Leo Varadkar story in The Village??? - Mod Notes and banned Users in OP updated 16/05

gadarnol

Bishop of hope wrote: »

So what's the constitutional crisis?

Crisis? What crisis?

marieholmfan

IRISH_TIMES wrote:

Sitting judges seeking to move to higher courts do not go through the JAAB, the mechanism that barristers and solicitors use to apply for judicial office and which is chaired by Chief Justice Frank Clarke.

Helen McEntee's remarks are bizarrely disingenuous.

Yurt2

Bishop of hope wrote: »

So what's the constitutional crisis?

Unbelievable. Gridlock and a Mexican standoff in the highest court in the land and the NoTHinG TO sEe hERe unit won't call it by its' name.

Floppybits

Ah folks nothing to see here same as there was nothing to see with darragh Murphy, Leo the leak and golfgate. I'm sure I missed some other things?

McMurphy

s1ippy wrote: »

Fine Gael asked research candidates how to attack Sinn Féin

this is “type of negative campaigning Fine Gael are known for”. “This is a desperate attempt to distract from failed policies on health, housing and childcare,” he said. “They are also trying to get research on the cheap which is disappointing,”.

I don't especially like Sinn Féin either but what a waste of time, resources, money, personnel and energy. No wonder everything is awful.

Just to compare.

https://twitter.com/DCeitinnSF/status/1326883340864131076?s=19

Floppybits wrote: »

Ah folks nothing to see here same as there was nothing to see with darragh Murphy, Leo the leak and golfgate. I'm sure I missed some other things?

Sipo nomination.

thomas 123

marieholmfan wrote: »

Helen McEntee's remarks are bizarrely disingenuous.

Be careful they might be taking screenshots of your posts!

Bubbaclaus

Yurt! wrote: »

Unbelievable. Gridlock and a Mexican standoff in the highest court in the land and the NoTHinG TO sEe hERe unit won't call it by its' name.

I dont think that's the argument the poster is making.

I think they are asking how exactly this is a constitutional crisis. I'm also struggling to see what part of this is a constitutional crisis. Maybe people are just using it as a general phrase without understanding what it actually means?

Yurt2

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

I dont think that's the argument the poster is making.

I think they are asking how exactly this is a constitutional crisis. I'm also struggling to see what part of this is a constitutional crisis. Maybe people are just using it as a general phrase without understanding what it actually means?

I think we all recognize what the phrase means. The current AG has already outlined the grave constitutional issues presented by the current predicament. The phrase has been deployed in the media increasingly in recent days. The Taoiseach has described the situation as 'grave and serious'.

I'm conscious that the above won't satisfy the hand waving posters who don't want "their guy" to take a knee, but we all know what we're looking at truth be told.

Brendan Bendar

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

I dont think that's the argument the poster is making.

I think they are asking how exactly this is a constitutional crisis. I'm also struggling to see what part of this is a constitutional crisis. Maybe people are just using it as a general phrase without understanding what it actually means?

I think these lads think a councilor being caught speeding is now a constitutional crisis, Bubba.

They are trawling every platform for every bit of mud they can sling and firing it up here.

But don’t worry, there are those who can match them stride for stride.;)

Floppybits

Yurt! wrote: »

I think we all recognize what the phrase means. The current AG has already outlined the grave constitutional issues presented by the current predicament. The phrase has been deployed in the media increasingly in recent days. The Taoiseach has described the situation as 'grave and serious'.

I'm conscious that the above won't satisfy the hand waving posters who don't want "their guy" to take a knee, but we all know what we're looking at truth be told.

Hopefully a good thing to come out this is a proper system for appointing judges that does not involve Politicians, they really cannot be trusted with anything. As much as Shane Ross was a buffoon he was right on his Judicial Appointments Bill.

Yurt2

Floppybits wrote: »

Hopefully a good thing to come out this is a proper system for appointing judges that does not involve Politicians, they really cannot be trusted with anything. As much as Shane Ross was a buffoon he was right on his Judicial Appointments Bill.

He absolutely was. There was an extreme amount of hostility to Ross on this point from the great and the good of this country, and it spilled into the public perception of him. Not that he was an outstanding minister by any means, but he had a target on his back because of this issue. When you're an independent minister without a party machinery behind you, this was always going to happen.

RandomViewer

Is this Woulfe guy a bit thick?

Man with broke phone

I was away for a while, couldnt follow this,

There was a Leo always delivers thing and the cash emoji with the Dp centre. Then the crushing the other union leak.

Now Im back and it looks like a judge got hired when all other CVs got thrown in the bin.

Am I missing anything else?

gadarnol

Man with broke phone wrote: »

I was away for a while, couldnt follow this,

There was a Leo always delivers thing and the cash emoji with the Dp centre. Then the crushing the other union leak.

Now Im back and it looks like a judge got hired when all other CVs got thrown in the bin.

Am I missing anything else?

The FF Taoiseach is being led around by the nose by FG.

Man with broke phone

Man with broke phone wrote: »

I was away for a while, couldnt follow this,

There was a Leo always delivers thing and the cash emoji with the Dp centre. Then the crushing the other union leak.

Now Im back and it looks like a judge got hired when all other CVs got thrown in the bin.

Am I missing anything else?

The government hired an ex-lobbyest for nagp to investigate the leak from leo to nagp on grounds of ethics in public offices



You couldnt make up,this level of bare-faced contempt for the irish people

Bubbaclaus

[Deleted User] wrote: »

The government hired an ex-lobbyest for nagp to investigate the leak from leo to nagp on grounds of ethics in public offices



You couldnt make up,this level of bare-faced contempt for the irish people

Except you did make it up.

1. Nobody has been hired
2. The role clearly hasn't been created just to investigate a complaint from Paul Murphy

I agree she shouldn't ultimately be approved, but there is no need to make things up in an attempt to add outrage.

Bubbaclaus

[Deleted User] wrote: »

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thejournal.ie/geraldine-feeney-sipo-5264399-Nov2020/%3famp=1

She will be approved,we dont matter to them.cúnts and they dont care


Fail to see difference between approving someone for a role and hiring em.tbh

But you agree your post was completely inaccurate then?

Got plenty of 'thanks' I suppose, which is the main goal on boards of course. Who cares about accuracy if you get people rowing in behind you

FrancieBrady

Whatever about appointing judges, appointing people to monitor the standards of politicians should not be in the gift of politicians.

Floppybits

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

But you agree your post was completely inaccurate then?

Got plenty of 'thanks' I suppose, which is the main goal on boards of course. Who cares about accuracy if you get people rowing in behind you

I will give you a thanks if thats all that is annoying you?

Bubbaclaus

Floppybits wrote: »

I will give you a thanks if thats all that is annoying you?

I couldn't care less about getting 'thanks'. That was not the point of my post.

Bubbaclaus

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Its 100% accurate?

What is inaccurate about it?


Gaslighting as usual from government supporters

I will quote my post again since you must have missed it the first time. See below. As I said, I agree she shouldn't ultimately be approved, but there is no need to make things up in an attempt to add faux outrage. The facts are enough.

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

Except you did make it up.

1. Nobody has been hired
2. The role clearly hasn't been created just to investigate a complaint from Paul Murphy

I agree she shouldn't ultimately be approved, but there is no need to make things up in an attempt to add outrage.

Bubbaclaus

[Deleted User] wrote: »

She will.be approved,this is only a formality??


Do you honestly think she wont,or anyone would have heard of this,only for doherty

FFG are only laughing in our faces with their carryon,and pretending she wont get approved is a weird way of trying to gaslight people

Would you support calls for government to resign,if/when she gets approval/hired

Not sure why you are getting defensive. I was simply pointing out that there is no need to make things up in an attempt to create some increased faux outrage. You'd be better off sticking to the facts and arguing your position based on those facts.

Bubbaclaus

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Except i havnt made things up


Curious you will still cheerlead and support the government,when she gets approval,despite saying she shouldnt

Still making things up? I said, several times, I think she shouldn't be approved in my posts that you are replying to.

Not sure why you feel the need to do that.

Bubbaclaus

[Deleted User] wrote: »

But when she is approved,and she will be btw,will you call on the government to resign??

Or do you just prefer the government to ignore your wishes,and then keep supporting them??

If we were to call for governments to resign every time they did something I didn't like we would be having general elections every month.

thomas 123

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

If we were to call for governments to resign every time they did something I didn't like we would be having general elections every month.

What would they need to do for you to think enough is enough?

Bubbaclaus

thomas 123 wrote: »

What would they need to do for you to think enough is enough?

Not sure. Substantially more than this "story" anyway. Many many magnitudes more.

Floppybits

thomas 123 wrote: »

What would they need to do for you to think enough is enough?

As Trump said before he could shoot someone on the street and he would get away with it, its the same here for FG. Nothing they have done, are doing or will do would make their supporters think enough is enough. We have seen a TD double jobbing and claiming expenses here waddle off into the sunset and all FG did was shrug their shoulders, we have seen their Leader leak confidential documents to a mate and all they did was wave their hands and say nothing to see here, now we have 2 controversies the sipo appointment and the Woulfe affair and still they shrug their shoulders.

The only reason I can think is that they are terrified of facing the public that is why you will hear cliches like the public are not interested, they would never forgive for bringing down the government, etc. Any decent person would be ashamed to be associated with the FG party after what has gone on

Scoondal

Mr Varadkar, as Taoiseach, confirmed that he gave confidential government documents to his friend. No sanction. Could we not even see a one month loss of his cabinet position ?
Therefore, Justice Woulfe should not get a small sanction on his position.
Ireland is turning into a really horrible country.

Bubbaclaus

[Deleted User] wrote: »

So you support something,you dont like

How deos that work?

Not sure I follow. Are you suggesting you would call for a Government to resign every time you disagree with them? That just seems absolutely bizarre to me.

Jinglejangle69

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I certainly wouldnt support someone i disagree with?

It deosnt make sense to me to do so

Who you vote for in the last election?