as usual with ffg put their own interests above the country


    Whereas the greens are in disarray,near daily resignations/splits.....a party leader who scraped through a leadership.challenge and members who arent whole-hearted liking having to carry the can over mother/baby homes controversy and being fcuked under bus by ffg again


    If.anywhere the dissent is going to come from.there

    Depends on their wanting to go to the polls again for the Greens I think.
    In since February, 8 months, do they want to trust their chances of getting reelected, there aren't many safe green seats.
    FG are going to defend Leo and if there's decent within govt that helps a no confidence motion against Leo succeed then they will certainly walk imo triggering an election.
    I can't see anyone in govt voting for the SF motion myself.


  • #3654
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 73,532 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Gatling wrote: »
    Didn't a few boaresies already decided what laws he supposedly broke , despite not knowing a single thing about law was supposedly broke .

    And if the anti corruption unit says no nothing to investigate the same posters will be crying Garda corruption ,
    It will be nothing more than trumpisms for the next week ,i can only imagine how many thread bumps by the same 3/4 people until Tuesday

    There is a legal opinion in the mix for almost a week that outlines what law he might have broken.
    Trump is behaving exactly as he wishes with no regard for the institutions of the state. He will excuse it in exactly the same way as Varadkar - 'I am doing it for the good of the country'.

    BTW: We know there is corruption in the Gardai for exactly the same reasons that we know what we know about this, the work of whistleblowers and the Opposition.


  • #3655
    Junkyard Tom
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,116 ✭✭✭✭Junkyard Tom


    Sierra Oscar wrote: »
    The no confidence motion will make the noisy FF backbenches uncomfortable. Put up or shut up.

    Even if SF lose it they win as they're forcing FF TD's to cover Varadker/FG.


  • #3656
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 6,192 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Bishop of hope wrote: »
    Depends on their wanting to go to the polls again for the Greens I think.
    In since February, 8 months, do they want to trust their chances of getting reelected, there aren't many safe green seats.
    FG are going to defend Leo and if there's decent within govt that helps a no confidence motion against Leo succeed then they will certainly walk imo triggering an election.
    I can't see anyone in govt voting for the SF motion myself.

    It should be interesting......ideally in a non partisan this motion should piss through,he's been caught doing wrong and his story isnt plausible,or stand upto scrutiny



    But politics is a funny business,where doing.the right thing,almost never happens,despite what everyone hopes :(


  • #3657
    James Brown
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,013 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    Gatling wrote: »
    Didn't a few boaresies already decided what laws he supposedly broke , despite not knowing a single thing about law was supposedly broke .

    And if the anti corruption unit says no nothing to investigate the same posters will be crying Garda corruption ,
    It will be nothing more than trumpisms for the next week ,i can only imagine how many thread bumps by the same 3/4 people until Tuesday

    Like the civil services is very white, SF don't like white men or leaking confidential information to a friend and telling your party to pick your friends better?


  • #3658
    James Brown
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,013 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    Bishop of hope wrote: »
    Depends on their wanting to go to the polls again for the Greens I think.
    In since February, 8 months, do they want to trust their chances of getting reelected, there aren't many safe green seats.
    FG are going to defend Leo and if there's decent within govt that helps a no confidence motion against Leo succeed then they will certainly walk imo triggering an election.
    I can't see anyone in govt voting for the SF motion myself.

    On a purely self serving note, any Greens would be helping their election odds by supporting this. Right now they are done for as it stands, IMO.


  • #3659
    lemonTrees
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 105 ✭✭lemonTrees


    Clever move by SF. Really puts it up to the Greens and the FF backbenchers.


  • #3660
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    "This non-story will be dead by Monday".

    Yikes :pac:


  • Advertisement
  • #3661
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 73,532 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Bowie wrote: »
    On a purely self serving note, any Greens would be helping their election odds by supporting this. Right now they are done for as it stands, IMO.

    Gilt edged opportunity for them to recover some ground as it seems to me this ship is going to run aground sooner rather than later. I can see them hedging their bets and hoping the public might forget.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement