Alison at Creekside has a much better summary of what’s happening behind the scenes on the RoboCon movie than I could hope to write. Warning: If you keep reading though, you may feel the urge to spend $20 or more dollars toward exposing Canada’s most effective election fraud criminals.
Michael Sona has to wait until next month to find out how much time he’s spending in jail for being convicted of participating in a nefarious scheme to defraud Guelph voters of their votes.
While Sona’s been found guilty of one charge, questions remain about how he would have managed to have log files removed from CPC Headquarter’s computer database known as CIMS.
Sona did not have computer access, or skills to perform that part of the cover-up, so how did those log files go missing. How did unnamed Conservatives in Ottawa avoid obstruction charges for their apparent participation?
The judge didn’t believe the liar Andrew Prescott. Why’d he believe any of the other Conservative staffers who were telling the same sort of lies, we may never know.
Yeah, they did give him immunity to compel testimony.
So kids, if you commit election fraud in Canada, move to Alberta, or Kuwait, and you’ll be free. As it stands now, the Conservatives last election overspent on multiple campaigns, and at least in Guelph (and actually in hundreds of other ridings too not mentioned in this verdict) took steps to misdirect voters away from polls. The party of Contempt for democracy is the party of election fraud.
(PC Load Letter is from printer displays of the past, and the comedy Office Space. It indicates the paper tray is empty. It was the best pun I could come up with on short notice.)
Looks like a blatant vote misdirection scheme, akin to RoboCon used by the federal Conservatives in the last general election. One of the Conservative campaigns, in Guelph, is under scrutiny in court right now.
An important trial in Canadian history is underway in Guelph, Ontario. Michael Sona, the only person accused by prosecutors of carrying out the illegall robocalls in Guelph to redirect people to the “Old Quebec St. Mall”, faces jail and fines. However, he could not have carried out this crime by himself, calling into question the accuracy of the investigation by Al Mathews.
Here’s a list of some of the evidence being presented in court today, as I assembled it over the past 2 years. It includes one of the robocalls heard this morning, as well as another used elsewhere in Ontario, but not by the Guelph Conservatives under question in court.
Crawford’s note that CIMS is restrictive in access helps prove the point that the Poutine election fraud was a conspiracy since Sona did not have access to both download the required phone numbers then remove evidence of such an act. Someone with more database permission than Sona had to have acted to cover tracks of the illicit access.
A lawyer central to the Federal Court challenge of election fraud in 2011, has made a list of deficiencies in the Elections Canada Commish’s report.
What led the Commish Cote to ignore obvious evidence and conclusions. Hopefully it’s not a factor of being appointed by Stephen Harper, but any reason still leaves Canadians with an unsolved crime. The Commish failed to carry out his duty to protect Canadian elections from crime.
The Commissioner explains the purpose of his investigation this way:
The purpose of the investigation was to determine one thing: whether there was enough evidence to recommend to the Director of Public Prosecutions that charges be laid for violations of the Canada Elections Act in relation to nuisance calls or calls providing incorrect poll location information outside the electoral district of Guelph.
However, as set out in s. 509 of the Canada Elections Act (the “Act”), the Commissioner’s mandate is actually much broader than this – He is charged with the duty “to ensure that [the] Act is complied with and enforced.”
Some behind the scenes numbers about Elections Canada’s impotent investigation into illegal robocalls…
[note Prime Contact, which came up in the blogosphere earlier this week.]
81. At the national level, the Conservative Party, using data from its Constituent Information Management System (CIMS) database, called through two primary telemarketing companies: Responsive Marketing Group (RMG) for live calls, and RackNine for automated calls. Individual candidate campaigns used a variety of telemarketers. For its part, the Liberal Party used its Liberalist database and called electors through two telemarketing companies, Prime Contact and First Contact, while individual candidate campaigns used several telemarketers …
83. They were unable to establish the content of that call or determine that the call received was the one about which the elector submitted a complaint. As a result, in many cases, it was simply not possible to gather any information confirming the allegation made by a given complainant that he or she had received an inappropriate call.
So, because there was no recording of the crime, investigators and Elections Canada overlooked the testimony of witnesses from whom they were able to obtain evidence of phone calls made to those multiple people with the same complaint?!