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

Rows Grower

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Blanch walks into another haymaker.

He's punch drunk at this stage.

Just like Leo will be once The Village hear the bell for round 2.

seamus

FrancieBrady wrote: »

If there is 'no crime' then the precedent is set, a Taoiseach can do (in secret and without consultation or record) whatever he/she likes for the good of the country.

Are you happy with that as a precedent?

It's either a crime or it isn't. We don't get to decide whether an action is or isn't a crime based on what precedent we want to set.

That's separate from whether it was wrong, and if it was wrong, just how grevious a wrong it is.

WicklaWolf

I was confused, but after rereading the relevant sections of the Act and the Village's statement today, it is clear that section 4 and the Act DOES apply to Members of the Oireachtas.

"Persons" is not defined in Section 2 and applies to ALL persons.

"Public office" is defined in Section 2 and does not include members of either house.

Therefore, rereading Section 4 with this in mind, a person includes members of the houses and they should not communicate official information.

"
4.—(1) A person shall not communicate any official information to any other person unless he is duly authorised to do so or does so in the course of and in accordance with his duties as the holder of a public office or when it is his duty in the interest of the State to communicate it.
"

smurgen

Looks like it's with the Gardai now.

https://twitter.com/BowesChay/status/1323603304543375362?s=19

dundalkfc10

https://twitter.com/BowesChay/status/1323603304543375362?s=19

Leo's going down

Fann Linn

dundalkfc10 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/BowesChay/status/1323603304543375362?s=19

Leo's going down

Well that's put a dampener on it I suppose. For now.

Legal precedence and criminal investigation will probably silence this for a while.
Turns up the pressure however on MM & FF and the LP who said they'd settle for an apology at midday today.

seamus

God, the Village stuff is written like a angsty blog. No wonder they have trouble being taken seriously.

WicklaWolf wrote: »

I was confused, but after rereading the relevant sections of the Act and the Village's statement today, it is clear that section 4 and the Act DOES apply to Members of the Oireachtas.

There are still two avenues here though.

"Public office" does not apply to members of the oireachtas, but may apply to a Government Minister, because that is a specific role.

There's also the "duly authorised" part. There's a strong argument - I would argue an almost certainty - that the Taoiseach can "duly authorise" themselves to reveal whatever they want.

JohnnyFlash

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

Time to put the toys away, lads, and get back to class. Mountain made out of a molehill on all this. Lessons learned and Leo gets to fight another day. Good lesson in realpolitik for some of you.

Called it on Saturday this wouldn’t be a resigning matter.

Twenty minutes later...

smurgen wrote: »

Looks like it's with the Gardai now.

https://twitter.com/BowesChay/status/1323603304543375362?s=19

FrancieBrady

seamus wrote: »

It's either a crime or it isn't.

That has yet to be decided.

JohnnyFlash

This reminds me a bit of when people were getting outrage boners when Drew Harris hit the ramp at Garda HQ. Another national scandal according to some folk - especially in the outrage engine rooms of Twitter.

ohnonotgmail

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

This reminds me a bit of when people were getting outrage boners when Drew Harris hit the ramp at Garda HQ. Another national scandal according to some folk - especially in the outrage engine rooms of Twitter.

I'm not aware that there was an allegation of illegality in that instance.

Floppybits

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

I'm not aware that there was an allegation of illegality in that instance.

Ah poor Johnnyflash is having a hard time at the moment with the pressure his hero Leo is under and is just lashing out. I am sure he will be firing out insults soon.

JeffKenna

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

This reminds me a bit of when people were getting outrage boners when Drew Harris hit the ramp at Garda HQ. Another national scandal according to some folk - especially in the outrage engine rooms of Twitter.

Also reminds me of the time when you were saying the Maria Bailey story would go away in a few days.

TheChizler

Holy Mary wrote: »

Is that it?!

https://villagemagazine.ie/dail-debate-must-focus-on-whether-release-of-document-was-in-public-interest-and-criminality/

It kind of reads like an angry post in this thread, are all their articles like that?

JohnnyFlash

TheChizler wrote: »

It kind of reads like an angry post in this thread, are all their articles like that?

Opinions aren’t facts - some folks need to learn that.

FrancieBrady

JeffKenna wrote: »

Also reminds me of the time when you were saying the Maria Bailey story would go away in a few days.

Johnny thinks the tide has turned and Leo will brazen it out and decides to come back...Leo gets a criminal complaint slapped on him 5 minutes later. You couldn't write this stuff.

Fann Linn

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

Opinions aren’t facts - some folks need to learn that.

We should let the head of the anti corruption unit decide what is or isn't a fact.

Rows Grower

seamus wrote: »

God, the Village stuff is written like a angsty blog. No wonder they have trouble being taken seriously.


There are still two avenues here though.

"Public office" does not apply to members of the oireachtas, but may apply to a Government Minister, because that is a specific role.

There's also the "duly authorised" part. There's a strong argument - I would argue an almost certainty - that the Taoiseach can "duly authorise" themselves to reveal whatever they want.

Seriously?

As in do you expect to be taken seriously?

McMurphy

dundalkfc10 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/BowesChay/status/1323603304543375362?s=19

Leo's going down

Will be have to step down temporarily?

I mean, surely if there's a Garda investigation into his actions, you can't have him remain in a position where he can interfere with the investigations proceedings?

smurgen

seamus wrote: »

God, the Village stuff is written like a angsty blog. No wonder they have trouble being taken seriously.


There are still two avenues here though.

"Public office" does not apply to members of the oireachtas, but may apply to a Government Minister, because that is a specific role.

There's also the "duly authorised" part. There's a strong argument - I would argue an almost certainty - that the Taoiseach can "duly authorise" themselves to reveal whatever they want.

So in that instance you're saying a taoiseach can never perform insider trading for example?

seamus

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Johnny thinks the tide has turned and Leo will brazen it out and decides to come back...Leo gets a criminal complaint slapped on him 5 minutes later. You couldn't write this stuff.

Hilarious the amount of people here who think "criminal complaint" means it's game over.

You too can send in a criminal complaint about Leo, and then go on Twitter and declare that a criminal complaint has been made to the Gardai.

The fact that he's done this tells me one of two things;

1. He's knows there's nothing really in this and the criminal complaint will go nowhere, so he's bigging it up as much as possible in the hope that the "pressure" will be enough

2. He hasn't a rashers what he's doing and doesn't realise that a criminal complaint will muzzle the media from discussing any of this at all.

I suspect it's #1, because if he did believe there was a criminal case to answer, he would have just made the complaint to Gardai instead of prejudicing the entire investigation before it even started.

McMurphy

Poor Leo, imagine the very first and only time in your life that you ever leaked or passed on sensitive documents in your political career through skulduggery backchannels, and you get caught.

What are the odds.

s1ippy

I'm looking forward to three o'clock.

I Am The Law

TheChizler wrote: »

It kind of reads like an angry post in this thread, are all their articles like that?

That's how you reply to accusations of "inaccurate and grossly defamatory" reporting.

JohnnyFlash

McMurphy wrote: »

Will be have to step down temporarily?

I mean, surely if there's a Garda investigation into his actions, you can't have him remain in a position where he can interfere with the investigations proceedings?

You’re not thinking this through, Murph. First the Gardaí have to decide if there’s a case to investigate, and second if a politician had to step aside every time some no mark made a complaint then every crank, contrarian, and malcontent in the country would be logging complaints with the Gardaí.

Very poor understanding of democracy around here in general.

FrancieBrady

seamus wrote: »

Hilarious the amount of people here who think "criminal complaint" means it's game over.

You too can send in a criminal complaint about Leo, and then go on Twitter and declare that a criminal complaint has been made to the Gardai.

The fact that he's done this tells me one of two things;

1. He's knows there's nothing really in this and the criminal complaint will go nowhere, so he's bigging it up as much as possible in the hope that the "pressure" will be enough

2. He hasn't a rashers what he's doing and doesn't realise that a criminal complaint will muzzle the media from discussing any of this at all.

I suspect it's #1, because if he did believe there was a criminal case to answer, he would have just made the complaint to Gardai instead of prejudicing the entire investigation before it even started.

Or, you get Leo to admit he did it first and then you go to the Gardai, adding that to the veracity of your complaint.

FrancieBrady

And it gets more and more fascinating,,,who needs US elections?

https://villagemagazine.ie/senior-counsels-opinion-for-village-affirms-being-a-minister-does-not-exclude-you-from-the-obligations-of-the-official-secret-act/

NSAman

Anyone who thinks Leo’s actions are “not illegal”, shows that person up as being of dubious moral character.

At the least, it is absolutely wrong to leak documents of a sensitive nature, at worst it is an illegal act.

It tells you something about Irish politics, where people are basically saying, “shure it’s ok, no harm done, we all do it”

seamus

smurgen wrote: »

So in that instance you're saying a taoiseach can never perform insider trading for example?

Depends on the context. Insider trading typically involves personal gain, which would be breaking a whole pile of other laws.

According to the Act, if Simon Harris had shared this document, he would not have been in breach. As the Minister for Health, he would be entirely entitled to self-authorise this.
It stands to reason that the Taoiseach, as a higher office holder than the Minister for Health can likewise self-authorise.

Section 5 though might be a sticking point for Leo as it requires written authorisation. So if the information qualifies as confidential information in a contract, then it's tricky.

That is, of course, if the Official Secrets Act applies here at all.

I'm going to give him the benefit of the doubt and assume he has sought competent legal advice on this and whether he has broken the law. But, stranger things have happened.

McMurphy

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

You’re not thinking this through, Murph. First the Gardaí have to decide if there’s a case to investigate, and second if a politician had to step aside every time some no mark made a complaint then every crank, contrarian, and malcontent in the country would be logging complaints with the Gardaí.

Very poor understanding of democracy around here in general.

I mean, surely if there's a Garda investigation into his actions

The people who've been jumping the gun are the ones insisting this would have already blown over by now.