Our *favourite* jackass Senator mispeaks.

When Pierre-Hughes Boisvenu opens his mouth, cockroaches spill out.

This morning before going into a Contempt Party caucus, he reflected that he was against capital punishment but that convicted killers should be left wit a noose in their prison cell so they could do the right thing. Then he added that it was an economic issue, that long term incarceration for murderers was an expensive burden for the state to shoulder.

He's withdrawn his remarks now, but it's not outrageous to assume that many of his fellow Con job caucus members share the same opinions.

As Yukon Gale tweets, one expects the reformaTories to include in their pension reform schemes a provision for sending off seniors who need OAS on ice floes.

UPDATE: As can be expected, #Boisvenu is trending. Parliamentary reporter Martin Bégin points out that Art. 241 of the Criminal Code has stiff sentencing - 14 years - for individuals who incite someone to commit suicide.

Move along now.

So. This morning Con Justice Minister Rob Nicholson said the families of murder victims (and "lifelong victims' right advocate"?) can now STFU "move on with their lives".

That would be just ducky with us if it meant Pierre-Hughes Boisvenu would now be shutting his lying yap.

Oh. Wait. Boisvenu holds one of those Harper-appointed patronage-awarded Senate Seats, right? And the Cons' Hard-On Crime Bill C-10 must pass through the Upper Chamber shortly.

That means he still has some water-carrying to do for Stevie's Contempt Party and their reformaTory cronies.

Nonetheless it does seem those set props tearful survivors of crime victims the Politburo/PMO once regularly trotted out for photo ops with PMSHithead have joined the growing ranks of the unemployed.

More Contempt from the Cons

Another verse of "They lie they lie they lie THEY LIE!"

Senator Pierre-Hughes Boisvenu, the poster Con Job for victims' rights & the Hard-On Crime Bill has been challenged regarding the truthiness of the claims he made on Radio-Canada, by no less than the Law Society of Québec. Here is an ad hoc translation of the sternly worded letter that was sent to Boisvenu:

During your interview, you stated, to an audience of several thousand people, that our interventions in the study of Bill C-10 were motivated by corporate interests. Specifically, you said: "The Law Society has about 80% of defense lawyers. These people say they are against a Bill that will affect their clients and it is quite normal. I defend the Senate, not the interests of criminals, but those of the victims ... "

As Director General of the Bar Association of Québec, it is my duty to tell you that you have misled the audience with incorrect information.

The Law Society has approximately 24,000 members. Among these members, only about 5% are lawyers arguing in court in criminal cases. The diversity of practices among our members is vast: corporate lawyers, government lawyers, lawyers in private practice working in over 140 areas of law such as business law, civil law, family law and human rights, etc..

Our interventions, made through the Conseil du barreau, reflect the position of our professional association. This position is recommended by a committee which consists of Crown prosecutors, university professors and defense lawyers who are experts in criminal law and who reviewed the bill through the lens of their professional commitment, but also in terms of respect for the rule of law.

Our position is similar to that of the Minister of Justice of Québec, and aims to promote prevention and rehabilitation rather than an approach based on indiscriminate repression. Rehabilitation, believes the Law Society, is also a means of protection for the people, and we believe it is important to remind the public of that recourse.

Our position is detailed, thorough and accurate. We respect the fact that you do not share it, but we are indignant that you dismiss our position as a "corporatist interpretation" and, moreover, that you present it in a wrong context by questioning the legitimacy and credibility of our profession. It is an offense to the professional system and to citizens who listen to you and who put their trust in you.

That was a lovely letter, a polite way of saying: Fuck you Pierre-Hughes Boisvenu and the fucking Contempt Party that rides you.