Andrew Prescott’s immunity deal is a strange development. The loyal party worker and born-again Christian had for two years categorically denied any knowledge of or involvement in the robocall affair. But why do innocent people need immunity deals? One of the people Prescott professed his innocence to was Michael Sona.
“I looked Andrew dead in the eyes outside church. He was in his car in the parking lot. I asked him if he knew anything. He said, ‘I don’t know anything.’ That’s why I defended him when I went on the CBC. I took him at his word.”
Sources say that just before the Calgary floods cancelled the CPC convention, Prescott had made the same claim to a friend — that he was innocent of any involvement in the robocalls. At the time of that conversation, Prescott was angry because the party would not give him credentials as a blogger as they had at previous conventions.
Andrew Prescott’s information fingers the already charged Michael Sona, and the exiled Ken Morgan who is living in Kuwait. Prosecutors will have to decide if he is telling them the truth, or if he was telling me the truth when he told me in an email conversation he’d asked me to share on my blog last year:
Feel free to think whatever you may… however, know that pretty much every point you touched on in your e-mail is wildly incorrect. Specifically, your assumption that I know anything about whatever happened on a local OR national scale.
You are wrong. Period.
That’s an odd person to give immunity to.
.@ChristianConsrv You told the whole country for 2 years you knew absolutely NOTHING about #robocon. Don't you think people are sad w you?!— Pierre Poutinievre (@PrrePoutinievre) April 04, 2014
If the CPC was cooperating with the investigation, why did it take nearly three months for Hamilton to arrange an interview with Guelph campaign worker Andrew Prescott for lead investigator Al Mathews, and why did national campaign director Jenni Byrne advise Prescott not to talk to Mathews before she talked to a lawyer?
SATIRE: “Commissioner Yevs Cote told Postmedia’s Stephen McMaher, “It’s been really difficult for investigators to obtain evidence when the trail led to the United States, as we have no power there.””
REALITY: “[Pierre Poutine] created an email address for himself — firstname.lastname@example.org When EC investigators tried to get account information for that address, Google claimed that it was an American company that operated under American law and did not have to comply with the court order.” Continue reading →
It’s time for a federal election. They want to change fundamental Canadian rights, and oppose laws in our Constitution that they didn’t get a mandate for in their crooked 2011 stable victory.
A not-so-radical proposal: If the government wants to make major changes to the Supreme Court, the Senate, and how people are elected to the Commons, why not let the people decide?
“Normally, electoral reform is done with wide, multipartisan consent, simply because our democratic rights are so basic. (They are often why wars are fought, for instance.) But there’s been no wide consultation — much less consent — for what the Conservatives are planning.
Political-science professors, domestic and international , have joined the protest.”
It’s been time for an election since 2012 when we learned the governing party benefited from election fraud in 247 ridings.
Borys Wrzesnewskyj, the former Liberal MP in Etobicoke Centre, successfully went to court to have the May 2, 2011, election results in the riding overturned due to ballot irregularities. Conservative Ted Opitz, who won the riding by 26 votes, has appealed the decision to the Supreme Court of Canada.
The seniors’ home incident, which Wrzesnewskyj dropped from his case before it was heard, happened at the St. Demetrius Seniors Residence, a large apartment building in Etobicoke offering assisted living and long-term care.
Affidavits filed by three Elections Canada polling staffers at this poll, number 427, describe a Conservative named Roman who arrived at the poll in the morning and “suddenly started screaming and waving his arms wildly … He was raging in a bullying fashion, which caused confusion, and frightened many voters.”
Mr. Opitz broke the Election Act by exceeding a limit to the tune of thousands of dollars, and is not facing charges! This after he went to court to defend his seat narrowly won amidst voter intimidation and the Robocalls scandal, rather than resign and run again.
1. Conservatives did not consult Elections Canada.
[The Conservatives avoid and work against Elections Canada, said the Federal Court.]
2. Elections Canada wanted investigative powers: request denied and then some.
3. The bill “closes loopholes to big money”… by raising donation and spending limits?
Also, the costs of calling past donors who gave $20 or more will not be considered a campaign expense. Weird. Call it the RMG provision.— Glen McGregor (@glen_mcgregor) February 04, 2014
4. Make it harder for youth and poor people to vote.
5. Rush the debate on complex legislation.
Why isn’t this Orwellian Fair Elections Act part of the upcoming undemocratic budget omnibus bill?
In all seriousness, if I thought more people were concerned and not scared of opposing this government to retake fair elections, I’d be organizing a protest for Regina to publicly demonstrate.
Andrew Prescott has reportedly worked out an immunity from prosecution agreement in the Pierre Poutine Robocalls (RoboCon) election fraud of 2011. Presently Michael Sona faces charges as the only Conservative charged in Guelph with the Pierre Poutine conspiracy to misdirect voters by fraudulently claiming to be Elections Canada.
“Why would Prescott need immunity, if he’d not done anything wrong?” is what I expect Conservatives to ask. Well, actually I don’t expect it from Conservatives, but I’d hope they’d think about it.
Liddy thinks that a note she sent to Elections Canada may have lit a fire. In that note, she told investigators that she had also alerted the RCMP to a Fantino tele-conference hosted by embattled Senator Mike Duffy back in 2010 that she can’t find expensed in the candidate’s public filings.
The Duffy/Fantino tele-townhall is a bit of a mystery.
“During the meeting of January 18, 2011, Mr. Sam Ciccolini made the Vaughan Electoral District Conservative Board of Directors aware of a second bank account that he reported had hundreds of thousands of dollars in it,” Mr. Lorello wrote in his affidavit.
Mr. Lorello claims that he and other directors “expressed serious concerns” about the second bank account and requested a copy of the financial statements to disclose details about the funds before accepting them.
Mr. Lorello also said in his affidavit that the minutes of the January 18 meeting did not contain any reference to the discussions about the alleged second bank account, suggesting the official record had been sanitized.
Tracey Kent was also at the January 18 meeting and corroborated Richard Lorello’s account of how the Vaughan EDA learned of the existence of another bank account. Kent had been a member of the Vaughan Conservative EDA for four years, including a stint as Chief Financial Agent. One of her problems with the alleged second account, was that it had never been under the control of Julian Fantino’s Chief Financial Agent.