News   Apr 03, 2020
From the Editor: A Message to Our Readers
 8.4K     3 
News   Apr 02, 2020
Topping Off March 2020: What's Hot on SkyriseEdmonton
 9.8K     0 
News   Apr 02, 2020
News Roundup for April 2, 2020
 3.1K     0 

Alberta Politics

calgaryherald.com

Danielle Smith says call with Artur Pawlowski was between two party leaders

calgaryherald.com calgaryherald.com

Screenshot_20230408-185343_Samsung Internet.jpg
 
Sooo…

She shouldn’t have taken the call and she shouldn’t have said what she did during the call.

But she had her own - first - version of what she did and said and why to explain why it was okay after all. It was however an explanation that simply wasn’t credible.

Then an actual recording of the call was released and she had her own - second - version of what she did and said and why to explain why it was okay after all. It was however an explanation that simply wasn’t credible either.

Now she has yet another - third - version of what she did and said and why to explain why it was okay after all. It however is an explanation that is even more incredibly unbelievable than the first two (which in itself is pretty hard to believe).

I don’t know what game she is playing but it’s too bad it’s not baseball where the rules are pretty simple and after three strikes you’re out…
 
The story keeps on changing or evolving, as they sometimes say in politics. I'm fairly sure she had an idea of what he wanted to talk about, given his situation and interests.

Given that it took her a number of days to come up with this new alternative explanation, it shows how top of mind it really was.
 
perhaps as with some of the other incredulous statements and positions she and her party have taken on other files and stories, she thinks the consistent use of “imprecise language” to express her “muddled thinking” [to quote david staples] will bail her out. as if albertans want a premier with muddled thinking who uses imprecise language…
 
according to the cbc, since this particular story broke:

“…Smith has offered multiple, at times conflicting, explanations on who she talked to, what was discussed and when. She has said the talks were only about broad prosecution principles but has also said they were about issues related to the cases. She has stated the talks were ongoing and that the talks had ended.”

using yet another sports analogy, it’s like sitting at centre court watching a tennis match between danielle smith and danielle smith only with no out of bounds rule.
 
kcantor said:
Sooo…

She shouldn’t have taken the call and she shouldn’t have said what she did during the call.

But she had her own - first - version of what she did and said and why to explain why it was okay after all. It was however an explanation that simply wasn’t credible.

Then an actual recording of the call was released and she had her own - second - version of what she did and said and why to explain why it was okay after all. It was however an explanation that simply wasn’t credible either.

Now she has yet another - third - version of what she did and said and why to explain why it was okay after all. It however is an explanation that is even more incredibly unbelievable than the first two (which in itself is pretty hard to believe).

I don’t know what game she is playing but it’s too bad it’s not baseball where the rules are pretty simple and after three strikes you’re out…
Click to expand...
What is the over under for five different versions?
 
This is really comical and sad at the same time. It's almost like she is trying to sabotage her own election campaign because this is just so bizarre how it's being handled.

Is Smith, just for fun, being so incompetent just to see how bad she can be and still win the election?

"I totally crossed the line, then made up multiple versions of the story, and people still stood by me! It's good to know when I'm elected how far I can really start to take things." -note- this is not a real quote from our Premier, just a fictional idea in my head.
 
The_Cat said:
I think there's the hopeless case that some people will vote UCP anyway.
Click to expand...
I agree its still a toss up. As one of my neighbor said yesterday. "I don't want all those social programs and I want someone who like the oil industry. Our taxes will go up and everything will cost more". And when I bring up the fact that everything is costing more now she blames Trudeau. So I am not hopeful. Will spend a trip this summer to look at places in the Maritimes. For someone born and raised here, has had a good career and helped build this province, after 64 years I am tired and can't see a future here. (That's what hurts).
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top