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

RandomName2 · 12-03-2021 12:20AM

James Brown wrote: »

Confidential means it's not for consumption by any Tom, Dick or Harry. The seriousness does not mean it's only a little bit confidential. The fall out or results can be minor or serious.

The water is muddied in this case by the publication of the contents by the IMO however.

James Brown wrote: »

LV was trying to garner support from his pal's membership by doing them a solid and passing this confidential document. I base this opinion on the back and forth as published.

Well yeah, clearly.

James Brown wrote: »

I do not believe the 'public good' line. I think he lied to try cover his arse.
Basically he damaged the trust for any future negotiations.

The IMO isn't complaining publicly at least. The only GP union that was highly critical of the government was the one that received the document, and it doesn't exist anymore.

James Brown wrote: »

The thread is extended every time somebody, like yourself, comes in to dispute or fudge the bare facts and add their own tuppence ha'penny on why Varadkar did nothing wrong.

Oh no he clearly did wrong, and I'm no fan of his motive. When I evaluate how substantial the wrongdoing was though I find it fairly paltry. More significant than the event itself would be the judgement (or lack thereof).

James Brown wrote: »

It's not about McCabe I would say Fitzgerald was raised because she mislead the Dail and was resigned. What Varadkar did was in the least as bad.

Well yes that's presumably the argument that people are beating around the bush about. Resignation is a voluntary process, though the leader of a party can essentially push their party member (as was the case with our last Minister for Justice). However in this case Varadkar is the party leader, so the judgment rests entirely on himself. There could be a backbench revolt, but there seems no chance of that.

If the shoe was on the other foot would FG be demanding a resignation? Presumably. That's the way politics works in this country. Would the resignation demand be entertained? Highly unlikely.

RandomName2 · 12-03-2021 12:34AM

Muahahaha wrote: »

Im not sure what you find doubtful, its literally what happened.

So the Dail statements were entirely unrelated to the McCabe affair? I am highly doubtful this is the case.

The report stated that her behavior in relation to the McCabe affair was reasonable and justifiable given the information available to her.

Now language might mean different things to you and I, but if something is a subset of something else, I would assume that it were covered by the more general term.

This is mainly nonsense though as this issue is merely being brought up due to to her resignation. There is no actual interest in whether or not she merits exoneration. Her resignation was because to not do so would have caused a snap election triggered by the opposition party Fianna Fail. If Fianna Fail were not in a position to do so, presumably she would not have resigned. Resignation is discretionary.

Is there anything else to say on the matter?

I suppose a long list of minsters who misled the Dail who didn't resign could be compiled. Not sure if it would prove the point of resignation being discretionary given that this is already patently obvious.

For what it's worth FFG in my opinion seems to me to have been somewhat scapegoated in this affair. Not entirely blameless, but not an unreasonable or malicious actor. However I think it is fair to say that Fine Gael did have some significant responsibility for the treatment of McCabe, and FFG predominantly got unlucky being passed the buck.

Muahahaha · 12-03-2021 12:43AM

markodaly wrote: »

Best write to Justice Charlton, RTE and the Irish Times so, as they are 'outright lying'.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/frances-fitzgerald-acted-appropriately-at-all-times-charleton-1.3660184?mode=sample&auth-failed=1&pw-origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.irishtimes.com%2Fnews%2Fpolitics%2Ffrances-fitzgerald-acted-appropriately-at-all-times-charleton-1.3660184

So then you'll be able to point me to where the Terms of Reference covered an investigation by Charleton into Fitzgerald misleading the Dail then?

If you cant do that (which you cleary cannot) then how can you ever claim that she was exonerated by Charleton for something that he literally did not investigate nor comment upon.

Im not sure how many times it has to be said but Charleton never ruled on her misleading the Dail, he ruled upon her and her department not supplying him with emails under his discovery process. These are two separate matters and any cursory reading of the Terms of Reference of the Tribunal that he ran confirm that as fact.

So unless you can provide a direct quote from the Charleton Report that says he exonerated her for misleading the Dail then it is very very simple- its because he never did despite your claims that he did. He wasnt allowed to because doing so would have broken his own Terms of Reference.

markodaly · 12-03-2021 01:37AM

Muahahaha wrote: »

So then you'll be able to point me to where the Terms of Reference covered an investigation by Charleton into Fitzgerald misleading the Dail then?

If you cant do that (which you cleary cannot) then how can you ever claim that she was exonerated by Charleton for something that he literally did not investigate nor comment upon.

Im not sure how many times it has to be said but Charleton never ruled on her misleading the Dail, he ruled upon her and her department not supplying him with emails under his discovery process. These are two separate matters and any cursory reading of the Terms of Reference of the Tribunal that he ran confirm that as fact.

So unless you can provide a direct quote from the Charleton Report that says he exonerated her for misleading the Dail then it is very very simple- its because he never did despite your claims that he did. He wasnt allowed to because doing so would have broken his own Terms of Reference.

Is it your claim that Justice Charlton, RTE and the Irish Times are 'outright lying'?

RandomName2 · 12-03-2021 01:48AM

markodaly wrote: »

Is it your claim that Justice Charlton, RTE and the Irish Times are 'outright lying'?

No he's saying that he doesn't specifically mention the Dail.

Proposition - FFG did wrong
Charlton - No she didn't
Proposition - Well you didn't mention the Dail specifically, as such Varadkar should resign.

I said from the outset, it is incredibly labored logic, and that's being generous.

James Brown · 12-03-2021 03:51AM

markodaly wrote: »

Best write to Justice Charlton, RTE and the Irish Times so, as they are 'outright lying'.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/frances-fitzgerald-acted-appropriately-at-all-times-charleton-1.3660184?mode=sample&auth-failed=1&pw-origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.irishtimes.com%2Fnews%2Fpolitics%2Ffrances-fitzgerald-acted-appropriately-at-all-times-charleton-1.3660184

It's like a loop.
Can you cite in the report where it exonerates her on the misleading the Dail, (the reason she was resigned)?

James Brown · 12-03-2021 03:59AM

RandomName2 wrote: »

The water is muddied in this case by the publication of the contents by the IMO however.

Well yeah, clearly.

The IMO isn't complaining publicly at least. The only GP union that was highly critical of the government was the one that received the document, and it doesn't exist anymore.

It was confidential and unpublished when he leaked it to his pal. No mud just a leak.
He leaked a confidential document. What the IMO say or don't say won't change that.

RandomName2 wrote: »

Oh no he clearly did wrong, and I'm no fan of his motive. When I evaluate how substantial the wrongdoing was though I find it fairly paltry. More significant than the event itself would be the judgement (or lack thereof).

That's the problem though. Another minister leaks something you do have issue with and he says he doesn't think it's a big deal and we all shrug it off?
Or you are in sensitive negotiation and find out the other party is passing out info behind your back. Would you be confident in continuing?

RandomName2 wrote: »

Well yes that's presumably the argument that people are beating around the bush about. Resignation is a voluntary process, though the leader of a party can essentially push their party member (as was the case with our last Minister for Justice). However in this case Varadkar is the party leader, so the judgment rests entirely on himself. There could be a backbench revolt, but there seems no chance of that.

Too late IMO. FF/FG/Greens had their chance to show some ethics and decided pensions and power trumped them.

RandomName2 wrote: »

If the shoe was on the other foot would FG be demanding a resignation? Presumably. That's the way politics works in this country. Would the resignation demand be entertained? Highly unlikely.

Yes, political parties are out to get each other, however what he did warrants he get resigned IMO.
We don't know. I'd like to think others have a bar.

Doesitmatter21 · 13-03-2021 11:03PM

https://twitter.com/colincoyle/status/1370855722569850883?s=20

Things have changed

Johnthemanager · 13-03-2021 11:15PM

Doesitmatter21 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/colincoyle/status/1370855722569850883?s=20

Things have changed

Well, well, well!!!!

Will Leo step aside while the Criminal investigation is on going?

golfball37 · 13-03-2021 11:15PM

https://mobile.twitter.com/oconnellhugh/status/1370860252724408324

Still nothing to see here I presume

Jinglejangle69 · 13-03-2021 11:20PM

I actually thought they were investigating it already????

Fann Linn · 13-03-2021 11:31PM

golfball37 wrote: »

https://mobile.twitter.com/oconnellhugh/status/1370860252724408324

Still nothing to see here I presume

Not a normal party. Sectarian comments last week, Garda investigation this week. The man isn't fit to be a member of govt.

Brendan Bendar · 13-03-2021 11:34PM

Fann Linn wrote: »

Not a normal party. Sectarian comments last week, Garda investigation this week. The man isn't fit to be a member of govt.

Ease back on the hyperbole, dude.

golfball37 · 13-03-2021 11:34PM

Fann Linn wrote: »

Not a normal party. Sectarian comments last week, Garda investigation this week. The man isn't fit to be a member of govt.

He’d fit perfectly in SF. He’s done more for them electorally than anyone.

Fann Linn · 13-03-2021 11:35PM

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Ease back on the hyperbole, dude.

Is any of the above wrong?

IngazZagni · 13-03-2021 11:36PM

Jinglejangle69 wrote: »

I actually thought they were investigating it already????

It was an initial investigation. Some people here rubbished me for suggesting it wasn't a criminal investigation already.

It's not surprising in my opinion. I think the Guards would be ridiculed for not formally investigating it.

Brendan Bendar · 13-03-2021 11:38PM

Fann Linn wrote: »

Is any of the above wrong?

Almost everything...

Jinglejangle69 · 13-03-2021 11:38PM

IngazZagni wrote: »

It was an initial investigation. Some people here rubbished me for suggesting it wasn't a criminal investigation already.

It's not surprising in my opinion. I think the Guards would be ridiculed for not formally investigating it.

So they are just investigating it now?

And haven't interviewed Leo yet?

Sorry I'm confused here.

The tweet says Gardai have upgraded from initial enquiries to an investigation now.

"Gardaí have upgraded their initial inquiries into Tánaiste Leo Varadkar’s leaking of a confidential Government document to a friend into a full investigation"

So basically it's only an investigation now and wasn't before??

IngazZagni · 13-03-2021 11:39PM

Jinglejangle69 wrote: »

So they are just investigating it now?

And haven't interviewed Leo yet?

That seems to be the case yes.

Fann Linn · 13-03-2021 11:43PM

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Almost everything...

So he's not being investigated?
He didn't make sectarian comment last week?

Doesitmatter21 · 13-03-2021 11:44PM

Getting a case together before they will speak to him it seems

Johnthemanager · 13-03-2021 11:47PM

Fann Linn wrote: »

So he's not being investigated?
He didn't make sectarian comment last week?

Don't let them distract you mate, they'll try and drag you down a different path. We're discussing the criminal investigation into fine gael leader Leo varadker. Party of law and order indeed.

golfball37 · 13-03-2021 11:58PM

One reply on the tweet nails it. He’s admitted he did it so just proceed to see if it’s a crime. Why waste time. I suspect the dpp wouldn’t proceed with it but we don’t need it dragged out. Harris obviously told the Gardai the truth that he was unaware of Leo’s intention to leak this. Had he said he gave the ok then there is no case to answer

Brendan Bendar · 14-03-2021 12:05AM

Fann Linn wrote: »

So he's not being investigated?
He didn't make sectarian comment last week?

No.

jammiedodgers · 14-03-2021 12:08AM

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

No.

Is the sky blue?
Is grass green?

Brendan Bendar · 14-03-2021 12:17AM

jammiedodgers wrote: »

Is the sky blue?
Is grass green?

Yes.

Doesitmatter21 · 14-03-2021 12:22AM

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Yes.

The defenders are defenceless

James Brown · 14-03-2021 12:34AM

So the current leader of the 'law and order party' is a "person of interest" in a criminal investigation. Interesting.
Add to that all his stupid divisive comments and FG's hammering in the last election; they must be just keeping him around for ****s and giggles.

An Claidheamh · 14-03-2021 12:37AM

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

No.

I wonder would Leo tell us if he believes the DUP are a sectarian party considering they have no Catholic members (amongst other things )

But then again, he is a coward

LessOutragePlz · 14-03-2021 12:44AM

Highly doubt he'll step a side but this will do him and FG no favours in the next election.

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

Comments