Karlheinz Schreiber surprised a Parliamentary committee Thursday by saying the $300,000 he paid to Brian Mulroney was supposed to be $500,000, but the former prime minister didn't do the work that was expected of him.Its easy to sympathize with Mr. Schreiber. In the 1980s, Canadians hired Mr. Mulroney with the expectation that he would work to strengthen the nation. Instead he spent ten years rolling the dice with it.
12 comments:
From Thursday's ethics committee:
Conservative MP Russ Hiebert: "Mr. Schreiber, I have a couple of simple questions I'd like to ask you. They only require a yes' or 'no' answer. They're not complicated and I hope you'll be willing to provide me with the answers.
"Have you ever spoken directly with, or met, Prime Minister Stephen Harper?"
Karlheinz Schreiber: "No."
Conservative MP Russ Hiebert: "Has a lawyer, while acting on your behalf, ever met with or spoken with Prime Minister Harper?"
Karlheinz Schreiber: "No."
Conservative MP Russ Hiebert: "Have you, or a lawyer acting on your behalf, ever met with or spoken with a member of the staff of Prime Minister Harper's office?"
Karlheinz Schreiber: "Not to my knowledge."
[...]
Conservative MP Russ Hiebert: "Mr. Schreiber, have you ever held a membership or donated funds to the Conservative Party of Canada since its creation in 2003?"
Karlheinz Schreiber: "No."
Nice picture. Two outstanding Canadian Prime Ministers.
That's incoherent, drive-by. If Muldoon was so outstanding, why is it necessary for you to point out the distance between Schreiber and Harper? A little skittish, maybe?
Relax, Harpies. If you've got nothing to worry about, go out and play golf or go to Tim Horton's or to church or whatever it is you people do, and stop trolling liberal/lefty blogs.
Drive by:
It is just the first day of what is going to be a very long-term story so your celebrations may be a little premature. Then again maybe not. There is no predicting where this is going to go.
As well, it really does not matter what the facts are in politics. Perception is much more important.
If do not believe me I would remind you that Gomery exonerated Paul Martin. It did not mean much in the end did it drive by?
The current Conservative government has been acting as if they have something to hide. Or in other words they are acting guilty.
This whole affair has to potential to be a cancer that eats away at the current Conservative government. Whether that is fair or not is an open question but fairness is foreign to politics.
Ottlib, Gomery may have exonerated Martin, but it gave us a peak at the Liberal organization in Quebec, replete with organized crime ties, money laundering and outright theft. That's what harmed the Liberals. Martin himself was not harmed by Gomery so much, but the party as a whole certainly was.
As for Martin, he was done in by his own waffling and indecisiveness, and his increasingly erratic behaviour in the weeks leading up to the election. The budget deal with Layton, the Buzz & Dithers Roadshow, the Notwithstanding Clause hail Mary pass during the second debate, the disastrous Mansbridge interview when he came up with four different explanations for how the "soldiers in our streets" ad got out. Gomery killed the Liberals. Martin killed himself.
"As well, it really does not matter what the facts are in politics. Perception is much more important."
You're right. And the perception could quickly become that the opposition is wasting everyone's time while more important issues are not discussed.
As much as it might be your wish that this somehow taints the current government, people who aren't hardcore partisans realize this is about Brian Mulroney and not the current government. Could the same be said about Adscam? I don't think so.
when you are faced with lies smears and political distortions, you respond with simple truths.
Yes, *we* do. What you con-tards are doing is something else altogether. I suspect it's a substitute for sex, but I could be wrong.
Ottlib, Gomery may have exonerated Martin, but it gave us a peak at the Liberal organization in Quebec, replete with organized crime ties, money laundering and outright theft. That's what harmed the Liberals. Martin himself was not harmed by Gomery so much, but the party as a whole certainly was.
As for Martin, he was done in by his own waffling and indecisiveness, and his increasingly erratic behaviour in the weeks leading up to the election. The budget deal with Layton, the Buzz & Dithers Roadshow, the Notwithstanding Clause hail Mary pass during the second debate, the disastrous Mansbridge interview when he came up with four different explanations for how the "soldiers in our streets" ad got out. Gomery killed the Liberals. Martin killed himself.
Oh my God, you're such a freak.
You take over the Conservative brand, you get their muck as well. Especially when Harper talks like Mulroney but without the depth. I think he must have taken speech lessons from Mulroney, while his policy all comes from Bush.
"Like Mulroney without the depth"
Isn't that kind of like saying "Like Nixon without the whimsy"?
That was an intentional pun. Mulroney can speak in a deeper voice, but I don't recall ever hearing Harper doing that; he probably can't achieve that much emotion.
I recall, around the last election time, thinking that Harper sounded a lot like Mulroney. I recently heard on CBC radio someone who imitates Canadian politicians saying that Harper was Mulroney Lite. Exactly.
Yeah, but you still voted for some hairy arm-pitted, vagino-centric NDP candidate in the last election, didn't you, Holly?
Admit it.
No, Ti-guy, sorry, I didn't vote for you. Work on your door-knocking skills.
Post a Comment