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

RandomName2 · 31-03-2021 03:07PM

McMurphy wrote: »

It's significant because it looks like Leo was sending it to OTuathail in a personal capacity, rather than sending it to him via NAGP Kildare street address - IE an official capacity.

Yes, but this is merely optics, surely. And optics that aren't witnessed by anyone is like one hand clapping.

McMurphy · 31-03-2021 03:09PM

RandomName2 wrote: »

Yes, but this is merely optics, surely. And optics that aren't witnessed by anyone is like one hand clapping.

The optics weren't supposed to be witnessed by anyone. That's the fly in your ointment.

RandomName2 · 31-03-2021 05:13PM

McMurphy wrote: »

The optics weren't supposed to be witnessed by anyone. That's the fly in your ointment.

But at the end of the day optics are just optics. They just give an appearance of something. If anything they distract from the core aspects.

Varadkar's apology was in relation to the optics. He said that it should have looked more professional, but that the principal of providing information relating to the GP agreement was not itself wrong (either ethically or legally). This is the case to prove or disprove. Everything else is just optics and optics are, as they ever have been, largely irrelevant.

Which is why I find the insistence of people repeating ad nauseum 'leo the leak gave documents to his pall' so tiresome. It wouldn't matter if O'Thuanthail hated Varadkar and was a life-time member of the Solidarity party. It is as relevant as his sexual orientation (which I had no knowledge of until the threadbanned guy discussed it). This always has been about the information. The information. The information. What public good did it potentially provide? What potential harm could its disclosure do? That's all that has ever been relevant, but people here are interested in optics, optics, optics (mainly their own, but sometimes with the thread topic thrown in).

In truth it is hard at this distance to actually come to a conclusion about the document. I have looked to see if it's online, and I can't find it. If there was no, and never would be, any opportunity to make significant changes to the GP agreement after providing it the NAGP then there's very little basis for there being any harm. It is not as if the information itself is at all sensitive after all. However if significant amendments were made after its debate in the Dail, on foot of suggestions from NAGP, that's a different story entirely. The public good angle is a straightforward enough narrative. This was the GP agreement which was going to be enacted. It was important to get GPs to sign up to it. Informing the largest GP union of the core aspects of this agreement would be useful to this end.

James Brown · 31-03-2021 05:36PM

RandomName2 wrote: »

But at the end of the day optics are just optics. They just give an appearance of something. If anything they distract from the core aspects.

Varadkar's apology was in relation to the optics. He said that it should have looked more professional, but that the principal of providing information relating to the GP agreement was not itself wrong (either ethically or legally). This is the case to prove or disprove. Everything else is just optics and optics are, as they ever have been, largely irrelevant.

Which is why I find the insistence of people repeating ad nauseum 'leo the leak gave documents to his pall' so tiresome. It wouldn't matter if O'Thuanthail hated Varadkar and was a life-time member of the Solidarity party. It is as relevant as his sexual orientation (which I had no knowledge of until the threadbanned guy discussed it). This always has been about the information. The information. The information. What public good did it potentially provide? What potential harm could its disclosure do? That's all that has ever been relevant, but people here are interested in optics, optics, optics (mainly their own, but sometimes with the thread topic thrown in).

In truth it is hard at this distance to actually come to a conclusion about the document. I have looked to see if it's online, and I can't find it. If there was no, and never would be, any opportunity to make significant changes to the GP agreement after providing it the NAGP then there's very little basis for there being any harm. It is not as if the information itself is at all sensitive after all. However if significant amendments were made after its debate in the Dail, on foot of suggestions from NAGP, that's a different story entirely. The public good angle is a straightforward enough narrative. This was the GP agreement which was going to be enacted. It was important to get GPs to sign up to it. Informing the largest GP union of the core aspects of this agreement would be useful to this end.

Can you quote where Varadkar states by 'manner' he means conveyance or format and not leaking? Isn't this just your opinion?
Reads like he apologised for not going through proper channels, i.e. leaking.

People need repeat it because folk keep denying it happened when it did.

The 'feels' are irrelevant. He passed on/leaked a confidential, unreleased, not yet published negotiation document to his pal, the then head of a rival union to the one engaged in the negotiations. These are the plain facts. These facts are all that's relevant.

As above, what you or anyone else feels could or might be of advantage or disadvantage it completely irrelevant.

RandomName2 · 31-03-2021 06:16PM

James Brown wrote: »

Can you quote where Varadkar states by 'manner' he means conveyance or format

Core aspects. Information disclosed.

Going through it with O'Thuanthail line by line, sending it to his house, communicating its contents through an obscenely long string of emojis, courier, taxi, post, his house, the office, government buildings, the side of the street. Switch up the variables and the result is the same.

He says he should have gone through it with O'Thuanthail line by line, in person, and you say this is him saying he shouldn't have leaked it. I.. don't think I have anything to say on this front..

James Brown wrote: »

People need repeat it because folk keep denying it happened when it did.

Like the conspiracy theory stuff, I find these make believe people who deny that Varadkar leaked are part of that optics campaign I have already dismissed as irritating, distracting, and irrelevant. People who post it are arguing it with noone. They just want to be heard. Well, since it's 'optics', I suppose that should be 'read', but same idea. It is metaphorical noise even if it isn't literal noise.

At least it would have merit on twitter because the usual crowd would be trying to get a particular hashtag trending. Again, for the sake of optics.

jmcc · 31-03-2021 06:30PM

Varadkar, according to the e-mail that was subject to the FOI request claimed that he wanted to look at the agreement again. There's no mention of it being given to O'Tuathail or the NAGP.

"Do you have a copy of this [the contract]? SH [Simon Harris] gave it to me but I put it into the recycling bin having read it. Want to look at it again."

https://twitter.com/mattcarthy/status/1374872796510179332/photo/1

"Varadkar told the Dail that he sought the document for his personal use, but these revelations show that he was making arrangements to leak it before he even had it in his possession." (Pearse Doherty/SF)

There does seem to be an FG attempt to change the narrative to make it appear that Varadkar was trying to bring the NAGP onboard despite the NAGP not being party to the negotiations. A confidential document was leaked by Varadkar to his friend O'Tuathail after NAGP had sent that letter outlining the effects of NAGP members campaigning against FG.

O'Tuathail had asked Harris for a copy of the document but did not get it. He then asked his friend Varadkar for a copy and Varadkar obtained it and sent it the same day.

The confidential document was sent to O'Tuathail's home address (Varadkar asked for it.) rather than the business address of the NAGP. No matter how FG tries to spin this, it is a very serious situation for Varadkar and the credibility of FG.

Regards...jmcc

Nobotty · 31-03-2021 07:24PM

jmcc wrote: »

Varadkar, according to the e-mail that was subject to the FOI request claimed that he wanted to look at the agreement again. There's no mention of it being given to O'Tuathail or the NAGP.

"Do you have a copy of this [the contract]? SH [Simon Harris] gave it to me but I put it into the recycling bin having read it. Want to look at it again."

https://twitter.com/mattcarthy/status/1374872796510179332/photo/1

"Varadkar told the Dail that he sought the document for his personal use, but these revelations show that he was making arrangements to leak it before he even had it in his possession." (Pearse Doherty/SF)

There does seem to be an FG attempt to change the narrative to make it appear that Varadkar was trying to bring the NAGP onboard despite the NAGP not being party to the negotiations. A confidential document was leaked by Varadkar to his friend O'Tuathail after NAGP had sent that letter outlining the effects of NAGP members campaigning against FG.

O'Tuathail had asked Harris for a copy of the document but did not get it. He then asked his friend Varadkar for a copy and Varadkar obtained it and sent it the same day.

The confidential document was sent to O'Tuathail's home address (Varadkar asked for it.) rather than the business address of the NAGP. No matter how FG tries to spin this, it is a very serious situation for Varadkar and the credibility of FG.

Regards...jmcc

All members of the NAgP would have to sign that same contract ,thats 40% of the countries gp's meaning it was a good idea to bring them in
Vradakar was doing this on the quiet(or so he thought)
How do you get over the hurdle of that case he's making and make it a crime?
Vradakars FG base are obviously already with him on this if being consistently 10% up on the GE in red c polls is anything to go by
I'm just not see'ing anything here troublesome for them
Everything is out in the open,theres nothing new since the thread started and the 2 debates other than the Gardaí are rightly being thorough, is there

jmcc · 31-03-2021 07:46PM

Nobotty wrote: »

All members of the NAgP would have to sign that same contract ,thats 40% of the countries gp's meaning it was a good idea to bring them in
Vradakar was doing this on the quiet(or so he thought)

Varadkar leaked a confidential document to his friend O'Tuathail. He knew, based on the FOIed e-mail that IMO had not published the document and had not distributed it to its members. NAGP was not party to the negotiations. NAGP also had members who were holding off renewing their subscriptions as they did not know what was in the DoH/IMO contract. The board of NAGP resigned in late April 2019 and NAGP went into voluntary liquidation with debts of around 400K Euro in May 2019.

How do you get over the hurdle of that case he's making and make it a crime?

Varadkar was not making a case. He was making excuses after the story broke. There is an on-going criminal investigation dealing with the issue of what laws may have been broken and who may have broken them.

If the Village Magazine had not published this story, it might never have been told and there would have been no criminal investigation into Varadkar leaking a confidential document to his friend. Both the Official Secrets Act and corruption legislation have been mentioned.

Regards...jmcc

Nobotty · 31-03-2021 08:05PM

jmcc wrote: »

Varadkar leaked a confidential document to his friend O'Tuathail. He knew, based on the FOIed e-mail that IMO had not published the document and had not distributed it to its members. NAGP was not party to the negotiations. NAGP also had members who were holding off renewing their subscriptions as they did not know what was in the DoH/IMO contract. The board of NAGP resigned in late April 2019 and NAGP went into voluntary liquidation with debts of around 400K Euro in May 2019.

So like I asked last night,is it the boards.ie prosecution supposition that vradakar did this to save the NAGP? Versus vradakar's being,these guys needed to be on board,I know their president so I'll facilitate him but I took an unfortunate short cut
Thats your basis for a crime
[ cue Judge Judy laugh]

Varadkar was not making a case. He was making excuses after the story broke. There is an on-going criminal investigation dealing with the issue of what laws may have been broken and who may have broken them.

If the Village Magazine had not published this story, it might never have been told and there would have been no criminal investigation into Varadkar leaking a confidential document to his friend. Both the Official Secrets Act and corruption legislation have been mentioned.

Regards...jmcc

You're right,there'd be no fuss if O'Tuathall hadnt whatsapped
But the rest is opinion without any juice at all as to where the crime is
The gain for FG and the saving a limited liability entity ,the Nagp from bankruptcy being evidence of crime is a stretch
To expect those to trump vradakars explanation in the eyes of investigators,however much yours or my politics doesnt like it,is cloud cuckoo land
Much more plausible IMO is,a complaint is made,its hot coal being thoroughly investigated as is the rightful process, and it probably wont be the junior staff signing off on its conclusion given it involves politics ,ie its sensitive

skimpydoo · 31-03-2021 08:19PM

Nobotty wrote: »

You're right,there'd be no fuss if O'Tuathall hadnt whatsapped
/QUOTE]

It's like saying if I hadn't been caught on CCTV I would not have been arrested,

A crime is a crime even if it's never found out.

Nobotty · 31-03-2021 08:59PM

skimpydoo wrote: »

Nobotty wrote: »

You're right,there'd be no fuss if O'Tuathall hadnt whatsapped

It's like saying if I hadn't been caught on CCTV I would not have been arrested,

A crime is a crime even if it's never found out.

You haven't any crime (yet or most likely ever from what I can see)
The reason Judge Judy is laughing is because you are trying to invent one with 2 things that never happened
(a) FG got its lowest vote ever I think and (b) the NagP went bankrupt even with its president having the document and all irs gps signing up to it

I genuinely wonder if facts matter here
They should

James Brown · 31-03-2021 09:08PM

Nobotty wrote: »

You haven't any crime (yet or most likely ever from what I can see)
The reason Judge Judy is laughing is because you are trying to invent one with 2 things that never happened
(a) FG got its lowest vote ever I think and (b) the NagP went bankrupt even with its president having the document and all irs gps signing up to it

I genuinely wonder if facts matter here
They should

Point is he did what he did. Thankfully he was rumbled. Doing it and getting away with it wouldn't have made it okay.

Marcos · 31-03-2021 09:16PM

James Brown wrote: »

Point is he did what he did. Thankfully he was rumbled. Doing it and getting away with it wouldn't have made it okay.

For the likes of you and me maybe, but for the likes of him, his hangers on and others in the golden circle, it would have been the perfect crime. The one that isn't investigated.

Nobotty · 31-03-2021 09:17PM

James Brown wrote: »

Point is he did what he did. Thankfully he was rumbled. Doing it and getting away with it wouldn't have made it okay.

I agree,but high crime and mis deameanor to his base or the centre bits of FF/independents he might canibalise it is not
In life you are going to get,people,parties and voters that dont do what you want

RandomName2 · 31-03-2021 09:20PM

jmcc wrote: »

There does seem to be an FG attempt to change the narrative to make it appear that Varadkar was trying to bring the NAGP onboard despite the NAGP not being party to the negotiations.

Just got to double check the date this was posted. It would be embarrassing if I was replying to a post from the second page of this thread.

Now. It's from today.

Well, maybe you are new to this conversation, and it's your first time posting in this thread. If so, my apologies. But this has been the stance of Fine Gael since 31st October 2020.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/varadkar-rejects-allegations-he-acted-unlawfully-in-sharing-draft-gp-contract-1.4396697
https://www.finegael.ie/statement-on-behalf-of-an-tanaiste-leo-varadkar/

jmcc wrote: »

A confidential document was leaked by Varadkar to his friend O'Tuathail after NAGP had sent that letter outlining the effects of NAGP members campaigning against FG.

Again, I understand if you are new to this thread that you can't be wading through all 566 pages of content. After, all, people keep posting the same stuff, over and over again, so there's been a lot of content bloat, so it's understandable if you couldn't get though all of it.

I've outlined why O'Thuanthail being Varadkar's friend is as relevant as O'Thuanthail's sexuality, in the same way it being sent to O'Thuanthail's office would make this no different from it being sent to his home. The information, and potential harm, is the crux of the matter.

Also I have pointed out that the NAGP have always been opposed to the government: long before they received the GP agreement, and after they received the GP agreement. I can't say 'long' after before they didn't survive long afterwards, cursing the government with their last breaths as they fell into bankruptsy due, they claim, to the government freezing them out of contracts.

What was that threat about?

The government freezing them out of contracts.

Did the government stop freezing them out?

Nope!

So.. what where was this killer political blow? They are GPs. They've about as much political clout as a pear. The government could afford for them to die.

jmcc wrote: »

The confidential document was sent to O'Tuathail's home address (Varadkar asked for it.) rather than the business address of the NAGP. No matter how FG tries to spin this, it is a very serious situation for Varadkar and the credibility of FG.

What? This. Again. If he had run out of Leinster House with it bundled under his arm, and pressed into O'Thuanthail's sweaty palms, that would be significantly different from it being sent to his home? Of course not. If it had been sent to NAGP office, and addressed personally to O'Thuanthail nothing would be different. You would be the first to say it would make no difference were that the actual course of events. I'm not sure why there is the need for all this distraction.

jmcc wrote: »

Regards...jmcc

Cordially, Scofflaw.

McMurphy · 31-03-2021 09:20PM

So when all is said and done you've whittled it down to this?

Nobotty wrote: »

You're right,there'd be no fuss if O'Tuathall hadnt whatsapped

Which is just a long winded and over convoluted way of saying "there'd be no fuss if he hadn't of been caught"

Kinda like most things in life.

RandomName2 · 31-03-2021 09:25PM

Nobotty wrote: »

vradakar did this to save the NAGP?

Damn remind me if I'm ever in trouble not to reach out to Varadkar!

Nobotty · 31-03-2021 10:41PM

McMurphy wrote: »

So when all is said and done you've whittled it down to this?

Which is just a long winded and over convoluted way of saying "there'd be no fuss if he hadn't of been caught"

Kinda like most things in life.

Depends on who's making the fuss I suppose

James Brown · 31-03-2021 10:45PM

Nobotty wrote: »

I agree,but high crime and mis deameanor to his base or the centre bits of FF/independents he might canibalise it is not
In life you are going to get,people,parties and voters that dont do what you want

If ever I'm under criminal investigation I'll be sure to tell the Garda that.

James Brown · 31-03-2021 10:49PM

RandomName2 wrote: »

Damn remind me if I'm ever in trouble not to reach out to Varadkar!

Well he seemingly always delivers.
I believe he did it to try avoid any loss of support for himself and FG. Why else would he leak a confidential document? He could have told his pal, hold on a day or two it should be released soon. He could have said no.

FrancieBrady · 31-03-2021 11:43PM

James Brown wrote: »

If ever I'm under criminal investigation I'll be sure to tell the Garda that.

The nod and wink culture of Irish politics we were supposed to see the end of in Enda's great vision and promise.

RandomName2 · 01-04-2021 12:45AM

James Brown wrote: »

Well he seemingly always delivers.

Said the Fine Gael fanboy. Who was a friend of Varadkar's. Sounds to me like he was trying to win over his audience.

James Brown wrote: »

I believe he did it to try avoid any loss of support for himself and FG. Why else would he leak a confidential document?

Because he wanted to encourage a less hostile response by NAGP to the agreement? That is, in fact, the stated reason. Getting general GP support for the GP agreement would ultimately be a win for Fine Gael.

James Brown · 01-04-2021 02:01AM

RandomName2 wrote: »

Said the Fine Gael fanboy. Who was a friend of Varadkar's. Sounds to me like he was trying to win over his audience.

Because he wanted to encourage a less hostile response by NAGP to the agreement? That is, in fact, the stated reason. Getting general GP support for the GP agreement would ultimately be a win for Fine Gael.

I'm basing my opinion on the conversation they had. Not the effort at an excuse Varadkar gave.

jmcc · 01-04-2021 04:06AM

RandomName2 wrote: »

Just got to double check the date this was posted. It would be embarrassing if I was replying to a post from the second page of this thread.

You do seem to be creating strawman arguments and arguing with them rather than with what people post.

The Village Magazine published the original article on Varadkar leaking the confidential document to his friend O'Tuathail in October 2020 and FG has been trying to spin its way out of it ever since. The Village Magazine kept digging while the newspapers and RTE tried hard to ignore the story. FG kept trying to change the narrative and has been claiming that Varadkar leaked the confidential document to his friend in order to get the NAGP onboard.

The problem is that other facts have emerged since then and there has been an FOI request by SF which obained an e-mail by Varadkar where he knew that the agreement was not in the public domain and asked when the IMO would publish it and distribute it to its members. That discredited the spin about the contract/agreement being in the public domain.

Well, maybe you are new to this conversation, and it's your first time posting in this thread.

Perhaps you haven't been paying attention.

But this has been the stance of Fine Gael since 31st October 2020.

It is mere political spin. The Village Magazine ran the story about Varadkar leaking a confidential document to his friend and FG has on the back foot ever since. It also emerged that Simon Harris, the Minister for Health, was still trying to get a copy of the agreement as late as 17th April 2019.

I've outlined why O'Thuanthail being Varadkar's friend is as relevant as O'Thuanthail's sexuality, in the same way it being sent to O'Thuanthail's office would make this no different from it being sent to his home. The information, and potential harm, is the crux of the matter.

Bringing up the canard of O'Tuathail's sexuality again? How pathetic! It is irrelevant.

The point wasn't about the confidential document being sent to the O'Tuathail's office. It was about it being sent to his home address rather than the NAGP address. Varadkar directly asked O'Tuathail for his home address and, if the timeline is correct, this was before Varadkar even had a the copy of the confidential document as it was waiting in the car for him when he arrived back from Brussels. That emerged in the e-mail obtained by an SF FOI request and quoted in the Irish Examiner article.

What was that threat about?

Go read the Heydon letter. It has been linked on the thread. The letter outlined the effect of NAGP members campaigning against FG in elections.

If he had run out of Leinster House with it bundled under his arm, and pressed into O'Thuanthail's sweaty palms, that would be significantly different from it being sent to his home? Of course not.

Yet another attempt to distract from the facts.

If it had been sent to NAGP office, and addressed personally to O'Thuanthail nothing would be different.

And again.

The facts are that Varadkar leaked a confidential document to his friend O'Tuathail. He asked O'Tuathail for his home address in order to send it directly to O'Tuathail bypassing the NAGP office. That ensured that the leaked confidential document directly reached O'Tuathail instead of running the risk of having been opened by a secretary or other person.

The FOIed e-mail quoted Varadkar as saying that he wanted to read it again. He, Varadkar, did not say that he wanted the document in order to bring NAGP onboard. O'Tuathail tried to get a copy of the document from Simon Harris and failed. He contacted Varadkar and Varadkar obtained a copy of the document for him within hours. If Varadkar was so intent on keeping NAGP in the loop then why didn't he leak/provide previous drafts and details to NAGP directly? The confidential document that Varadkar leaked to his friend was part of a Department of Health negotiation with the IMO and NAGP was not part of that negotiation.

You would be the first to say it would make no difference were that the actual course of events. I'm not sure why there is the need for all this distraction.

You are simply trying, and failing, to distract from the facts. Varadkar, while taoiseach, leaked a confidential document to his friend. Varadkar is now under criminal investigation.

Regards...jmcc

McMurphy · 01-04-2021 07:02AM

RandomName2 wrote: »

Getting general GP support for the GP agreement would ultimately be a win for Fine Gael.

A win for Fine Gael..... Wouldn't a certain act apply there if that's the case?

Nobotty · 01-04-2021 09:01AM

A political party isn't a person and of course if it was the intention, it spectacularly failed
Next

McMurphy · 01-04-2021 09:35AM

Nobotty wrote: »

A political party isn't a person

You might need to read the legislation again nobotty, this isn't a "gotcha moment" for you I'm afraid. Here's a hint...... Varadkar (a person) sent it to OTuathail (also a person) to his home address, not to NAGP (not a person) at their business address....

A. Using confidential information obtained in the course of his or her office [and how else can the information here have been obtained?], or doing an act in relation to his or her office, which – “ being more general – “would also cover using confidential information.

B. in either instance it depends on [obtaining an advantage for another person [O Tuathail]. The reaction of the NAGP “inner sanctum” shows they clearly knew they were getting an advantage.

C. that the act was for the purpose of corruptly obtaining the advantage.

Basically covers those sending the information, and those in receipt of it.

and of course if it was the intention, it spectacularly failed
Next

I don't think success or failure of an intention gets someone off with anything. Don't believe me?

Ask anyone doing time for attempted fraud, robbery or murder for starters.

Nobotty · 01-04-2021 09:55AM

You might want to check the election results again Mc or your nickname for him,was it Leo the 5th? Or remain in cloud cuckoo land
That 'theory' is a huge judge judy laugh out loud moment when compared to the reasoning vradakar gave
Its a presumtion of guilt supposition as opposed to what the law provides for
I do know what you are really at here though,you enjoy needling the Fg'ers
If they're concerned by your last 2 posts or any of this opinion,they'd be stupid

RandomName2 · 01-04-2021 09:58AM

jmcc wrote: »

You do seem to be creating strawman arguments and arguing with them rather than with what people post.

You are simply trying, and failing, to distract from the salient points.

Your straw-men arguments about people refusing to admit that Varadkar leaked.

The repetition, over and over, of aspects relating entirely to optics.

Do you think your argument gets progressively stronger by just repeating the same old line 'Leo leaked a document to a pall.'

jmcc wrote: »

That ensured that the leaked confidential document directly reached O'Tuathail instead of running the risk of having been opened by a secretary or other person.

He sent it to his secretary, who sent it via courier, to O'Thuanthai's house. I don't think.. that needs any further counterargument. Not that that point had any real substance to it anyway, as you are using it to distract.

jmcc wrote: »

Go read the Heydon letter. It has been linked on the thread. The letter outlined the effect of NAGP members campaigning against FG in elections.

Buzz buzz. You bringing up this, again? I've already discussed Goodey's letter. If you have anything further to add, or want to counter any of the points I have already made on that matter, go ahead. You are just trying to distract, and repeat the same soundbites.

All this, same old, same old, rehash rehash.

It's not October 2020, it's.. it's April 1st 2021.

April 1st. Oh sorry jmcc, thought you were seriously contending that that was an argument you were advancing, didn't realize this was just a wind up.

01-04-2021 10:03AM

Sad to see Leo quitting politics and returning to medicine in the US with his partner. I wish him well anyway.

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

Comments