And I might add that he also sought out the home address of his friend to send the document onto rather than deliver them to his office which was on the same street as Varadkarâs office. He claimed he was unaware the NAGP office was across the road, a former minister for healthâŚthe head of state who was being kept abreast of negotiations.
Complicit, a stooge or incompetent. He is not fit for office.
So youâre saying that youâd utterly condemn the questioning of the motivation and sources of media stories. Unequivocally. In every case.???
Iâll leave these here so âŚ
Trump tactics were Varadkar blustering about taking legal action on the allegations and then backing down on it when the allegations being made against him were completely corroborated by the evidence.
Deflection is talking about SF IRA in a Leo Varadkar thread.
But but but SF.
We are talking about Leo The Lawbreaker here.
@Tim_Riggins
@tallback
@TheUlteriorMotive
What supports Leo Varadkarâs contention that he gave the documents to his friend to get the deal over the line? Do ye believe it and if so why?
Your position is riddled with hypocrisy. Making out like Helen Lovejoy about criminality, âbully-boy tacticsâ, media smearing etc. Desperate to make this into a bigger deal. Wetting yourself in anticipation of the big scoop from Village etc. Youâre a busted flush.
If Iâm honest, I think youâre still acting out about Tyrone having their holes handed to them.
I was referring more to the âFFG traditionââŚ
More bluster and deflection.
The one thing you will not address is the issue at hand and we all know why.
I havenât seen any more likely explanation to be honest. Village lead with big claims of âcorruptionâ but havenât been able to uncover anything to that effect.
I think it suited Leoâs needs to give him the doc as to Leoâs view it helped get more GPâs on board with the deal.
I think it was a pretty tawdry bit of business but in the real world thatâs how things like this often go.
The question you were asked was what is there to support it? And youâve offered nothing.
There is plenty there to completely discredit Varadkarâs defence and I have no problem detailing that.
The question posed to you is what supports or corroborates Varadkarâs defence, you seem to be fairly light on anything other than blind faith, naivety and partisan support for a disgraced political leader.
The Blueshirt Corruptalites have been asked to give some credible support for Varadkar defence and realise there actually isnât any available.
There is absolutely nothing to support his defence but loads there to discredit it. If you had a dutiful mainstream media in the 26 they would be all over it.
As they had agreed to consult with the NAGP.
This consultation was âlooseâ language owing to the relationships between the NAGP, IMO and DoH.
Getting the NAGP onside was important because of the number of GPs attached it.
In terms of Varadkarâs own motivations. A deal negotiated by his Government that would result in Government policy proceeding is quite clearly in his own interest.
Apparently the Village have loads of text messages, so are there any that suggest otherwise? Why would Varadkar scupper a deal that would damage him politically?
Anyway, back to ârevelationsâ number 2 that you posted, whatâs the beef?
Who had agreed to consult with the NAGP?
Why did the Minister for Health not do this?
Why did the Minister for Health not release the document?
Why did they go through backchannels to get this document?
Why did Varadkar not consult with his gov colleagues, his minister for health, IMO before, during and after this?
If this was Varadkarâs strategy then why was it his friend who was pursuing him for it rather than the other way around?
Why was it delivered to his friendâs home address rather than their office across the road?
Why the need for secrecy?
Do you find it credible Varadkar didnât know their office was across the road?
Why did he write subject to change/amendments on the document if it was finalised?
Why did he reiterate that in a further text message ânot to take it as gospelâ?
Why did he delete text messages containing these requests?
Why would he contact his friend who isnât a close friend 3 times during the course of them releasing their statements? Do you find his justification for this credible? Do you think the optics of them being in cahoots with their joint statements is terrible and something Vardakar should have avoided?
His friend is on record as saying he wanted to destroy the IMO and the document could allow them to âtake the windâ out of the IMOâs sail. His friend was the head of a rival organisation. Did Varadkar show a massive and reckless error of judgement in putting a confidential document into the hands of a rival organisation with sinister motivations?
Varadkarâs story lacks any sort of credibility. What you have offered as a defence is not supported by anything and when you look at the established facts we have now, Varadkarâs defence is actually totally and utterly undermined by them.
What supports this? Merely blind faith?
By god
âTriggeredâ I believe they call it
A lot of questions there which have already been through ad neusium.
You have a view which he should go because a leak is a leak. There is no evidence of why he would want to scuttle the contract, all motivations appear to be to get the deal done. Just asking âquestionsâ because you donât believe the explanation for partisan purposes is just weird.
Just stick to the leak is the leak, the rest of it is embarrassing.
As for the rest, you are again failing to engage on the latest ârevelationsâ that you posted on here. They were about dealing subsequent to this accord. Why donât you have a view on that?
Logic�
Again, I donât understand this from you. You can hold the position that a leak is a leak and he should go, thatâs fine, but trying to turn it into Watergate is embarrassing.