Archives: 2008→ FEB: 23 JAN: 09 2007→ DEC: 30, 19, 12 NOV: 14, 13, 12, 05, 01 OCT: 30, 26, 15, 09 SEP: 28-6 23, 21, 15 JUNE: 20, 11 MAY: 30, 20, 12, 09, 04 APR: 28, 25, 20, 18, 16, 13 MAR: 27, 20, 18, 07, 05 FEB: 24, 15, 07, 05 JAN: 24, 22, 11, 04 2006→ DEC: 30, 22, 17, 15, 09, 05 NOV: 28, 26, 17, 06, 03 OCT: 29, 26, 23, 20, 14, 10, 08 JUL: 15
Welcome to my blog. I learn so much from others who share with me their thinking, opinions, experiences, photos, music, pains, happiness, and so much more. In turn, I like sharing too and especially enjoy engaging and thoughtful dialogue. So don't be afraid to tell me what you think. If you want to know more about me and my work, I hope you will read a few of my posts and visit corestrategies.ca.
Still, there is enough in Mr. Schreiber's Affidavit alone to provide sufficient clue about how this evolving saga is likely to unfold for all parties, and individuals, concerned.
The stench some are trying to raise – and it’s the overriding flavour throughout the Fifth Estate special – is that somehow the $300K in cash payments Mr. Mulroney received were somehow tied to the Airbus deal.
The intent of the Fifth piece is for the viewer to come away thinking something fishy about the cash payments. There is an implied yet unmistakable “nudge-nudge wink-wink” that envelopes full of cash were in fact future tokens of appreciations - allegedly agreed to at Harrington Lake on Mr. Mulroney's final days as Prime Minister - to be given to Mr. Mulroney for his part in ensuring the Airbus deal went a certain way. Watch the Fifth Estate piece, here, and tell me that isn’t the gist of what the show's producers want you, in Mr. Schriber's own words, to believe.
Fast forward a mere seven days from the Fifth's airing on October 31, 2007, to November 7, 2007, and carefully read Mr. Schreiber's Affidavit. In particular read paragraphs 15, 16, 35, 36, and then read paragraph 41.
In paragraphs 15 and 16, Mr. Schreiber outlines Mr. Mulroney's future duties, allegedly discussed at Harrington Lake, in connection with "...establishment of a production facility for light armoured vehicles by Bear Head Industries Limited...". Note, in Mr. Schreiber's own words, there is no mention, whatsoever, of Airbus.
Later, in paragraphs 35 and 36, Mr. Schreiber outlines Mr. Mulroney's 2001 duties in connection with "Reto's Restaurant Systems International Inc. ... At this time I approached Mr. Mulroney to assist in obtaining private or government commitments towards the expansion of the Reto pasta manufacturing process and Reto franchises ... in Ontario and across Canada." Again, no mention of Airbus.
And yet it's in paragraph 41, where Mr. Schreiber suddenly makes reference to demanding repayment of the $300K paid to Mr. Mulroney in connection with Mr. Schreiber's dissatisfaction with Mr. Mulroney's apparent poor performance in connection with Bear Head and Reto Pasta, not Airbus.
Mr. Schreiber can't have it both ways. On the Fifth Estate, the $300K is reportedly in connection with Mr. Mulroney's alleged role in greasing the Airbus wheels, yet in Mr. Schreiber's most recent Affidavit it's for greasing the wheels of light armoured vehicles and pasta processes. Which is it?
If the $300K is for Mr. Mulroney's role in greasing Airbus, why is Mr. Schreiber asking for that money back in paragraph 41 of his Affidavit? Did the Airbus deal not proceed as planned, with some $20 Million in additional commission payouts?
Earlier this week Mark Messier was inducted into the hall-of-fame in part for being the only player in NHL history to captain Stanley cup victories for two different teams. Will Brian Mulroney become the only player in political history to captain consecutive apologies and costs, from two different governments, Liberal and Conservative?
Surely this has something to do with Mr. Mulroney's buoyant level of confidence.
.jpg)
Sure as day, things can and likely will change by as early as tomorrow. But here's a thought for today and that may provide a hint about the direction Mr. Mulroney’s defence strategy may take.
I took the time to actually read, here, Mr. Schreiber's November 7th Affidavit, something I suspect most people don't do. The copy I have does not contain the exhibits so I am flying somewhat blind.
Flaws of logic in Schreiber Affidavit hint to possible Mulroney defence strategy