ConCalls: Sun TV – No Credibility #RoboCon

I’d say that Sun TV lost credibility in this video clip from March ’12, but they’d have to have credibility to begin with, in order to lose it.

The Sault Star (obviously a Sun affiliate) handily provides one bit of evidence to show the reporter/pundit in the video clip as incorrect about Elections Canada being unaware of illegal robocalls during the May ’11 election. The Star’s usefulness ends there though.

Check out CBC’s report instead.
“The emails show Elections Canada officials discussed putting out a news release to warn voters about the calls.”

Contrary to Sun’s claim that no reporters were aware of illegal robocalls, CBC was among the media to help warn Canadians there were fake Elections Canada phone calls being sent out in parts of the country.

Also, check out the Star’s ridiculously biased poll options:

Will the ‘robocalls’ scandal dent the Tories’ popularity?
[So, given the situation where evidence shows that Elections Canada detected illegal activity conducted by the Conservative Party, and failed to lay charges, the concern should be, "will the Conservatives slip in the polls"?]

88%
15 votes
In the short term, yes
[In the short term? Short term?? What about the long term, eh? How about de-registering the entire Conservative Party of Canada for running a scam to cheat in the last general election?]

6%
1 votes
No. The right party won
[Holy crap! The Star actually thinks it's acceptable to provide a poll option that justifies election fraud, because the "right party won". So long as your boys win, cheating and law breaking and authoritarianism is okay, eh?]

6%
1 votes
I don’t know
[Now you do.]

About these ads

21 responses to “ConCalls: Sun TV – No Credibility #RoboCon

  1. Excellent ‘catch-up’.. clear & minimal, factual. Unfortunately the stark and grim reality of 234 affected ridings and impending Supreme Court cases slip to the background, probably due to lack of information or progress from Elections Canada.

    What truly staggers me.. and is what I infer is incredibly damning.. is the fierce denial from our government and conservatives that anything untoward actually happened.. aside from Guelph…

    – Fast Forward – Mr Harper declares his government will not support re-opening debate on abortion & women’s right – and yet a majority of the Harper Government’s MP’s and Federal Ministers in fact do vote in support of the Woodworth motion. There’s an interesting fact that appears to have escaped Mr Harper.. and he certainly has not enlightened Canadians regarding it. A majority faction, theocratic or creationist.. or evangelical.. anti abortion within his own government, that he seemingly has no control over.. hmm.. had no inkling ?

    – Flash back to Now – Since the EC investigation involves electoral fraud, a crime.. I wonder why so many obvious people have not been deposed or interviewed. I assume there is a suitable penalty for lying to or attempting to obstruct the investigation.

    Its been clearly explained by numerous informed sources, that 234 ridings with live and robo call messages hitting specific non conservative voters is an extensive, expensive, sophisticated and coordinated campaign. Aside from cost and hardware/connectivity access, database work, scripting.. it appears an added and very inhibiting workflow was necessary. It had to be devised, mounted and executed in complete secrecy and leave no trail back to its sponsors, management cadre, operations crew or service providers/enablers.

    Why ? Why the elaborate cover up .. ? Because it was understood the fraud and suppression would be discovered due to its broad scope. It had to be bulletproof. But it used electoral data from The Harper Government and the Conservative Party.. as well as certain campaign phone numbers, and allegedly, certain Conservative live/robo call service providers.

    We’re now being asked to believe, assume or wonder, per the Prime Minister’s ‘fiat’ – and via Ms Jenni Byrne, Arthur Hamilton, Giorno, De Lorey, Van Loan, Poilievre et al .. that Conservative campaign phone numbers were used without any official campaign staff/volunteers awareness, despite being informed of this by Elections Canada, prior and up to the election.. The phone use occurred at the riding levels. The denials that the central campaign was involved or aware, continue to fly, but it seems harder currently, to gain comments from conservative apparatchiks. Hence my surprise that these highly informed, potentially helpful people have not be deposed or interviewed. Arthur Hamilton excluded of course.. Client/Solicitor privilege y’know ..

    My humble observation .. re a very odd coincidence

    We have concerted, stone cold, criminal and suppression actions against Canadian people, laws, democracy, election and votes.. conducted within an environment of secrecy, obstruction, malice, technology and misdirection.
    We have motive/weapon, we know who benefitted.. we all know who is denying
    via shrill state paid lawyers and Conservative spokespersons.

    We have concerted, stone cold, omnibus budgets enacted against, pensions of Canadian people, existing law, environment, electorate, conducted within an
    environment of secrecy, obstruction, theocracy, bluster, and redaction.
    We have motive/weapon, we know who benefits.. we all know who is denying
    via the exact same state paid lawyers and Conservative spokespersons.

    • In the CoC court case, where the Cons have calculated it doesn’t matter, they’ve admitted they misdirected people, but claim now it was by accident, and only their own supporters in a botched Get Out The Vote phone effort. This revelation undermines their defence later in criminal court.

  2. Canada has become a, putrid cesspool of corruption.

    That Harper lied and cheated to win the election, is a given. That Harper is now lying and cheating, to get out of his election fraud is another given. Harper also campaigned over a Calgary radio station, right on election day. That too is election fraud.

    Corbett of Elections Canada, suddenly “resigned”? Harper installed his own boy in Elections Canada, Yves Corte. Other honest members of Elections Canada, “resigned”?? Harper is desperately trying to quash, the robo-call election cheat investigation.

    The election riding disputes? We have judges overruling judges. Harper is scared to death he could lose his majority, he cheated so hard to get.

    The media are propaganda machines for the government. There is no such thing as, good honest journalism and reporting anymore. The media are a shameful disgrace, to their professions. There should be a refresher course for journalists, who have lost their way of, truth, honesty, credibility, and dignity. That is sure in the hell is lacking.

    Harper has no ethics nor morals, what-so-ever. He is a Traitor, selling us out to a Communist country, is Treason. The only way provinces can protect themselves and avoid Harper’s treachery, is to separate. This country isn’t Canada anymore anyhow. Let Harper keep Ottawa and Alberta, he can dictate to his hearts content. The rest of the provinces, can form their own country. We can restore our Democracy, our Civil Rights and Liberties. We can keep, our Freedom of Speech, and protect our Human Rights. Harper is taking, ALL of that away.

    • G, sometimes I wonder if you’re unbalanced… the rest of the time I know you are.

      One of your biggest harpies is “He is a Traitor, selling us out to a Communist country, is Treason.” yet no decision has been made about this issue! Talk about just making stuff up! Harper did reject China’s attempt to own Sask potash.

      As further projection, look who DOES favour the ethical oil sands CNOOC-Nexen deal: “Why is the CNOOC-Nexen deal good for Canada? Because Chinese and other foreign investors will create middle-class Canadians jobs. Foreign investments raises productivity, and hence the living standards of Canadian families. More fundamentally, it is in Canada’s interest to broaden and deepen our relationship with the world’s second-largest economy.” Justine Trudeau wrote in an op-ed for Postmedia. sunnewsnetwork.ca/sunnews/politics/archives/2012/11/20121120-144025.html

      Then again, as a true seperatiste, you would think “The only way provinces can protect themselves and avoid Harper’s treachery, is to separate.”. When you say rubbish like this G “This country isn’t Canada anymore anyhow.” this immigrants advice to you would be ‘move then’.

  3. I doubt that there were 234 ridings in play. Most likely, I would guess that there was “spillage” whereby Riding A’s phone list contained phone numbers for people living in other ridings. A conspiracy covering 234 ridings just doesn’t make any sense even if people in 234 ridings did receive a phone call of one sort or another.

    • Its included in court documents by Elections Canada & RCMP as fraudulent or misleading phone calls in 234 ridings.. Is there a number that makes sense? There were also unregistered voters, likely vote moving tactics employed as well. ( http://www.votemoving.com/ ) I’d like to see the entire illegal campaign reverse engineered so to speak, so we can see how many people, how many phone numbers, how much technology had to be aligned.. how much central command/coordination etc

      • Some of these sorts of questions are answered by googling “saskboy production” to find my fact filled post with recordings, court document links, etc…

      • I don’t doubt that voters in 234 ridings were contacted with fraudulent calls of one kind or another. I’m just saying that some of those calls were probably spill-overs from inaccurate lists. For example, they may have been contacting people who used to live in Guelph but had moved to another riding. If they had received a robocall, it would have likely referenced Guelph and not the riding they lived and voted in. It’s perhaps a small point but I think it can hurt credibility to say that illegal attempts were made to influence the results in 234 ridings.

      • Can accurately and safely say that voters were interfered with in at least 234 ridings, some of which were interfered with to the point that it’s likely a percentage who were suppressed significantly impacted the results.

        Robocalls of this sort are used because they have an effect. For those out there claiming they want proof that misdirection robocalls actually change the vote turnout, ignore that the perpetrators believe it to be true. If there’s no significant effect, why commit the crime? If our law requires suppressed voters to come forward in sufficent numbers and admit to an act that is supposed to be secret, well, then our law is messed up.

  4. Thanks Sask .. for the tireless and often thankless tracking
    of ‘facts’ and strict avoidance of conjecture.. presumption.
    Instead going with ‘evidence based diagnosis or observation ..’

    I don’t quite know what to make of redjeff..
    which is not a problem for me.. or for you, evidently

    You and he (or her) seem obvious adversaries ..
    Yet I take my cue from your patience and respect for dissent & freedom of speech .. props to you for that exemplary ‘walk the walk’ attribute

    Jeffy .. you surprise .. in many good ways
    especially in presenting alternative accurate specifics
    of general topics/conflicts pertinent to the situation

    This is the Canada I appreciate..
    opinion, dissent, discussion.. riposte .. thrust

    We are not a ‘meek shall inherit’ culture.. or country ..

    • Sorry Diamond, but Sask is only running on conjecture and presumption.

      I’ve been harping on for quite some time for a name of a disenfranchised voter. Despite the bleatings no name has been provided. None. The recent Supreme Court decision in the Opitz Etobicoke Centre case was clear in the view of the court… a result can be overturned if “the number of impugned votes is sufficient to cast doubt on the true winner,”.

      Clearly this is not the case. Even the litigants for the Clowncil of Canadians have been forced to admit they voted. Thus, barring any change of ‘witnesses’ the court would find no reason to overturn the election results. What the top court has affirmed is what I’ve been almost singularly saying… in order to show a vote invalid you have to show, and prove, a proportionate number of ‘victims’. Again, the Clowncil can’t.

      The court also said the “result can be overturned where fraudulent activities “are such as to call into question the integrity of the electoral process.””. This becomes a guessing game of numbers with no legitimate correct answer. The figures are interpolations, extrapolations and statistical conjecture of behavioral patterns and (repressed ha ha!) memories with little to no proof of accuracy. Like it or not, the courts are loathe to intervene on voting issues, especially when it comes to the judiciary deciding the outcome of the electorate. More so when the judiciary themselves get to decide the number.

      • You keep harping, because you don’t listen. If you did listen, it’d destroy your narrative, which is why I’ll keep pointing out to late arrivals that you are not an honest debater, and fit Thwap’s description.

        You only want one name? Lori Bruce. There are many more who came forward with credible information that they were illegally contacted by live callers claiming to represent Elections Canada, and misdirected them. Your claim that “not a single person has come forward” is demonstrably bogus. Besides, when the Cons are finally charged with a crime, the law doesn’t rely on victim testimony to prosecute, it’s dependent upon a guilty mind and a guilty act. Both are easily demonstrated, and your bogus and moot deflection only further injures the party you support.

        To claim simultaneously that the robocalls had no effect, and that people also respond to telemarketing, is not just mind boggling, it exposes your “intellectual” dishonesty. I suppose whoever paid for the robocalls (illegal and otherwise) did so knowing they wouldn’t have any effect other than to put their reputations and standing into disrepute? You’re an idiot.

      • Lori Bruce in fact voted. She was not disenfranchised.

        Perhaps you don’t comprehend the difference between ‘people coming forward’ and ‘people who were disenfranchised’. Hell the Clowncil has 31,000 coming forward. None disenfranchised.

        Sorry to debate ‘idiotically’ but the above were quotes from your beloved Steve Maher. Again, to debate ‘idiotically’, can you point out to where I implied (never mind said) “(I) claim… that people also respond to telemarketing”? Or did you just make the strawman up?

        The rest of your response is just nothing short of presumptive soothsaying. Debate it’s not.

      • Well what do you know, you’re actually right about something, Bruce did vote. I copied my comment from earlier, as an answer to your claim that not a name of anyone could be given who was contacted by the Conservatives to attempt to prevent them from voting. Gzap’s answer is better, where many in Guelph complained they were sent to an empty parking lot.

        It could be very hard to find a long list of names of people who didn’t vote and were affected by an illegal robocall since we can’t exactly pour through the list of electors like Elections Canada can, and the queries in CIMS that determined who got calls. Investigators can do this though (except they seem to have not got an uncorrupted copy of CIMS to work with).

        It’s not exactly human nature to admit when they’ve been conned, and couple that with a semi-secret process like voting, and there’s a crime that’s really hard to get first-hand accounts into the media for us to see individuals affected. Your claim, and the Conservatives’ that individuals cannot be provided, remains a stupid test when there are audio recordings of fraudulent calls, and emails from Elections Canada to the Conservatives regarding the fraud calls. You cannot deny the crime without looking crazy(ier) so you pick the closest loop hole you’ve been working on for months as if it somehow justifies the crime.

      • I think it could also be argued, that being misdirected away from a real poll, is a form of disenfranchisement, regardless if the person overcomes the obstacle put in their way.

        “Disfranchisement (also called disenfranchisement) is the revocation of the right of suffrage (the right to vote) of a person or group of people, or rendering a person’s vote less effective, or ineffective. Disfranchisement may occur explicitly through law, or implicitly by intimidation or by placing unreasonable requirements.”

      • Enough with the ‘disinenfranchised’ straw man argument, redintheface.

        This debate is about electoral fraud, through attempts to misdirect voters. As the council of Canadians case says, enough calls were made to sway the outcomes in a number of ridings.

        It is illegal under Canadian law.

        Why are you still supporting breaking the law and thwarting democracy?
        Are you afraid of your part in this crime coming out?

      • Sask, I’ve been right all along. It’s just taken you 5 months to clue in.

        Sadly, rather than find out the truth yourself, one that runs counter to your narative, you would rather threaten, falsely accuse and lie… “My next response will be to toss you out of here again if you can’t leave your tired, sorry ass, wrong, propaganda in the past and try to debate honestly.” So, being tossed for being honest.

        As for “honest debate”, please explain to me how this is possible when you spend the next 7 lines trying to justify the strawman argument you, yourself created? “as an answer to your claim that not a name of anyone could be given who was contacted”. Seriously, after 5 months you still couldn’t read the question right? Even G sez “Enough with the ‘disinenfranchised’ straw man argument”. He read it right. Didn’t understand it but he read it right.

        Not to worry, you’re still ahead of the curve compared to G. By that I mean he still thinks one of the Supreme Court’s two criteria of overturning an election result is a “strawman”. Brilliance.

        You’re correct in that “It could be very hard to find a long list of names of people who didn’t vote (because of bobocall)” that’s why I only require a single solitary one. Hmmmmmmm, I wonder if you read this request right?

        Weird, you also say that “It’s not exactly human nature to admit when they’ve been conned” yet over 31,000 signed up on the Clowncil of Canadian internet survey. Seems THESE bunch are bustin’ at the seams to show victimhood. Poor precious snowflakes.

        Finally, whether we find it “stupid” or not is academic, the Supreme Court has ALREADY ruled that “(my) claim, and the Conservatives’ that individuals cannot be provided” is an acid test for action on disallowing an election result. That said, if you think the top court’s strict criteria nothing more than a “loophole”, you would probably think of the nations laws as no more than an nuisance… in a dictatory kinda’ way.

      • It’s not a straw man, we know EC has been contacted by thousands of people impacted by the illegal calls, and it’s not for you to know at this point (or ever) if they voted or not.

        The bottom line is you’re taking the position you are because it supports the resulting situation, which used election fraud, voter suppression, and interfering automated (and live) phone calls. It’s really disgraceful.

        Etobicoke Centre at the Supreme Court was handled badly by the court because it failed to consider the other polls within the riding. They tossed votes from only the 10 polls looked at as a sample, and didn’t extrapolate or force Elections Canada to submit the remaining polls for review. As a result, they came to the wrong decision. Fortunately, the six other ridings challenged don’t depend on the faulty paperwork at EC, but rather the extent to which robocalls suppressed the vote across the riding. Since a scientific survey can show there’s a likelihood of the result being impacted, it’s only sensible for the court to order a by-election. The court isn’t installing an opposing MP, they are simply enforcing the law which says a highly questionable result should result in another election.

        Legitimacy: it’s what you and the Conservatives lack.

      • It is a strawman Sask. Instead of discussing the one of two criteria needed by the Supreme Court, your answer is about a contactee. That is a strawman. You then spend the next 4 lines repeating the same strawman!!! Maybe you don’t realize you’re doing it, a mental block or something.

        The bottom line is I’m taking the position I am because it is supported by the Supreme Court and the ‘magic number test’. If you want to create a SECOND strawman for yourself, and subsequently argue that, go ahead, maybe you’ll beat yourself in your debate… maybe you won’t!

        As for Etobicoke-Center, the victory was Opitz’s, the recount gave it to Opitz and the Supreme Court reversing a wrong lower court decision declare Opitz the winner. 10 individual polls were called into question, 10 individual polls were investigated and 10 individual polls confirmed the results. But still the QDP isn’t happy.

        Finally, the last 10 lines of your spiel is nothing short of a self-justification for not having, and it seems in your opinion, not needing to meet the burden of proof…
        -other ridings challenged don’t depend on the faulty paperwork
        -a scientific survey can show
        -there’s a likelihood
        -it’s only sensible for the court
        -a highly questionable result

        That said why is the burden of proof so important? I’ll leave the last word to Steven Shrybman, lawyer for the Clowncil of Canadians (CoC)… “Ms. Bielli informs me that at the time of swearing her affidavit, and until our call [on Oct. 18], she had the honest belief that she resided in the riding of Don Valley East,” Steven Shrybman wrote in the letter.” http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2012/10/23/pol-election-challenger-lives-in-wrong-riding-tories-contend.html

        DESPITE Ms Bielli’s, DESPITE Mr Shrybman’s and DESPITE the CoC suckers honest beliefs, they were all, to a man, completely wrong. The courts burden of proof puts paid to that.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s