Putting faces to the election fraud story

Duffy has the great misfortune of looking like a caricature of what it turns out he is.  Wallin is less porcine in appearance but still holds looks like someone who believes she is better than others, naturally entitled to perks and law breaking activities.

For many people, it is easier to relate to a story and to stay interested in it when it has a face.

I believe this is part of the reason why the PMO/Senate stories are getting so much attention, while the more serious issue of election fraud is scarcely mentioned.  In fact, some people seem to think that the matter is resolved because a judge made a ruling and no charges were laid.

Charges were not laid because it wasn’t that kind of a case.

The Council of Canadians launched a lawsuit to ask for by-elections to be ordered in seven ridings where complaints were received and where Conservatives had won by slim margins.   Judge Mosley ruled that there was no proof that robocalls changed the outcome in those ridings so he dismissed the case.

He did, however rule  “that electoral fraud had indeed been committed by Conservatives in six ridings across Canada.”

So the story isn’t over, the matter is not resolved.  The election results in the ridings in question are, for now, to stand, but there is now a clear ruling that election fraud has been committed.

What does the law do when fraud has been committed?  It investigates, finds who committed the fraud, and charges them.

We know that the current elected government will not order an investigation into anything that could make them look bad unless the public outcry is so loud and constant that it causes them to drop sharply in the polls.  We know that other bodies, like the RCMP also act more quickly under public pressure.

Not all the pressure from the opposition will make a bit of difference if the issue is not picked up and repeated over and over by the press and makes its way into the daily discourse of many, many Canadians.

So with all of that in mind, here are some of the faces of this election fraud story:

 

Joyce Bateman

Kelly Block

John Duncan

Ryan Leef

 

Lawrence Toet

 Joe Daniel

Were they knowing participants in the election fraud which occurred in their ridings?  Only a criminal investigation can help answer that although they should know what their campaign is up to, and they are responsible for how it is run.

Did those ridings, and others all across Canada simultaneously and independently engage in election fraud?  Not likely, not remotely reasonable to think so.

And who is it that sets the tone for a party to believe that committing fraud to win an election is not only fine, but encouraged?

This guy:

(photo)

  
Whether or not harper had direct knowledge or direct involvement in the election fraud , he still set the tone.  He’s the leader, and he is responsible for what those under his leadership do.

Not surprising harper hates artists.

Through their art, good artists reveal the nature of their subject.

By chance, I came upon a 2010 blog post by Ottawa photographer Tony Fouhse entitled STEPHANIE + STEPHEN.  

In the post, he shows photos he took of “drug addict” Stephanie, and “power addict” Stephen Harper.  Tony writes about his experience photographing both, offering us the perspective of an artist trying to capture their nature.

I think he did a phenomenal job with harper – 

 

Considering the restrictions imposed upon his shoot by harper & Co., Tony’s results are amazing.

"But before I get into the vibe of the Harper shoot I have to tell you that his people gave me 45 minutes to set up and he would sit for 5 minutes. So it’s not like I know him like I know Stephanie. But a fotoshoot can be a charged, intense situation, one which provides all kinds of dynamic and input that allow you to see more clearly.

And you walk away with proof….. "

Yes, you do.

That is without doubt the most chilling photo of harper I have seen.  Cold, emotionless, a touch of contempt and cruelty showing in his pressed lips.  Slight impatience in the posture and eyes. 

Tony tells us something more of what the experience told him of harper's nature:

"But the way Steph does it is, she acts, she gets in touch with some emotion and shows it to me. Not in a pretentious way, but in a way that approaches some truth. She wants to connect.

Stephen, on the other hand, doesn’t act. He just stands there and is himself. No emotion, no connection.

And that’s a kind of truth, too."

Yes, it is.

Three years have passed since that photo was taken and harper has since learned that he needs to soften his image, needs to appear more human, needs to pretend that he is approachable.  I doubt he would allow an independent artist to take his photo now unless he could stage the shots to his pretend heart’s content and own full rights of the product.

Despite his best efforts at staging photo ops to project a nature he wants Canadians to believe he has, photos of him over the past few years fail miserably to warm Canadians to him.  They are so obviously staged, so contrived, and harper is so very uncomfortable having to pretend to be something he isn’t.

In five minutes, Tony Fouhse saw something three years ago that is only becoming obvious  to many Canadians now -

“He just stared into the camera.  There was no transparency.” – Tony Fouhse, MacLean’s Portraits, 100 Years of Celebrity, Power and Personality, Saturday, April 27, 2013

Are you losing your mind, or just lying, Marjory?

Does the woman even care that reality might actually slap her silly?  I guess not -

Marjory LeBreton, speaking to reporters in the Senate foyer, said, " It's ridiculous. The idea that the prime minister or anyone would pass over elected members of the House of Commons and name Mike Duffy as a minister? It's so ridiculous it's not even funny. It's totally bizarre. Who knows, who knows, but when I read it, when I read it — I don't know who the recipient of the email was — but when I read it I went, like, there isn't a chance of a snowball in hell of this ever happening, and I never spoke to him about it."

OK, I know 2006 was a whole seven years ago, but really, have you forgotten this guy?

 

Here's a hint:  he was one of yours.  You know, an unelected Senator.  And - brace yourself, Marjory - the prime minister (that would be harper, mam)  passed over elected members of the House of Commons and named him Minister of Public Works and Government Services.  Neat trick, that.  I'm surprised you don't remember, considering this:

Because he will be a senator, Public Works Minister Michael Fortier won't be able to enter the Commons or appear before committee of the whole House of Commons to answer questions about the $13 billion in procurement contracts his department signs annually on behalf of the government.