Jagdeo apologizes for “F@#king bad book” comment, says, “I’m human and I do get angry”

0
 

Former President Bharrat Jagdeo today apologized for crass comments he was heard making in a widely circulated leaked recording.

The distinct voice of the People’s Progressive Party (PPP) leader was heard saying “Tell him that you just get in f@#king Jagdeo bad books; he just cussing your sk@#t here.”

Jagdeo, at this Church Street office today, told media operatives: “I want to say to people: I do get angry. Let me say to them again: when I get angry, sometimes I use expletives and I’m sorry that people had to be exposed to that. I’m sorry. I’m human and I do get angry. I’m really sorry that the public had to hear what took place in a private setting.”

Jagdeo said that he was angry after popular Jamaican Cricketer, Chris Gayle, was seen at a Peoples’ National Congress Reform (PNCR) event in Linden, over the weekend. What fueled his outburst, he added, was the belief that Gayle was tricked by government-aligned individuals into attending the event.

“But they knew, it was an APNU event and [Director-General of the Ministry of the Presidency, Joseph] Harmon was in touch with them to get Chris Gayle to walk around with him. They did not tell Chris Gayle about that – the context in which he was going to Linden,” Jagdeo claimed.

The former Head of State said that Gayle being present at the event would have sent a bad message to the famed cricketer’s fans, that he was supporting a political party.

“I was angry because one, the people of Guyana would believe that Chris Gayle endorses APNU and I know that Chris Gayle would not endorse any party…secondly, they would damage Chris Gayle’s fan base and credibility. If they (persons who facilitated Gayle’s presence at the rally) were his friends, they should have never done that because they will damage his credibility among people, and it had already started online.” Jagdeo said.

Questioned whether his rage because Gayle had refused to attend an event organised by the PPP/C’s youth arm, Progressive Youth Organisation (PYO), Jagdeo responded in the negative. He said that the PYO does not have the resources for such activities and whatever “little” it has, is going towards the campaign for the upcoming elections.

Gayle has since issued a statement, distancing himself from Guyanese politics. His statement reads: “I, Christopher Gayle, would like to make it very clear that I in no way, manner or form endorse or support any individual or political party in Guyana. I have noted the many Social Media comments in relation to my recent presence in Linden, and I wish to set the record straight. I was invited to Linden to participate in community outreach. As a sports personality, I relish the opportunity to meet with my fans, and also to reach out to any community under the neutral banner of sports. I am apolitical of any political commitment, and strongly condemn attempts to tarnish my brand and personality.”

kp posted:
Django posted:
kp posted:
Django posted:
Dave posted:
Django posted:

Look like i have to pull the video of the Town Hall meeting.

You can provide what ever videos, the US Ambassador is on record condemning Granger government for violating the constitution. However, where is the evidence to support Meeks . that’s what you need to show. 

It's not only Meeks ,it's the Congressional team that came to the conclusion. The US ambassador can withdraw her statement , after having discussions with the US Congressional team that visited Guyana. What ever is on record at the time is gone.

Isn't Meeks that took bribe, his words bear no weight. Look what the PNC did to Gayle?

He got off ,you probably know the story involving the NYC real estate mogul.

Regarding Gale ,don't think there was any payment arrangement, who knows.  Now Gale in Jagdeo bad book ,for going to Linden.

Gayle is friend of Jagdeo. I met Gayle a couple times at a club called "Windies" located  in Scarborough, the owner of that club is a close friend to Jagdeo. Sarwan is co-owner of the club. The other owner is in Guyana campaigning for the PPP.

It was a business arrangement for Gayle to visit Linden, like he said , he has no political bias, Pay for Play.

Wow ,one of my friend in the homeland is a close friend of Sarwan.

Django posted:
kp posted:
Django posted:
kp posted:
Django posted:
Dave posted:
Django posted:

Look like i have to pull the video of the Town Hall meeting.

You can provide what ever videos, the US Ambassador is on record condemning Granger government for violating the constitution. However, where is the evidence to support Meeks . that’s what you need to show. 

It's not only Meeks ,it's the Congressional team that came to the conclusion. The US ambassador can withdraw her statement , after having discussions with the US Congressional team that visited Guyana. What ever is on record at the time is gone.

Isn't Meeks that took bribe, his words bear no weight. Look what the PNC did to Gayle?

He got off ,you probably know the story involving the NYC real estate mogul.

Regarding Gale ,don't think there was any payment arrangement, who knows.  Now Gale in Jagdeo bad book ,for going to Linden.

Gayle is friend of Jagdeo. I met Gayle a couple times at a club called "Windies" located  in Scarborough, the owner of that club is a close friend to Jagdeo. Sarwan is co-owner of the club. The other owner is in Guyana campaigning for the PPP.

It was a business arrangement for Gayle to visit Linden, like he said , he has no political bias, Pay for Play.

Wow ,one of my friend in the homeland is a close friend of Sarwan.

Dig a little deep .. you may find one of your cousin in-law samdeen  is a very close friend of Jagdeo and Dr Alli.

ksazma posted:
Django posted:
Dave posted:
Django posted:

Look like i have to pull the video of the Town Hall meeting.

You can provide what ever videos, the US Ambassador is on record condemning Granger government for violating the constitution. However, where is the evidence to support Meeks . that’s what you need to show. 

It's not only Meeks ,it's the Congressional team that came to the conclusion. The US ambassador can withdraw her statement , after having discussions with the US Congressional team that visited Guyana. What ever is on record at the time is gone.

That team does not negate the CCJ’s ruling just because they visited Guyana. Why are you minimizing the CCJ’s ruling when that is Guyana’s highest court of law?

Who arguing about the CCJ. That's the view of the US Congressional team.

You guys funny t@rass ,picture like a picture when the US Congressional team visited Jagdeo. When Rubio office made a statement ,every one flying high. The statement not in favor ,all kind negativity coming forth.

The Afro Guyanese in NYC ,have more connection with US politicians ,than the Indo Guyanese . Bibi can probably attest.

Dave posted:
Django posted:
kp posted:
Django posted:
kp posted:

Regarding Gale ,don't think there was any payment arrangement, who knows.  Now Gale in Jagdeo bad book ,for going to Linden.

Gayle is friend of Jagdeo. I met Gayle a couple times at a club called "Windies" located  in Scarborough, the owner of that club is a close friend to Jagdeo. Sarwan is co-owner of the club. The other owner is in Guyana campaigning for the PPP.

It was a business arrangement for Gayle to visit Linden, like he said , he has no political bias, Pay for Play.

Wow ,one of my friend in the homeland is a close friend of Sarwan.

Dig a little deep .. you may find one of your cousin in-law samdeen  is a very close friend of Jagdeo and Dr Alli.

We know Irfaan and his parents ,don't think any connection with Jagdeo.

Django posted:
ksazma posted:
Django posted:
Dave posted:
Django posted:

Look like i have to pull the video of the Town Hall meeting.

You can provide what ever videos, the US Ambassador is on record condemning Granger government for violating the constitution. However, where is the evidence to support Meeks . that’s what you need to show. 

It's not only Meeks ,it's the Congressional team that came to the conclusion. The US ambassador can withdraw her statement , after having discussions with the US Congressional team that visited Guyana. What ever is on record at the time is gone.

That team does not negate the CCJ’s ruling just because they visited Guyana. Why are you minimizing the CCJ’s ruling when that is Guyana’s highest court of law?

Who arguing about the CCJ. That's the view of the US Congressional team.

You guys funny t@rass ,picture like a picture when the US Congressional team visited Jagdeo. When Rubio office made a statement ,every one flying high. The statement not in favor ,all kind negativity coming forth.

The Afro Guyanese in NYC ,have more connection with politicians in the US ,than the Indo Guyanese . Bibi can probably attest.

You seems to be missing the BIG picture hay … This congressional team is quoting the US Ambassador .. rite.

Answer these two questions.

1. Did the US Ambassador issue any statement to justify these congressional members, who said the following  … "that the US ambassador affirms the conclusion that the Granger Government  did not breached the constitution."

2. Didn't the US Ambassador accused the Granger government of breaching the constitution and Granger and his foreign affairs minister issue strong statement against US.  

Dave posted:
Django posted:
ksazma posted:
Django posted:
Dave posted:
Django posted:

Look like i have to pull the video of the Town Hall meeting.

You can provide what ever videos, the US Ambassador is on record condemning Granger government for violating the constitution. However, where is the evidence to support Meeks . that’s what you need to show. 

It's not only Meeks ,it's the Congressional team that came to the conclusion. The US ambassador can withdraw her statement , after having discussions with the US Congressional team that visited Guyana. What ever is on record at the time is gone.

That team does not negate the CCJ’s ruling just because they visited Guyana. Why are you minimizing the CCJ’s ruling when that is Guyana’s highest court of law?

Who arguing about the CCJ. That's the view of the US Congressional team.

You guys funny t@rass ,picture like a picture when the US Congressional team visited Jagdeo. When Rubio office made a statement ,every one flying high. The statement not in favor ,all kind negativity coming forth.

The Afro Guyanese in NYC ,have more connection with politicians in the US ,than the Indo Guyanese . Bibi can probably attest.

You seems to be missing the BIG picture hay … This congressional team is quoting the US Ambassador .. rite.

Answer these two questions.

1. Did the US Ambassador issue any statement to justify these congressional members, who said the following  … "that the US ambassador affirms the conclusion that the Granger Government  did not breached the constitution."

2. Didn't the US Ambassador accused the Granger government of breaching the constitution and Granger and his foreign affairs minister issue strong statement against US.  

I have already explained the answers to both of the questions in my posts. If you missed it ,will restate.

The US Ambassador don't have to make a public statement.The discussions between the US Congressional team and the US Ambassador is enough. The Congressional team can make a declaration for the US Ambassador change of mind,which was done in the public.

Hopefully my explanations can put the matter to rest.

Django posted:
ksazma posted:
Django posted:
Dave posted:
Django posted:

Look like i have to pull the video of the Town Hall meeting.

You can provide what ever videos, the US Ambassador is on record condemning Granger government for violating the constitution. However, where is the evidence to support Meeks . that’s what you need to show. 

It's not only Meeks ,it's the Congressional team that came to the conclusion. The US ambassador can withdraw her statement , after having discussions with the US Congressional team that visited Guyana. What ever is on record at the time is gone.

That team does not negate the CCJ’s ruling just because they visited Guyana. Why are you minimizing the CCJ’s ruling when that is Guyana’s highest court of law?

Who arguing about the CCJ. That's the view of the US Congressional team.

 

Exactly. The CCJ ruled that Granger violated the Constitution. These fools pictured below said he didn't. I say the CCJ is correct and these fools are dead wrong. You should write to them as inquire if they understand the Guyana constitution.

Attachments

Photos (3)
cain posted:

I agree with dem three above.

To agree with dem three is to assert that the judges who sit on the CCJ are incompetent. While at least one of those were involved in malfeasance, is there any evidence of any of the CCJ judges who ruled that Granger violated the constitution ever been involved in any malfeasance? Don't be reckless like Django. He needed that message so desperately he didn't bother to care who the messengere were. 

Add Reply

Likes (0)
Post


×
×
×
×
×