It has been a busy week in politics. From election fraud allegations to the war against Bill-C30, Canadians can say that they have had quite a bit to deal with. Anonymous followed through with its word Friday, encouraging Canadians to research the talking points they discuss in their videos for themselves. These videos are said to be based on evidence from named and anonymous sources but some arguments rely on logical reasoning based on past events.

The expositions go as far as to claim that Prime Minister Stephen Harper knew about Toews’s poor record as a family man and purposely switched his cabinet position to save the Conservative Party from humiliation when the news of his divorce would make way. Nonetheless, Anonymous argued, the strong policies that alienated centrists passed despite replacing Toews with Rob Nicolson as Justice Minister in an attempt to paint a friendlier face, which was the argument for the shuffle at the time.

Anonymous said they would be back after at least a week to protect their anonymity and the anonymity of their contacts and resources as they fight against those who fight against freedom.

If you didn’t already see the videos, below are the two parts and their respective transcripts.

---

Videos

Part 1–Transcript Below

Part 2–Transcript Below

---

Respective Transcripts

Transcript for Part 1

Hello, citizens of Canada.

We are Anonymous.

As promised, we are revealing the information about MP Vic Toews that we have received not only from one, but several named and anonymous sources (not to be confused with the group Anonymous itself).

This video will be split into two parts, as there is a great deal of information to be presented.  This may strain some of viewer’s patience; however, this is a very serious allegation, and we must be dealt with in the most in-depth manner possible.

On November 23, 2006, when Mr. Toews was serving the Minister of Justice, he appointed Catherine Everett, formerly a judge of the Provincial Court of Manitoba, to the Family Division of the Court of Queen’s Bench of Manitoba.  The allegations that Anonymous has received state that at the time this appointment was made, Vic Toews was engaged in an affair with Catherine Everett.

We are not legal experts by any means, but it seems to us that this would represent an enormous conflict of interest, especially since this information was not disclosed at the time of the appointment.  It also opens the door to the possibility that this appointment was made in exchange for sexual favours, either directly or indirectly, which would not only be unethical, but very likely criminal activity.  We can establish that Vic Toews and Catherine Everett were familiar with each other for some time, as he first appointed her to Provincial Court of Manitoba in 1998, long before her subsequent appointment in 2006.

Of course, short of images or video of Vic Toews and Catherine Everett in romantic or sexual situations, we cannot prove conclusively that this allegation is true.  However, we can make an educated guess.

First, we must consider the source of the information.

Next, we must consider if this allegation is consistent with Mr. Toews’ character.  As past behaviour is the best predictor of future behaviour, and vice versa, we will ask ourselves several key questions, and answer them based on facts Mr. Toews himself has confirmed, with information through sworn court documents.

These questions are:
1. Would Vic Toews commit adultery and have an ongoing affair while married to his first wife?
2. Would Vic Toews cheat on the woman he was cheating with?
3. Would Vic Toews risk his political career to engage in extramarital sex?
4. Would Vic Toews use his political connections to give the woman he was having an affair with a government job?
5. Would Vic Toews engage in hypocritical behaviour; ie, behave unjustly while the minister of justice?
6. Would Vic Toews engage in criminal behaviour associated with his political position?

Finally, and most damning of all, we will examine a timeline of events from January, 2007 to late 2008.  Analysis of these events suggests to us that not only is the allegation true, but that Stephen Harper knew about it, and quietly removed Mr. Toews from his position as Justice Minister as a result, but not disclose Mr. Toews’ actions to the authorities.   We will now go through these points one at a time.  Our viewers will be utterly sick of hearing the word “quote” by the end of this video, but it’s necessary to avoid any confusion, so please bear with us.

First, considering the source.  Anonymous obviously cannot release the identity of the individuals who revealed this information to us, as doing so would bring the full wrath of the government down upon their heads, as we have already seen with the creator of the Vikileaks account.  However, we can tell you that, even disregarding anonymous sources, more than one individual has made this claim to us, and we have confirmed through public records that they were employed in a capacity that put them close to either Vic Toews or Catherine Everett.

There is always the possibility these individuals are part of a carefully orchestrated conspiracy to discredit Mr. Toews and the Harper government, as we are sure they will claim.  This seems unlikely to us, but just in case, let us give no weight to the identity of the sources whatsoever and analyze their claims based on the merits of the facts alone.

Anonymous is fairly certain Mr. Toews will declare this video a character assassination.  It is more accurately described as a record of character suicide, as Mr. Toews himself admits to nearly all acts discussed beyond this point.

Question 1. Would Vic Toews commit adultry and have an ongoing affair while married to his first wife?

This we can answer with a conclusive yes.  Mr. Toews himself admits to this in sworn affidavits from his divorce proceedings.

Quote: “In late 2006, I discovered that the woman with whom I was having an affair was pregnant with my child.”

There are several other statements in these affidavits from Mr. Toews’ first wife, confirming he engaged in multiple and ongoing affairs:

Quote: “He was in fact having an affair with our children’s former babysitter from 1986 to 1993.”

Quote: “It is true that in 2006 Vic began suggesting that I should seek employment.”

Quote: “I know now, although I did not know it then, that Vic was involved in an affair at that time.”

Quote: “On January 28th 2007 Vic informed me that he had been having an affair for the past 3 years and that the woman was pregnant.”

This statement in particular we can confirm refers to Stacey Meek.

Quote: “It was devastating for me because Vic had informed me in 1993 that he had been having an affair with my sister’s nanny for 7 years.”

Quote: “He told me then that he would terminate the affair and promised to be faithful thereafter.”

And from Mr. Toews again:

Quote: “The two affairs did not happen in isolation from the abusive manner in which she started to treat me shortly after we got married.”

Note that Mr. Toews only acknowledges having engaged in two affairs, one with the babysitter, and one with Stacey Meek.  That his wife did not bring up a third woman, or Catherine Everett in particular, suggests that if Mr. Toews did in fact engage an affair with her, his first wife was not aware of it.

2. Would Vic Toews cheat on the woman he was cheating with?

Note that above, Mr. Toews claims to have been involved with Ms. Meek for the past three years as of January 2007.  This would mean that if he was engaged in an affair with Catherine Everett in 2006, he would not only be cheating on his first wife, but his mistress Stacey Meek as well.

We suppose it’s possible Mr. Toews and Ms. Meek had established some sort of non-exclusive open relationship at that point, but we will not dwell on this as it is largely irrelevant.  It is safe to assume that a man willing to cheat on his wife of 30 years would also cheat on his mistress of 2 or 3 years.

3. Would Vic Toews risk his political career to engage in extramarital sex?

This we can also answer with a conclusive yes.  Vic Toews campaigned and was elected in one of the most conservative and religious ridings in Canada, and was once dubbed “The Minister of Family Values”.  It was this now discredited public image that initially endeared him to the voters of Provencher.

As mentioned in our previous videos, Mr. Toews campaigned to deny gay, lesbian, and bisexual Canadian citizens equal rights under the law, making statements such as:

Quote: “Marriage is one of the cornerstones upon which our society has been built.”

Quote: “Heterosexual marriage has a unique social purpose that other relationships simply do not share.”

Quote: “Marriage is a uniquely heterosexual institution, that indeed is a sacrament.”

It stands to reason that Mr. Toews had at the very minimum a reasonable expectation that his adulterous activities would ruin his carefully constructed image of a devoutly Christian family man, causing his religious base in Provencher to withdraw their support from his candidacy and Mr. Toews finding himself without a job.

4. Would Vic Toews use his political connections to give the woman he was having an affair with a government job?

This we cannot be sure of, though pure common sense will reveal it is certainly possible.  We do know for a fact that his former mistress, Stacey Meek, is currently employed in an administrative capacity by Conservative Senator Terry Stratton, is listed as a constituency assistant for Conservative MP Joyce Bateman, and was previously employed by Conservative MP Joy Smith, until either:

A) Vic Toews’ first wife had her fired from her job out of spite, as Mr. Toews alleges in the affidavits from his divorce proceedings.
Or…

B) The Conservative Party itself fired her in attempt to suppress a political scandal should Mr. Toews’ affair be made public.

If, as Mr. Toews alleges, his wife used her personal connections to have Stacey Meek fired, it stands to reason that an actual Conservative politician would be more than capable of using his personal connections to have her hired in the first place.

5. Would Vic Toews engage in hypocritical behaviour; ie, behave in an unjust or unethical manner while in the position of provincial Justice Minister?

This we can answer with a resounding, conclusive yes.  In addition to the points we’ve already discussed above:  Mr. Toews condemned gay marriage on the basis that it could lead to polygamy.  Apparently Mr. Toews only objects to ongoing sexual relationships and the fathering of children with more than one woman when it is formalized and done out in the open, as opposed to behind your wife’s back.

Speaking of marriage, another statement from Mr. Toews:

Quote: “We are very concerned that people carry out their legal obligations to their spouses on the termination of the marriage, or otherwise, to ensure that both the spouse and the children receive the monies that they are entitled to.”

And from his first wife:

Quote: “After the separation Vic paid support on a voluntary basis.”

Quote: “In February 2010 Vic closed the joint account into which the support was being deposited.”

Quote: “When I asked him to send the money to another account, he ignored me.”

Quote: “Eventually he admitted to my lawyer that he had no intention of paying any further support.”

Quote: “Vic missed the March 1st 2010 payment, so I have had no money since February 2010.”

Quote: “In addition I was raising our two children almost single-handedly.”

Of course, it is not uncommon for former spouses to level unfounded accusations at each other during divorce proceedings.  However, things like closure dates for bank accounts and the depositing of money can be proven through banking records.  If Mr. Toews had truly been paying regular child support or alimony, any lawyer worth his or her salt would have leapt upon this immediately as evidence that Mr. Toews’ ex-wife’s claims were unfounded.    And finally, from Mr. Toews again, in regard to his now 4 year-old son with Stacey Meek and his wife at the time:

Quote: “She was prepared to remain in our relationship but stipulated that I was to have no contact with the child until he was 18 years of age.”

And from his then wife:

Quote: “Vic was anxious to remain married and to do anything he could to keep the marriage together including agreeing to have nothing more to do with his mistress and nothing to do with the baby.”

Presumably “nothing to do with” includes not paying child support.

Of course, while these examples are morally repugnant, they deal with Mr. Toews’ personal, rather than political life.

Perhaps the best example of Mr. Toews hypocrisy is that despite the fact that he is a convicted criminal, he states that government is not in the, quote, “business of forgiveness” and supports so-called tough on crime legislation.  Which leads us to our final question:

6. Would Vic Toews engage in unethical or even criminal behaviour associated with his political position?

This we can also confirm with absolute certainty.  In 2005, Toews was charged with violating Manitoba’s Election Finances Act in the 1999 provincial election.  During the election cycle, it was discovered that his election campaign had spent thousands of dollars more than the allowed limit.  Mr. Toews was convicted of this offense.

From the court case, Her Majesty The Queen versus Vic Toews. Sentence Delivered February 4, 2005, Provincial Court Of Manitoba:

Quote: “It is not in dispute that Mr. Toews  exceeded the limitations on election expenses in his campaign.”

Quote: “Others worked to ensure that this was avoided. Others exercised due diligence. Mr. Toews and his campaign did not.”

We don’t know whether to laugh or cry over the fact that in 2006, Stephen Harper appointed Mr. Toews to the position of Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada.  And this is where things get very interesting.

So far, we have only proven that Vic Toews is a manipulative, deceptive individual who is willing to misrepresent himself, tell bold-faced lies, and is willing to engage in unethical or criminal activity to get what he wants, both in the pursuit of political power and sexual conquest.

In the next video, we will discuss an extremely suspicious series of events that occurred Jan 2007 to late 2008, that deal not only Vic Toews and Catherine Everett, but Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his possible involvement in this situation.

Transcript for Part 2

Nearly all the information discussed beyond this point can be confirmed by news media, governmental and other sources linked from Wikipedia articles.  We encourage Canadians not to take our word for it, but to confirm these facts for themselves.

Vic Toews held the position of Minister of Justice, which he was appointed to by Stephen Harper, from February 6, 2006 – January 4, 2007.

In November 2006, Toews announced that police representatives would be appointed to the provincial judicial advisory committees that review the qualifications of potential judges. This proposal was widely criticized by the Canadian media and by opposition MPs, some of whom argued that Toews’ intent was to stack the courts with right-wing judges.  In an unprecedented move, Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin and the Canadian Judicial Council issued a statement that Toews’s proposal would “compromise the independence of the Advisory Committees”, and called for the minister to consult with judicial and legal representatives before making any changes.

The Federation of Law Societies of Canada has also criticized Toews’s plan, arguing that the government had “politicized” the judicial appointments process.  Ontario Chief Justice Roy McMurtry and Attorney General Michael Bryant added their opposition in early 2007, with Bryant arguing that “the forces of legal populism” were threatening to “tear asunder the basic principle of judicial independence”.  Toews’ indicated that he would proceed with his changes despite the opposition, though he was removed from the Justice portfolio before the new system could be implemented.  In January 2007, the Conservatives appointed two powerful Ontario police union leaders to an advisory committee.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper shuffled his cabinet on January 4, 2007, and appointed Toews as President of the Treasury Board. Some commentators argued that Toews’s hardline approach to law-and-order issues was damaging the Conservative Party’s image among centrist voters, and described his replacement Rob Nicholson as presenting a more moderate image.

The Cabinet shuffle confused many at the time, especially because despite removing Toews, the Conservative Party went ahead with his controversial plan to appoint high-ranking police officers to the provincial judicial advisory committee.  If it was truly Mr. Toews’ hardline approach that motivated his removal from the position of Justice Minister, why then push ahead with the very policies that alienated so many in the first places?

An article from Xtra.ca, published in August 2008, sheds more light on this confusing series of events and the conclusion people later came to.  The article begins:

About six months before I spotted Toews at the Winnipeg Fringe Festival, Stephen Harper shuffled him from the high-profile Justice portfolio into the influential but less noticeable job of Treasury Board President.

It was Jan 2007, and the move puzzled cabinet-watchers. It was seen as a demotion, even though Conservatives seemed to like Toews as Justice Minister. Apart from some controversial views, he hadn’t done anything scandalous — at least not that most people knew about at the time.  In light of new revelations about his personal life, though, the move is now seen as Harper’s attempt to distance himself from Toews.  That’s because the Treasury Board President’s formerly squeaky-clean image as an upright, Christian family man is now in tatters.

His wife of 32 years, and the mother of his adult children has filed for divorce. A few months ago, another woman gave birth to a baby — his.

Many people would say that’s nobody’s business, except for one thing: the way the Conservatives are allegedly trying to deal with the sticky situation of having an adulterer in their ranks.

End of article for our purposes.

Listen closely, because the following timeline is very important.

November 23, 2006 – Justice Minister Vic Toews appoints Catherine Everett to the Family Division of the Court of Queen’s Bench of Manitoba.

January 4, 2007 – Stephen Harper removes Vic Toews as Justice Minister, confusing many.

People will later conclude, based on the birth of Mr. Toews son and his subsequent divorce, that this was the motivation behind his removal, as the Conservatives didn’t want Vic Toews’ marital scandal hurting the party’s political prospects.  However, Vic had not even told his wife he was having an affair yet, and would not do so until January 28, as confirmed in sworn court affidavits.

His son would not be born for another 6 or 7 months.

His first wife would not file for divorce until more than a year later.

These events cannot have been the motivation for Vic Toews’ removal from the position of Justice Minister, unless you believe that Mr. Toews told Stephen Harper about his mistress’s pregnancy nearly a month before informing his own wife.

The other frequently offered explanation for Vic Toews’ removal, that his hardline reputation was alienating voters, seems very dubious as the Conservative Party followed through with the very plans that caused so much controversy and earned Vic Toews that reputation in the first place.

January 28th, 2007 – Court affidavits from Toews’ first wife state, quote, “On January 28th, 2007 Vic informed me that he had been having an affair for the past 3 years and that the woman was pregnant.”

July, 2007 – Vic Toews’ and Stacey Meek’s son is born.

March 31, 2008 – Vic Toews’ first wife files for divorce.

So, what then was Stephen Harper’s motivation for removing Vic Toews from the position of Justice Minister, a position in which he was generally well-liked by Conservatives?

Anonymous has been informed that not only did Vic Toews appoint Catherine Everett to the Court of Queen’s Bench while sleeping with her, but that Stephen Harper was discovered this at some point in time during the month or so between Nov. 26, 2006 and January 4, 2007, and quietly removed Vic Toews from the position of Justice Minister in a careful orchestrated balancing act between protecting himself and the party by not having his sitting Justice Minister embroiled in a political and legal scandal were this information to be made public, and continuing to conceal this information in order to protect the Conservative Party’s political prospects.

If there was any justice in this country, an investigation would be launched into these allegations.  However, as our government seems hell-bent on calling those who engage in legal protests using social media before ethics committees and holding Anonymous in contempt of Parliament instead,  this seems unlikely.  We will not be holding our breath.

Vic Taves has said in regard to Bill C-30, “I will continue to do my duty and carry out my responsibilities in respect of this piece of legislation.”  Mr. Toews, it is not your duty to pass Bill C-30.  Bill C-30 represents the antithesis of your duty, and everything this country stands for.  Your duty is to serve the people of Canada, not invade their privacy, violate their civil rights, or treat them like criminals by presuming them guilty before they are proven innocent.

Having released this information, Anonymous must now take additional measure to ensure both our anonymity and our security.  This means there will likely be no new videos released for a week or more.  Some will say that we have fled, or that we’ve given up the fight.  They will be wrong.  If it were possible to frighten Anonymous into silence, we would have deleted this account the day it was demanded we be held in contempt of Parliament, and we would never have released this information.  They said our first video was rhetoric and nothing more.  They said we had nothing to tell before we revealed the identity of Mr. Toews’ mistress.  Anonymous has kept all it’s promises to the Canadian public thus far.  Have faith in us.

Should we receive more information we feel the Canadian public must be made aware of, or should the Canadian government once again attempt to undermine the civil rights of Canadian citizens, we will re-emerge to meet these challenges to our collective liberty head on.  Our allegiance does not, and will never, lie with the government of this country… our allegiance lies with the Canadian people.

We are Anonymous.

We are Legion.

We do not forgive.

We do not forget.

Expect us, for O Canada, we stand on guard for thee.