Was Brian Mulroney a Crook?

[M.Dancer]

Why does anyone care what a con artist and prospective extraditee Karlheinz Schreiber has to say about much of anything?

Because the con artist was in thick with Canada's disgraced PM who managed to actually con the con artist out of the price of a small townhouse in Calgary?

The facts are at this point clear, Muldoon has lied about his relationship with Karl.

..but letys be honest, Brian is as honest as Ben is talented....

[old_bold&cold]

Again there are a number of the same issues now open and active are people just stupid or they really trying to get banned for starting multiple threads.

[Moxie]

Because the con artist was in thick with Canada's disgraced PM who managed to actually con the con artist out of the price of a small townhouse in Calgary?

The facts are at this point clear, Muldoon has lied about his relationship with Karl.

..but letys be honest, Brian is as honest as Ben is talented....

LOL Dancer good one.

Old the Liberals are going to Milk this for all it's worth, they think it's an election breaker. Is it, who knows the Canadian Public doesn't pay much attention to forums.

[jbg]

Again there are a number of the same issues now open and active are people just stupid or they really trying to get banned for starting multiple threads.

Did you mean "threads on the same issues"?

If a certain poster isn't banned for multiple threads asserting that "income taxes" = "slavery to queen" I don't know what gets a poster banned.

[trex]

All in good time, friends, all in good time...

[trex]

Everybody get out of the way, a big man is about to fall down. Thats wht Harper is trying to stand clear. He might get sucked in the undertow

[trex]

If a certain poster isn't banned for multiple threads asserting that "income taxes" = "slavery to queen" I don't know what gets a poster banned.

Intersting who is calling for bannings here. Certainly someone should not be banned for a mistake. It really harms no one.

Why should it matter? It's no less a valid thread for discussion.

Or is this a way to suppress the topic, without taking it fully on?

I think it's fine, it's not the same as the other thread. As the subtitle clearly indicates, Herper may have been complicit.

I am shocked that Murloony would really be that stupid to get his hands dirty with a wheeler and dealer... yet his submission of a tax form subsequesntly for the amount seems to be almost an admission of guilt. He is now poison, anethema to Harper.

The conservative melodrama continues, alot of the secrets hidden in the closet, and, under a blanket too, apparently, these crotchety old conservatives...

Edited November 11, 2007 by trex

[jbg]

Intersting who is calling for bannings here. Certainly someone should not be banned for a mistake. It really harms no one.

I was not calling for your banning. Quite the opposite.

If anything, I'm to your left, though it's close.

[old_bold&cold]

Intersting who is calling for bannings here. Certainly someone should not be banned for a mistake. It really harms no one.

Why should it matter? It's no less a valid thread for discussion.

Or is this a way to suppress the topic, without taking it fully on?

I think it's fine, it's not the same as the other thread. As the subtitle clearly indicates, Herper may have been complicit.

It was very obvious that you were openignnew threads when the subjects were already able to be covered in existing threads. You were warned and ignored, so I would imagine that the mods did finally make their point with you. I also would suggest you not argue that point as that again would be you flaunting rules because they are not in your way of thinking. That is another no no. I have no problem in letting you have a say, but do so in the active threads and remember that not ever small point deserves a seperate thread. I was once warned about doing this before as well, but I soon learned to live within the rules as they are, and not what I think they should be.

I am shocked that Murloony would really be that stupid to get his hands dirty with a wheeler and dealer... yet his submission of a tax form subsequesntly for the amount seems to be almost an admission of guilt. He is now poison, anethema to Harper.

The conservative melodrama continues, alot of the secrets hidden in the closet, and, under a blanket too, apparently, these crotchety old conservatives...

I really do not think you are going to like waht is going to happen in this. Yes I think Mulroney is crooked, but we already learned that he can bite back at us. The same thing is going to happen here as Schieber only used this as a way to delay his extradition and that is not going to work, so now his repeating his accusations will cost him more in his trials in Germany and he will soon deny everything. That is again then going to make it a very weak case against Mulroney, and he may well again get a bonus from the government for damaging his reputation.

But now that this has set up the power for Harper to call inquiries on past leaders, both Chretien and Martin are open season and a lot more dirt can be made at the whim of Harper. So look for reports from those inquiries to be had near possible election calls, and there is nothing the Liberals can say to not sound like hypocrits to try and stop this. Dumb move again by the Dion Liberals.

[jbg]

But now that this has set up the power for Harper to call inquiries on past leaders, both Chretien and Martin are open season and a lot more dirt can be made at the whim of Harper. So look for reports from those inquiries to be had near possible election calls, and there is nothing the Liberals can say to not sound like hypocrits to try and stop this. Dumb move again by the Dion Liberals.

I always wondered why Harper hasn't been pounding away at the corrupt and iniquitous rule by the Liberals, including such fiascos as the Long Gun Registry and FN policies. I guess the Liberals have now made the mistake of pulling off the gloves.

The fight could get fun, and it won't go 13 rounds.

[trex]

I hope it will be a good fight, however as you point out it could be quickly swept under the rug for self-protecting interests. And yes, their hands are dirty on each side.

I am all for investigating and charging anyone in government who is directly involved in such improprieties. Let them be outed, to every man and woman, their parties wiped out and if necessary a completely new generation of leaders brought in new parties. Better that than the stinking pool of corruption that pervades our system now, with these characters.

PS Yes, I can dream...

[trex]

It was very obvious that you were openignnew threads when the subjects were already able to be covered in existing threads. You were warned and ignored, so I would imagine that the mods did finally make their point with you. I also would suggest you not argue that point as that again would be you flaunting rules because they are not in your way of thinking. That is another no no. I have no problem in letting you have a say, but do so in the active threads and remember that not ever small point deserves a seperate thread. I was once warned about doing this before as well, but I soon learned to live within the rules as they are, and not what I think they should be.

Ok, I did not know you felt so strongly about this. I will try my best to do so. Truth is I did not know there was already another thread in the two incidents that I have done this.

I am truly sorry for any harm I may have casued, in so doing

[trex]

On the Globalnational.com you see and heard the latest on this topic. It seems Harper was sent a letter from Schreiber 7 MONTHS ago about this.

Is there a link for this information, Topaz?

[old_bold&cold]

Ok, I did not know you felt so strongly about this. I will try my best to do so. Truth is I did not know there was already another thread in the two incidents that I have done this.

I am truly sorry for any harm I may have casued, in so doing

It is not me who gets to say what you did or did not is a banning offence, and yes while I feel strongly about multiple threads, it is more because it splits the disscussion and therefore is not to anyones benefit. I would assume that you did so by being inexperienced, and I am sure the mods who will sooner or later catch you for this, will give you a warning etc.. As I said I was once given warnings as well. But just make sure you follow the rules and do not quesyion too much when you are caught, and you will probably never get banned or have a mod take issue.

As for harm done, it is one of wasteful bandwidth, and it also shows grandstanding on making every point a thread. Give it time and you will have all this down and be able to may be guide the next person who makes te same mistake. We all do try to help in these things, as the mods can not always be here to change it, but yes they will catch it even if no one says anything about it. I hope you understand that while we have many differenet opinions and we sometimes get heated in our expressions, we still are a community where we all help each other no matter what the disscussions may show.

[trex]

It is not me who gets to say what you did or did not is a banning offence, and yes while I feel strongly about multiple threads, it is more because it splits the disscussion and therefore is not to anyones benefit. I would assume that you did so by being inexperienced, and I am sure the mods who will sooner or later catch you for this, will give you a warning etc.. As I said I was once given warnings as well. But just make sure you follow the rules and do not quesyion too much when you are caught, and you will probably never get banned or have a mod take issue.

Dont stick your neck out or it will get chopped off. I understand...

I appreciate your advise. It was very impertinent of me to challenge the rules. I guess the closet anarchist just came out in me.

No worries now though, sheep may safely graze once again. There is no wolf here

[jbg]

Dont stick your neck out or it will get chopped off. I understand...

I appreciate your advise. It was very impertinent of me to challenge the rules. I guess the closet anarchist just came out in me.

No worries now though, sheep may safely graze once again. There is no wolf here

I don't understand what you're babbling about. No one's saying you can't post an opinion; they're just saying that sometimes they're better off in an open thread. There are many boards disintegrating because of thread proliferation. A combination of that, and being accused of plagarizing a post (it was my original, legal-style writing) drove me off of www.neoconplanet.com, where you won't find many threads beyond one or two posts long.

[jdobbin]

Still wondering how this never warranted telling Harper about months ago.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/sto...PStory/National

"[That] the Privy Council did not give such information that is so serious to the Prime Minister's Office ... is very difficult to believe," Mr. Dion told CTV's Question Period. "We need to know exactly what happened. We are speaking about something that in a democracy should not happen - the possibility of a former prime minister receiving cash money from obscure services given by a business person who is in trouble with the justice system."

Yesterday, Mr. Schreiber also questioned what happened.

"How could it be your [Harper's] people wouldn't show it to you when you have the political dynamite like this?" Mr. Schreiber said in an interview from the Toronto West Detention Centre, where he is awaiting a hearing on a bid by Germany to extradite him over charges of fraud, bribery and tax evasion. "The question is ... Did Harper see it or was it hidden from him?"

Asked to explain the decision not to relay Mr. Schreiber's March 29 correspondence to the PMO, the Privy Council Office said officials decided it did not require a reply "as the bulk of this ... contained letters to Mr. Mulroney and the subject matter was part of private lawsuit which was before the courts and did not involve the federal government."

I think the problem was that the PMO refused to be briefed on anything in regards to Shreiber.

In other news today on the Charles Adler show, Adler says the reason that Harper threw Mulroney under the bus is because Mulroney told Shreiber when he was having a meeting with Harper. Harper realized that the only way that Shreiber could have known that information is if Mulroney told him himself.

I can imagine that Harper was furious when he saw his own name listed in the affidavit. He must have really boiled when he knew that Mulroney was responsible for putting it there.

[Riverwind]

Still wondering how this never warranted telling Harper about months ago.

Schreiber has no evidence of his claims. The guy is facing many corruption related changes in Germany and has little credibility at the best of times. The PMO correctly decided that this issue was a private civil matter and that it would be resolved in due time and that there was no need for any political involvement by the PM. Edited November 13, 2007 by Riverwind

[jdobbin]

Schreiber has no evidence of his claims. The guy is facing many corruption related changes in Germany and has little credibility at the best of times. The PMO correctly decided that this issue was a private civil matter and that it would be resolved in due time and that there was no need for any political involvement by the PM.

The PMO had the same information then as they got on Thursday. This time though it rated an inquiry though.

[August1991]

In other news today on the Charles Adler show, Adler says the reason that Harper threw Mulroney under the bus is because Mulroney told Shreiber when he was having a meeting with Harper. Harper realized that the only way that Shreiber could have known that information is if Mulroney told him himself.

That is pure speculation, Dobbin. Many people likely knew when and where Mulroney and Harper met.

I agree that Harper had to act when he saw his name on the affidavit (although Harper has said that it was to protect the office of the PM that he has called this enquiry.)

It may well be that Shreiber has gone a little too far in his accusations. I am surprised that so many people are giving this guy so much credibility. It is quite obvious that he will say or do anything to avoid extradition.

I have mixed feelings about this enquiry. It is bound to turn into a political witchhunt aimed not only at Mulroney but also somehow at Harper and the Conservatives. Some people really dislike Harper and they will grasp at anything to bring him down a notch. Canadian politics may be taking on the allure of Ken Starr.

OTOH, I think Harper could show his Reform/ADQ colours and shine some light on Liberal-style politics. If this busts open into general accusations and finger-pointing, it might be good for Canadian politics. The Tories have gone though a crucible. Perhaps the Liberals should too.

[guyser]

Schreiber has no evidence of his claims. The guy is facing many corruption related changes in Germany and has little credibility at the best of times. The PMO correctly decided that this issue was a private civil matter and that it would be resolved in due time and that there was no need for any political involvement by the PM.

But the PMO has acknowledged getting the letter back in April. Therefor he knew, or ought to have known and cannot claim innocence. As for Schrieber, well, he is in a pickle so he would lie to get out of it. But once the PMO claims they got then what?

As for no political knowledge, ahhhh....i have a hard time believing that. The timeline suggests no political knowledge until Stevey sees his name on the suit.

Then the inquiry comes . Why now?

[Michael Bluth]

But the PMO has acknowledged getting the letter back in April. Therefor he knew, or ought to have known and cannot claim innocence. As for Schrieber, well, he is in a pickle so he would lie to get out of it. But once the PMO claims they got then what?

As for no political knowledge, ahhhh....i have a hard time believing that. The timeline suggests no political knowledge until Stevey sees his name on the suit.

Then the inquiry comes . Why now?

Wrong. The Privy Council Office got the letter in April.

[Keepitsimple]

The interesting part of this whole story is why didn't the major media outlets make this into a blockbuster back in 2006? Why only two weeks ago? Why is the Globe & Mail "breaking" this story now? It's been common knowledge that Mulroney was mixed up with Scheiber to the tune of $300,000 for a long time. Why did the story fade away? Is it just lazy journalism? Here's the story from the Gazette published February, 2006 - all the major papers followed it for a few days. Not much has really changed other than Herr Schreiber changing his story a couple of times.

Mulroney challenged on $300,000 payment

HUBERT BAUCH , The Gazette

Published: Thursday, February 09, 2006

Karlheinz Schreiber, a notorious German wheeler-dealer and fugitive from justice in his home country, contradicts Brian Mulroney's response about $300,000 in cash that Schreiber paid the former prime minister after he left office.

Link to full story: http://www.canada.com/components/print.asp...719&k=98075

Edited November 13, 2007 by Keepitsimple

[guyser]

Wrong. The Privy Council Office got the letter in April.

Thank you for the correction.

Same diff though. The PCO is there to provide essential advice and support to the Prime Minister and Cabinet.

So, you think the PCO thought "..hmmmm....not worth bothering steve with this". Would that be a fair assessment?

Edited November 13, 2007 by guyser

[jdobbin]

That is pure speculation, Dobbin. Many people likely knew when and where Mulroney and Harper met.

I agree that Harper had to act when he saw his name on the affidavit (although Harper has said that it was to protect the office of the PM that he has called this enquiry.)

It may well be that Shreiber has gone a little too far in his accusations. I am surprised that so many people are giving this guy so much credibility. It is quite obvious that he will say or do anything to avoid extradition.

I have mixed feelings about this enquiry. It is bound to turn into a political witchhunt aimed not only at Mulroney but also somehow at Harper and the Conservatives. Some people really dislike Harper and they will grasp at anything to bring him down a notch. Canadian politics may be taking on the allure of Ken Starr.

OTOH, I think Harper could show his Reform/ADQ colours and shine some light on Liberal-style politics. If this busts open into general accusations and finger-pointing, it might be good for Canadian politics. The Tories have gone though a crucible. Perhaps the Liberals should too.

It wasn't my speculation but it dominated the talk radio stations all day. Adler was speaking to several people and they said that word on the Hill was that there was a lot of anger with Mulroney in regards to this meeting being public.

As for your Ken Starr remark, I think I pointed out to you that this type of scandal in Canada is not a recent sort of thing. Read about John A. Macdonald and the Pacific Scandal.

I have no idea what Tory crucible you are referring to. Is the best response of the right on this subject to start an investigation into the Liberals?