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

DTownD wrote: »

This is due to Loyalist threats and graffiti in the North. Unrelated to the leaking.

Ya, but the blueshirts want to link the two.

Jinglejangle69 wrote: »

Didn't see that. When was it?

https://youtu.be/zkTXMnA0uIA

Is that Kate O'Connell jumping the ship on RTE at the moment?

Johnthemanager wrote: »

Kate o Connell threw him under the double decker on Brendan o Connor this morning!

I missed it.. what did she say?

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

The newspaper article above suggests Leo is done TBH. For the Gardai to come out in the press and remind everyone that comments made in the media are not privileged is a significant development. It's a warning to Varadkar himself and his colleagues that they could find themselves in-line for a "interfering with a criminal investigation" charge.

It's an unnamed garda source not an official press release, bit of a jump to read it as some sort of warning from the investigation team when the source might be the reporter's buddy in the local station.

Rosita wrote: »

Good day for Harris in the context of a future leadership contest. Comes across as a man of honour who had the opportunity for leaking but didn't take it. He was a Coveney supporter in the previous one so he might let him have the next one.

The 'man of honour' who neglected to give this information to the Dáil? He's as bad as Leo if he is now angling for the top job using this.

shtpEdthePlum wrote: »

Great, so there's no doubt that they directly benefitted from Leo leaking it to them. That's one of the requirements for corruption in office.

Well the members of the union certainly benefited insofar that they would know in advance what sort of contract they would be obliged to follow in relation to community healthcare. It is hard to see how NAGP itself would benefit: it was no longer able to conclude contracts, and blamed the government for no longer being financially viable. They implied corruption in relation to the relationship between the IMO and government.

shtpEdthePlum wrote: »

By whom? Not by Varadkar seemingly.

Well yes it was. Varadkar introduced the under 6's medical cards. NAGP objected to this introduction. In retaliation NAGP was frozen out of all further negotiations.


I think that's a more serious issue than the GP agreement being circulated to NAGP. The GP agreement should always have been circulated to the people it would affect. NAGP should not have been frozen out of the negotiations.


I also feel that under 6's shouldn't have been given medical cards in the first place. It seems daft that a five year old sees a GP for free but a 7 year old is charged €65 for a 10 minute visit. It's a minor thing, but it's really the event that set all this off.



I don't know whether the treatment of NAGP was felt as necessary for optics by Varadkar. He certainly seemed to regret the way it panned out, and was apparently trying to mend bridges. Maybe he felt that the window of opportunity to do so was brief given the inevitable demise of NAGP.

shtpEdthePlum wrote: »

You're right, but at the time they seemed pretty happy about getting this on the WhatsApp group.

Having the boardroom door slammed in your face and then having a note with the salient aspects of the boardroom decision slipped under the door by the person who had slammed the door would give cause for some minor celebration I suppose. Matt Ó'Tuathail also seemed to be trying to swing the other members of NAGP to support Varadkar (or at least change their view of him on the back of this apparent benevolence) whilst also being cock-a-hoop at his own importance in the matter.

RandomName2 wrote: »

Well his sexuality would certainly be grist to their mills. Paramilitaries tend to have a large dollop of machismo.


Like [not mentioning any party] attacking Varadkar due to his popularity, the loyalists will presumably be attacking the most popular and powerful politician in the Republic [excluding the party that will not be named]. Perhaps the loyalists don't see any point in attacking the leader of [the party that will not be named] because [the party that will not be named] is in government in Northern Ireland, thereby affording its leader a large degree of insulation. Furthermore Leo's party is a 'foreign' party as far as the loyalists are concerned, granting further motive.


The loyalists would care no more about the leak than [the party that will not be named] but they are not terribly politically literate, so are unlikely to use that as a weapon in this case. Given their form it would more likely be a car-bomb.

What are you talking about?

TheCitizen wrote: »

Been very critical of Leo Varadkar in this affair, however I see he’s had credible death threats and needs constant Gardai supervision as a result which is disturbing. Maybe there’s a thread on it?

The threats are from Loyalist paramilitaries. Are they focusing on him because of his sexuality?

I wouldn't say so, I'd say it's more to do with them generally being scumbags who are stoking up tensions in the North!

I Am The Law wrote: »

"Leo is Toast" says old Mr. Brennan.

FG headquarters ordering extra butter and marmalade

TheCitizen wrote: »

What are you talking about?

They've decided to conflate the Loyalist Brexit death threat against Varadkar and Coveney with Varadkars leaking of documents, two completely different stories ,