Tribunal Newsflash - Bertie's money [Archive]

Calcio Jack

28/05/2007, 12:29 PM

Mahon tribunal have accessed the bank records.
They didn't take enough sterling on the day that Bertie claimed he exchanged Wall's money.
They did take over 45k dollars though.

Not quiet correct.... what was said during today's opening statement was that on the day in question the amount/s lodged to the accout equated to $45k dollars and no sterling lodgement was made to the account on the day in question

The opening statement also declared that another lodgement did not back up Bertie's claim that he received Stg£8k from Manchester businessmen and that there is little documentary evidence to support his evidence about the source of five lodgements totalling over Stg£116k

No doubt Bertie will now claim that he can't comment as the Tribunal is in session... still the people have decided that it's ok to elect him...we get what we deserve.

pete

28/05/2007, 1:57 PM

Mahon tribunal have accessed the bank records.
They didn't take enough sterling on the day that Bertie claimed he exchanged Wall's money.
They did take over 45k dollars though.

Moderator: Please post a link to this (See Current Affairs forum rules) or i need to closer this thread

strangeirish

28/05/2007, 2:05 PM

Moderator: Please post a link to this (See Current Affairs forum rules) or i need to closer this thread
From RTE (http://www.rte.ie/news/2007/0528/mahon.html)

monutdfc

28/05/2007, 2:50 PM

Moderator: Please post a link to this (See Current Affairs forum rules) or i need to closer this thread
Link added now.
It was breaking news at the time, on the radio and not on any internet source.

monutdfc

28/05/2007, 3:07 PM

Full transcript here if anyone's bored
http://www.planningtribunal.ie/images/SITECONTENT_578.pdf

pete

25/09/2007, 10:19 AM

Macy

25/09/2007, 10:36 AM

What does everyone thing given his performances in the Tribunal recently? Any one actually changed their mind one way or the other?

IMO he seems more guilty by the day although I realise the Tribunal will never prove anything.

Got a big sense of deja vu seeing the clapping & cheering of Bertie as he left the Tribunal... :(
Anyone who's been watching and listening to RTE TV/Radio would've missed the important bits. Their coverage has been appauling when it comes to picking up the important elements of the story changes. I doubt many will have changed their minds - most that were blinkered reman so, those that are not are just having their opinion confirmed. Shame on FG/Labour for not going for the kill pre-election.

Is there some legal reason that none of the media are explaining why the $45,000 is so important? i.e. linking it back to evidence given by other witnesses?

jebus

25/09/2007, 1:40 PM

Anyone who supports Bertie is a fool, and when the recession finally hits Ireland I hope that we are able to pass a law that stops these people from ever voting or voicing an opinion ever again, its been my line for many a year now and nothing that has happened recently has changed it one bit

kingdom hoop

25/09/2007, 2:21 PM

Is there some legal reason that none of the media are explaining why the $45,000 is so important?

At a reasonably educated guess I would say no. Tribunals are not subject to the same procedural perimeters as a criminal case may be. It is unlikely the judges would have placed restrictions on the media coverage given hoards come to view the shenanigans unfurl, and at any rate the inquiry has no jurisdiction to dole out punishment nor form a basis for conviction. So the judges, while not undermining the seriousness of the tribunal, probably feel there would be no wanton compromising of the investigation even with full media glare.

The nub of my curiousity is the magnitude of the events AWOL from his memory. How could you forget unless you were so mired in depravity and deception that everything had a semblance of the surreal? Nothing standing out as being exceptional because the whole period was so tumultuous? Or maybe I'm inconsiderate of the rigours of political life, or perhaps I'm just inconsiderate of his plain stupidity. Whatever, there is definitely a stench of fish enveloping the Wood Quay environs the likes of which not suffered since Unhygienix and his mates had their stalls set up there. (A little Asterix reference for his legions of fans there.:cool:)

Macy

25/09/2007, 2:46 PM

At a reasonably educated guess I would say no. Tribunals are not subject to the same procedural perimeters as a criminal case may be. It is unlikely the judges would have placed restrictions on the media coverage given hoards come to view the shenanigans unfurl, and at any rate the inquiry has no jurisdiction to dole out punishment nor form a basis for conviction. So the judges, while not undermining the seriousness of the tribunal, probably feel there would be no wanton compromising of the investigation even with full media glare.
I didn't really mean from the Tribunal angle, more the libel/ slander angle. There is a reason why $45k could be very important, and why he's being so adamant he never dealt in dollars.

Calcio Jack

25/09/2007, 3:24 PM

I didn't really mean from the Tribunal angle, more the libel/ slander angle. There is a reason why $45k could be very important, and why he's being so adamant he never dealt in dollars.

Two reasons:

(1) He has denied ever getting a dollar "donation" from anyone

(2) If it was proved that someone did give him $45k , it would lend credence to the theory that when on a trip to the USA circa 1994 , it is documented that he met with a number of American based associates of O'Callaghan, who were interested in re-developing into a Las Vegas stlye casino the land in and around the Phoenix Park racecourse. The speculation is that they might of donated some funds to BA as he was the then Minister of Finance and it would of been within his remit to change our then "gambling" legislation to allow for a casino.As I say sure it's all only speculation !!

kingdom hoop

25/09/2007, 7:50 PM

I didn't really mean from the Tribunal angle, more the libel/ slander angle. There is a reason why $45k could be very important, and why he's being so adamant he never dealt in dollars.

Oh right yeah, sorry, I should have copped that. I guess Calcio Jack offers decent explanation, stories circulating are very much unsubstantiated and claims of willfully accepting cash for casino would definitely be libelous. So the papers have probably rightly held their tongue, or finger if you will.

For the conspiracy-minded, one could interpret the following of plotting the thick somewhat; "Mr Ahern said the suggestion he might have been involved in a dollar transaction was first made to him in private by the tribunal a few weeks before the general election campaign." Why was he asked in private? And the fact that a tribunal calculation showing that the amount lodged converted into exactly $45,000 sounds pretty suspicious to say the least. Though this was tempered by Ahern's admission that; "I received no dollars". :o

pete

25/09/2007, 7:56 PM

For the conspiracy-minded, one could interpret the following of plotting the thick somewhat; "Mr Ahern said the suggestion he might have been involved in a dollar transaction was first made to him in private by the tribunal a few weeks before the general election campaign." Why was he asked in private? And the fact that a tribunal calculation showing that the amount lodged converted into exactly $45,000 sounds pretty suspicious to say the least. Though this was tempered by Ahern's admission that; "I received no dollars". :o

Do the Tribunal look for clarification of suspicious financial dealings before bringing them into the public sessions?

:confused:

kingdom hoop

25/09/2007, 8:33 PM

Do the Tribunal look for clarification of suspicious financial dealings before bringing them into the public sessions?

Good point, that could well be it but wouldn't you have thought the purpose of a tribunal was just that, to uncover disparaties and then that they'd have free reign to interrogate on behalf of the public. Or of course it could, oblivious to me, just be part of procedure. Though it does seem a bit pointless asking him off the record unless it was procedurally necessary, or that they thought there was something sinister in the exact correlation of a lodgement of a strange amount of Punts with the tidy sum of $45k, and then the tribunal discovered it could'nt've been Sterling and wanted to go off and investigate the possible source of the dollars before the tribunal sat...That's obviously very much conjectural though, and I don't know how far-reaching the remit of the tribunal is - ie is it their concern where the dollars could have originated, would they need the time to check the CCTV from that fateful day in Giant's Stadium to see if there were any surreptitious exchanges of briefcases, for example.

Macy

26/09/2007, 7:08 AM

Oh right yeah, sorry, I should have copped that. I guess Calcio Jack offers decent explanation, stories circulating are very much unsubstantiated and claims of willfully accepting cash for casino would definitely be libelous. So the papers have probably rightly held their tongue, or finger if you will.
Well yeah, Calcio Jack is making the link that everyone is shying away from.

Calcio Jack

26/09/2007, 7:20 AM

Do the Tribunal look for clarification of suspicious financial dealings before bringing them into the public sessions?

:confused:

Yes it does. The Tribunal in fairness always takes the approach of (a) deciding if a accusation needs to be pursued, eg they have declined to make any serious follow up to something like 18 matters that BA was accused of by Tom Gil. (b) Once the Trib has decided to investigate, to allow for fairness it sets out in writing a number of questions. BA received such correspondence and was also interviewed in private by the Trib. (C) Ultimately if the Trib deems it necessary it will also pose questions at the Public hearings, that can be done on either the basis that (1) an individual has not fully co-operated in private and/or (2) the Trib deems the matter to be of such importance that due process and transparancy dictates the nedd for the matters to be aired in public....

So in BAs case he's had plenty of time to respond in private and provide clear answers that could of enabled the Trib to deem Tom G's claims as been untrue thereby in effect exonerating BA. Instead BA has chosen a route that has lead to him spending already 18 hours in the witness box with more to come...and it will in the end be up to the 3 Tribunal judges to decide if his evidence proves or disproves that he took money for corrupt purposes .

IMO the judges will at least condemn him for taking huge tranches of money (€300k in todays terms) whilist he was the Minister of Finance

pete

26/09/2007, 10:17 AM

I had to laugh when such a big deal was made of spending 17 hours being questioned over 4 days. That is less than 4 hours a day but I suppose that can be taxing when spent the last 2 months on holidays have flight to Paris for rugby junket to catch.

:rolleyes:

I see two more FF politicians in the news yesterday for tax fraud. FG had their ex-TD too but Lowry situation not new.

Macy

26/09/2007, 10:31 AM

I see two more FF politicians in the news yesterday for tax fraud. FG had their ex-TD too but Lowry situation not new.
He's part of the Government block now. Surely done enough to earn a call up to FF and the front bench a la Bev?

Lim till i die

26/09/2007, 12:12 PM

There is actually a que around the Fianna Fail stand (guessing it's societys day) outside the Computer Centre :rolleyes:

This fcuking country.......... :mad:

jebus

26/09/2007, 7:04 PM

Hadn't realised Bertie might be out by half eight tonight now that Enda has tabled a motion of no-confidence, heres hoping anyway, although I don't really want a man as ugly as Brian Cowan as our head of state

Risteard

26/09/2007, 11:40 PM

Wow. 3 votes short.
Not too much confidence.
Does that mean some of the government independents backed the motion?

Lim till i die

27/09/2007, 9:30 AM

Does that mean some of the government independents backed the motion?

Beverly Flynn and Michael Lowry :p

I say it again.........this fcuking country :mad:

jebus

27/09/2007, 9:49 AM

OneRedArmy

27/09/2007, 11:28 AM

anto1208

27/09/2007, 11:33 AM

This has to be the only non-Chinese ran country that would allow a leader, who obviously is as on the take and hasn't got the support of even all of his party, to remain in government, purely because he makes some wise cracks about Man Utd tickets and likes a bit of sport. What LtiD said this rotten country :mad: Makes me think that what the Brits said about the Irish not being able to govern themselves was more spot on then we care to talk about

Every politician is on the take these political donations all ways strike me as odd . Look at the states where they actually have lobbyists . If you have seen Moores new film it shows Hilary Clinton was going to reform the health insurance industry until she got a political donation of nearly a million dollars from the insurance companies and suddenly she changed her mind .

Same thing happens here it’s the reason buildings/roads get planning permission in places that it just shouldn’t be granted its why public / private hospitals are coming , why private health insurance is being pushed , why cannabis will never be legalised and fags and beer will never be made illegal .

The only thing that surprises me is that people are surprised that a politician took money

jebus

27/09/2007, 12:16 PM

The only thing that surprises me is that people are surprised that a politician took money

Not surprised that he is on the take, surprised that when he is found out he isn't booted out of office though, or that he doesn't have the dignity to resign.

As for Italy, well they voted Silvio out last time around, so at least they have shown that they had enough of his Bertiesque nonsense. Over here we would probably have combined the offices of the Taoiseach and the President and handed him an indefinite run in office

geysir

27/09/2007, 9:59 PM

Two reasons:

(1) He has denied ever getting a dollar "donation" from anyone

(2) If it was proved that someone did give him $45k , it would lend credence to the theory that when on a trip to the USA circa 1994 , it is documented that he met with a number of American based associates of O'Callaghan, who were interested in re-developing into a Las Vegas stlye casino the land in and around the Phoenix Park racecourse. The speculation is that they might of donated some funds to BA as he was the then Minister of Finance and it would of been within his remit to change our then "gambling" legislation to allow for a casino.As I say sure it's all only speculation !!
Or it could be as V. Browne suggests, that some bad minded people might make the connection between o´Callaghan´s reputed IR30,000 donation to Berties construction fund and its exact currency equivalent of $45,000.

Two things are emerging
Gilmartin heresay evidence that Bertie had taken charge of IR30,000 and IR50,000
and Bertie juggling nervously with those sums of money.

kingdom hoop

27/09/2007, 10:08 PM

Two things are emerging

Uh-oh, I think a third, turd even, is now as well.

(Kingdom hoop races out of the room to punch one out)

OneRedArmy

28/09/2007, 8:39 AM

Surely the most damning indictment of our country is that a vote on the Governments position towards a regional airport finished closer than one where its leader accepted large amounts of cash in dubious circumstances and then, repeatedly, didn't fully account for the money.

Pariochal politics rule.

pete

28/09/2007, 10:08 AM

I still can't believe that the leader of the government can get away with saying he can't remember what happened to such a large sum of money. 50k would have a reasonable enough house that would cost 300-400k today. 50k would have been maybe 3 times the average salary in the country too. It makes you think want kind of sums of money Bertie was dealing in that he forgot about the small change...

Surely at the very least he will have a tax liability?

mypost

29/09/2007, 3:04 AM

It's all very well tabling no-confidence motions now, but the election has passed, and the song is still the same. For all the country's problems, greed and "fear" for the economy were the votes that won out. Not a single FF TD lost his seat, even Martin Cullen kept his. :eek: Bertie has seen off 3 other party leaders since the election, and the inertia continues.

Shannon Airport?? Tribunals?? :confused: It won't matter for another 4,5 years, when we're called to vote FF in again. :rolleyes:

Macy

12/10/2007, 7:19 AM

I see that Dunphy, who was a co-conspiracy with O'Callaghan in the Dublin Dons, is going into the tribunal and will say that O'Callaghan told him that Ahern was brought.

OneRedArmy

21/12/2007, 12:47 PM

Tribunal has got very interesting in the last few days. After moving in forensic detail through each individual transaction counsel is starting to pull it all together and making a few allegations, in a roundabout manner.

Bertie's getting very hot and bothered by it and his stories make less and less sense by the day.

pete

21/12/2007, 1:24 PM

Bertie always hits back when he is asked questions he does not like. This is the same in the Tribunal & the Dail.

Bertie setup the Tribunal in the first place so he can hardly start to complain about the terms of reference just because he doesn't like it.

Interesting to hear one of "contributers" to the "hand out" saying he thought he was giving a political donation at the time.

I think by the time the Tribunal finishes Berties political career will have finished but the report could take the shine off it.

Clifford

21/12/2007, 1:39 PM

Joker of the highest order, untouchable in everything he does and says. Yet again he thinks everyone else is lying and he's the only honest man left in the world. Good grief when will he give it up.

jebus

21/12/2007, 2:00 PM

Joker of the highest order, untouchable in everything he does and says. Yet again he thinks everyone else is lying and he's the only honest man left in the world. Good grief when will he give it up.

Maybe This Christmas Charlie Brown

dahamsta

21/12/2007, 8:18 PM

I was surprised to hear Newstalk refer to the so-called "dig-outs" as "so-called" today. I've always been very annoyed at their propogation of his explanation without question. It's about time the so-called news hounds in this country stopped kow-towing to the man and started reporting Bertie's explanations as the farce and lies that they so clearly are.

adam

CollegeTillIDie

22/12/2007, 11:48 AM

It's interesting to see the link between the failed Dublin Dons project and political corruption.
However the Tribunal as thus far FAILED to substantiate any direct financial link between Owen O'Callaghan and Bertie.
What it has uncovered is a lot of other donors to the Bertie cause, who don't seem to have gotten any bang for their bucks :D

GavinZac

23/12/2007, 12:58 AM

It's about time the so-called news hounds in this country stopped kow-towing to the man and started reporting Bertie's explanations as the farce and lies that they so clearly are.Its the tribunal's job to call them a farce and lies.

They haven't.

Wishful thinking gets the opposition nowhere, as usual.

Lionel Ritchie

23/12/2007, 3:04 PM

Its the tribunal's job to call them a farce and lies.

They haven't.

Wishful thinking gets the opposition nowhere, as usual.

yeah...yeah...yeah ...the old Bart Simpson "nobody can touch me, I know the law, you can't prove anything" response. Is it wishful thinking to wonder if a time will come when enough FF supporters will get past a bit of wishful thinking of their own?

GavinZac

23/12/2007, 3:16 PM

yeah...yeah...yeah ...the old Bart Simpson "nobody can touch me, I know the law, you can't prove anything" response.I honestly have no idea what bart simpson has to do with anything.
Is it wishful thinking to wonder if a time will come when enough FF supporters will get past a bit of wishful thinking of their own?what? :confused: are you actually saying anything of substance?

opposition parties have been blowing on about lies and farces for months now and yet the tribunal has said repeatedly that they have no issues with it. Consequently, you have people like dahamsta complaining about the media, when all the media are doing is reporting on actual events, while the oppositions continue bleating about their own imaginings rather than the actual failings of the government do nobody any good.

Lionel Ritchie

23/12/2007, 5:06 PM

I'm asking is it too much to hope that some FF supporters face up to the emerging likelihood that their teflon taoiseach is as bent as an S-hook.

GavinZac

23/12/2007, 6:40 PM

I'm asking is it too much to hope that some FF supporters face up to the emerging likelihood that their teflon taoiseach is as bent as an S-hook.
Well not that there has been a shred of evidence other than a tribunal asking him what he was doing, but even as someone who voted FF as their 3rd choice (after the socialist party and the greens) frankly I'd be more worried about the state of our mental health services or the wisdom of an entirely knowledge based economy when so many adults are illiterate, than bertie taking a few millionaires for a few grand. Why is it then, that the opposition insists on mudslinging rather than making a better case than "well, bridie mary in clones was telling me about her daughter last week..."

Lionel Ritchie

23/12/2007, 9:09 PM

.....frankly I'd be more worried about the state of our mental health services or the wisdom of an entirely knowledge based economy when so many adults are illiterate, than bertie taking a few millionaires for a few grand. Why is it then, that the opposition insists on mudslinging rather than making a better case than "well, bridie mary in clones was telling me about her daughter last week..."

Fair enough ...there is a bigger picture and a great big world outside the tribunals. But many of the inherent problems in our country are cumulatively constructed on a culture where it was okay for public servants to be indebted to individuals and lobbies who line their pockets ...directly and indirectly. It doesn't surprise me in the least that Bertie doesn't seem to think he's really done anything wrong. He may even know better than we ever will that this is small beer.

noby

21/02/2008, 12:47 PM

So, what exactly is 'a political donation for my personal use'?

jebus

21/02/2008, 1:00 PM

From a piece on RTE.ie*

Mr Ahern cannot explain the source of a £5,000 cheque cashed at the Irish Permanent on the day the savings account was opened.

He said he did receive a contribution from someone around that time but he could not recall from whom, he described the payment as, 'a political donation for my personal use'.

Lord God but Bertie is making more of a mockery out of his defenders with each passing day. I wonder how the Fianna Failers will pass this one off?

* Sorry I would link, but computer restrictions at work don't allow me to us the sidebars for some odd reason