Listen Up! I am not a fan of Doug Ford but I will be voting Conservative ~ Hugh Mackenzie


Hugh Mackenzie
Huntsville Doppler

Biting the Bullet …

Ten days from Election day in Ontario and it looks like a horse race between the Progressive Conservatives and the New Democratic Party. The CBC’s poll of polls, in my view the most reliable tracker of voters’ intentions, shows the NDP leading the popular vote with 36 per cent followed closely by the Tories with 35.9 per cent and the Liberals with 21 per cent. The media is screaming that the NDP has catapulted into first place. On Friday the front page of the Toronto Star featured a poll showing the NDP at 47 per cent, a number they must have known was wrong, which it later proved to be.

What has been much less publicized is what these numbers actually mean when translated into how many seats each political party is projected to win. This is important because a large percentage of New Democratic support is concentrated in inner-city ridings. The CBC’s poll of polls has broken down the popular vote, riding by riding, and based on the current popular vote for each party, they project 70 seats for the Conservatives, 51 for the NDP and three for the Liberals. That still translates into a majority government for the Conservatives.

Anything can happen in the last week or so of an election campaign and it often does. Barring a miracle, the Liberals seem to be down for the count. The mood for change is very strong and the recent revelation from the Provincial Auditor General that Ontarians paid $37 billion above market price for electricity over the last eight years was, for many, the final straw.

That leaves the Conservatives and the NDP and not withstanding the seat projections, I believe it is a horse race because only a slight shift in the popular vote can make a significant difference in a number of ridings attained by each. What a stark choice voters have. That would include me.

As one friend said to me recently, an NDP win would be worse than another Liberal government in Ontario and, sadly, I agree with him. Andrea Horwath may be the best liked of the three main party leaders but make no mistake, she brings with her an undisguised socialist-like agenda that can only add to Ontario’s current dismal and frightening economic outlook.

In their first year in office, the NDP proposes to add $4.7 billion to Ontario’s already staggering debt of $348.79 billion, the largest debt of any sub-national government anywhere, with interest already costing taxpayers $11.9 billion every year for which they get nothing in return. Horwath has no real plan to reduce Ontario’s debt.

The NDP don’t seem to understand that someday soon financial institutions around the world are going to stop buying Ontario’s debt. The Province’s credit rating will likely be downgraded within hours of a new government taking office, which means that interest rates will increase. And at some point there will be much less money to pay for essential services such as health and education, let alone for all the so-called free programs the NDP are promising in order to get elected. This is not scare-mongering. This is reality.

It is also scary to realize that an NDP government will be controlled by some of the more aggressive unions in this province. One can say what they like about Bob Rae’s NDP government of a generation ago, but when push came to shove he put Ontario’s interest above the interests of the unions that supported him, making him a pariah in what was then his own party. Not so Andrea Horwath. She has already said that a government led by her would never pass back-to-work legislation to end strikes that go on too long; strikes that prevent students from graduating or people from receiving services they badly need. That completely changes the balance of power in collective bargaining. It is a sure and certain signal that unions will have the hammer and they will own an NDP government. Even the left-leaning Toronto Star has its doubts about that.

I truly believe an NDP government with its current platform led by Andrea Horwath, however nice a person she may be, would be a disaster for Ontario. I also believe there is nothing to be gained in this election by voting for either the Liberals or the Green Party, although the Green Party platform does contain some elements to be admired. So, where does that leave me?

As previous comments from me would indicate, I am not a fan of Doug Ford. I would have much preferred another leader for the Progressive Conservative Party. But we have what we have. I do not have to like the leader. I just have to believe that he and his party are the most likely to deal with the essential elements that will return Ontario to the economic engine of Canada that it once was. I do believe that.

The Conservatives are the only political party that takes Ontario’s debt seriously. It is, I believe, the most important challenge facing Ontario. Reducing our debt and eliminating government waste, bringing manufacturing jobs back to Ontario and stimulating the economy are the only ways to preserve a government’s ability to provide a high quality of essential public services such as health care and education. It is also the only way to ensure that we have the resources to help those in our society who, for whatever reason, are unable to help themselves. To me, that has to be the bottom line.

I also take some comfort in the bench strength that the Conservatives appear to have. People like Christine Elliott, Caroline Mulroney and Rob Phillips will balance whatever proclivities Doug Ford may display. Their influence is real because, in Ontario, a leader cannot govern without the support of his or her caucus.

And so, in spite of my reservations about Doug Ford, I will bite the bullet and vote Conservative. For me, no other viable option has been presented. I should stress that this is a personal opinion and does not reflect the opinion of any one else. With the possible exception of Hazel McCallion, I may be all alone on this one! We shall see.

Don’t miss out on Doppler! Sign up for our free newsletter here.



  1. Steve Ainger on

    Some good comments Hugh. You are willing to trust or do you mean cross your fingers and hope that Ford and the PCs will be responsible. Maybe the party can rein Ford in but I doubt it. They are waiting til the last minute to give us a look at their financial plan. Is that because they don’t have one yet?
    It’s too bad the PCs elected Ford. History has proven he is not the leader Ontario needs.

    • What history? Is it because he’s “a Ford?” To me he deserves credit for the loyalty he had for Rob, his brother who had huge mental health issues and made devastating personal decisions but had superb fiscal sense when it came to putting the city of Toronto’s finances in better order.. Unfortunately achievements were constantly blocked by a socialistic council. Doug Ford has not even begun to show what potential he has as a leader of the Ontario Conservative party. His platform says that the is the leader that Ontario needs after years of Liberal corruption and devastation when the best interests of the people of Ontario were put dead last. What Ontario does need is citizens of the province who make a commitment to positively work with him, hopefully as premier and with his team of Conservatives and show a willingness to endeavour to bring back our province to the status it had before the McGuinty and Wynne reign, a horrendous assignment and not one that someone without a genuine commitmentt would sign up for. Ontario will not recover with another socialist government. To designate Ontario a sanctuary province puts the citizens of Ontario last. It opens up all provincial services to people in the country illegally allowing them access to health care burdening a health care system already in crisis, police and social services all without disclosing their immigration status. So people that pays no taxes under Horwath’s scheme could get healthcare, welfare, education for their kids, drivers licences and other services. Doug Ford, as a successful businessman recognizes that layers of red tape, bureaucracy, and government regulations along with high taxes do not encourage businesses to remain in Ontario and do not encourage new businesses to establish themselves in our province. Unions in our province should not be able buy the election of candidates that will allow themselves to be dictated to by these unions. It is positive that this man listens to the people rather than the establishment in Ontario.

      • Absolutely correct, BJ. This Province has been nearly bankrupted by the leftists in the Liberal government (one of Wynne’s henchmen said that he is “proud” that the debt tripled under the Liberals) and now we are threatened with the NDP to finish the job?! Confiscatory taxes are right around the corner. A number of years ago, I had the occasion to speak to a relatively new immigrant to Canada from Denmark. I asked him how he liked Canada and why he came. He said that as a small businessman, he found that he could not save any money for his old age in Denmark, because the taxes were so incredibly high. He was not at all certain that the government would have any money left when it came time to collect his retirement (and he’s probably right about that–Denmark is bankrupting itself). He thought Canada (specifically Ontario) was a great place to start a business and did so–employing several people in addition to himself. He said that, for the first time, in years, he was now able to put money aside for the day when he got old and couldn’t work. He also said that he would move to Alberta if Ontario got too socialistic and would take his business with him.

  2. Bob Bettson on

    I sincerely believe Ford is not realistic in his financial expectations. If he cuts income taxes and reduces the gas tax how does he pay for his expensive spending promises without having an even larger deficit than the NDP proposes. In addition if he wants 6 billion in efficiencies or more realistically how would he do that. Government functions like health education and corrections and many other areas are primarily done with staff. If you cut staff you cut services. Mr. Ford found that out at city hall..and the voters and his fellow councillors refused to go along. Ford would be an unmitigated disaster…like Trump south the border. A bullying businessman without the intelligence or the character to be premier.

    • Bob… You support Liberal further debt, no fiscal responsibility, scandal after scandal, cradle to grave liberal programs, Liberal increased taxes on EVERYTHING etc etc… UNBELIEVABLE! Give him a chance to review the ‘BOOKS’ and conduct an unbiased audit … which I am sure will reveal a much worse situation in Ont, .. Give him a chance to make his proposals for change and assessment of impact and consequence of his changes and programs! Lets see what happens to Ont as far as investment goes, jobs, hospitals and health care, and .. most importantly a balance budget! Remember … not everyone will win with the changes that are needed … but on the other hand ,, ONT can not continue with Liberal ideology that budgets balance themselves and .. the Liberal policy that .. EVERYTHING is FREE! Smart people know that is not TRUE!

  3. Henk Rietveld on

    Ford is Trump-lite! God help us if he becomes premier. There is no obvious PC platform, just a bunch of statements that seem to have no real credibility. At least Ms. Horwath seems to have her act together. Unfortunately, Ms. Wynne has worn out her welcome, having inherited Dalton McSquinty’s foibles.
    Definitely time for a change, but Doug Ford is a loose cannon, in spite of his protestations to the contrary.

  4. Great commentary, Hugh. Andrea Horwath’s radical agenda includes making Ontario a “sanctuary province”–she has said so. Just look at what that has done to the mighty California economy. Southern California is a stinking mess–it is where most of the illegal aliens have settled and California is having to support them with the tax dollars of the citizens of California. Those piles of tax dollars are shrinking, as moderates and small businesses leave the state and the debt of California is skyrocketing. Is this something we want to happen to Ontario? Vote Conservative. If you don’t like Ford, he can be replaced. Trump’s numbers are climbing precisely because the people of the U.S. like his solidly conservative policies–which are counteracting some of the awful effects of the leftist Democrats. Socialism DOES NOT WORK. The socialists love to point out the “miracle of the Nordic countries” which is no miracle at all. The finances of the Nordic countries are falling further and further behind. They will eventually go bankrupt when they “run out of other people’s money”. Voting Conservative is the only chance we have to get back to sanity in government.

    • Erin Jones-a summary of substance and reality. And yes, President Trump has proven to the American people that chose him that he is committed to them although anyone relying on much of the media that’s become pure propaganda using lies of obfuscation, distortion, distraction, and primary omission would ever know of and understand his achievements.

      • Correct, BJ. The super-wealthy globalist elite have apparently determined that we will have a totalitarian government and the way that they are selling it to the people is “socialism”–just as the communists in every communist nation have always sold it to their people. What communism ultimately amounts to is a two-tiered society–there are those who are the controllers (the commissars) and the controlled (everyone else). These communist states ultimately fail because the people get tired of “we pretend to work and the government pretends to pay us” (an old joke from the Soviet era in Russia).

        Canadians should listen to our own Professor, Jordan Peterson of the University of Toronto. He says that the universities both here and in the U. S. have been taken over by Marxists and that the educational establishment (manipulated by the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, at the University of Toronto) are following a program of indoctrinating our young people in Marxism. We need to get back local control of our schools.

  5. Frances Botham on

    The Conservatives blew it big time with their ousting of Patrick Brown. That fiasco should have every clear thinking Tory questioning the integrity of the Party when it comes to standing up for their own. Now we face whether we want Doug Ford as our premier? Do we want a leader who flip flops on major issues to pander to potential voters and particularly big developers? He was clearly video taped as stating that he wanted to sacrifice a big chunk of the green belt around the GTA/Hamilton area in order to facilitate developers. Media uproar made him change his tune and he quickly back tracked. He has made it clear that the environment is not an important issue on his agenda. He’s on an open highway to destroy our environment. He vows to abolish the Liberal’s cap and trade plan, which would implement a carbon tax to fight climate change. Ford and his Tories have announced no campaign to benefit our environment. The “now liitle” blue machine bumbles along back firing. The last I heard Ford wants to rip out wind turbines with his bare hands. Leadership quality you say? I can’t claim whether the NDP’s are any better than the Liberals. Horwath is frightening in her dealing with the finances of the province. Wynne is surely on her way out after her bleak track record. And Doug Ford is such a pathetic candidate that he certainly will not get my vote. What a conundrum.

    • When one votes Conservative, one is voting NOT for Doug Ford but Conservative policy. Conservative policies, however Conservatives work out the details–(and we should be part of that discussion)–are the only real alternative to the radical socialist agenda that has been pushed onto Ontarians over the majority of the last 30 years by the Liberals and Bob Rae’s NDP. That agenda has seen an enormous growth in the governmental sector with its red tape and the ever increasing numbers of “public servants” who neither feed, house nor clothe anyone but themselves with their occupation. If we expect to be prosperous, we need to be producers, not to be mere consumers of the capital that we have in our holdings and in our decent and industrious people.

      • Frances Botham on

        One is not realistic to even suggest that the premier of Ontario is led by his Party. Surely what is spewing from Doug Ford’s mouth is not verbatum from the Tory membership. If so, it’s a sad day.

        • What has he said that is so offensive to you? Perhaps that he wants to cut the size of government? Do you work for the Provincial government? If not, then you should be glad that he wants to cut the size of the enormous bureaucracy that keeps on growing in spite of the fact that the Province is borrowing more and more money to underwrite the cost.

      • Patrick Flanagan on

        Ha ha. So we should not vote for the buffoon-leader, but instead vote for the party policy. But the party refuses to release a platform. So now what?

        What kind of person would seriously consider voting for a party with no stated policies, led by a person whose only notable achievement was being a successful drug dealer in his early years?

        • In general, I think the citizenry knows what to expect from conservatives smaller government, more local autonomy and cutting the bloated budget, borrowing and taxes. What’s not to like there? That is, unless you buy into the radical socialist agenda. I would recommend against it. History has shown that it is not a good plan. The communists always started out calling themselves “socialists” and the end result is murderous sprees by the Bolsheviks, Castro brothers, Pol Pots, Stalins and Maos of this world (of their own citizenry, I might add). The “miracle” of Nordic socialism will also come to a sad end when they run out of money to support their social programs which have lately been totally overrun by migrants.

      • Steve Ainger on

        Erin to quote you, « Conservative policies, however they work out the details…. », that says a lot as to why I am concerned about the PCs. This election campaign while shorter than some has been long enough to deliver a platform. All we have heard are talking points. Sell off the green belt, sell beer in corner stores, go back to square one on primary school health education, spend millions on audits, on and on and on.
        Erin, you say a vote for the PCs is not a vote for Ford. Of course it is. The PC membership elected Ford and presented him to the voters as their best choice for premier. If elected he will choose his cabinet and run our provincial government. Are you suggesting if the going gets rough the party will simply toss him out like it did Patrick Brown. I can’t vote for Ford on that basis. I’m surprised that you can.

        • Funny how EVERYONE who supports the liberals ..forget what they have done($$)! And now .. all you want to do is focus on a person who has not even been given a chance! Four more years of Liberal ideology will doom this province forever! You can not continue to run anything in the RED .. sooner or later … THE BILLS NEED TO BE PAID! Hopefully you do not run your household or business in the RED .. if you do it .. your future is bankruptcy! The changes will be tough .. but .. necessary!

        • I’m not voting for Ford–I am voting for conservative policies. We have a parliamentary system–we vote for the party, NOT the party leader. You are thinking like an American. The Progressive Conservatives are the only party who are at all supportive of sound fiscal practices. All the rest are “tax and spend” and for growing government.

          Horwath even wants Ontario to be a “sanctuary province” and that is totally scary when you are aware of what those kinds of policies have produced in other jurisdictions. Google “California’s tent cities” for a preview. Californians now have a smart phone app that locates the tent cities on an electronic map so that they can skirt them. They are a total drain on all the services that are offered to them. I feel sympathy for them–they come from failed nations (except for the criminals among them who mostly come to “kill, steal, rape and control”–in the actual motto of the MS-13 gangs). Why would ANY politician propose to invite that sort of thing into Ontario? Do we not have enough problems housing, feeding and clothing our own citizens? Do we not have enough crime? Horwath apparently thinks that “sanctuary cities” are sound policy–I couldn’t bring myself to vote for anyone who does.

    • Terry McCaffery on

      Patrick Brown’s upcoming book should be an interesting read!!! I expect a lot of small “c” Conservatives will hold their respective noses and vote for Ford! What ever happened to the “Red” Tories who put the Progressive in the Progressive Conservative Party?

  6. Ian McTavish on

    For me it is quite simple. The conservative party has not put out a fully costed platform. I can not vote for a party when I have no idea how they will manage the province. Finding “efficiencies” has a nicer ring to it compared to “we will cut services”.
    It is pretty obvious that Doug Ford has not had the time to come up with a cohesive plan. There are options.

  7. Extremely well written document, Hugh defining with clarity your rationale for voting Progressive Conservative. You are making the best interests of the people of Ontario your priority in voting decision.

  8. I find it extremely worrisome that opinions of, in this case, people in politics are often formed purely from the media whose motivations are becoming increasingly suspect. Unethical media and leftist anarchist groups are spending tens of millions upon tens of millions of dollars for the express purpose of promoting fake news stories intended to disillusion and erode the support for politicians that are not left leaning socialists, that believe in a country’s patriotism and nationalism as opposed to the Globalists that wish to destroy it. Much of the media today is a controlled, socialistic, leftist variety that regularly report a completely fabricated version of reality with the result that the electorate never know the reality of political events or Conservative politicians around them. This media lie and distort everything they report to create a false version of reality to the public in order to keep them compliant and controlled. They attempt to silence the alternative media as these sources pose a threat to them. Many reporters and journalists have become paid operatives to dispense the news according to the specifications of someone behind the scenes, usually Globalists. Social media is the most expansive and game-changing form of communication today. It is these facts that make online political censorship one of the largest threats to free speech we have ever seen. Conservatives are not given the same ability to express their political ideas on line as liberals without fear of being censored or suppressed . As Liberals are given priority this is another means of controlling the opinions of the electorate. A multitude of media sources are connected with or owned by groups that push liberal agenda, many of them funded by the stridently Liberal Globalist, George Soros, a confidant of Justin Trudeau. Soros has ties to numerous mainstream news outlets including The New York Times, ABC,

    The Ontario electorate need to be fully aware of foreign third parties that collude with each other to strongly influence Canada’s election results. One of the most influential of these groups is Leadnow already at work in our country. Doug Ford is being targeted with vicious lies by this foreign funded lobbyist, Leadnow. The charges they are laying against Ford in an effort to get gullible lefties to sign onto their campaign include, “…he’ll engineer massive tax cuts for the rich, slash public services, and make Ontario less safe for minorities by emboldening his base of extremists.”
    Leadnow’s campaign is nothing but flat out lies paid for by foreign money and our biased leftist media will make every effort to ensure that their propaganda is heard
    Leadnow in Canada is the brainchild of Adam Shedletzky who also happens to be a Senior Policy Advisor to Kathleen Wynne.

    • You are so right, BJ. The globalists are already turning Britain into a police state that persecutes conservatives. Are you aware that they are now jailing conservative journalists there? Tommy Robinson, an independent journalist, (who is, of course, dubbed “far-right” by the British media) has been jailed for thirteen months, without a trial, for attempting to report on the criminal trials of an immigrant gang of pedophiles who drugged and raped many children. The British government ordered that all social media scrub every reference to Robinson’s case from their sites in Britain. Even Breitbart-London was forced to take down its report. Since the jails in Britain are full of immigrants, putting Robinson in the general prison population amounts to a death sentence for him. One brave conservative politician has already said that if anything happens to Robinson while in jail, he would band together with other like-minded parliamentarians in demanding an investigation of the entire affair. Robinson’s supporters (thousands) marched to protest his arrest over the weekend. Did the world’s media report on it? Very few. Canadian conservative journalist, Lauren Southern, has reported the arrest. She was recently arrested in Britain and deported. And what was her crime? Reporting on Robinson’s previous arrest for “contempt of court” when he published an article that protested the government’s policies on immigration in spite of a “gag order” imposed by some kind of tribunal. The British are just a little further down the road to totalitarianism than we are. Look up “inverted totalitarianism”–it will explain a lot about our current predicament.

  9. Murray Christenson on

    I have to agree with your viewpoint Hugh, it’s a thoughtful approach. I do have to laugh when I see and hear all the people who seem to have bought the Liberal narrative that Ford is Trump north…Doug Ford is nothing like Trump. He’s not a mysoginist, homophobe or bigot….in fact he probably had more support from visible minorities in his home ward of Etobicoke when on city council than most others.
    Like you, he’s not my first choice but I’m ok with it…I expect the stellar caucus the PCs will bring to the table including Christine Elliot who will almost certainly be Deputy Premier and Vic Fedelli will wield significant influence in caucus meetings keeping any radical right elements in check.

  10. We are about to come to Lake of Bays for our annual four month stay in your beautiful country. As an American, I obviously cannot vote in your upcoming Provincial election. But I have been following it very closely because I pay property taxes and Hydro (over 3x what it is in Georgia).

    The choices the people of Ontario have on June 7 remind me very much of the choices I faced in Nov 2016. I was no fan of either candidate. I did not believe the US could endure another 4 or 8 years of liberal progressive policies. I held my nose and voted for Trump. Contrary to what you may read or hear in the media, his administrations conservative policies have been and are very good for the country. The economy is booming, taxes are down, spending is being brought under contol, onerous regulations are being rolled back, the judicary is turning around, and on and on. None of this appears in the media. And yes there are still problems, gun violence and illegal immigration to name two. The media continue to focus on Colusion (which is not a crime in the US) et al byTrump, while ignorning other misdeeds by Clinton. I agree Trump is his own worst ememy and needs to lose his Twiiter privliges. In spite of him, the Conservative principles are working even with unprecedented obstruction in the Congress by the Democratic party.

    I worry very much about what a Liberal, NDP or Green Party government will do to the CRUSHING Ontario debt (you don’t want to become a California or Illinois ) and what that will do to the wonderful people of Ontario and my 65 year investment in Muskoka.

    • Thank you for your very honest and correct assessment, Dan. President Trump is right—most of the mainstream media (throughout the world) are the enemies of the people. They are owned lock-stock-and-barrel by the super-wealthy globalists (a la George Soros) and they exist solely to sell globalist totalitarian policies to the people.

    • Karen Wehrstein on

      Sorry, Dan, but I think you will regret your vote. Trump is not a legitimate president. The investigation into his conspiracy (you are correct that collusion is the wrong word) with Vladimir Putin’s Russia, and possibly other countries, to win the 2016 the election is not fake, else it wouldn’t have already put one man in jail and produced three more guilty pleas (sentencing to follow). I follow it very closely and there is a lot to come out yet. This is why he is trying so hard to stop it, by steps that jeopardize the rule of law in America (such as firing an FBI director and demanding personal loyalty from an attorney general). His attacks on media other than Fox (which is only one Shep Smith away from being a complete Trump propaganda organ) are designed to damage the role of the media as a check on the ruling party’s political power.
      He has repeatedly and unapologetically taken advantage of the Presidency for personal gain to himself and his family, in everything from making the Secret Service use (and pay for) his own golf carts to sweetheart deals with China, the Ukraine and Qatar for foreign policy alterations in return for loans or investments to Trump family members to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars (and these are just the ones we know about).

      I’m only choosing a couple of big examples of Trump corruption here. Then there is the racism, the lying, the incompetence, the sexual exploitation, the complete lack of empathy, the economic policies that all have the same theme, take from the poor and give to the rich… I could go on and on and on, as people who keep up on a broad range of news sources all know.

      • Unfortunately, Karen, you have been taken in by the Marxist propaganda of the mainstream media in the States–all owned by globalists. There are only five major media companies there. If it wasn’t for truly independent voices, Americans would be utterly controlled by big media. The globalist owners of social media are trying to suppress conservative voices, but it is not working terribly well.

        The media lie repeatedly about Trump and totally try to drum up hatred against him and his family–even his (at the time) ten-year-old son was subjected to attack by leftist shills.

        Trump has NOT been enriched by the Presidency–in fact, Trump International has shown a loss of millions, since he became President. This is due, not in small part, to the efforts of leftists to destroy the President financially. This is unprecedented.

        He had every right (and duty) to fire Comey for Comey’s total mishandling (read corruption) of the Clinton “investigation”. She DID break the security laws egregiously and was never held to account except in the court of public opinion. That is why she lost the election. The Dems have been screaming about how the “Russians hacked” their servers–yet they never permitted investigators to examine those servers. Independent computer gurus have all said that it was NOT a hack–that it was a leak from inside the Democratic Party–and they proved it by showing that the rate that it was streamed was not even possible to be done except by someone on the inside. But that is never reported in the leftist media.

        American federal prosecutors have said that, if Clinton had ever been indicted, she would have been convicted–because it was an “open and shut case”. A two-tiered justice system–one for the wealthy and well-connected and one for everyone else is a denial of equal justice under the law.

        The previous administration set out to entrap members of the Trump team. Mueller’s “investigation” has NEVER, in all this time, connected President Trump to any “Russian collusion”. That was a lie made up by the Democrats to try to explain why Hillary Clinton had every thing bent in her direction and she STILL lost. She and her husband were the worst thing to ever happen to America. They are corrupt to the core. And so is the Mueller “investigation”. Do you even know Robert Mueller’s history? He was the “bag man” for the Uranium One corruption–no wonder he is so eager to attack the President and his administration. One of his lieutenants in the “investigation” is attorney, Andrew Weissman, who is known around Washington as one of the more corrupt Dems and someone who is brought in to cover up Democratic Party wrongdoing. He was brought in to engineer attacks in order to distract from the extreme corruption in which the Dems have been immersed for much of the past thirty years.

        That is all Democrats ever do–attack. It is from their bible–“Rules for Radicals” by American Communist, Saul Alinsky who said, “Always accuse your opponents of what you yourself are doing.” All of the cities which the Dems control are totally corrupt and going bankrupt–Detroit, Chicago, L.A., Houston, Seattle, etc.

        • Karen Wehrstein on

          Not a single source here, as usual. Just lots of attacks on whole groups of people. And a lot of lies. I’m not mincing words: you are spreading lies.
          Hillary never broke a law for which the FBI saw fit to recommend prosecution. She has never been charged, let alone convicted, despite the best efforts of rogue agents in the FBI, centred around the New York office. Example of the lies:

          “Globalist elites” – this lie is a renewal of the old international Jewish conspiracy slander. There are no globalist elites pushing socialism.

          Chief individual target: philanthropist George Soros, who is Jewish.
          BTW I agree that media ownership concentration is a problem. However the multimillionaire or multibillionaire owners are not socialist and not pushing socialism.
          Russians hacking of Democrat servers did happen and is being investigated:
          Mueller builds criminal case against Russians in DNC hack, WikiLeaks

          Former admin didn’t try to entrap Trump.
          This one was just silly:
          The FBI was investigating the man who Trump hired as campaign director in 2014, before Trump started his presidential run.
          Said campaign manager, Paul Manafort, has now been indicted for money laundering and tax evasion among other things, and is under house arrest. He’s possibly about to be jailed while he awaits trial, to stop him from witness tampering.

          You want to talk about two-tiered law:
          Enough evidence has been found of conspiracy with the Russians to steal the election (“collusion” is an incorrect term legally) to put one conspirator in jail already (Alex van der Zwaan), and gain three guilty pleas (Michael Flynn, George Papadopoulis and Rick Gates). Very hard to give only one source on this but here’s a recent one:
          Uranium One is a made-up scandal.

          Andrew Weissman is just a tough prosecutor who’s good at getting bad guys to turn state’s evidence, i.e. flip. He put 30 criminals in jail for the Enron scandal. (Google him.) In other words, the sort of guy who criminals try to slander.
          Saul Alinsky and communism have nothing to do with the Democratic Party.
          Cities going bankrupt: the onus here is on you to prove, not me to disprove. Proof requires numbers.
          Quit spreading alt-right fake news.

          • Terry McCaffery on

            Hi Karen, I totally agree with you on Erin Jones’ alternative right, alternative news and conspiracy theories. I too did some research on globalist theories and found some of it disturbing. Some it is indeed anti-semitic in that these theories promote an international Jewish conspiracy to control the world banking system and create a global socialistic system of government! This is not unlike the anti-semitic propaganda preached by the likes of Adolf Hitler and
            Joseph Goebbels in the 1930’s! I think it was Goebbels who purported the ‘Big Lie Theory’! Which roughly states that if you state something that is too preposterous to be believed and state it often enough, people will eventually come to believe it is true! Ms. Jones appears to have consumed the global conspiracy kool-aid and it appears to be a very bitter draught, indeed!

          • 1) This is from an article called, “The Rise of Left-wing Anti-Trump Fake News” by the BBC:

            “…One of the reasons for the growth in liberal fake news is financial. ‘Those people who generate this kind of fake news don’t care about politics. They just care about generating clicks, and so sometimes they generate similar messages for the right and the left,’ says Filippo Menczer, a professor of Informatics and Computer Science at Indiana University who runs the fake news tracking site Hoaxy.” You can read the rest of the article here:

            2) Hillary Clinton DID break security law–that is indisputable. Anyone who says she did not is lying or misinformed. Even the liberal Associated Press is starting to report on the corrupted mess that the Clintons are. Are you really so naive that you do not know that Hillary Clinton did her senior thesis at Wellesley College on Saul Alinsky and that she corresponded regularly with him until his death? The Democratic Party is at war with itself. The extreme leftist elements against the “business Democrats” are quietly (quietly because the left-leaning media do not report it) wrestling for the control of the Dem party.

            3) Do you really not know about the many, many reports of financial mismanagement of the cities where the Dems rule? I can’t spare the time to look them all up but here’s one on the financial mess in the Democratic Party-controlled Chicago and thus Illinois. The current Republican governor of Illinois, Bruce Rauner (took over in 2015) and inherited a huge array of financial problems from the previous Democratic governor, Pat Quinn. The Dem political machines control many of the cities but the people of the states that they are in having been steadily voting in Republicans.

            The Washington Post as well as the New York Times has been caught repeatedly telling fabrications–so has CNN. CNN recently had a “roundtable” discussion (chaired by Brian Stelter) which speculated that Melania Trump was put in the hospital because the President “beat her up”–in spite of the fact that two members of the Washington press corps saw her at a recent outing. She really does have kidney disease and she really was treated for it. The liberal media are desperate to stop their slide and so have turned to “tabloid journalism”. I’m surprised that you would buy into it.

            Uranium One is NOT a made-up scandal. But I don’t expect that anyone will ever be prosecuted for it. Those who are wealthy and politically well-connected, always have ways of escaping punishment for their corruption. By the way, Andrew Weissman is known for being a hack lawyer around Washington. This is from an article entitled, “Judging by His Staffing Choices, Mueller May Not be Very Interested in Justice” in The Hill (which is NOT “alt-right” by the way):

            “…Yet Mueller tapped a different sort of prosecutor to lead his investigation — his long-time friend and former counsel, Andrew Weissmann. He is not just a ‘tough’ prosecutor. Time after time, courts have reversed Weissmann’s most touted ‘victories’ for his tactics. This is hardly the stuff of a hero in the law…”

            You can read the rest of the article here:

            You are misinformed, Karen–but that is not surprising, considering that you only cite mainstream media. Accusing me of lying or being “alt-right” (I’m actually very centrist/conservative) is really over-the-top. Bad form on your part.

  11. Christine Elliot is somewhat radical; but at least we knew where she stood on the issues. I could “possibly” have broken a record of more than 50 years, and voted Tory, with her as leader. I feel that Ms. Horvath is being unfairly saddled with the record of the Rae government. All Mr. Rae did was introduce a “social contract” in an attempt to fight the injustices caused by the worst recession in Ontario’s history since the 1930’s. As a well-paid government worker at the time, I gladly sacrificed a portion of my salary in order to assist others facing fiduciary problems. I’m certainly not bragging about that: I would hope that anybody would do the same. And I was in a BIG union (CUPE). When push comes to shove, will Ms. Horvath back the unions or not? She’s no different than any other politician; appealing to her power base for votes.
    I can only reiterate what several others have mentioned. An invisible platform cannot prop up any government.

  12. Not to worry. The Conservatives will win in Muskoka!
    If the conservative party did not exist Muskoka would vote conservative.
    To each their own!

  13. The Toronto Star Opinion piece is worth repeating here:
    Kathleen Wynne doesn’t deserve the disdain of voters
    Mon., May 28, 2018

    Premier Kathleen Wynne speaks to the Star’s editorial board. (RICHARD LAUTENS / TORONTO STAR)
    Her government has tackled some of the thorniest issues around, like precarious work and climate change. It has pioneered in pension reform and pharmacare, expanded child care, invested hugely in the energy grid and infrastructure, and led the country in progressive social legislation.
    Wynne’s reward for all this? A big slap in the face from voters. Campaigning for re-election on June 7, her Liberal party is stuck far down in the polls, running a poor third as Doug Ford’s Progressive Conservatives and Andrea Horwath’s New Democrats duke it out for first place.
    And Wynne herself, as the polls have shown for many months, is a big part of the reason. Most voters long ago tuned her out; some don’t like her policies and many others simply don’t like or trust her. They simply won’t give her or her party a proper hearing.
    Wynne knows there’s no point in grumbling about all this, although she admitted to the Star’s editorial board on Monday that the naked antipathy toward her “doesn’t feel great.” Voters have apparently decided that this election is all about “change,” and there may be no way to change their minds.
    We’ll know their verdict in little over a week. But before the vote it’s worth taking a moment to reflect on Wynne and her legacy. And the conclusion has to be that the disdain for her is massively out of proportion to her personal faults and the shortcomings of her government.
    Obviously, 15 years is an awfully long time for any party to be in power. The Liberals racked up their full share of policy bungles and scandals during that time, mostly under her predecessor, Dalton McGuinty. Some of them — like the eHealth fiasco and the politically motivated gas plant relocations — cost taxpayers a bundle. More recently, Wynne’s government let hydro bills get out of control before finally bringing them down.
    The temptation to throw the bums out at a certain point is a healthy democratic reaction, and it’s no surprise the Liberals are fighting that sentiment now.
    It’s also undeniably true that much of the province hasn’t shared in the wealth of Ontario’s recent prosperity. The GTA and Waterloo corridor are booming, but big areas like the southwest and Windsor have stagnated in the face of deindustrialization. There’s scant comfort for people there in Ontario’s headline economic numbers.
    All this means any Liberal premier would have an uphill battle to persuade voters to give the party a fifth consecutive mandate. But if the polls don’t change significantly over the next nine days Wynne is facing not just defeat, but humiliation. And that she definitely does not deserve.
    Whatever her failings, Wynne is still the most impressive leader among the three people vying to form Ontario’s next government.

    • I would expect that sentiment from the very Liberal Party-oriented Toronto Star. They have been white-washing for the Ontario Liberals for some time.

  14. Emmersun Austin on

    No escape from the idea of “debt” within the present economic system. The #interest” monster will never be paid or settled. Give Matt a chance to play the game & speak on behalf of Muskoka.

    • As Professor Jordan Peterson has continued to emphasize, University of Toronto is a hotbed of Marxists. He should know as he is a tenured professor there himself.

      • Hugh Holland on

        PS – You have make sure you are comparing apples to apples. Eg US municipalities carry a much larger share of debt than in Canada. When total state and local debt are included, California is at 54 % of gdp and Ontario is at 42 %. And that does not include about 40 % of the budget for health care that is privately funded in the USA. Add that and California is a much higher % than Ontario.

  15. Hugh Holland on

    It’s time for some fact checking. The 20 countries with the highest debt as percent of gdp range from Japan at 240% to Jordan at 95% and includes the USA at 108%. Canada stands well down the list at 89%. Ontario is 37%, Sweden Is 41%, Denmark Is 36% (not as bad as quoted in comments to this article). You would not want to live in any of the 20 countries with the lowest debt as % of gdp.

    Rating debt by itself is meaningless. What matters is what you get for that debt. In Ontario we have better roads, more clean electricity, fewer boarded up strip malls, less crime, and more people covered with decent health care than in almost all of the many places I have visited in North America. Let’s hope people check their facts before they vote. If not, they will get what they deserve.

    • Hugh Holland on

      PS – You have make sure you are comparing apples to apples. Eg US municipalities carry a much larger share of debt than in Canada. When total state and local debt are included, California is at 54% of gdp and Ontario is at 42%. And that does not include about 40% of the budget for health care that is privately funded in the USA. Add that and California is a much higher % than Ontario.

      • Hugh Holland on

        PPS – Ontario’s debt to gdp ratio is virtually the same as 5 other provinces. It is lower / better than NL and Quebec and higher than Saskatchewan and BC. Only Alberta has zero debt and they share their oil wealth with the rest of us. But our environmental extremist friends are determined to put an end to that.

        • Terry McCaffery on

          Hi Hugh, Maybe you could write a commentary on the Canadian Government’s plan to purchase the Kinder Morgan pipeline project! I am of two minds about it but will consider any argument for the government doing so. Just a suggestion! Thanks

    • Terry McCaffery on

      Thank you, Hugh for injecting some reality into this debate about Ontario’s debt and what it really means for Ontarions: a better standard of living!!! I just read yesterday that Canadians now have the largest household debt to income in history: over 2 trillion dollars worth!

      • See my comment to Hugh Holland, Terry. We have NO cause to celebrate extremely high personal debt. Also, reading the linked article from the UK Guardian, about the situation of the Nordic countries is an eye-opener.

    • Hugh,

      The debt to GDP ratio in Ontario increased nearly 55% in nine years–from 20007 to the 2016-2017 fiscal year. In that same period, Quebec (and the Quebecois are not exactly shy of taking on provincial debt) only took on an extra 18%.

      As for the “Scandinavian miracle” that Europeans are quick to laud, here’s an article that gives a more realistic look at the trouble that is likely coming their way:

      In the article, they point to the “worryingly sluggish” rate of productivity in Denmark. The Danes finance their lack of productivity by personal borrowing–at a rate that is FOUR times the rate of Italians–enough to warrant a warning from the IMF. All it would take is a significant uptick in interest rates to trigger massive levels of bankruptcy among the Danish population. Since neo-liberal governments these days seem to be only too glad to increase the national debt to bail out banks for their unwise lending practices, look for their national debt to soar, under those conditions.

      I would agree that borrowing to pay for capital improvements is the only legitimate reason for increasing debt (like borrowing to buy a house, for example, may be a good investment on a personal level–as long as the population is growing). Borrowing to pay the electric bill or the guy who cuts your lawn is a bad idea. On a governmental level, the Liberals have been borrowing to pay not only the guy who cuts our provincial lawn, but we are borrowing to get someone to pick our flowers and arrange them in a vase (at a very high price–which we went for because he’s our brother-in-law). For a while, the bouquet may look nice and even smell good but, when our lender has come knocking and foreclosed on our house and garnished our wages, it suddenly doesn’t smell so good. Now, that we cannot even feed, clothe or properly house our children (and this WILL happen, if we don’t change our provincial spending) what have we done? And saying, “Oh well, we’ll just put the squeeze on Great Aunt Tillie and she will come through for us” isn’t going to cut it. Aunt Tillie has decided that she is tired of financing our profligate ways and has cut us off. There is not only no free lunch, there is nothing to keep us from having to live in our car (that is, until the lenders come and get that too).

      • Hugh Holland on

        Erin, I agree that we all have to reign in our debt on both a personal and government level. Politicians respond to what they think the voters want and they keep coming up with new ideas to convince the public about what we should want. Ultimately the voter can be in charge but they must do their homework including fact checking to make sure they are not being misled. To be fair, we must recognize that the Liberals faced a perfect storm caused by the collapse of the US banking system. In hindsight they made a few mistakes but overall did a pretty good job. We will see if their successor can do better – – -or not.

        • With all due respect, Hugh, it was not just the U.S. banking system that was at risk–it was the global banking system that was at risk. And who put it at risk? The same people who paid enormous amounts to various politicians (particularly neo-liberal politicians, worldwide) to keep the game going. The enormously profitable investment banks, like Goldman Sachs, are making more money than ever and are still putting the financial system in danger with risky lending practices. The repeal of Glass-Steagall under Bill Clinton set the stage for the 2008 debacle and, if the Americans don’t reign in the lending practices of the big investment houses, it will happen again. The investment banks should NEVER have been permitted to combine with the commercial banks. That’s what Glass-Steagall (of 1933) was designed to prevent (even though it was not doing that great a job of it because the big banks are ingenious in being able to skirt banking regulations. It seems that the Wall Street gurus didn’t learn a thing from the financial collapse of 2008 (or even 1930, for that matter).

          Interestingly, President Trump has quietly signed an Executive Order that will serve to strengthen the much smaller banks (which were hurt in favor of big banking through past legislation). These smaller, more conservative lenders, will hopefully become a stabilizing influence. The very large multi-national banks have not changed their practices at all. The stock exchanges are being run like casinos as well.

  16. Bryan Stone on

    There is a distinct disadvantage to arguing against Hugh, as he represents the status quo. People are far more familiar with the ethos of his arguments and statements, and can quickly and easily fill in the glaring holes with their existing predilections. However, the position occupied by the NDP requires a new modus operandi. When Erin or Andrea state their position they must, by necessity, fill in conceptual holes the public may have so as to protect against an inherent skepticism of a new way of thinking.
    Hugh wrote his opinion piece on May 27, to that date the conservative party had not released its platform. This was not a symptom of technical difficulties at the printer, or a demonstration of laziness, it was a tactical decision. The Conservative party knows that by not publishing a platform they are free to make any hazy and general statements they like and the voting public will fill in the conceptual holes with what they want to hear rather than what is said. Assumptions are dangerous in politics and no one is more apt to assume than the people who believe their views are common sense.
    Hugh’s position is a likeness to this consistent error in our political conceptions. He upholds the standard understanding that the NDP will be owned by unions, without stopping to read and grapple with the reasoning behind upholding unions and workers. He fears economic catastrophe at the hands of any government other than conservative, again a status quo view despite consistent evidence that conservative economic policy does not adapt or age particularly well. And finally the acceptance of an imbecile at the head of the party… I suppose you can accept just about anything when driven by fear of the unknown but I would encourage anyone thinking of voting for Doug to familiarize themselves with a full party platform that has actually been released.

  17. Brian, is Doug Ford an “imbecile” or is he just painted that way by a leftist media? The Marxists are in control of our universities (and I say that as a holder of an undergraduate and graduate degree). The leftist indoctrination is especially strong in the liberal arts–where most journalists receive the bulk of their education. Starting in the 1960s, the Marxists have passionately controlled the narrative to the point that almost no one with a university degree is capable of rational analysis any longer. But every action brings a reaction and I have been inspired by some signs that the brighter ones among the younger generation are turning their backs on ideology and simply going with “what makes sense”.

    • Bryan Stone on

      Erin, It’s an interesting tack to steer the conversation away from the main thrust of my comment, that is the lack of a conservative platform thereby encouraging persons to assume he represents “what makes sense”, towards the ‘leftist media’ and ‘liberal bias in higher education’. I would appreciate it if you engage the substance of my comment or start a new thread rather than derail the conversation I began. With that aside let me directly address your comment; You seem highly concerned with “leftist indoctrination” to the point of assuming anyone who does not agree with you is dim, or at least the “brighter ones” are the ones that agree with you, which is a dangerous way to think of people who challenge you. Considering those who challenge you in this way allows you to never genuinely attempt to understand, this is the definition of dogmatism. If this conversation is to continue please simply make note of someone I should read who you think adequately represents your position that the left is controlling the narrative and or that our academic institutions are being dumbed down by Marxist ideologues. If you would like to continue on this thread please stay on the topic of the dangerous (or ‘perfectly acceptable’ if you wish to defend it) implications of voting for a party without a platform. As I see it when people do not know what they are voting for they assume they are voting for what they want, or common sense or simply “what makes sense” and this assumption is misguided.

      • Our very own Professor Jordan Peterson of the University of Toronto is the one to consult on the matter of leftist indoctrination on our university campuses and in our public schools–I have noted his comments on the subject before. The PCs have put out a platform but they have limited themselves to what is doable after they examine the books—we KNOW the Liberal Party is fond of lying about what they have spent and what they are carrying on the books for future generations to have to deal with.

        • Erin, you seem oddly accepting of going in to vote relatively blind. Having a plan and being forced to change it after ‘the real numbers’ are exposed is far better than not having a plan at all (other than various vague promises). The liberals have made available a set of numbers from which all parties (including the liberals) are working from to demonstrate their plans for the province, true or not, it is exceptionally telling what a party plans to do with those numbers. Not releasing their platform because numbers may change is wholly unconvincing to me, it appears to be an excuse to avoid accurate discussions of what is feasible. Again, the most likely explanation is what I have mentioned, the PC’s do not want to release their full platform because without it their vague promises translate into people assuming they are voting for what they individually want or “what makes sense” to them, when in reality to do this would be impossible and involve several contradictions. I believe the release of the PC’s limited platform has only made this argument more likely:

          • I am voting (and indeed, have already voted) for conservative policies–smaller government, tax cuts for individuals and especially for small to medium-sized businesses, who have taken a beating under neo-liberal policies around the world. The neo-liberals, at the same time, favored enormous corporations as yet another means of power and control over the people. “Neo-conservatives” follow the same play book–the only difference is that they favor war as a means to gain more wealth (since the super-wealthy also own the corporations which profit from war). True conservativatism (labeled “populism” by a hostile media) it adhering to the principles that made the Western nations great in the past.

            Your focus is too narrow, Bryan. Neo-liberal policies have been horrible for all Western nations. The only way to combat them is with policies which favor the average individual–not the super-wealthy. The neo-liberals follow the corrupt practice of courting super-wealthy owners of mega-corporations against the needs an concerns of the average citizen. Everywhere that neo-liberal policies have been put in place (and Ontario is no exception) we see the growth in the divide between rich and poor. If that keeps up, soon Ontario would resemble every other Third World country where the super-wealthy live in exclusive, guarded communities and everyone else scrabbles for existence.

            The middle class is the backbone of democracy–where it flourishes, you have freedom. Where it is shrinking, you have growing tyranny. There are lots of details and complexities in the current milieu, certainly. But, watching the trends over the last thirty years (during the ascendancy of neo-liberal policies interspersed with brief periods of “neo-conservativism”) does not suggest that more of the same will get us to any place the vast majority of us want to go. We need policies that build and prosper the middle class.

  18. Frances Botham on

    According to a news release in the National, Doug Ford states that if elected,he will implement a “strong mayors” system in the Ontario municipalities similar to what is in place in some states in the U.S. This would give the mayor of a municipality almost autocratic power in many instances, the right to veto council decisions as one example. Unbelievable. I hope the voters aren’t snoozing through his distorted agenda.

    • I think it is probably meant as a counter-balance to the autocratic power of majority provincial governments, Frances. You should be in favor if you fear that the PCs will get a majority government.

      • Terry McCaffery on

        The last time I checked, all 10 Provincial Legislative Assemblies were democratically elected parliamentary democracies. Any democratically elected provincial majority government would not be autocratic but democratic as it would have been legally voted in by the electorate to carry out it’s legislative mandate. In effect the electorate are assigning that considerable power to the elected government. Autocratic power presumes self imposed power and rule. Giving elected mayors more power such as the ability to veto council decisions is fraught with problems! The veto power could lead to gross abuse and corruption by the person in office. One need only to look at the current POTUS south of us to see autocratic abuse in action: his pardoning of Dinesh D’Souza and his possible of pardoning of Rob Blagojevich and Martha Stewart! There are many more people deserving presidential pardons than these three miscreants. To be fair, Bill Clinton abused his power by pardoning scumbag businessman Marc Rich whose wife donated bundles of money to the Clinton Library and to Hillary Clinton’s run for a senate seat. It is a reminder of that old adage: “power corrupts…absolute power corrupts, absolutely!”

        • Dinesh D’Souza was railroaded. Read up on the actual case and you will see that. Also, while Martha Stewart was guilty of a small amount of insider trading (hard to believe she would risk everything for $10,000 which was pocket change for her at the time), if you read in depth about the her case, it is clear that she was prosecuted for vastly less than others who got off scott-free. On the Blagojevich case, the Department of Justice likely wants to get a deal going where they get the President to pardon him in exchange for information about the Democratic corruption in Chicago. The attorneys for Blagojevich probably pitched the deal to the U.S. attorneys at the DoJ. I would also like to see a pardon for Conrad Black. He was railroaded too.

          • Terry McCaffery on

            Dinesh “There isn’t a conspiracy theory that I don’t like” D’Souza was not railroaded! He pled guilty to illegal campaign contributions and his defence never made any claim that the charges brought against him were politically motivated. Could it possibly be that Trump pardoned him because D’Souza is another one in the president’s arsenal of far-right provocateur defenders? Blagojevich was one of several Democratic politicians/operatives who were found guilty of federal corruption charges. The Feds did there investigation into corruption: that is why there were indictments! Wasn’t Blagojevich a contestant on Trump’s ‘The Apprentice’? I think Martha Stewart might have been a contestant on it as well-I never watch that kind of crap! Stewart was found guilty of obstructing justice and lying to the FBI which are, coincidentally felonies that are central to the current Mueller investigation! James Comey oversaw the Martha Stewart investigation-just coincidence??? Her potential pardon is not needed-she has become much more successful since her conviction! Patrick Fitzgerald, a long time friend of James Comey, prosecuted the case against Blagojevich. Patrick Fitzgerald is now one of James Comey’s personal attorneys! I am not one to purport conspiracy theories but you must admit, Erin there are a lot of coincidences! It will be very calculated and politically shrewd of Trump if he goes ahead with his planned pardon of Blagojevich and Stewart which neither deserve!!!

          • Terry, the prosecution of individuals has been VERY selective on that subject. D’Souza is hardly “far-right” although, of course, the leftist media tries to portray him that way. They also paint anything that they don’t like as a “conspiracy theory”–but they feel free to come up with the most preposterous conspiracy theories themselves. “Lying to the FBI” is also selectively prosecuted and probably violates Constitutional guarantees of a defendant not having to incriminate himself/herself under the Fifth Amendment. Scooter Libby was sent to jail under the “lying to the FBI” provision and he wasn’t even guilty of the original crime they were investigating.

            A pardon is not issued based on monetary success or lack of it. Marc Rich was fabulously wealthy–and yet he was pardoned by Bill Clinton.

            It will be interesting to see what the rank-and-file FBI agents have to say about the Comey years. They are starting to come forward to testify.

  19. I would look into Doug Fords past, I grew up in his neighborhood ,went to the same schools, saw and heard first hand things the brothers did. I also knew someone who worked at their company in rexdale.
    Just saying……… You should check it out before trusting him to this position.

Leave a reply below. Comments without both first & last name will not be published. Your email address is required for validation but will not be publicly visible.