::: Official PNM Government Affairs Ched :::

[zoom rader]

Would you guys be so supportive if a UNC MP got the minister of housing to organise a house for their woman?

Sent from my MotoG3 using Tapatalk

The PNM Media would be digging up all kind of dirt.

But now the media protects this wrong doing government

[antlind]

The real mystery here is that Marlene actually have ah man.

[rollingstock]

The real mystery here is that Marlene actually have ah man.

Dan! Dan!
Yuh make mih spit out mih drink, all through mih nose and sheit

[EmilioA]

Would you guys be so supportive if a UNC MP got the minister of housing to organise a house for their woman?

Sent from my MotoG3 using Tapatalk

Who being supportive ? This what I say.

What law she breaking ?
This is the way Govt in TT works. People does go around the Bureaucrats, talk to the Minister so they could get they stuff done faster. They have a law against that ? There should be but there isnt.
Now if you could show that Marlene received some benefit. Like say the house is not occupied by Mr Carewn but is in fact being rented out and rent money ends up in Marlene's possession and control. Now you have a case.

I not being hypothetical when I said this you know.

If I know who renting that house then Sturge know who renting that house and he and Senior Counsel Kamla suppose to know how to lay out a case against Marlene. If he doesnt then it means, the UNC not serious either about removing Marlene.

I dont have time to care for UNC games. I trying to survive the PNM fallout.

[De Dragon]

But Dragon,
you cant FIRE some one on feelings.

We all know that ministers call each other...
..she could have called him and he said no.
.or the application was already approved.
Or he make a call and put the man in the house.

The only thing to be done is to wait and see what comes out...the PM cant move just because....

Yes but he's not saying that! He's saying she will not be fired. Period, end of matter. So he has already proclaimed her innocence regardless of the outcome. "Minister to Minister" remember? That is highly improper, and unless Mr Carew dumb, I don't see why he couldn't make his own enquiries.
Are we really still saying that her personal call wasn't intended to lend her full weight and support to ensuring that he got this HDC house? Really?

[Rainman]

But Dragon,
you cant FIRE some one on feelings.

We all know that ministers call each other...
..she could have called him and he said no.
.or the application was already approved.
Or he make a call and put the man in the house.

The only thing to be done is to wait and see what comes out...the PM cant move just because....

Yes but he's not saying that! He's saying she will not be fired. Period, end of matter. So he has already proclaimed her innocence regardless of the outcome. "Minister to Minister" remember? That is highly improper, and unless Mr Carew dumb, I don't see why he couldn't make his own enquiries.
Are we really still saying that her personal call wasn't intended to lend her full weight and support to ensuring that he got this HDC house? Really?

sorry

[De Dragon]

But Dragon,
you cant FIRE some one on feelings.

We all know that ministers call each other...
..she could have called him and he said no.
.or the application was already approved.
Or he make a call and put the man in the house.

The only thing to be done is to wait and see what comes out...the PM cant move just because....

Yes but he's not saying that! He's saying she will not be fired. Period, end of matter. So he has already proclaimed her innocence regardless of the outcome. "Minister to Minister" remember? That is highly improper, and unless Mr Carew dumb, I don't see why he couldn't make his own enquiries.
Are we really still saying that her personal call wasn't intended to lend her full weight and support to ensuring that he got this HDC house? Really?

sorry

Unintentional I assure you.

[Redman]

But Dragon,
you cant FIRE some one on feelings.

We all know that ministers call each other...
..she could have called him and he said no.
.or the application was already approved.
Or he make a call and put the man in the house.

The only thing to be done is to wait and see what comes out...the PM cant move just because....

Yes but he's not saying that! He's saying she will not be fired. Period, end of matter. So he has already proclaimed her innocence regardless of the outcome. "Minister to Minister" remember? That is highly improper, and unless Mr Carew dumb, I don't see why he couldn't make his own enquiries.
Are we really still saying that her personal call wasn't intended to lend her full weight and support to ensuring that he got this HDC house? Really?

if she did lend her weight Carew would own SEPOS.

I want to see that there is an investigation,timely resolution and the findings made public.
Based on that if it is that she stepped over the line...the PM will have to act.
Icant see him making a permanent stand on the issue unless he already knows the facts.

We are here determining whats the truth based on what lawyers and politicians say ....

And to be clear I could care less whether she is fired or not....what I do care about is that we do this based on the results of unbiased investigations.

[De Dragon]

But Dragon,
you cant FIRE some one on feelings.

We all know that ministers call each other...
..she could have called him and he said no.
.or the application was already approved.
Or he make a call and put the man in the house.

The only thing to be done is to wait and see what comes out...the PM cant move just because....

Yes but he's not saying that! He's saying she will not be fired. Period, end of matter. So he has already proclaimed her innocence regardless of the outcome. "Minister to Minister" remember? That is highly improper, and unless Mr Carew dumb, I don't see why he couldn't make his own enquiries.
Are we really still saying that her personal call wasn't intended to lend her full weight and support to ensuring that he got this HDC house? Really?

if she did lend her weight Carew would own SEPOS.

I want to see that there is an investigation,timely resolution and the findings made public.
Based on that if it is that she stepped over the line...the PM will have to act.
Icant see him making a permanent stand on the issue unless he already knows the facts.We are here determining whats the truth based on what lawyers and politicians say ....

And to be clear I could care less whether she is fired or not....what I do care about is that we do this based on the results of unbiased investigations.

How pray tell would he know that? Does the PM have an investigative arm now? What you are (conveniently) forgetting here is that she has ADMITTED to improper conduct. Are we going to say only criminal conduct should result in dismissal? Did Mary King commit a crime? Was she accused of a crime?

[zoom rader]

Amazing how the media protects this government, we hear very little on PNM affairs.

[EmilioA]

How pray tell would he know that? Does the PM have an investigative arm now? What you are (conveniently) forgetting here is that she has ADMITTED to improper conduct. Are we going to say only criminal conduct should result in dismissal? Did Mary King commit a crime? Was she accused of a crime?

Tsk Tsk

The question you should be asking is why when Sturge has evidence of criminal conduct he not using it.

I dont expect the PNM to fire thier own Ministers just so, I expect the UNC to hold them accountable.

[shogun]

But Dragon,
you cant FIRE some one on feelings.

We all know that ministers call each other...
..she could have called him and he said no.
.or the application was already approved.
Or he make a call and put the man in the house.

The only thing to be done is to wait and see what comes out...the PM cant move just because....

Yes but he's not saying that! He's saying she will not be fired. Period, end of matter. So he has already proclaimed her innocence regardless of the outcome. "Minister to Minister" remember? That is highly improper, and unless Mr Carew dumb, I don't see why he couldn't make his own enquiries.
Are we really still saying that her personal call wasn't intended to lend her full weight and support to ensuring that he got this HDC house? Really?

if she did lend her weight Carew would own SEPOS.

I want to see that there is an investigation,timely resolution and the findings made public.
Based on that if it is that she stepped over the line...the PM will have to act.
Icant see him making a permanent stand on the issue unless he already knows the facts.We are here determining whats the truth based on what lawyers and politicians say ....

And to be clear I could care less whether she is fired or not....what I do care about is that we do this based on the results of unbiased investigations.

How pray tell would he know that? Does the PM have an investigative arm now? What you are (conveniently) forgetting here is that she has ADMITTED to improper conduct. Are we going to say only criminal conduct should result in dismissal? Did Mary King commit a crime? Was she accused of a crime?

Mary King actually did inappropriately award a contract to a company her family is associated with.

Are you saying that enquiring about a house for your SO is the same?

[Dizzy28]

But Dragon,
you cant FIRE some one on feelings.

We all know that ministers call each other...
..she could have called him and he said no.
.or the application was already approved.
Or he make a call and put the man in the house.

The only thing to be done is to wait and see what comes out...the PM cant move just because....

Yes but he's not saying that! He's saying she will not be fired. Period, end of matter. So he has already proclaimed her innocence regardless of the outcome. "Minister to Minister" remember? That is highly improper, and unless Mr Carew dumb, I don't see why he couldn't make his own enquiries.
Are we really still saying that her personal call wasn't intended to lend her full weight and support to ensuring that he got this HDC house? Really?

if she did lend her weight Carew would own SEPOS.

I want to see that there is an investigation,timely resolution and the findings made public.
Based on that if it is that she stepped over the line...the PM will have to act.
Icant see him making a permanent stand on the issue unless he already knows the facts.We are here determining whats the truth based on what lawyers and politicians say ....

And to be clear I could care less whether she is fired or not....what I do care about is that we do this based on the results of unbiased investigations.

How pray tell would he know that? Does the PM have an investigative arm now? What you are (conveniently) forgetting here is that she has ADMITTED to improper conduct. Are we going to say only criminal conduct should result in dismissal? Did Mary King commit a crime? Was she accused of a crime?

Mary King actually did inappropriately award a contract to a company her family is associated with.

Are you saying that enquiring about a house for your SO is the same?

A house that is being sublet after receipt........YES!!!!!

[De Dragon]

But Dragon,
you cant FIRE some one on feelings.

We all know that ministers call each other...
..she could have called him and he said no.
.or the application was already approved.
Or he make a call and put the man in the house.

The only thing to be done is to wait and see what comes out...the PM cant move just because....

Yes but he's not saying that! He's saying she will not be fired. Period, end of matter. So he has already proclaimed her innocence regardless of the outcome. "Minister to Minister" remember? That is highly improper, and unless Mr Carew dumb, I don't see why he couldn't make his own enquiries.
Are we really still saying that her personal call wasn't intended to lend her full weight and support to ensuring that he got this HDC house? Really?

if she did lend her weight Carew would own SEPOS.

I want to see that there is an investigation,timely resolution and the findings made public.
Based on that if it is that she stepped over the line...the PM will have to act.
Icant see him making a permanent stand on the issue unless he already knows the facts.We are here determining whats the truth based on what lawyers and politicians say ....

And to be clear I could care less whether she is fired or not....what I do care about is that we do this based on the results of unbiased investigations.

How pray tell would he know that? Does the PM have an investigative arm now? What you are (conveniently) forgetting here is that she has ADMITTED to improper conduct. Are we going to say only criminal conduct should result in dismissal? Did Mary King commit a crime? Was she accused of a crime?

Mary King actually did inappropriately award a contract to a company her family is associated with.

Are you saying that enquiring about a house for your SO is the same?

Yet another misguided soul who believed that she merely "enquired"

[De Dragon]

But Dragon,
you cant FIRE some one on feelings.

We all know that ministers call each other...
..she could have called him and he said no.
.or the application was already approved.
Or he make a call and put the man in the house.

The only thing to be done is to wait and see what comes out...the PM cant move just because....

Yes but he's not saying that! He's saying she will not be fired. Period, end of matter. So he has already proclaimed her innocence regardless of the outcome. "Minister to Minister" remember? That is highly improper, and unless Mr Carew dumb, I don't see why he couldn't make his own enquiries.
Are we really still saying that her personal call wasn't intended to lend her full weight and support to ensuring that he got this HDC house? Really?

if she did lend her weight Carew would own SEPOS.

I want to see that there is an investigation,timely resolution and the findings made public.
Based on that if it is that she stepped over the line...the PM will have to act.
Icant see him making a permanent stand on the issue unless he already knows the facts.We are here determining whats the truth based on what lawyers and politicians say ....

And to be clear I could care less whether she is fired or not....what I do care about is that we do this based on the results of unbiased investigations.

How pray tell would he know that? Does the PM have an investigative arm now? What you are (conveniently) forgetting here is that she has ADMITTED to improper conduct. Are we going to say only criminal conduct should result in dismissal? Did Mary King commit a crime? Was she accused of a crime?

Mary King actually did inappropriately award a contract to a company her family is associated with.

Are you saying that enquiring about a house for your SO is the same?

Yet another misguided soul who believed that she merely "enquired" Whether you steal a dollar, or a million dollars it is theft. Your degree of censure would be different, no doubt, but theft is theft. This PM seems determined to ensure that she receives absolutely no censure whatsoever and even went so far as to say he influence peddles on a regular basis himself

[Redman]

Isn't the IC looking at this formally?

[De Dragon]

Isn't the IC looking at this formally?

It has been referred to them and the TTPS, so the PM's pronouncements about her innocence are even more inappropriate.

[Redman]

Ho

using Minister Marlene McDonald will not be fired, Prime Minister Dr Keith Rowley said yesterday.
Speaking at a news conference in Tobago, Rowley said every single member of his Cabinet is responsible for his or her conduct and at this time, the minister has not acted inappropriately

So the PM said at this time he is not firing her...

Pretty inappropriate for real.

Knit pick much?

[zoom rader]

Still waiting for a PNM achievement

[shogun]

But Dragon,
you cant FIRE some one on feelings.

We all know that ministers call each other...
..she could have called him and he said no.
.or the application was already approved.
Or he make a call and put the man in the house.

The only thing to be done is to wait and see what comes out...the PM cant move just because....

Yes but he's not saying that! He's saying she will not be fired. Period, end of matter. So he has already proclaimed her innocence regardless of the outcome. "Minister to Minister" remember? That is highly improper, and unless Mr Carew dumb, I don't see why he couldn't make his own enquiries.
Are we really still saying that her personal call wasn't intended to lend her full weight and support to ensuring that he got this HDC house? Really?

if she did lend her weight Carew would own SEPOS.

I want to see that there is an investigation,timely resolution and the findings made public.
Based on that if it is that she stepped over the line...the PM will have to act.
Icant see him making a permanent stand on the issue unless he already knows the facts.We are here determining whats the truth based on what lawyers and politicians say ....

And to be clear I could care less whether she is fired or not....what I do care about is that we do this based on the results of unbiased investigations.

How pray tell would he know that? Does the PM have an investigative arm now? What you are (conveniently) forgetting here is that she has ADMITTED to improper conduct. Are we going to say only criminal conduct should result in dismissal? Did Mary King commit a crime? Was she accused of a crime?

Mary King actually did inappropriately award a contract to a company her family is associated with.

Are you saying that enquiring about a house for your SO is the same?

Yet another misguided soul who believed that she merely "enquired" Whether you steal a dollar, or a million dollars it is theft. Your degree of censure would be different, no doubt, but theft is theft. This PM seems determined to ensure that she receives absolutely no censure whatsoever and even went so far as to say he influence peddles on a regular basis himself

How am I "misguided" when i clearly say that to my knowledge she only enquired? It's all i heard from all media reports. I agree though, that if it is found that she used her position to influence others to granting her favour, then that's just as inappropriate. From reports it doesn't sound like it went that far though.

Obviously theft is theft. Where did i draw a distinction? I heard nothing about her obtaining anything inappropriately.


If you have information that the rest of us aren't privy to, please share?

[zoom rader]

Dark days ahead the PNM Wants a private police force.

Dictatorship Awaits this nation

[shogun]

Dark days ahead the PNM Wants a private police force.

You must have your own line of butt plugs, yes... with the size sh!t you's pull out of your arse

Dictatorship Awaits this nation

Ent

First iz over the top idolatry, then creeping dictatorship....



...We wouldn't want that

[De Dragon]

Ho

using Minister Marlene McDonald will not be fired, Prime Minister Dr Keith Rowley said yesterday.
Speaking at a news conference in Tobago, Rowley said every single member of his Cabinet is responsible for his or her conduct and at this time, the minister has not acted inappropriately

So the PM said at this time he is not firing her...

Pretty inappropriate for real.

Knit pick much?

No, he said she was innocent, that accusations are going to be made blah blah blah before this Tobago news conference.
Spell check much? Apparently not.............

[ronsin1]

it could be worst:-

http://sxmislandtime.com/component/k2/3 ... e-tax.html

[Redman]

Ho

using Minister Marlene McDonald will not be fired, Prime Minister Dr Keith Rowley said yesterday.
Speaking at a news conference in Tobago, Rowley said every single member of his Cabinet is responsible for his or her conduct and at this time, the minister has not acted inappropriately

So the PM said at this time he is not firing her...

Pretty inappropriate for real.

Knit pick much?

No, he said she was innocent, that accusations are going to be made blah blah blah before this Tobago news conference.
Spell check much? Apparently not.............

And if he said that..the fact that he has gone on to qualify is in your mind irrelevant.The Tobago conference would be his latest utterance?

if you are going to take every soundbite as binding govt policy ...you gonna have a long 5 years.

As most logical people can conclude...there is an investigation...lets wait on the results before we act.

so by fussing on my spelling mistake on knit pick...you have made the point that you do in fact nitpick.

[zoom rader]

39 murders to date and this government is impotent on crime