Media blackout

Earlier, federal Liberal provocateur Jonathan Ross reported former Pilothouse Public Affairs Inc. lobbyist Erik Bornman is articling at McCarthy Tetrault LLP's Toronto offices. Of course, our astute readers will know this is the same Mr. Bornman who is alleged, according to search warrant documents released yesterday, to have "had contact with BASI and received information and documents from BASI in exchange for payments which were made to Aneal BASI for forwarding to David BASI," who was once the most powerful ministerial assistant in the Campbell administration. So we thought we might phone McCarthy Tetrault to see if the powerhouse law firm had any comment concerning those recent allegations. The emailed response from the firm's communications director Doug Maybee: "As your inquiry relates to a matter that is before the courts in BC, we feel it is inappropriate to comment." Further inquiries in a phone interview didn't illicit a different answer. Previously, Pilothouse partner Brian Kieran stated on September 11, 2004 that Mr. Bornman had been informed by police "that he was not under investigation." A call placed to Mr. Bornman, who is a potential Crown witness, hasn't been returned. The following is a complete copy of Mr. Maybee's email.

From: Maybee, Doug
Sent: 04 April 2006 14:30
Subject: McCarthy Tetrault

Sean,
As your inquiry relates to a matter that is before the courts in BC, we feel it is inappropriate to comment.
Regards,
Doug Maybee
Director of Communications

34 Comments

I dunno much, but - if he isn't charged with anything, and is co-operating with the investigation, testifying and coming clean - can you ask for much more?

I've gotta say, I really admire Johnathan Ross.

He seems to put priniple before party, which doesn't seem to be a common trait among federal Liberals,

"I gotta say, I really admire Johnaton Ross"

Um...either you
(a) are Johnathon Ross;
(b) have never met Johnathon Ross, or read his blog; or
(c) are really funny


Two reasons why Ross isn't someone to be admired:

1) He often criticizes other people for puffing their chests out and taking credit for doing things. Kevin Chalmers is a good example. Then he takes every opportunity to puff his chest out and take credit for things that he once mentioned in his blog, implying that him writing about it caused the ensuing actions.

2) He often criticizes other people in his blog then acts like a victim when people don't like him. Well, maybe he shouldn't criticize them..?

his coverage got things straighted out at UBC and nationally. without it, Sana wins by cheating.

I was an active young liberal during a time when Jonathon Ross pranced around as some self important young liberal thingy. The way I remember it Ross actively organized and participated in the same mass sign up, booze for votes, and other electioneering bullshit that he now decries on his hilarious website. Politics is full of hypocrites...Ross is no different.

He is not a Young Liberal.

He should keep his nose out of our business. We will govern ourselves.

You know, if one reads those search warrants critically, especially this one, it's kind of hard to understand how it is that those who allegedly took the bribes, but not those who allegedly offered them, are the only ones who have been charged in this thing.

.

Jonathon Ross raises interesting questions. Why do people tend to go personal when they disagree with someone?

the ubc meeting's only 2 days from now...

It might have something to do with the fact that little TDH strategies' "interesting questions" are actually almost always highly personal and dubiously sourced accusations.

I must be dealing with the wrong law firms as none of mine have a 'director of communications' person. On second thought, I think I like my law firms just fine. Why does wunderboy here get a free ticket ?

I can't imagine why JR's joke of website would even be linked to this site.


Being someone who doesn't take orders well always tends to ruffle feathers.

Say what you want about TDH, but a lot of his stuff rings true

Remember the meeting between emerson & the burnaby tory?

everyone called him a twit then. how about now?

he's irrelevent, but everyone on here seems to know and read his blog.

hmmmmmmmmm...

sounds like sour grapes to me

To me, you all sound like a pack of disgruntled Martinites who were proven wrong by the guy. He had the balls to publicly decry the shameful acts that were going on under Mr. Dithers� watch, and he exposed a lot of the dirty tricks that nearly destroyed this party. If any of you had been gifted with anything close a double digit IQ, you would take him on on substance and ideas and drop the pathetic name-calling. The thing is, you know you got nothing on the substance.

The meeting between Emerson and Burnaby Tory is still not true.

Mr. Holman,
Two things are clear:

1) the majority of your readers commenting here seem to have the intellect and maturity of 2 year olds, and

2) Given the comments here by aspiring politicos, this country's future looks pretty bleak.

Almost destroy the party? what a bunch of BS. If you left the Liberal Party to Herb Dhaliwal, Sophia Leung and Jonathan Ross, you would have a shell of the organization that was built for the 2004 and 2006 elections -- elections where the Liberals did better in BC than they did in a long, long time.

Herb Dhaliwal lost his riding because he was lazy. He refused to make a compromise with the Martin supporters who sold more memberships in his riding than he did. He should have realized that he should have tried to forge a consensus with all of the people who were in his association. He was supposed to be representing all of them, right? Any smart politician would have figured out a way how.

Instead, he chose to fight, and he lost. All of his intelligent political staff were flabbergasted at his insistence at fighting with everyone.

Jonathan Ross was not one of the smart ones.

I really don't know Jonathan Ross, I have seen him at the various recent Liberal wine and cheeses. I just heard about his blog recently, and he seems to have some good sources within all the camps involved. But why all the hatred for this guy here, seems people sure are envious

The people posting on this board are the same supporters who tried to embarass Herb Dhaliwal on a weekend he was out of town, and at a time his wife was dying of cancer.

These attacks are why I quit the Liberal party.

She was sick with cancer for a long time. That Annual General Meeting was called on the last day possible, over 6 months overdue.

Herb Dhaliwal knew that the Annual General Meeting was taking place, and he thought being away in India (away from his sick wife, I might add) was more important than being with his constituents.

TheyHaveNoShame, either you have been given revisionist history, or you are spreading it.

Hey "martinite"

Do you even realize that Martin had the second worst popular vote showing in the Liberal Party's 130+ year history?

Not only was Martin one lousy Prime Minister,the antics of his backroom boys have destroyed the Liberal Party.

I didn't know that you were suggesting that the BC Martinites controlled the whole country. I thought the criticism here was of the Martinite takeover of the party in BC. While the results across the country were not good, the Liberals did better in BC than they did since 1968.

"Not only was Martin one lousy Prime Minister, the antics of his backroom boys have destroyed the Liberal Party."

If the trial of Basi & Virk unfolds as it should, there will be ample proof of this comment.

The meeting between Emerson and Burnaby Tory is still not true.

Posted by nicetry on April 4, 2006 09:45 PM

OKay, "nicetry", ... care to elaborate? I rather like Jonathan Ross and his website, they have been instrumental in bringing shadowy goings on to public view. That's exactly what we want a low cost Internet to do for news and communications.

There's a lot of interesting stuff in this thread, but as a New Democrat the basic overall message I am getting is that the Martin-Chretien feud is still on full-blast. It's kind of like the immature and destructive garbage we in the BC NDP had to put up with for nearly twenty years, mainly the Berger-Barrett conflicts coming out of the 1969 convention.

We can thank Dennis and Yvonne Cocke and Dave Barrett himself for that never-ending downer. It seems like most of the Liberals on this site are determined to place the blame for their party quarrels as far down the ladder as possible, the better to absolve the big name players of any responsibility for the acts of their supporters. How is it that the name "nicetry" suddenly comes to mind again?

Budd, only dipper idiots defend JR. Feel free to keep it up.

There are PLENTY of Liberals that support JR.

you guys just don't get it.

"There are PLENTY of Liberals that support JR.

you guys just don't get it."

Do we need to? This Martin-Chretien schism has to
end.

The Dipper had it right. The Barrettistas vs.
The Bergeranas. Joe Clarkies vs. The Mulroneyans.

The next interesting one will be those in blind loyal support of Gordon Campbell vs. the contenders Coleman, Falcon and Carole Taylor.


I'm just wondering aloud how Spiderman is going to spare his buddy Marissen any grief?

The elephant in the room in all of this is Marissen and his forever underhanded tactics. That's fine for an election or two, but after awhile, you've got to back it all up with some brains (and balls), either of which he appears to have little of.

I used to think Christy really needed him...I think it's the other way around.

"I used to think Christy really needed him...I think it's the other way around."

Once Again a direct hit has been scored on the House of Clark-Marissen. But remember this, once Marissen is implicated, it's a short line uphill to David Anderson and then to Paul Martin. Anderson is retired, Martin nearly so, ... but there is still considerable potential for damage to the entire Liberal Party, both national and provincial, if people who once were at those levels get dragged into the mess.


While Bornman likely got his articling job at McCarthy Tetrault through his Liberal connections I find it hard to believe they wouldn't be troubled by his actions and conduct as the best indicator of future behaviour is past behaviour. An employer should be concerned how his reputation will reflect on the company and the legal profession. Does anyone know whether this situation will impact Bornman being called to the bar? In response to a previous post, most of the large law firms have marketing/communications staff.

Jonathan Ross is is a mid twentysomething sad execuse for a blogger whose diatribes will one day lead to his unduing by way of law suits for slander and libel. And why does he always refer to himself as "we" on his website, we all know there is now "we" its just him sitting in a basement somewhere hating the world and complaining about all the people who are trying to do something constructive for the party. Last time I checked since the purge of the old gard that didn't value growing the grassroots the liberal party has never been in better shape in BC and thank goodness for that. Ross seems to think he has the achivements of warren kinsella, the last time i checked there is not a single constructive thing that Ross has ever done for the party in BC, ever.

Came across thus thread by accident. Have no reason for animosity. Grew curious and checked out TDH.

Saw this: "Since its establishment in 2000, TDH Strategies has been able to fill the void existent between communication professionals with little knowledge of the far reaching parameters and implications of public policy and policymakers with an inability to effectively convey a message."

Is this an example of effectively conveying a message? Strunk & White would not agree. I don't know the poor fellow who is taking such a beating, but I am mildly amused that [and I will now use a numbered list, parodying what seems to be a signature debating structure by the target individual]:

1) The sentence is neither clear nor effective communication:
(a) "fill the void existent" is simply dreadful; and
(b) it is not clear to whom the word "between" is meant to refer--while I know what is meant, the sentence clearly has another interpretation, which is also a big no-no in communications.

2) The sentence is either attempting to insult (albeit subtly) communications professionals and policymakers (otherwise there would not be a "void") or it proclaims that he is a blend of two kinds of incompetents. What does he think, that some policy professionals will call him up and say, Hey, I am incapable of effectively communicating a message; let me hire you. Or, on the communications end: I have little knowledge of far-reaching policy implications; you must be my guy.

Interesting technique: selling oneself by insulting everyone else.

Leave a comment

Copyright © 2004 - Public Eye Mediaworks. Reproductions of any portion of this Website are permitted only with the expressed permission of Public Eye Mediaworks.
Canadian Web Hosting graciously provided by dotcanuck Web Services. Layout and graphics courtesy of Art Department Design.