We all do things for our friends.
For instance I didnāt like having to lie to The Border Bullās mammy on how he got a black eye but I did.
But Varadkar as head of state broke every ethical and dutiful standard to do favours for his friend and then lied about it.
You are saying that Leo Varadkar had no skin in the game for the deal to go through?
In the same way he had no skin in the game to save lives for the Irish Air Corps? Yes.
His contention that he did this as a strategy to get the deal over the line is betrayed by all the established facts. The established facts you keep ignoring.
You are saying that the head of Government had no skin in the game to get a deal done that would have avoided potential work stoppages and his policy getting through.
Good man, making it up as you go along.
I am saying that if that was his motivation, then he would not have sought to undermine everybody involved in the negotiations by going behind their backs and distributing a live document to the head of a rival organisation who wanted to destroy one of the parties negotiating the contract.
Iām saying that he would not have done it through backchannels if that was the case.
Iām saying that he would have been the instigator and not the responder if that was the case.
Iām saying that he would not have been deleting text messages if that was the case.
Iām saying that he would not be writing āsubject to changes/amendmentsā and ānot to take it as gospelā if the contract was finalised as he contended.
Itās a very weak defence that folds when you look at established facts. I will reiterate again how you steadfastly refuse to take into account all the facts that have been established so far and have not been contended. You seem to naively believe that if Leo says it then it must be true, irrespective of what has been established.
Itās just a pity that SF having won the election wonāt have enough votes to get this motion through following the FFG merger and how they enticed the stooks in the Green Party to give them cover.
Iād say this will get quite vitriolic later. FFG canāt abide it when SF take the high moral ground. And one of the reasons Iād say theyāve gone for Varadkar was because heās been so vocal in his anti-SF sniping over the last year or so. They want to knock him down a peg or two. Heās also been party leader while FG have launched a policy of releasing Trumpian style attack ads online against SF every other week.
Both sides despise each other and you have a handful of TDs on each side that seem to actively get involved in bashing each other online, e.g. Cullinane and Richmond on either side. Think one of the last times there was one of these big set piece SF v FG DĆ”il showdowns, Patrick OāDonovan accused the Ra of being behind the Dublin-Monaghan bombings. Thereāll be wild stuff mentioned later.
Unfortunately for you, the facts are that he was the Taoiseach. A breakdown in a deal impacted him more than anything else.
The facts are also that the deal went through.
Further facts are that despite the claims of special access, there was no deal on the CIS that would have benefitted Chay Bowes and MOT.
You have gone off deep on this one in looking for a justification, we thought the fact was that it was a leak and he should go for that alone. The rest is conjecture and illogical motivations being supposed that you are using to justify in your own head why he needs to go, as deep down you donāt think he should.
So does he do this routinely so or does he just do it for his friends? The problem for you and your simple defences is they generate more questions than they answer. The only reason Varadkar seem to break all those protocols was that it was friend who was the beneficiary, we have seen that he invokes his code of conduct when a person wants to save lives. But for his friends, he doesnāt see the merit in those same standards.
So? That has nothing to do with him leaking the document to his friend, has nothing to do with him breaking protocols and has nothing to do with him acquiescing to his friendās requests. Do you let drink drivers off if they donāt knock anybody down or cause damage? Do you let people who try to murder someone off because they didnāt succeed? Or do you actually punish them for the crime they committed?
Donāt think thatās in debate here. All that is in debate and has established is that Varadkarās breaks protocols, codes of conduct and potentially laws to service his friends with things they should not have in their possession. In addition to this, he does so by hiding it from his cabinet colleagues, parties to the contract and by request of his friend.
The deep end? Iāve just looked at the established facts, you are trying to legitimise fairytales, you are the invoking blind faith and completely overlooking all the established facts. You have failed to address any of those established facts because they are completely at odds with Varadkarās fairytale.
The only conjecture here is that Varadkar had legitimate motives when there is nothing to support that whatsoever and in contrast has everything to discredit it.
Do you have a logical reason why he went behind the backs of his cabinet members? Why did he release the document (marked confidential and not for circulation) when the Minister of Health did not?
When are you going to actually address the important points rather than pushing fairytales?
[FG]Sinn Fein robbed the Northern Bank because they wanted to solve the housing crisis.
It wasnāt best practice.[/FG]
As quite clearly there was a poor relationship between the IMO, DoH and NAGP, this was addressed at the beginning of the thread.
One of the suggestions before was that Varadkar released it so that FG wouldnāt be campaigned against in the next election as stated. Have you given that line up?
Quickly changes my passwords from simplesimon
I never pushed that line so you can take that up with someone else or show a post where I did.
I believe Varadkar did this with the sole intention of doing his friend a favour and the ego stroke he got out of it.
Thatās two sole intentions
I think youāve merely stood out yourself as a thicko.
One sole intention and the benefit of it.
So you are saying that Leo Varadkar doesnāt care about self preservation in politics?
Use your words. Youāre getting over-excited.
He does and heās also brazen enough to break all the codes of conduction and responsibilities of his job to help his friends and think heāll get away with it.
He had no issue throwing his friend under the bus.
Overexcited.
So you are saying that he just decided to forego self preservation here for his mate? Why?
Itās also an āestablished factā that the NAGP threatened Fine Gael that they would campaign against them. Why have you ignored this in your thought process?
Yes. Because he never thought heād get caught, brazen arrogance and it was easy to see it when Catherine Connolly caught him out.
Further highlighted when he told his party colleagues to be careful in choosing their friends rather than operating to the standards of office.
I havenāt ignored that fact. Are you trying to imply that Varadkar did this out of intimidation now? Thatās even worse.