Was Brian Mulroney a Crook?

Shakeyhands · November 29, 2007

your reading skills are atrocious Michael. This is what we call a question...

(Shakeyhands @ Nov 28 2007, 01:26 PM)
And besides that, I do not think they have any recourse but to cooperate with the Speakers Warrant, otherwise they would be in contempt, no??

The little curly things at the end are the giveaway...

Edited November 29, 2007 by Shakeyhands

capricorn · November 29, 2007

I watched episode 1 of the Schreiber circus. He led the show and the Ethics Committee Chair (Liberal Paul Szabo) gave him quite a bit of leeway. The Chair guided him as to how to defer answering questions. As a result, Schreiber deferred answering almost all questions until he consults his documents.

Thomas Mulcair managed to blacken Marc Lalonde who for a time was Schreiber's lawyer. Mulcair is doing a lot of grandstanding in this matter for reasons I can't figure. I hope Lalonde appears before the committee to set the record straight about his relationship with Schreiber.

It looks like Schreiber will be under house arrest until his next committee apperance, Tuesday I believe, so that he can review his documents and prepare his answers to the Committee's questions next time he testifies. The whole question of the protocol regarding who has custody of Schreiber and who decides where he should be held. It just seems whatever Schreiber wants, Schreiber gets.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/sto...y/National/home

One thing we did find out is the money he gave Mulroney "had nothing to do with pasta". Stay tuned for the rest of the answer...whenever that is.

noahbody · November 29, 2007

Schreiber offered few details on what was involved in the cash payments, only saying the money which was given to Mulroney shortly after he left office, was "for future services."

So that's that then.

capricorn · November 29, 2007

So that's that then.

I don't think this will satisfy the opposition. The witch hunt isn't over yet.

It won't satisfy Schreiber either. He just wants to stay in Canada and will do anything to drag out this thing.

Michael Bluth · November 29, 2007

I don't think this will satisfy the opposition. The witch hunt isn't over yet.
It won't satisfy Schreiber either. He just wants to stay in Canada and will do anything to drag out this thing.

The positive thing is that the Conservatives can fairly argue that Schreiber's testimony at the commons committee is sufficient to be read into evidence at the inquiry.

Get Mulroney up there blowing his horn and nobody will want to watch. So it's win-win for the Conservatives.

Fortunata · November 29, 2007

The witch hunt isn't over yet.

The witch hunt? LOL. Mulroney took money from Schreiber and then testified he didn't have any dealings with him. And that constitutes a witch hunt to find out the truth? What wouldn't be a witch hunt to you - if it were a Liberal?

Edited November 29, 2007 by Fortunata

capricorn · November 29, 2007

The witch hunt? LOL. Mulroney took money from Schreiber and then testified he didn't have any dealings with him. And that constitutes a witch hunt to find out the truth? What wouldn't be a witch hunt to you - if it were a Liberal?

The witch hunt in question goes beyond Mulroney. It is being led by the opposition parties that are hoping and praying that something, anything, sticks to Harper and the present government. That's the hunt I am referring to.

Michael Bluth · November 29, 2007

The witch hunt in question goes beyond Mulroney. It is being led by the opposition parties that are hoping and praying that something, anything, sticks to Harper and the present government. That's the hunt I am referring to.

If it were just about Schreiber's accusations the opposition would not have needed to call for an inquiry.

jdobbin · November 29, 2007

I don't think this will satisfy the opposition. The witch hunt isn't over yet.

Do you think the government should be satisfied with what was said and call it a day?

capricorn · November 30, 2007

Do you think the government should be satisfied with what was said and call it a day?

No, and I never implied it either. I'm anxious to hear the rest to Schreiber's testimony and Mulroney's testimony. I read that Liberal MP Robert Thibault, member of the Ethics Committee recently met with Schreiber on more than one occasion. I want to know if this is true and if so, when and where did they meet, and why.

jdobbin · November 30, 2007

No, and I never implied it either. I'm anxious to hear the rest to Schreiber's testimony and Mulroney's testimony. I read that Liberal MP Robert Thibault, member of the Ethics Committee recently met with Schreiber on more than one occasion. I want to know if this is true and if so, when and where did they meet, and why.

Seems like you might be on a bit of witchhunt then. heh

Edited November 30, 2007 by jdobbin

capricorn · November 30, 2007

Seems like you might be on a bit of witchhunt then. heh

If there's a parade, I'd rather be in it than watching it go by.

jdobbin · November 30, 2007

If there's a parade, I'd rather be in it than watching it go by.

I'd just like to find out if the $2 million was paid out by the government under false pretenses and whether the terms of the $300,000 Mulroney was paid constituted breach of trust.

Prior to hearing about the $300,000 and the actual relationship Shreiber had with Mulroney, I had believed Mulroney had no connection to the man and that the RCMP had somehow got it wrong.

Wild Bill · November 30, 2007

I'd just like to find out if the $2 million was paid out by the government under false pretenses and whether the terms of the $300,000 Mulroney was paid constituted breach of trust.
Prior to hearing about the $300,000 and the actual relationship Shreiber had with Mulroney, I had believed Mulroney had no connection to the man and that the RCMP had somehow got it wrong.

I'm more curious about how once the inquiry is over who do we punish?

Mulroney? He's already in the Canadian Hall of Shame as regards public opinion. He may always have a tarred legacy in the history books.

Harper and the Tories? They are anything but the same Tories! You can't blame this crop that came from only a pitiful remnant of Mulroney's party and a much larger group of old Tory adversaries from Reform/Alliance.

I guess we'll have to drag out poor old Joe Clark and hang him for it!

Or maybe we could take it out on David Orchard. That is, assuming we could find him!

jdobbin · November 30, 2007

I'm more curious about how once the inquiry is over who do we punish?
Mulroney? He's already in the Canadian Hall of Shame as regards public opinion. He may always have a tarred legacy in the history books.

Harper and the Tories? They are anything but the same Tories! You can't blame this crop that came from only a pitiful remnant of Mulroney's party and a much larger group of old Tory adversaries from Reform/Alliance.

I guess we'll have to drag out poor old Joe Clark and hang him for it!

Or maybe we could take it out on David Orchard. That is, assuming we could find him!

You've convinced me. Cancel the whole thing and brush it aside.

noahbody · November 30, 2007

I guess we'll have to drag out poor old Joe Clark and hang him for it!

Do you think there's a noose large enough to fit over his head?

jdobbin · November 30, 2007

Norman Spector comments on Mulroney.

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

A onetime top aide to Brian Mulroney says the ex-prime minister intervened in a project that's now at the centre of a $500,000 cash-payments scandal and ordered him to "get this done."
In 1990, Norman Spector says, the prime minister handed him a tiny white paper and told him to move ahead with a plan to build military vehicles in Nova Scotia.

The directive flew in the face of opposition from bureaucrats in the Department of National Defence, from military brass and from the most senior bureaucrat in the country, Spector told The Canadian Press in an interview.

They each had their own concerns about a proposal from German arms maker Thyssen Industries to open a plant in exchange for a federal grant and a contract to build light-armoured vehicles.

"There was tremendous opposition in the system,'' Spector said.

He says arms lobbyist Karlheinz Schreiber was embroiled in a bitter dispute with senior military officers, who were pleased with similar vehicles already being built by GM in southern Ontario.

Federal bureaucrats also opposed the project because they saw it as an attempt by Thyssen to get around tough laws in Germany that banned weapons sales to pariah states. They were concerned Canada would be a staging ground for questionable international sales.

And the clerk of the Privy Council -- Paul Tellier -- was so dead-set against Thyssen's plans that he tossed arms lobbyist Schreiber out of his office, Spector says.

Then one morning Mulroney delivered instructions, he says.

The marching orders came during a regular morning meeting between the prime minister, Tellier, his top bureaucrat, and Spector, his political chief of staff.

I wonder if Spector will be called before the committee.

Edited November 30, 2007 by jdobbin

jdobbin · November 30, 2007

And CBC reports that Mulroney had dealings with the Harper government lobbying for Quebecor.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2007/11/29/...oney-lobby.html

Former prime minister Brian Mulroney lobbied the current Conservative government on behalf of a company that could benefit from Ottawa's decision to open up the wireless industry to more competition, CBC News has learned.
Mulroney played an active role in bringing together former industry minister Maxime Bernier and Pierre Karl Peladeau, CEO of Quebecor Media. Mulroney is on the board of directors for Quebecor Media, CBC News has learned.

Sources say earlier this year, Mulroney asked Bernier to meet with Peladeau. The request was made during a conversation on a range of topics.

During their chat, Mulroney reminded Bernier of Quebecor's strong belief that the government should allow new players into the telecom sector, something sources say Bernier was opposed to.

Mulroney did not argue those finer points of the case with Bernier. He asked only that Bernier meet with Peladeau.

I guess that explains the dealings Harper mentioned briefly in his new conference that his government has with Mulroney. I wonder if there are any others.

capricorn · November 30, 2007

The Liberals' search for government officials linked to or tainted by Mulroney continues. Scott Brison has accused Jim Prentice Minister of Industry, of having dealings with Luc Lavoie, a spokesman for Mulroney, in the matter of the federal auction of wireless spectrum.

"Mr. Harper called for a cessation of dealings between his government and Brian Mulroney,'' Brison said. "I don't think he would have done that had he not been aware of certain dealings.

"So the question's quite simple is what were those dealings and did some of those dealings have to do with the auctioning of spectrum which represents a significant benefit to the company that Mulroney serves as a director.''

Prentice said he has only met Mulroney twice in 15 years, both times during social occasions and both times prior to become industry minister during the summer.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...129?hub=QPeriod

Perhaps Prentice will be added to the Committee's list of witnesses.

capricorn · November 30, 2007

I wonder if there are any others.

I'm certain the opposition is beavering away at uncovering them all. Looks like the Ethics Committee is in for a long sitting on the Mulroney/Schreiber affair.

jbg · November 30, 2007

I watched episode 1 of the Schreiber circus. He led the show and the Ethics Committee Chair (Liberal Paul Szabo) gave him quite a bit of leeway. The Chair guided him as to how to defer answering questions. As a result, Schreiber deferred answering almost all questions until he consults his documents.

What I found amazing is that a high-powered lobbyist who can amass $300,000 for a bribe has no memory without papers. I think Szabo is seeking to allow this to string out. If he weren't, he'd threaten to support Mr. Schreiber being put on a plane to Germany, subject to videotape deposition from Germany if Schreiber doesn't cooperate.

jdobbin · November 30, 2007

The Liberals' search for government officials linked to or tainted by Mulroney continues. Scott Brison has accused Jim Prentice Minister of Industry, of having dealings with Luc Lavoie, a spokesman for Mulroney, in the matter of the federal auction of wireless spectrum.
Perhaps Prentice will be added to the Committee's list of witnesses.

Mulroney had gotten the ball started by contacting Bernier to meet with Quebecor's CEO. Lavoie continued that process with Prentice.

This all happened before Harper said that the government was going to end all dealings with Mulroney. What we didn't know until now is that Mulroney did have dealings with the government as an unregistered lobbyist.

jdobbin · November 30, 2007

I'm certain the opposition is beavering away at uncovering them all. Looks like the Ethics Committee is in for a long sitting on the Mulroney/Schreiber affair.

Well, we certainly know what the Tory response was: vote no on appearing before the committee and say that there isn't anything to be done about extradition Saturday despite being called on it by the non-partisan Parliamentary lawyer.

noahbody · November 30, 2007

What I found amazing is that a high-powered lobbyist who can amass $300,000 for a bribe has no memory without papers. I think Szabo is seeking to allow this to string out. If he weren't, he'd threaten to support Mr. Schreiber being put on a plane to Germany, subject to videotape deposition from Germany if Schreiber doesn't cooperate.

He didn't say he had no memory. He wanted papers to back up his words.

capricorn · November 30, 2007

Well, we certainly know what the Tory response was: vote no on appearing before the committee and say that there isn't anything to be done about extradition Saturday despite being called on it by the non-partisan Parliamentary lawyer.

Mr. Schreiber extradition date has been pushed back and he is not going anywhere anytime soon. Due process assures Mr. Schreiber that his application to the Federal Court for a stay of extradition will be heard tomorrow and an appeal to the Supreme Court is in the works.

Their appears to be a problem that if Schreiber's stay in Canada exceeds a certain number of days any extradition proceedings will be nullified and Canada will have to cease its efforts of sending him off to Germany. Given our system and the umpteen appeal processes open in such cases, I'm starting to hope that Schreiber gets his wish and remains here a free man till his dying day. That'll give him ample time to attend as many inquiries as we can throw at him.