Was Brian Mulroney a Crook?

[August1991]

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?

If you go up in this thread, you'll see the reason.

The CBC's fifth estate broke the news that Mulroney earned the money well before he declared it to the Revenue Agency under a special voluntary declaration programme.

Mulroney has not explained this latest wrinkle in this saga. (It seems to me that anyone with access to Mulroney's income tax statements would have known this. This fact raises the curious question about why the Liberal government paid out a $2.1 million settlement.)

[jdobbin]

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.

The Globe and Mail and the CBC have been the only media who continued inquiries. Canwest newspapers which dominate the regional newspaper market stopped reporting it.

[jdobbin]

If you go up in this thread, you'll see the reason.

The CBC's fifth estate broke the news that Mulroney earned the money well before he declared it to the Revenue Agency under a special voluntary declaration programme.

Mulroney has not explained this latest wrinkle in this saga. (It seems to me that anyone with access to Mulroney's income tax statements would have known this. This fact raises the curious question about why the Liberal government paid out a $2.1 million settlement.)

We don't know when he declared the money. Was it after he got the $2 million?

[Michael Bluth]

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?

There is a huge difference.

The PCO gets thousands of pieces of correspondence for the Prime Minister. The majority are not forwarded to the PMO.

I doubt staffers at the PCO refer to the PM as steve though.

-------------------------------------

There is one huge piece of this puzzle that has been ignored on this thread.

Schreiber is a desperate man who has been fighting extradition to Germany for EIGHT YEARS.

He is due in court on Wednesday for a final appeal. If he loses it he could be extradited by the end of the month.

There have been no allegations of any personal dealings between Schreiber and Harper of any kind.

[Riverwind]

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

1) Schreiber signed an affidavit - i.e. he could face even more jail time if he is found to be lying. That does not make his words any more credible but is does force people to take them more seriously.

2) The media has made this issue has become a political issue which means the PM has no choice but to act (to his credit Harper has acted).

The allegations against Mulroney are serious and need to investigated. The allegations against Harper are simply silly especially when you consider the 2.1 million settlement that the former liberal government was forced to pay. Ignoring Schiebers letter 7 months ago was the _only_ rational response under the circumstances. I am pretty sure Dion would have done the same he was in charge.

Edited November 13, 2007 by Riverwind

[guyser]

There is a huge difference.

The PCO gets thousands of pieces of correspondence for the Prime Minister. The majority are not forwarded to the PMO.

I doubt staffers at the PCO refer to the PM as steve though.

Oh my, you being such the guy against spin.

So, the PCO got the letter, which they have acknowledged, and the PCO went , nahhh....not for our stevey to see?

Right...........

(What do they call him.....Stevey? steverator? steve-O?)

-------------------------------------

There is one huge piece of this puzzle that has been ignored on this thread.

There have been no allegations of any personal dealings between Schreiber and Harper of any kind.

Maybe because we know that , thus no spin is needed to point that out?

[guyser]

Ignoring Schiebers letter 7 months ago was the _only_ rational response under the circumstances. I am pretty sure Dion would have done the same he was in charge.

Yes you may be right.

But perhaps one should not have said "this is new information". It wasnt and we now know that.

Again, setting the bar low for steph , and steve walked right under is now okay?

[jdobbin]

1) Schreiber signed an affidavit - i.e. he could face even more jail time if he is found to be lying. That does not make his words any more credible but is does force people to take them more seriously.

2) The media has made this issue has become a political issue which means the PM has no choice but to act (to his credit Harper has acted).

The allegations against Mulroney are serious and need to investigated. The allegations against Harper are simply silly especially when you consider the 2.1 million settlement that the former liberal government was forced to pay. Ignoring Schiebers letter 7 months ago was the _only_ rational response under the circumstances. I am pretty sure Dion would have done the same he was in charge.

The prime minister was refusing to hear any information on Airbus or Shreiber in the last months. It isn't like Shreiber was keeping this information to himself.

[Riverwind]

But perhaps one should not have said "this is new information". It wasnt and we now know that.

Fair enough. Even if he had been informed by the PMO he probably would have completely forgotten about the issue because it has zero relevance to any important issue facing the country today. As a result, the guy spooked and he knows it looks bad in even if it ignoring 7 months ago was a sensible decision at the time. So he tries to minimize his knowledge and come off as if he is hiding something. But that is nothing more nefarious than political ineptness.

[Riverwind]

The prime minister was refusing to hear any information on Airbus or Shreiber in the last months. It isn't like Shreiber was keeping this information to himself.

Then where was the media? Why does the PM have an obligation to act on unproven allegations made by a man sitting in jail? And why do you think that a Liberal government would do any differently after getting burned for $2M the last time they tried to go after Mulroney? Edited November 13, 2007 by Riverwind

[jdobbin]

Then where was the media? Why does the PM have an obligation to act on unproven allegations made by a man sitting in jail? And why do you think that a Liberal government would do any differently after getting burned for $2M the last time they tried to go after Mulroney?

The CBC and the Globe have been the only ones really following the story for the last several months and some of the Tory supporters here said was a vendetta by the Liberal media. Canwest papers stopped reporting it and had begun a campaign to rehabilitate Mulroney during the fall when his book came out.

I don't a think a Liberal government would have ignored briefings on Shreiber and Mulroney. If we know anything about Martin, he would have referred it to the RCMP.

[Riverwind]

I don't a think a Liberal government would have ignored briefings on Shreiber and Mulroney. If we know anything about Martin, he would have referred it to the RCMP.

And risk another political embarrassment and $2M settlement? You have to be kidding - no politician would have volunteered to open that rats nest again. I also doubt the RCMP would have even bothered to look at it seriously because of their prior experience.

This issue needed to unfold in the way it has. It is now politically possible to pursue the matter without creating the apperance of a witch hunt. That was not possible 7 months ago.

Edited November 13, 2007 by Riverwind

[jdobbin]

And risk another political embarrassment and $2M settlement? You have to be kidding - no politician would have volunteered to open that rats nest again. I also doubt the RCMP would have even bothered to look at it seriously because of their prior experience.

This issue needed to unfold in the way it has. It is now politically possible to pursue the matter without creating the apperance of a witch hunt. That was not possible 7 months ago.

Given that the money was not known at the time of the payment, I suspect that if the Liberals were still in power, they'd have had no choice but to refer it to the RCMP.

[August1991]

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?

Macdonald took money for his campaign - it was open and shut. The Liberal Customs and sponsorship scandals required investigation.

Harper seems to be looking for a special prosecutor now and this has the makings of a Ken Starr/Archibald Cox fishing expedition to settle old political scores.

My refernce to a Tory crucible concerns the Reform/BQ split. To reform, the Tories had to face a number of truths. As a result, Harper and the Tories have absolutely nothing to fear or hide in an investigation. The Tories have re-organized themselves. The Liberals have not done that. Perhaps an investigation of Chretien's deals would be a good thing.

[Canuck E Stan]

The Liberals have not done that. Perhaps an investigation of Chretien's deals would be a good thing.

I'm all for an investigation to the Chretien's property deal that was written on a napkin, also I would like to see a Paul Martin investigation into where he got the money to pay for Canada Steamship Lines.

There is much to be properly looked at.

[August1991]

We don't know when he declared the money. Was it after he got the $2 million?

It appears that Mulroney received the $300,000 in 1993 and/or 1994. We don't know when he declared it to the Revenue Agency but for it to be legal, he would have had to declare it far before he received the $2.1 million legal settlement.

Former prime minister Brian Mulroney, who received $300,000 in cash from German-Canadian deal maker Karlheinz Schreiber in 1993 and 1994, did not pay taxes on the payments in the years he received the money.

...

Those facts raise questions about when Mr. Mulroney filed his disclosure and what he told investigators about the income. If Mr. Mulroney made his voluntary disclosure any time after Nov. 2, 1995, he would have been aware that he was the subject of an investigation by the RCMP, a highly publicized probe that focused specifically on his relationship with Mr. Schreiber – the very person who provided him the undisclosed income.

G & M

Mulroney received an apology and a $2.1 million out-of-court settlement to cover his legal fees in 1997.

[jdobbin]

Macdonald took money for his campaign - it was open and shut. The Liberal Customs and sponsorship scandals required investigation.

Harper seems to be looking for a special prosecutor now and this has the makings of a Ken Starr/Archibald Cox fishing expedition to settle old political scores.

My refernce to a Tory crucible concerns the Reform/BQ split. To reform, the Tories had to face a number of truths. As a result, Harper and the Tories have absolutely nothing to fear or hide in an investigation. The Tories have re-organized themselves. The Liberals have not done that. Perhaps an investigation of Chretien's deals would be a good thing.

Was the money for the campaign or was it for himself? It was not open and shut.

Harper could call this all off if you are not happy about. Ignoring it though doesn't seem to be working for him.

As for the crucible, the Reform/Alliance have reorganized themselves with the PCs. The crucible was self inflicted and many of the people involved with Mulroney back then are still in the picture. Harper has just jettisoned himself from Mulroney. Is Marjorie Lebreton far behind?

[jdobbin]

It appears that Mulroney received the $300,000 in 1993 and/or 1994. We don't know when he declared it to the Revenue Agency but for it to be legal, he would have had to declare it far before he received the $2.1 million legal settlement.

Mulroney received an apology and a $2.1 million out-of-court settlement to cover his legal fees in 1997.

Do you know when he declared it? That is very much the issue but no one in government seemed to care until now.

[jdobbin]

I'm all for an investigation to the Chretien's property deal that was written on a napkin, also I would like to see a Paul Martin investigation into where he got the money to pay for Canada Steamship Lines.

There is much to be properly looked at.

And then when this is all over, we can look at Harper's lawsuit settlements?

[capricorn]

1) Schreiber signed an affidavit - i.e. he could face even more jail time if he is found to be lying.

Right there, that is suspicious. If his goal is to avoid extradition, which would not surprise me, then a false accusation in an affidavit will do it. He'd better hurry up and confess he lied in the affidavit before he is extradited.

The allegations against Mulroney are serious and need to investigated.

Agreed. Yet, if he is proved innocent, another lawsuit to clear his name may be forthcoming and cost the taxpayer additional millions.

The allegations against Harper are simply silly especially when you consider the 2.1 million settlement that the former liberal government was forced to pay. Ignoring Schiebers letter 7 months ago was the _only_ rational response under the circumstances. I am pretty sure Dion would have done the same he was in charge.

Regardless of the findings of an investigation/inquiry, the Liberals are hoping mud will stick to Harper. Just the fact that the PM's name has been dragged into this mess has had the desired negative effect.

[August1991]

Do you know when he declared it? That is very much the issue but no one in government seemed to care until now.

Mulroney's income tax file is presumably somewhere in a box in a secure warehouse of the Canada Revenue Agency. I'm going to assume that the Minister (Gordon O'Connor) has access to it.

Then again, David Anderson - minister of National Revenue from 1993-96 under Chretien - presumably also had access to it.

[capricorn]

The prime minister was refusing to hear any information on Airbus or Shreiber in the last months. It isn't like Shreiber was keeping this information to himself.

What makes you think he was "refusing" to hear any information? Do you think he gave specific orders to PMO staff to hold back correspondence relating to Schreiber?

Edited November 13, 2007 by capricorn

[Keepitsimple]

I think you'll find that when the dust settles, this whole saga will only help Harper and the Conservatives - providing the investigation process is open and clear. Harper and Mulroney are not lifelong buddies so as disappointing as it might be, if in fact Mulroney is found to be in the wrong, Harper will be viewed as a leader who did the right thing - rergardless of partisan stripe. If Mulroney is vindicated or at least Schreiber is proven to be a liar, the opposition will look bad - and Harper's calm demeaner will again portray him as a leader. The key is in who he selects, what are the terms of reference, and how open the investigation and findings will be. Once again, publicf perception will be reality.

[jdobbin]

Mulroney's income tax file is presumably somewhere in a box in a secure warehouse of the Canada Revenue Agency. I'm going to assume that the Minister (Gordon O'Connor) has access to it.

Then again, David Anderson - minister of National Revenue from 1993-96 under Chretien - presumably also had access to it.

Do ministers have access to files without a warrant or public inquiry?

[jdobbin]

What makes you think he was "refusing" to hear any information? Do you think he gave specific orders to PMO staff to hold back correspondence relating to Schreiber?

I don't think anything. I am referencing last week's Globe and Mail articles that said civil servants were preparing briefs on Airbus and Shreiber and that they were not being read. These civil servants felt compelled to back themselves up by saying their briefs were not being read.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...07?hub=Politics

The Conservative government did not read briefing material prepared by the Justice Department on the Airbus affair and cash payments to Brian Mulroney, documents suggest.

Government papers obtained by The Canadian Press under the Access to Information Act reveal the secrecy and sensitivity with which the Conservatives are handling the matter.

The Tories are under pressure to investigate Mulroney's financial dealings following new details about $300,000 he received from businessman Karlheinz Schreiber, who was tied to Airbus.

Mulroney says the cash was unrelated to the Airbus affair, which involved allegations of a bribery scheme in the government's purchase of 34 planes.

Notes drafted for the Conservatives by bureaucrats point out that briefing material on Airbus and Mulroney was prepared in 2006 and 2007, but that it never made it to the desk of the current or former justice minister.