Home FAQ Search Memberlist User Groups Register Login   

BloggingTories.ca Forum IndexBloggingTories.ca Forum Index
    Index     FAQ     Search     Register     Login         JOIN THE DISCUSSION - CLICK HERE      

*NEW* Login or register using your Facebook account.

Not a member? Join the fastest growing conservative community!
Membership is free and takes 15 seconds

CLICK HERE or use Facebook to login or register ----> Connect


Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 1 of 1
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message

Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 7245
Reputation: 252.6
votes: 3
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Fri Sep 01, 2017 9:06 am    Post subject: MP Darshan Kang resigns from liberal caucus Reply with quote

( the allegations appear to be more serious than first though )

MP Darshan Kang resigns from Liberal caucus after sexual harassment allegations from second woman

The Canadian Press

First posted: Thursday, August 31, 2017 08:29 PM EDT | Updated: Thursday, August 31, 2017 09:49 PM EDT

Calgary MP Darshan Kang resigned late Thursday from the Liberal caucus after sexual harassment allegations from a second woman became public.

In a written statement, Kang said he’s leaving the governing party’s caucus because “I wish to focus my efforts at this time on clearing my name.”

The statement was issued shortly after The Hill Times reported that a woman who worked in Kang’s constituency office when he was a member of the Alberta legislature has come forward alleging that Kang sexually harassed her.

The woman alleged in an interview with the parliamentary precinct media outlet that Kang grabbed her breasts, among other inappropriate behaviour, and would not desist in the harassment despite repeatedly being asked to stop.

Kang, who was elected federally in 2015, is already under investigation after a young woman who worked in his federal constituency office complained in June of sexual harassment.

The woman’s father told the Toronto Star earlier this week that Kang allegedly offered the staffer as much as $100,000 if she didn’t tell her parents about the harassment. The Star cited the woman’s father, who was not named, alleging that Kang repeatedly harassed his daughter over a period of four or five years.

Among the father’s accusations: Kang gave his daughter unwanted hugs, stroked or held her hand, once took her to an apartment where he tried to remove her jacket and followed her the next day to her hotel and tried to get into her room to talk.

Kang has vehemently denied those allegations and has vowed to defend his reputation “at all costs.” His statement Thursday made no specific mention of the second set of allegations. He later responded to an email for clarification saying his statement “covers all angles.”

In his statement, Kang said he’s informed Liberal whip Pablo Rodriguez of his resignation from caucus.

“I appreciate that Parliament has provided for due process and a fair and objective policy for resolving this matter,” he said.

“I also very much appreciate that I am being provided an opportunity to provide my perspective to the independent investigator of the chief human resources officer of Parliament.

“However, I do not want my present circumstances to further distract from the good work carried out by my colleagues in government.”

Kang said he would have no further comment on the matter.

The NDP earlier this week called on Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to immediately suspend Kang from caucus — as he did when Liberal MPs Scott Andrews and Massimo Pacetti were accused of harassment by two female New Democrat MPs in 2014.

But Trudeau declined, saying that he wanted to let the matter unfold as it should under the new, independent process for resolving misconduct complaints involving parliamentarians and their staffers — a process that did not exist when he dealt with Andrews and Pacetti.

Under that process, adopted by the House of Commons in December 2014, when there is no mediated resolution to a harassment complaint, an external investigator is hired to review the facts.

Either the complainant or the respondent can appeal if they’re unsatisfied with the investigator’s final report, requiring an appeal panel to be appointed consisting of one member chosen by the complainant, one by the respondent and an external expert.

There is no time limit on either the investigation or the appeal.


Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 4676
Reputation: 253.8
votes: 8

PostPosted: Fri Sep 01, 2017 10:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Don't kid yourself -- Mr. Kang was offered a chance of rejoining the caucus, plus possibly another incentive to go quietly. Probably both are lies.

What is the evidence? This is what we always have -- women come out of the woodwork claiming the same thing happened to them. Imagine you're Tiger Woods, when every fame-seeking beach bunny wants to claim he screwed her too. Where does truth end and fiction begin?

Just so you understand, under normal circumstances, when someone claims the alleged perp did that same thing to them, it is not evidence in the first trial. It could be grounds for a second trial. There is an exception made in the case of female accusers of sexual crimes. Why has this basic protection been removed? Well ... as the old master said: "Must bust in early May, Orders from the DA ..." It's the need for convictions that drives these cases.

But what's the behaviour being alleged, along with the where, when, who of it all. Is there one scrap of objective evidence?

Have we actually come to the point in multicultural Canada where an Indo-Canadian can have his political career ended on the mere allegations of an anonymous female employee?

Yes we have. White females are a protected class.

Watch to see if Andrew says "Me too" in some form or another, or just ducks it altogether.

Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 4676
Reputation: 253.8
votes: 8

PostPosted: Sun Sep 03, 2017 12:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The campaign of hate starts. For those who do not believe that feminism is a hate movement, read the following article:


The article recalls all the high-profile sex-assault cases -- except the University of Virginia debacle, of course, and no, not the mattress girl ... or any of the other cases that were manufactured bits of fake news or the organized 'framing'an innocent person. The pretense is that women never lie ...

She talks as if the anonymous charges against Kang were true. No need for a trial, proceed with the punishment. The truth of it is that Kang is being disposed of before he has the benefit of a trial. Will he get to face his accuser? Or will she remain the shadows, grinning at all the pain she has caused? One wonders what is the truth in this case.

In any case, the propagandist Kingston goes on to emotionally milk the injustice of the situation ... because of a kind of weird corroboration.

So to recap: one allegation from a young female subordinate wasn’t enough to warrant either Kang’s suspension or resignation—it took two women, one willing to be named. Let’s compare that to the public dispatch with which Trudeau suspended two Liberal MPs in November 2014 after two female NDP MPs accused them of “personal misconduct” just days earlier (that “misconduct” included one of the women saying one of the men had sex with her without her explicit consent). Five months later, Trudeau booted Scott Andrews and Massimo Pacetti from the Liberal Party of Canada. As to the difference between the two incidents, one can only speculate. Is the word of women elected to office more credible than that of a low-level female staffer? Did the fact Trudeau was facing a federal election factor into events? That election saw Darshan Kang become one of two Liberals elected as MPs in Calgary for the first time in nearly half a century.

Ahem ... Kang hasn't been proven guilty of ANYTHING at this point. Does that count?

What the propagandist Anne Kingston, a former journalist, forgets is the fundamental injustice that Kang is facing. In fact, she can't even conceive that he has a case. This is Macleans -- a high-class news magazine, right? They presumably go along with this notion tht if a woman alleges an unseen sexual offense, the male she fingers should be dealt with immediately. No need of a trial, let the punishment begin.

Of is it just that she blanches in expressing her real feelings?

The article goes on in the same vein, Ghomeshi, Cosby, the cops who got off sexual charges, because, you know -- she organized the gang-bang. (Well, what do you expect from cops?) The whole litany are assumed to be guilty of the allegations of anonymous people -- who are believed ONLY because they are women.

For the record, Ghomeshi did not commit one violent act with the women involved. He just acted creepy, or more typically, treated the women as groupies, and politely disposed of them. NONE OF THEM HAD ANY SEX WITH HIM. It was all buised egos of rejected women, who nonetheless, as our propagandist would have it, would never tell a lie about something like that!

But the propagandist Anne Kingston claims a 'double-digit parade' of victims of his violence came forward. I guess Macleans doesn't fact-check.

Also ignored: the witnesses collaborated in their evidence, exchanged thousands of emails getting their stories aligned, etc. They hid evidence from the police.

In a just world, the plaintiffs tried to game the courts even more than they already are, and should face some charges themselves.


What do you think results from this? Usually, there is a "chill" that results, where men avoid situations where they can have allegations made against them. "Chill" is obfuscation ... it is the chill of intimidation in the air.

But another thing happens. The winner shares the whole experience with a small group of female friends. One of them thinks "Hell, I have a bigger complaint against the fucking manager in quality control ..." And so it goes. The friends have a friend and inspires her with story, and first thing you know -- two years ago, we had 2 cases, last year we had 5 cases, and this year we have six already and it's only August."

It is already at a point where there are occupations where men make it a practice to never be alone unobserved with a woman as a basic protection. It only takes one, despite what the propagndist says, before Human Resources gets involved. But it will continue. New ways of being offended will be discovered.

What do we have to do before the men get "woke"?
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 1 of 1


Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum

MP Darshan Kang resigns from liberal caucus

phpBBCopyright 2001, 2005 phpBB