Presidential Election 2025

Being a barrister, banker, bailiff, sheriff - leveller, wrecker - is not a get out of jail card - irrespective of whether they are just doing their job - irrespective of whether you agree with them or not.

So somebody doing their job as all barristers do is the same as a guy stiffing someone out of over 3 grand and he and his party thinking he could be President?

That's still a moral cop out.

If you don't agree with it then don't do it.

She has agreed to become a barrister and all that entails - by free choice. Don't allow her to run away from her decisions.

It's about you because you're the one posting this stuff.

CC has a great chance of winning this election, I gave her very little chance at the outset, I felt who ever finished first of the two government candidates would win. The campaign and polls have changed that dynamic...I'm more hopeful for CC now, far from certain she'll do it but 'running scared' I most certainly am not.

I find myself defending CC here. Anybody involved in repossessions is regarded as the devil incarnate. As it happens we needed more repossessions in the property crash, and faster ones too, especially when people who gambled in the market refused to face up to their responsibilities.

Regardless of who you support in this election, the stories will continue to roll in from everywhere, and anywhere. It would seem to me that Connollys hands were probably tied, and she did the job required of her. If that included repossessions, then so be it.

That said, its a presidential election. I wouldnt be surprised at all if individual people, who had their houses repossessed in proceedings that involved Connolly, begin to come forward. They have a right to do so. While it may not be possible for Connolly to get into specifics on these issues, for legal reasons; There will be no impediments on a private citizens; Nothing is preventing them from telling their story. I fully expect this to come up.

On this one I feel some sympathy for CC, its a tough job to do, distasteful certainly. Although it was her job and her hands were tied, if more stories emerge it will cause damage to her campaign. She probably needs to clarify what she can on this issue. The fact that she didnt rule out repossessions in the article, probably means there were a few.

Were I in her shoes, i would get out on front of this. Not being a barrister, im unsure where she stands.

I fully expect that she cannot go into specifics, but surely a clarification could be permissible. Akin to her saying, yes this happened for 'certain' clients et al. She could spin it, as evidence of how she conducts herself when a job requires her to take actions which conflict with her opinion? I mean, if i am a voter, worrying whether or not CC would sign in to law, a bill which she disagrees with; I really do have an answer now. She will do the job required of her, regardless of personal beliefs or opinions.

Optically its a bad situation though. Spin or no spin, if the stories emerge, they may be quite damaging. And if her hands are tied, legally, then the story as a whole may fester in the public square. Like i said at the start, its a presidential election. There are only two candidates, and more of these skeletons will pop up from both of their closets. We just have to judge how relevent they are to each of their campaigns. This one is, or is not relevent, depending on how you feel about CC, and what your opinion is on repossessions.

attack in court, you obviously have no idea how repossion works.. funniest post I have read in a while

The Irish Times trying to hit Connolly on using "tax payer funded allowances" for Syria trip. It is getting a bit desperate at this stage. Paddy Power has Connolly at 2/7 and Humphreys at 5/2. As usual, FFers prove spineless and grovel before Martin. It will be interesting to see the Irish Times/Ipsos-B&A poll and the RedC poll.

I think the barrister nonsense is the story that is liable to consolidate support for CC.

I said back earlier in the thread that the anti CC's needed to thread carefully because it could be seen as desperate mudslinging and bring support to her rather than take it away.

Can't remember what it was but barrister Jim O'Callaghan had the fact he had represented Gerry Adams sensationally thrown at him. The cab-rank rule got explained and they moved on. Callaghan is now mentioned in dispatches as leader of FF.