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
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
Leo Varadkar story in The Village??? - Mod Notes and banned Users in OP updated 16/05
Comments
-
FrancieBrady wrote: »No, I think all parties are weak on sanctioning wrong doing even when somebody confesses to it.
FG FF and the Greens proving they will circle the wagons if needed too.
Huge difference of course between taking a shortcut to inform a gp representative of what's in a contract the government would like signed by as many as possible to improve the health service and corruption of course
This is classed by our government as something they won't allow create a precedent that can be used by any Tom Dick or Paddy Cosgrave to disrupt the running of the country
Ergo the government have moved on letting the process play out
0 -
-
-
Seems a bit more complex than that. Initially, it was the government position that this was an FG problem rather than an FFG problem. Then there was the FG claim that there was nothing to see. The Village Magazine published WhatsApp chats that effectively landed Varadkar and his friend O'Tuathail in the crap. Then there was the claim that there was nothing to see and the Gardai were wasting their time. The Gardai took a look and then upgraded the investigation into a full criminal investigation. Varadkar and O'Tuathail were questioned under caution. Now Kate O'Connell has been interviewed as a witness and Bernard Durkan is to give a sworn statement this week. There were other members of the Oireachtas health committee but there's no news on whether they were asked for witness statements.The Gardai still have not submitted a file to the DPP on this case. No amount of handwaving and blaming Paddy Cosgrave will deflect from the reality that this is making FG and by extention the FFG government look bad.Marine Layer wrote: »Ergo the government have moved on letting the process play out
Regards...jmcc0 -
Marine Layer wrote: »Huge difference of course between taking a shortcut to inform a gp representative of what's in a contract the government would like signed by as many as possible to improve the health service and corruption of course
This is classed by our government as something they won't allow create a precedent that can be used by any Tom Dick or Paddy Cosgrave to disrupt the running of the country
Ergo the government have moved on letting the process play out
The 'government' are out of the equation. What happens next has nothing to do with them or Tom Dick r anyone else other than the Gardai and the DPP.0 -
FrancieBrady wrote: »The 'government' are out of the equation. What happens next has nothing to do with them or Tom Dick r anyone else other than the Gardai and the DPP.
The government are 100% in the equation when deciding what does or does not disrupt the business of government
Much to the disappointment of any Tom dick or paddy cosgrave who may try via instigating processes like what's playing out
Ergo, they've moved on 0 -
Marine Layer wrote: »The government are 100% in the equation when deciding what does or does not disrupt the business of government
Much to the disappointment of any Tom dick or paddy cosgrave who may try via instigating processes like what's playing out
Ergo, they've moved on
If they locked up Michael MArtin this morning the government will keep functioning.
Any chance you could stop with the waffle about this? The government circled the wagons and it has moved beyond them.
The government is working away but this STILL hangs over it.
They will be brought back in if this is adjudged to be a crime or worthy of prosecution.0 -
FrancieBrady wrote: »If they locked up Michael MArtin this morning the government will keep functioning.
Any chance you could stop with the waffle about this? The government circled the wagons and it has moved beyond them.
The government is working away but this STILL hangs over it.
They will be brought back in if this is adjudged to be a crime or worthy of prosecution.
I will continue with the facts thanks,for as long as you continue to opinion your wishes 0 -
Marine Layer wrote: »I will continue with the facts thanks,for as long as you continue to opinion your wishes
The government continues to function...we know this fact. They always do until they are no longer able and collapse. They are just ignoring Leo's predicament because it is out of their hands, they, like us are bystanders as a process of criminal investigation and DDP consideration completes.0 -
Advertisement
-
That of course is your opinion
It is mine that some here wish to have an innocent man tried and convicted of a crime that doesnt to our knowledge exist
The governments position is,they've moved on,content that there's no crime and closing the door to any Tom dick or paddy cosgrave disrupting the running of the country for a crime they believe not to exist
Proper order in my opinion 0 -
Marine Layer wrote: »Needs something new
All that's being posted here is repetition of opinions or people trying to get a rise out of each other
...Marine Layer wrote: »I don't know
What I do know is the government are so confident in that not happening that they've moved on
Someone stepping aside would be an indication that they weren't
Instead rather than set a precedent/opportunity for any Tom dick or Paddy Cosgrave to disrupt government they moved on whilst letting the process play out
Their action is really that simpleMarine Layer wrote: »It should also be pointed out though that one of those two could have been a super spreader disease event leading to deaths and the other is believed by the government not to be a crime at all,only a process that any Tom dick or paddy cosgrave could stir up
Wonder which is which?Marine Layer wrote: »Yeah,if I had a Fanny,I'd be a woman
That type of charade?
The justice system is not a charade
The government are so confident in their position on this that noone is stepping aside
No president created for any tom dick or paddy cosgrave to in their opinion spuriously interupt government in any way
They've moved on and let the process play out
It really is that simpleMarine Layer wrote: »It seems simple enough actually
They dont want to set a precedent whereby any Tom Dick or Paddy Cosgrave can engineer a process like the one thats ongoing and unseat a Minister in cases where they don't believe the accusation that a crime happened,and certainly have no regard for the bonifidé's of the accusers
If they did,their government would be gone
They must be very confident of the outcomeMarine Layer wrote: »I didn't say the government had anything to do with the process
They are just continuing confident in the opinion that no crime exists and letting the process instigated by a competitor of theirs or any Tom dick or paddy cosgrave play out like a huge percentage of investigations that dont conclude a crime always do
The justice system is not a game
It really is that simpleMarine Layer wrote: »The government don't believe a crime was committed and have moved on letting the process (they appear very confident) instigatable by any Tom dick or paddy cosgrave play out
No crime has been admitted toMarine Layer wrote: »Not really
Outside of Sinn Féin and those typically virulently anti Vradakar,this is spun as a process any Tom Dick or Paddy Cosgrave could get rolling against anyone including a Taoiseach
I wouldn't be at all surprised if when its concluded,several will speak to put what they see as misinformation about it to bed
Also as I said in the government thread,I think relying on it as a political football in the next election would be a mistake as its got too many angles for the then Taoiseach Vradakar to mince it,chief among them,its disgruntled originators and of course the opportunity to highlight the advantages of getting as many to sign up to the gp contract as didMarine Layer wrote: »Jaysis...
Could we get back on topic now
I'll start
The reason no one has stepped aside over this document thing,is the government believe no crime happened and don't want to be seen to be entertaining what they see as spurious processes instigated by any Tom Dick or Paddy Cosgrave designed to disrupt government
They've moved on and let the process play outMarine Layer wrote: »No tender hooks from the government,right from the start, when faced with what they believe to be mischief making posibilties available to any Tom ,Dick or Paddy Cosgrave
They're steadfastMarine Layer wrote: »But sure,they've nothing to protect,believing there to be no crime
Its more a case of preventing any Tom Dick or Paddy Cosgrave with a vandetta instigating investigations of what they believe not to be true
It seems the Times source has confirmed them right on that
No Crime,no charge
It really is that simpleMarine Layer wrote: »Here I've stuck to the known facts, that the government are confident that there's no crime and that they've moved on, letting the process that can be instigated by any Tom dick or Paddy cosgrave play outMarine Layer wrote: »The government who are in possession of the facts, have decided that this is not the stuff for precedent setting, opening the door for any Tom dick or Paddy Cosgrave to disrupt the business of running the countryMarine Layer wrote: »This is classed by our government as something they won't allow create a precedent that can be used by any Tom Dick or Paddy Cosgrave to disrupt the running of the country
Ergo the government have moved on letting the process play outMarine Layer wrote: »The government don't want to set a precedent where any Tom Dick or Paddy Cosgrave can disrupt the important business of the running of the country by setting in train processes like the one that's ongoing that they believe to have no basisMarine Layer wrote: »It's not, because they have all the facts of the matter and are confident in their decision that processes like this that can be instigated by any Tom dick or paddy Cosgrave should not be allowed create a government disrupting precedent
Ergo, they've moved onMarine Layer wrote: »Much to the disappointment of any Tom dick or paddy cosgrave who may try via instigating processes like what's playing out
Ergo, they've moved on
The FineGaelBot3000 needs some fine tuning.
Edit: missed another one while I was putting it together!0 -
Marine Layer wrote: »That of course is your opinion
It is mine that some here wish to have an innocent man tried and convicted of a crime that doesnt to our knowledge exist
The governments position is,they've moved on,content that there's no crime and closing the door to any Tom dick or paddy cosgrave disrupting the running of the country for a crime they believe not to exist
Proper order in my opinion
This is the completely farcical thing here. We still have no evidence to confirm a crime has been committed.
When someone is raped or assaulted or murdered, you can clearly see that a crime has been committed. In this case, we don't have that evidence, it is speculation that a crime is being committed.0 -
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
FrancieBrady wrote: »
*and no, I do not want to hear your learned opinion of the legislation. As I said you have undermined that by handwaving this a way through every stage it has progressed through. We will leave that to the 'experts'.
How is the viewpoint of innocent of a crime untill proven guilty handwaving?
Sure any tom dick or paddy cosgrave can instigate a crime investigation
In this case,the government are the ultimate authority on the status of the document
Ergo they've moved on, an indication of the facts in front of them
No amount of vradakar hate changes this 0 -
-
-
Marine Layer wrote: »How is the viewpoint of innocent of a crime untill proven guilty handwaving?
Sure any tom dick or paddy cosgrave can instigate a crime investigation
In this case,the government are the ultimate authority on the status of the document
Ergo they've moved on, an indication of the facts in front of them
No amount of vradakar hate changes this
The whole point of a Garda investigation is to ascertain either:
1) was a crime committed
or
2) given that a crime was committed, who committed said crime
Given we know Varadkar is the man in question here, the investigation is of the the 1st type. At this stage whether its a crime or not a crime nobody here can categorically say - thats up to the courts. So obsessing over whether it definitely is or isnt is just semantics. Mad that after how many months we still have people arguing over this point - I feel like I'm in a time warp.
Also about the highlighted - no, only the Gardai can instigate a criminal investigation. Members of the public can go to the Gardai if they believe a crime has taken place, but the investigation is up to the Gardai whether to start a case or not.
And as for that phrase - :pac:0 -
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
Marine Layer wrote: »Thanks
That was not an endorsement.Marine Layer wrote: »I suppose,since we are quoting a newspaper article and the village,I think it usefull to point out Vradakar has never said that he is immune from the official secrets act only that the document isn't coverrd by it
The government would know if this is the case
I've not heard yet of investigations into any other cabinet confidentiality question
Secondly we have the Sunday Times and Independent from a few weeks back telling us Garda sources haven't found any benefit from the document to vradakar
This is not surprising given the governments approach and that was to have the Dáil debate and move on
Varadkar stating that his own actions were lawful is hardly a surprise?
In investigations into misconduct of a member of the government, said government member is not to be used as any kind of authority into whether their actions were lawful.0 -
Marine Layer wrote: »How is the viewpoint of innocent of a crime untill proven guilty handwaving?
Sure any tom dick or paddy cosgrave can instigate a crime investigation
In this case,the government are the ultimate authority on the status of the document
Ergo they've moved on, an indication of the facts in front of them
No amount of vradakar hate changes this
Your insistence that 'the government has moved on', as something significant is the 'handwaving'.
The government are bystanders, just like you and me. It has no more influence on the course of events (we hope).
We await the outcome of what looks to be either a very thorough look at the evidence of a very complex one.
Either way, the 'government' have a senior minister who is the subject of a criminal investigation that they cannot 'move on' from. The government continues to function as it does, it even continued to function through a country closing pandemic.
Your handwaving means nothing in effect.0 -
-
-
Marine Layer wrote: »How is the viewpoint of innocent of a crime untill proven guilty handwaving?
Sure any tom dick or paddy cosgrave can instigate a crime investigation
In this case,the government are the ultimate authority on the status of the document
Ergo they've moved on, an indication of the facts in front of them
No amount of vradakar hate changes this
Mod: Can you please drop the use of this phrase, especially when you're repeating it ad nauseam. Once or twice was grand, but the repeated use of the same phrase would constitute trolling so let's leave it at that now.0 -
-
FrancieBrady wrote: »Who 'removed' the status?
Surely there is a paper trail on this order?
Cabinet minutes would be subject to the official secrets act, so I cannot answer that for you 0 -
Marine Layer wrote: »Cabinet minutes would be subject to the official secrets act, so I cannot answer that for you
So you don't now anything about this, but still proclaim you do?0 -
FrancieBrady wrote: »So you don't now anything about this, but still proclaim you do?
All I said was the government were confident,,having access to those details and have moved on
Thats certainly a fact 0 -
Advertisement
-
Marine Layer wrote: »All I said was the government were confident,,having access to those details and have moved on
Thats certainly a fact
The government don't have any choice but to "move on" they're awaiting the DPP decision, I don't think anyone expects them to do anything else until that happens, they've no control over what happens next, it's well out of their hands, all eyes will be on the DPP and what they decide to do. I believe they have to give a reason if they decide no prosecution is warranted, but there's a lot of people looking at this, they'll want to have all their ts crossed and I's dotted I would imagine.
Repeating "they've moved on" over and over again like it's some kind of revelation is silly.0 -
-
Marine Layer wrote: »All I said was the government were confident,,having access to those details and have moved on
Thats certainly a fact
So you don't know and it could be all bluster. Governments have blustered before and been wrong. That's a fact too.
Your're a beaten docket on this ML, just spinning the party line.0 -
no I'd say thats 1st part opinion,2nd part factFrancieBrady wrote: »So you don't know and it could be all bluster. Governments have blustered before and been wrong. That's a fact too.Your're a beaten docket on this ML, just spinning the party line.
In the above case,you're presenting your opinion of my opinion and not a fact at all
The thread of course is not about me 0 -
Marine Layer wrote: »no I'd say thats 1st part opinion,2nd part fact
In the above case,you're presenting your opinion of my opinion and not a fact at all
The thread of course is not about me
You can't back up your opinion...fact.
I can back up that governments engage in bluster and that governments have been wrong.0 -
Marine Layer wrote: »The thread of course is not about me
Going from your last 50 contributions it's now about Tom Dick and Paddy Cosgrave?Just why are Leo Varadkar’s friends abandoning him? Do they know something we don’t?
https://www.irishexaminer.com/opinion/columnists/arid-40278788.html
Reminiscent of the titanic rats, all doing a legger at the first whiff of weakness. I can't say I blame them.0 -
Advertisement
-
-
-
FrancieBrady wrote: »You can't back up your opinion...fact.
I can back up that governments engage in bluster and that governments have been wrong.
No,the bluster description would be opinion
I'd never dispute governments can be wrong
Your comments on my opinions this evening contain no facts about them,just your opinion
I've said the government are confident enough to move on because they know the documents status,they voted confidence in their Tánaiste and moved on
All fact[Deleted User] wrote: »Lot of anger here.
Ain't that a fact 0 -
-
-
Advertisement
![[Deleted User]](/applications/dashboard/design/images/defaulticon.png)
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement