I've received many an email over the last day or so asking me what the hell this Kinsella/Apps thing is all about. "Why would Kinsella swear an affidavit?" one reader asks. "Who the hell is John Mraz?" another asks. Didn't you call for Apps' resignation recently?" asks another.
Here's what I know and here's what I think.
Warren signed an affidavit. A legal document. He knew he could because he knew what he was saying was nothing but the truth so help him God. What else Warren probably knew is that Alfred Apps couldn't possibly do the same. Why, you ask? Well, I'll let you guess at that one.
Alfred Apps has a tendency to believe he, and he alone, is the centre of the universe. See my previous posts in archives. Probably in a conversation with WK and a subsequent conversation with Mraz, Mr. Apps may have thrown some names out there unassumingly....or not. Afterall, he's the guy that claimed to know Pierre Trudeau better than Trudeau's own son.
And, yes, I have called for his resignation over the whole Gallani/Jaffer affair because I think that Mr. Apps should have disclosed his meeting with Gallani to the Liberal Party of Canada before the witch hunt began.
Which leaves me with John Mraz. I damn neared died laughing when I heard Penny Collenette on Power and Politics yesterday when she denied on three occasions that she has never even HEARD of this John Mraz person. (Likened it to that biblical guy with Jesus where the cock crows). I mean really. The guy's been around some serious Liberal backrooms, was part of the War Room as recently as a few months ago and writes a column for the National Post. (Note donor 354 here. Mraz was big in Rae circles during the '06 leadership) What Liberal planet is she living on?
Further, I know John Mraz personally. I don't think he's about to put pen to paper to back up his buddy Warren unless it was nothing but the truth. Putting himself out there like that just isn't his M O.
So, what I'm telling you my Liberal friends is that two guys signed affidavits swearing the truth. One guy didn't. Enough said. With any luck these rumours of Apps are true too.
Now, what is it all about? Hell if I know, but what I can tell you is that the return of the senior Martinites is disturbing to me, and I'm certain WK probably ain't very thrilled about it either. Especially with the talking popcorn master on CBC everyday speaking for the Joe average Liberal.
It looks as though there really is a power struggle behind the scenes in Liberaland. Then again, what do I know?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
Thanks for this, JC.
It's been a bit of a ride, but I can say one thing: if you are planning a similar ride, you'll be lucky to have John Mraz with you.
One day I plan to tell his son that his Dad is a brave man, and that he tells the truth.
The worst thing about people like Penny Collenette, Tyler Banham, etc. is the obvious self-interest at play. They worry that in any coalition or merger scenario, they won't be able to run, so they are vocally against it.
Then there are the people who benefit from "Liberal Party Status Quo Circa Martin" - people otherwise unemployable - screaming against any possible discission: the embarrassing Scott Reid, Mark Marrissen and David Herle.
Last and least, there are similarly self-interested, unemployable people in the provincial wings of the Liberal Party of Canada: Dan Arnold, Jason Cherniak and Brigitte Legault.
Are ANY of these people interested in the future of the Liberal Party? It looks like their only interest is themselves.
It's curious.. in a way, ripping the LPC apart may be a good thing.
The problem is, talk of merger and coalition BEFORE an election is, I think, both short-sited and self-defeating.
The once juggernaut of Canadian politics, is now saying, "uncle", we need NDP help.
How about, "We were strong once, and we can be strong again?"
WK, intentionally or not, hits on the core issue - "honesty".
We're starved for politicians who are genuine. And no party has any high ground in this Country on that score.
Dear Anong @ Jun 11, 2010 1:26:00 AM:
I just want to let you know. I am against the merger and it has nothing to do with self serving or my non-existent ego. It is just that I am comfortable with the centre-right fiscal prudence that was the success of the last Liberal winning streak.
I honestly fear that former NDP influences in a merged party would pull the party towards the left so much that I would no longer be comfortable voting for that party.
I also assume that the conservatives will replace Harper with a normal Progressive-Conservative which will make it easier for people like me to go the other way.
Essentially, I do not want to change parties, I just want my party to go back to its roots or find new roots that are not at the knees of the rich old guys who control it. And I want to get rid of Iggy. Badly.
Please don't paint all anti-merger folks as opportunists. Thank you.
Jim,
Please forward me details regarding the person who posted the libel above at your ealiest convenience.
Jason
Dear Mr. Cherniak,
I like you and it certainly wasn't me who left that comment. I always use my moniker. And I don't think that way. But I think your above comment is ill-advised. It reflects poorly on you. One gets insulted all the time. To freak out and want to claim libel, even if true, is silly, and makes one look bad. Bad idea. Realise, no offense to Mr. Curran or any of us, but virtually no-one, in real terms, reads this blog, my blog, or almost any blog. Your reaction is disproportionate. I'd suggest you either ignore, respond in kind, or laugh off such comments. I am not opposed to protecting one's reputation through the law, should a real need arise, but online, where it's such a free for all, it's like the UK in 18th century, and pamphleteering ethos. Your comment, and proposed response, seems a vast overreaction to a small silly thing. C'mon. You have a thicker skin than that, I'm sure. Maybe you should reignite your blog, so you can argue with people directly, as you once did, and achieve catharsis in that manner?
Anyway, while I disagreed with your anti-coalition-talk argument, I enjoyed its quality. Taking stick in good humour is far more becoming than thin-skinned intolerance, no?
Best,
EFL
As a newly elected director on the HMFLA Exec Committee, I have to take exception with Anon's assertion that Tyler "won't be able to run".
Tyler's run as a Lib candidate and as a lawyer, his practice keeps him busy so why would he run?
Now, as a relative "newbie" to the Liberal Party, I am dismayed by the "internal bickering" (ie Jean Chretien VS. Paul Martin "camps"). You know what? I don't give a damn!
Either you are a Liberal or you're not. Instead of fighting amongest each other, wouldn't the energy be better spent getting Harper out of office?
David Winchester
Check your facts. John Mraz NEVER worked in a federal Liberal War Room.
Please. Give your head a double shake.
Post a Comment