Christian Conservative Christian "Independent"

I'm an evangelical Christian, member of the CPC, but presently & unjustly exiled to wander the political wilderness.
All opinions expressed here are solely my own.

Thursday, December 13, 2007

Watching Mulroney's Testimony

I'm watching the replay of the Ethics Committee on CPAC. I must say, what a partisan circus. The NDP's Pat Martin's performance was particularly disgusting. The basis of all his questions were based on false allegations, and he refused to even allow Mr. Mulroney to address and correct the false premises upon which his statements and questions were based. He just kept plowing ahead, demanding answers from the former Prime Minister on questions that were based on false supositions.

What gives? The NDP had (HAD, past tense) earned a lot of respect from me in recent months, but Pat Martin's complete farce today may have just blown all that respect away. Humm... "Leadership. Fairness." Neither of those things were on display by the NDP today, Mr. Martin.

Asking honest and legitmate questions, based on the information we already have in the public realm, that's something I completely support. Even the line of questioning from the Liberals was more respectable than that of the NDP... even though the Liberals also based many of their questions on false premises. But when they did, at least they let Mr. Mulroney speak and attempt to correct the record.

Of course, I also saw the Liberals try to make a farce out of this. It was interesting to watch the Liberals attempt to prevent him from correcting the record... they allowed Schreiber to ramble on and toss out little tidbits, but they attempted to limit the time he was given for his answers.

Man, if this is a pre-cursor to the inquiry, it's gonna be a long winded and money wasting fiasco.

For the record, I'm no fan of Mulroney... I don't think he was a particuarly great Prime Minister, and I think he was a major factor in why the right was split for so long. But, I think the guy's entitled to getting a fair shake... I guess the Opposition doesn't think so.



  • At Thu. Dec. 13, 07:46:00 p.m. EST, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Mulroney was shameful today. Bluster and bravado.

    Martin asked tough questions that demanded answers. Mulroney tried to wste time with rambling answers totally off the topic. Good on the chair for calling Mulroney to order.

    Mulroney`s story stinks from top to bottom.

  • At Thu. Dec. 13, 09:48:00 p.m. EST, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Today Mr. Mulroney claimed that he only took cash from Karlheinz Schreiber because that’s how Schreiber wanted to pay him--and that this was a huge mistake. But Mulroney then went on to admit the following:

    1) He didn’t deposited the money into any bank account but rather kept the money in cash

    2) He didn’t declare the money on his taxes until years later after Schreiber was arrested

    3) He didn’t bring the money he received in New York back to Canada thus avoiding declaring it at the border

    4) He never sent Schreiber a receipt for the cash or any invoice for services rendered

    5) When he finally did pay his taxes, Mulroney didn’t declare a single expense associated with the work he allegedly did for Schreiber (despite that meaning that he would have had to pay tens of thousands of dollars more in taxes)

    The decision to deal in cash appears to have been at Mr. Schreiber’s urging, but all of these subsequent actions were taken by Mr. Mulroney of his own accord and all of them had the effect of concealing the money that he received from Schreiber.

    Mulroney needs to explain why his own actions--after taking the money from Schreiber--maintained the complete lack of transparency that characterized his decision to accept cash from Schreiber in first place.

  • At Thu. Dec. 13, 11:16:00 p.m. EST, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Know what is really scary about this is that the left if in absolute control of this country would make every court like this. Think hard about this everyone. (real conservative)

  • At Fri. Dec. 14, 08:24:00 a.m. EST, Blogger Christian Conservative said…

    Me: "Anon@7:46pm, I'd like you to answer the following... what did you do with the $500 that Steve Janke gave you?"

    You: "I believe you're mistaken, Steve never gave me..."

    Me: "Mr. Chair, will you ask Anon to just answer the question?"

    You: "Mr. Chair..."

    Me: "Anon, just answer the question, where did the money go?"

    You: "But..."

    Me: "Anon, why won't you just answer the question? What did you do with that $500? Did you blow it on booze? I heard that you bought an new iPod with it. What did you do with it?"

    You: "MR. CHAIR!"

    Me: "I think we've heard enough from this witness. He's refusing to answer the question, and besides, I want everyone here to know that I don't believe you anyway."

    THAT is EXACTLY what happened dude, watch it for yourself. Tough questions are one thing, something I fully support. But a series of questions asked, based upon already addressed false allegations, are another matter. Then Mr. Martin refused to allow him to address the false premises upon which the line of questioning was based.

    You're right, rambling should be prevented, but this was something else completely.

    It was complete hypocrisy. They're not interested in the truth, they just want a nice drive-by-smear clip for the media.

  • At Fri. Dec. 14, 12:45:00 p.m. EST, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Why the hype about a $300,000 private transaction, and no answers or repercussions for millions of taxpayers stolen by the Libs?


Post a Comment

<< Home