As Mulroney's second day on the stand under cross-examination from commission counsel Richard Wolson begins, we keep coming back to Mulroney's testimony on April 21, 1996 as part of his lawsuit against the federal government for libel and slander.
In it, you'll recall, he is asked if he knows Schreiber. He replies he might have had a cup of coffee with him.
As Wolson reminded him yesterday, it was more than a cup of coffee, it was a cup of coffee at the end of which, Mulroney walked away with $75,000 in cash stuffed into an envelope!
Why didn't Mulroney tell the court about the nature and circumstances of his relationship with Schreiber when asked about it by government lawyers in 1996. Mulroney replies (and this is my shorthand, not the official transcript):
“This might sound technical to some people but I ask you to simply remembr the context: At that point, I'm fighting for my life and my family's honour. I'm confronting the government of Canada who is spending millions of dollars on top-flight legal talent. I had offered the government full and complete co-operationg prior to the publication of the letter. They turned us down flat. I walk into the courtroom in Montreal and I'm facing 9 lawyers who are out to destroy me. …
So I'm told to go in there and deal with it in exactly the truthful manner that I did…”
Many people keep implying that Mr. Mulroney was remiss in not volunteering the information about his prior three meetings with Schreiber, when he was given the $75000 per meeting.
Would anyone undergoing that kind of judicial pursuit offer information that might incriminate oneself, given the poisonous atmosphere that prevailed at the time? I think not. I think most people would have been very guarded in their responses to questioning from Mr. Sheppard or any other lawyer.
Mulroney was being accused of receiving bribes from Schreiber, was he not? Why would he divulge he'd agreed to an unconnected private business transaction with the very man he was being accused of accepting a bribe from? Would you?
Mulroney is not just 'anyone'. The whole point of this enquiry is to find out if a Canadian Prime Minister accepted cash from a lobbyist, which he failed to report to Revenue Canada for six years.