Fearless Prediction --Bergeron Will Win Montreal Mayoralty Race

It's always easy to comment about why this one or that won an election after the fact. We all know the old chestnut about hindsight.

This week many people have asked me who will win the race and truthfully I wasn't sure until I saw the poll released this week that called the race to close to call.

Richard Bergeron had a stunning rise in support that turned the two horse race into a decidedly three-way affair.

Most Montrealers are sick over the choice between a separatist and an incompetent.
There is absolutely no justification for re-electing Mr. Tremblay, in consideration of the recent appalling revelations of corruption. But voting for a sovereignist is a cup of poison few federalists just can stomach.
A guest (I can't recall who) on Friday's Tommy Schnurmacher Show on Montreal's CJAD radio pointed out;"Between a mobster and a separatist, I'll go with the Mob!"

Richard Bergeron is a lefty new age candidate who is more known for his kooky conspiracy theories (he's a 9-1-1 Truther) than his political platform.

But recently, people are starting to make allowances. After all, our illustrious Prime Minister McKenzie King was nuttier than a fruitcake, holding séances and such not while ruling the country.

Mr. Bergeron has Judge Gomery on his side and nobody has a more honourable reputation for honesty than he, especially in Montreal. He also has a pretty good command of English. So what if he's kookoo.

People who were looking to reject Harel and Tremblay, needed a viable alternative. The latest poll will catapult those sitting on the fence over to Bergeron's side.

I therefore boldly predict that he will win the election with close to 40% of the vote and become Montreal's next mayor.

I can live with it.
The alternatives are worse.

By the way, if I'm wrong, I will make no apologies.

Have a good weekend!

Sylvie Roy Punked by Liberals?

When Sylvie Roy rose in Quebec Parliament and asked Premier Charest if he was aware that three of his members vacationed aboard Tony Accurso's yacht, it was particularly strange.

Not because the allegation was hard to believe, but rather at the way the question was put to the Premier and his reaction.

Ms. Roy had Parliamentary privilege and could have named the members, yet chose not to. Obviously she wasn't so sure of her information and was on a fishing expedition.

In response to questions by the press, she claimed that she had a source that refused to come forward out out fear of reprisals. Without naming the source publicly or having a secondary source to confirm the story, she obviously didn't feel that she was in a strong enough position to name names.

Strangely, Mr. Charest didn't seem overly perturbed by the potential bombshell that she dropped. He remained calm, collected and even challenged her to name names. When she didn't, Mr. Charest obligingly provided the names himself.

The next day Mr. Charest triumphantly announced that the allegations were false and all the members involved had denied ever being on Mr. Accurso's boat.
Every thing seemed to be playing out to the Premier's advantage and he was beaming.

It was all too neat. Ms. Roy had been set up.

Lucky for her that she hadn't named the names. Had she done so, immunity or not, she would be looking for a new job.

Many years ago I learned a valuable lesson in political disinformation from a friend who was working in politics.
He was an old hand at intrigue and described to me in detail how he salted false stories in newspapers or fed disinformation to neophyte politicians when it suited his purpose. It's simple, he told me; "When a politician or a political party is in trouble because of allegations of corruption (which is more often than not) it's useful to plant more stories of corruption which can then be proved to be untrue, thus tarnishing the veracity of the real allegations."
"And people really fall for it?" I asked incredulously.
His answer was succinct. "Everybody's on a deadline"

Over guffaws and a bottle of red, I asked him if he had ever worked for the KGB.

Over the years, I have seen this strategy employed a couple of times, but none as expertly as the lynching of Ms. Roy. It's as textbook case.

Still have doubts.
As they say in Latin 'Cui bono?', (Who benefits?) Madame Roy's source was obviously out to get someone, either her or the Liberal party. You decide.

The Liberals attempted to apply the coup de grace by invoking a motion to censure Madame Roy in the Assembly. It failed as it should have, but the Liberals are determined to keep up the pressure as a sideshow, to deflect calls for an inquiry into political donations and inflated contracts in the construction industry.

Sylvie Roy isn't out of the woods yet, she has been badly damaged in the court of public opinion. She'd better come out fighting if she wants to survive. She should tell the truth or out the informant.

This all could have been avoided if she had the courage to act honestly by asking a more adroit question in Parliament. It was a rookie mistake.

I can imagine the chuckles around Liberal party headquarters.

Stephen Harper Set to Deliver Another Painful Dose of Payback to Quebec

If Quebeckers thought that by sending separatist Bloc Quebecois members to Ottawa they would send a message to English Canada, they were right.

The message has finally been received loud and clear, albeit after many years.

No matter how accommodating, no matter how much money Ottawa ships to Quebec, no matter how many political concessions are made, Quebeckers will continue to thumb their noses at federalist parties.

It's a lesson that took both the Liberals and the Conservatives many years to comprehend, but the penny has finally dropped, at least on the Conservative side. Mr. Harper and the Conservative party have written off Quebec politically.

If ever there was a case of overplaying one's hand, this is it.

Ironically, Quebeckers remain blithely unaware that their flirtatious game is over.

While they continue to pull on the same old strings, Mr. Harper and the Conservatives have gone off in another direction.

In many ways Quebec's rejection of the Federal political parties in favour of the Bloc has set Mr. Harper free. No longer does he, nor his party harbour any illusions that indulging Quebec can translate into seats and so, he has been liberated to return to his natural base, a constituency that is decidedly anti-Quebec.

I recently wrote a post about Mr. Harper's plan to add seats in Parliament a move aimed to correct an imbalance and reflect the changing demographics of the Canadian reality. The seats to be added are all located outside of Quebec.

Should the proposed legislation go through, Quebec's proportion of seats in the Canadian Parliament will be reduced and the likelihood of forming a majority government without Quebec support, enhanced.

This proposal was met with expected fury in Quebec, but the threats of reprisals by Quebec voters rang hollow, there's not much to lose for the Conservatives in Quebec. Had Mr. Harper owned twenty or thirty seats in the province, he'd never have entertained such a move.

It is ironic that While the Bloc claims to defend Quebec's interest in Ottawa, it's presence has the opposite effect and serves to rob Quebec of any influence. Bloc members sit idly in opposition, twiddling their thumbs and hurling insults at the government.

Most Quebeckers would be shocked to see how little effect the Bloc really has in Ottawa. The high attrition rate of Bloc members is a testament to how they themselves view their effectiveness. The reality is that they are pointedly ignored by the other members of Parliaments. Some western MPs even pull out their translation ear piece when Bloc members rise in the house.

The announcement by the Tories that they will be seeking an opinion from the Supreme Court as to whether the formation of a national agency to regulate financial markets under Ottawa's auspices is legal, is but another signal that they no longer care what Quebec thinks.

If the court sides with the government, something likely to happen according to constitutional lawyers, it would spell another humiliating defeat for Quebec.

Quebec finance Minister Raymond Bachand was apoplectic in a speech delivered at an event organized by the AMF, Quebec's regulatory agency.

"The federal government has no right to legislate in this area that is under the jurisdiction of the province of Quebec!"

Without any strong voices in cabinet and without the weight of Parliamentary seats, Quebec is powerless to stop the assault on what the province perceives as an invasion on provincial rights.

How will the Quebec public react to this real loss of influence?

By voting for the Bloc Quebecois, of course. It is after all, Quebec.

Lawyer For Earl Jones Leads Reporters Around by the Nose

That reporters accept on face value, statements that are patently false or manipulative from people that they are interviewing is one of my pet peeves.

Last week Jeffrey Boro, Earl Jones' lawyer, made a statement that begged a combative response by an inquiring press.
He told reporters that Earl Jones was destitute, broke and living off his old age pension, unable to find work.

Pleeese!!!!!!!

Mr. Boro would have to go down to a farm if he wanted to fling more bullshit than that!

Not one reporter asked him, that in light of Mr Jones disastrous financial situation, how Mr. Boro's legal bills were being paid?

Of course, had he been asked, Mr. Boro would have declined to answer, claiming client/attorney privilege, but at least he'd be put on notice that his story that Mr. Jones is destitute, is purely fictional.

If Mr. Boro is working for free, than I apologize, but somehow I don't think so.

If Mr. Jones' family, or a mysterious benefactor, is paying his bills (not) wouldn't that same generous entity make sure that poor Earl was also taken care of?

The dirty little secret of most criminal lawyers is that their fees are usually paid out of the proceeds of crime, in many instances from the exact crime that their client is being tried for.

Getting paid in dirty money is a necessary part of the game and everybody in the legal game knows that it is true.
Whenever you see a defendant claiming poverty, look to his lawyer. If he's using a $400 an hour attorney, it isn't hard to come to another conclusion. Even Vincent Lacroix was smart enough to get a legal aid lawyer to keep up appearances.

At any rate, Earl Jones is wasting his money. He is going to get the max if he goes to trial, (which he is not) even if he hired Alan Dershowitz as defence council. Crown prosecutors are going to knock a year, possibly two off of the sentence in consideration of a guilty plea. Any legal aid lawyer could do the deal.
Mr. Jones should save his the money spent on expensive lawyers.

By the way, if Mr. Boro is so concerned about Mr. Jones not being able to find employment, perhaps he could offer him a job in his law firm's accounting department, where he can put his experience to good use!

Will the Real Louise Harel Please Stand Up.

Here's what Louise Harel is telling us today.

For those of you who don't have a clear recollection of who she really is , this is what Louise Harel was selling for 35 years.

This is what she really believes in;