Was Brian Mulroney a Crook?

[BubberMiley]

The fixation, one might even call it obsession the Left has with attacking Mulroney might lead one to question their collective sanity, too, btw.

Sort of like "the Right's" obsession with Sponsorship?

[BubberMiley]

Riel couldn't have been a traitor because Manitoba wasn't a part of Canada during the Red River Rebellion.

Edited January 26, 2008 by BubberMiley

[jdobbin]

Which, of course, is true. Those obsessed with Mulroney, and there are many, have been accusing him and investigating him for fifteen years and they've come up with NOTHING to prove he ever did anything wrong. The very worst they can say is that he took some money from a lobbyist and did nothing in return.

Meanwhile, none of those fixated on Mulroney give a good goddam about the crooked shenanigans of Chretien, who by almost any measure was far more corrupt. The mystery surrounding Mulroney and Shreiber is nothing compared to the actual knowledge we have of Chretien and the Business Development Bank of Canada.

Actually, Johnston thought there was enough questions in regards to Shrieber and Mulroney to warrant and inquiry. Perhaps this will clear Mulroney once and for all. Maybe it won't.

As far as Chretien goes, ask Harper to start an investigation.

[jdobbin]

Rapley makes no mention of a 21st-century witch hunt in Canada today: the persecution of former prime minister Brian Mulroney, who has not been shown to be guilty of any crime. Mr. Mulroney has been investigated for at least 15 years by the RCMP; by an author with an apparent axe to grind; by the CBC and other media; and now by a Parliamentary ethics committee looking into his dealings with shadowy German businessman Karlheinz Schreiber. In a few months, a public inquiry will be launched by the Conservative government of Prime Minister Stephen Harper into Mr. Mulroney's conduct, mostly after he left office and became a private citizen. None of these inquisitors has ever found evidence of a crime, and there is no indication there is any to be found. Yet the witch hunt goes on.

It is funny that this article is written by Philip Mathias who is one of the people responsible for the claims against Mulroney in 1995.

[margrace]

There's no question Mulroney was and is a self-centred egotist. There's no question Riel was nuts, a religious kook who saw himself as the messiah of the Metis - who are a sort of half-breed group which has declared itself a people. Both are/were imperfect. But I think both tried to do what they thought best for their people.

The fixation, one might even call it obsession the Left has with attacking Mulroney might lead one to question their collective sanity, too, btw.

What an insulting post to a proud people, speaks volumes aye.

[gc1765]

The fixation, one might even call it obsession the Left has with attacking Mulroney might lead one to question their collective sanity, too, btw.

And yet you have no problem with the fixation on Chretien...in fact you even join in:

Meanwhile, none of those fixated on Mulroney give a good goddam about the crooked shenanigans of Chretien, who by almost any measure was far more corrupt. The mystery surrounding Mulroney and Shreiber is nothing compared to the actual knowledge we have of Chretien and the Business Development Bank of Canada.

Is it really so hard to agree that they were both corrupt?

[jbg]

What a load of crap, how can you compare Mulroney a self centered egotist to Reil who was trying to protect his people?

You missed my point, which was brought out by the blurb from the Poco song. Both Riel and Mulroney are ancient history. If Mulroney were to run for office again that would be a different story.

[margrace]

You missed my point, which was brought out by the blurb from the Poco song. Both Riel and Mulroney are ancient history. If Mulroney were to run for office again that would be a different story.

Sorry Jb you have to remember how old I am what in the devil is the Poco song?

[Argus]

Sort of like "the Right's" obsession with Sponsorship?

Sponsorship was a pretty damned obvious crime with a lot of people involved who were never brought to justice. We have no evidence there even WAS any crime with Mulroney - thirteen years earlier.

Yet curiously, the Left is still obsessed with Mulroney while the Right pays little attention to Spnosorgate except with regard to the possible "unindicted co-conspirators" involved - like Dion.

[Argus]

Actually, Johnston thought there was enough questions in regards to Shrieber and Mulroney to warrant and inquiry. Perhaps this will clear Mulroney once and for all. Maybe it won't.

And after fifteen years of investigations there'll be new answers? Nobody thinks that.

As far as Chretien goes, ask Harper to start an investigation.

The problem the Tories have always had is that they're about running government, while the Liberal Party is all about scoring political points - at whatever cost to the country. Unfortunately, that has led to more success for the Liberal Party.

If I were in the Tories I'd have launched a dozen investigations into the corrupt practices of the Chretien and Martin governments. I'd be investigating how Paul Martin's removal of the ports police allowed for greater smuggling - not excluding his own ships smuggling cocaine. I'd be investigating what happened with the BDC affair in regard to our money going to Chretien's friend, and how the RCMP got involved as Chretien's bullyboys. I'd be investigating how contracts went to Chretien loyalists, and how money for airport improvement went to a private airport used by Martin's father in law. I'd be investigating where all those billions of public money that went that Martin stuffed into those "trusts" which were unaccountable to the AG and run by Liberal Party loyalists. I'd have a dozen commissions going at once, all shouting loudly about how dishonest and corrupt the Liberals were.

[jdobbin]

And after fifteen years of investigations there'll be new answers? Nobody thinks that.

Johnston must have thought that.

The problem the Tories have always had is that they're about running government, while the Liberal Party is all about scoring political points - at whatever cost to the country. Unfortunately, that has led to more success for the Liberal Party.

I guess that explains why the Tories initiated the investigation into polls when they got into power. It ended up exploding in their face.

If I were in the Tories I'd have launched a dozen investigations into the corrupt practices of the Chretien and Martin governments. I'd be investigating how Paul Martin's removal of the ports police allowed for greater smuggling - not excluding his own ships smuggling cocaine. I'd be investigating what happened with the BDC affair in regard to our money going to Chretien's friend, and how the RCMP got involved as Chretien's bullyboys. I'd be investigating how contracts went to Chretien loyalists, and how money for airport improvement went to a private airport used by Martin's father in law. I'd be investigating where all those billions of public money that went that Martin stuffed into those "trusts" which were unaccountable to the AG and run by Liberal Party loyalists. I'd have a dozen commissions going at once, all shouting loudly about how dishonest and corrupt the Liberals were.

By all means, if the Tories think there was corruption and criminal activities going on, call investigations and inquiries till the cows come home.

[capricorn]

By all means, if the Tories think there was corruption and criminal activities going on, call investigations and inquiries till the cows come home.

The Liberals are the ones who are inquiry-happy these days. Seems they want just about all government decisions investigated. I hope they continue on this track as this won't sit well with Canadians and will cost them in support.

[Shakeyhands]

The Liberals are the ones who are inquiry-happy these days. Seems they want just about all government decisions investigated. I hope they continue on this track as this won't sit well with Canadians and will cost them in support.

And how is this different from when the previous government and their opposition formed the last government?

Edited January 27, 2008 by Shakeyhands

[jbg]

And how is this different from when the previous government and their opposition formed the last government?

Actually, Martin called the inquiry in order to nail the rival Chretien faction and it blew up in his face.

[BubberMiley]

Sponsorship was a pretty damned obvious crime with a lot of people involved who were never brought to justice. We have no evidence there even WAS any crime with Mulroney - thirteen years earlier.

Yet curiously, the Left is still obsessed with Mulroney while the Right pays little attention to Spnosorgate except with regard to the possible "unindicted co-conspirators" involved - like Dion.

Wasn't sponsorship largely around the referendum in 1995? Mulroney was allegedly accepting bags of cash at the PMO's office 3 years earlier. I think the sponsorship scandal was shameful and worth voting out the government over. Anybody who repeatedly brings it up, over and over again, years after the fact, and then accuses others of being "obsessed" with Mulroney for showing an interest only now when the crimes are coming to light, is an obvious partisan hack who doesn't care so much about whether crimes are committed but rather the party that is committing them.

[jbg]

Wasn't sponsorship largely around the referendum in 1995? Mulroney was allegedly accepting bags of cash at the PMO's office 3 years earlier. I think the sponsorship scandal was shameful and worth voting out the government over. Anybody who repeatedly brings it up, over and over again, years after the fact, and then accuses others of being "obsessed" with Mulroney for showing an interest only now when the crimes are coming to light, is an obvious partisan hack who doesn't care so much about whether crimes are committed but rather the party that is committing them.

Sponsorship started in 1996, purportedly as a reaction to the 1995 events. Sponsorship ran until Martin shut it down in 2004. Mulroney's Prime Ministerial bags of cash (if any) couldn't have been any later than June 1993, when he stepped down as PM. After he stepped down, what he did was his own business (and Revenue Canada's).

[Argus]

Wasn't sponsorship largely around the referendum in 1995?

No. It was part of an ongoing fund raising campaign which solicited bribes to the party in exhange for paying phoney work orders. There were other parts which have gotten less notice, such as free judges robes to lawyers who gave free legal services to the party.

Mulroney was allegedly accepting bags of cash at the PMO's office 3 years earlier.

Mulroney's cash came as a private citizen which even his accuser says was in exchange for work to be done later.

I think the sponsorship scandal was shameful and worth voting out the government over. Anybody who repeatedly brings it up, over and over again, years after the fact

,

Years after the fact? I think the difference here is that almost everyone not a Liberal hack acknowledges that the criminality almost certainly involved the entire Liberal Party leadership, including Jean Chretien, Paul Martin, the PMO, and certainly the senior cabinet ministers from Quebec, such as Stephan Dion. The suggestion this was all the doing of one civil servant and one or two junior fund raisers was always preposterous as the PMO and senior cabinet ministers had to be aware of why they were throwing money at these people, and where their own "donations" were coming from.

But no one but a few nobodies ever got hauled into the courts over it, and the people who were responsible - like Stephan Dion, and other Quebec Liberals, are still running the party.

Brian Mulroney, on the other hand, has long been out of politics, and has never been a member of the Conservative Party. And fifteen years of investigations by almost everyone have failed to turn up any evidence of a crime.

Not that logic or common sense means anything to the frothing at the mouth anti-conservative types.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

From my perspective Mulroney solicited employment from Schrieber. He did so while sitting as Prime Minister. That fact that no money changed hands while he was a Prime Minister does little to diminish the clear violation of the ethics codes in place at the time.

[Argus]

From my perspective Mulroney solicited employment from Schrieber. He did so while sitting as Prime Minister. That fact that no money changed hands while he was a Prime Minister does little to diminish the clear violation of the ethics codes in place at the time.

A very good reason not to vote for him again. But since he's not in politics anymore I don't really care.

[Topaz]

I do believe, and correct me if I'm wrong, Schreiber said that Mulroney was helped by foreign government and/or other high place politicans and ceo's to make sure he became PM and in return Mulroney would help them after he became PM. He also said that nothing had changed and that illegal things were still going on. When/if he gets a chance to tell everything at the inquiry he and Mulroney are both seeking.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

I didn't vote for him in the first place. Actually my point was that in fact he is guilty of a violation. Now what that translates into in terms of criminal law I have no idea. I would think that it would at least forced him to repay the 2 million he got from the government. At best perhaps a fine would be leveled against him. Which takes us to his tax records, any transgression there could prove to be expensive for him.

[Argus]

I didn't vote for him in the first place. Actually my point was that in fact he is guilty of a violation. Now what that translates into in terms of criminal law I have no idea. I would think that it would at least forced him to repay the 2 million he got from the government. At best perhaps a fine would be leveled against him. Which takes us to his tax records, any transgression there could prove to be expensive for him.

And once again - I don't care. This is pennie ante stuff of little interest beyond the fact his name is Mulroney. I don't think you get any criminal sanctions with ethics violations, though, and I don't think he will repay the money as it was in response to him being labelled a criminal - which no one has been able to produce any evidence to back up. And as Canada Revenue isn't interested in his taxes why would I be?

[Keepitsimple]

And once again - I don't care. This is pennie ante stuff of little interest beyond the fact his name is Mulroney. I don't think you get any criminal sanctions with ethics violations, though, and I don't think he will repay the money as it was in response to him being labelled a criminal - which no one has been able to produce any evidence to back up. And as Canada Revenue isn't interested in his taxes why would I be?

Ditto.

[BubberMiley]

Not that logic or common sense means anything to the frothing at the mouth anti-conservative types.

Wait. You just said Mulroney isn’t a conservative. How then could expecting the same concern for crimes committed by him as for crimes committed by Liberals be considered frothing-at-the-mouth anti-conservativism? The only froth I’m sensing is derived from a lingering “obsession“ with old-news corrupt Liberal practices that date back to the referendum of 1995.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

Wait. You just said Mulroney isn’t a conservative. How then could expecting the same concern for crimes committed by him as for crimes committed by Liberals be considered frothing-at-the-mouth anti-conservativism? The only froth I’m sensing is derived from a lingering “obsession“ with old-news corrupt Liberal practices that date back to the referendum of 1995.

The Conservatives called for the inquiry, now the job needs to get done. Mulroney wanted it too. Now they can reap the whirlwind. Let the chips fall where they may.