Canada: Blogger busts Adscam ban, officials thinking of charging Canadian blogger.

Ad exec's explosive testimony posted on American website By STEPHANIE RUBEC, Parliamentary Bureau

AN AMERICAN website has breached the publication ban protecting the explosive and damning testimony of a Montreal ad exec at the Adscam inquiry. The U.S. blogger raised the ire of the Gomery commission this weekend by publishing extracts from testimony given in secret by Jean Brault on Thursday.

The American blog, being promoted by an all-news Canadian website, boasts that "Canada's Corruption Scandal Breaks Wide Open" and promises more to come. The owner of the Canadian website refused to comment yesterday.

Adscam inquiry spokesman Francois Perreault expressed shock at the publication ban breach, and said commission co-counsel Bernard Roy and Justice John Gomery will decide today whether to charge the Canadian website owner with contempt of court.

"We never thought someone would violate the publication ban," Perreault said yesterday. "Maybe we were more confident than we should have been."

Gomery slapped a ban on Brault's testimony last week to ensure the Montreal ad exec would be able to find an unbiased jury for his fraud trial, which is set for next month.

Gomery also ordered a publication ban on the upcoming testimony of former sponsorship head Chuck Guite and former ad exec Paul Coffin.

But reporters and cameras have been allowed inside the hearing room as long as they don't publish Brault's testimony until the ban is lifted.

And members of the public have swarmed to the inquiry since Gomery cut off the live transmission, filling a special auditorium.

Rumours have swirled all weekend about a possible breach of the ban by American newspapers, Internet sites and television stations that are outside Gomery's reach.

Perreault warned that even if Brault's testimony has been outed by a U.S. website, it doesn't mean it is now public information in Canada.

"Anyone who takes that information and diffuses it is liable to be charged with contempt of court," Perreault said. "Anybody who reproduces it is at risk."

Sun Media lawyer Alan Shanoff said publishing the name of the blog, the Canadian news site or providing the Internet address could lead to a contempt charge.

Shanoff said American news organizations began breaching Canadian publication bans in earnest with Karla Homolka's murder trial.

"It became very clear from that case that publication bans are very hard to police," Shanoff said.

Shanoff said the Adscam breach would become more significant if Montrealers flock to the blogger's site to read Brault's testimony.

"The information, I gather, is very, very damaging and very prejudicial," he said. "If it's accessed by large numbers of people in Montreal where the trial will take place, it could have a prejudicial effect."

Brault is expected to wrap up his testimony tomorrow, when Gomery will hear arguments from lawyers as to whether he should lift the ban.

Brault's lawyer has asked a Montreal judge to delay the criminal trial until September. That decision is expected on Wednesday.

If the judge agrees, that might allay Gomery's concerns that Brault's Adscam testimony could negatively affect his fraud trial.

It's not a crime to post it in America:

On Thursday, Jean Brault began his testimony, subject to the publication ban, and revealed a massive pattern of corruption going to the highest levels of the Liberal party and government. Brault testified to hundreds of thousands of dollars of bogus transactions designed to benefit the Liberal Party of Canada over a period from 1994 to 2002.

Most of the illegal campaign contributions involved Brault either hiring “employees” -- who were in fact working full time on Liberal Party activities -- or paying invoices for Liberal Party campaign expenses (which were never declared as such) or making untraceable cash donations to Liberal officials. In exchange for helping the federal Liberals in Quebec, Brault received millions of dollars in federal advertising contracts.

Brault said he met with Jean Carle, a key aide to then Prime Minister Jean Chretien to propose a more direct way of ensuring that Groupaction got a large share of federal advertising dollars in Quebec. Carle referred Brault to federal bureaucrat Charles (“Chuck”) Guité and told him that “there was room for everybody.”

Guité later put together the sponsorship program, in which five Liberal connected firms -- including Groupaction -- were guaranteed a monopoly on government “sponsorship” advertising (e.g. federal advertising at sporting or cultural events) and related work. The sponsorship program eventually became a huge slush fund into which over $250 million was poured, over $100 million of which was paid in fees and commissions to these five advertising firms, with little or any evidence of work done or value for money.

In exchange for these large contracts for little or no work, Brault kicked back generously to the Liberal Party, putting Liberal organizers on his payroll while they continued to perform party work (including, at one point, Prime Minister Jean Chrétien’s brother, Gaby Chrétien), paying invoices to other companies for work actually done for the Liberal Party, and giving large donations -- in cash -- to the Liberal Party through Renaud or Liberal Party organizer (and close associate of Public Works Minister Alfonso Gagliano) Joe Morselli.

Protection Racket?

Towards the later part of the sponsorship program, the friends and associates of Public Works Minister and former ambassador to Denmark Alfonso Gagliano, some of whom have been linked to organized crime, played a larger role in the schemes.

At one point, Gagliano associate Tony Mignacca told Brault that if he didn’t rehire Renaud (who had left Groupaction to start a new company), he would lose his newly acquired contract with Via Rail -- Canada’s state-run passenger rail service. Brault broke down in tears after he recounted this testimony. At a meeting in 2001 with Joe Morselli, Brault said that he arranged to have the meeting in an overheated room in a restaurant -- so that Brault could ask Morselli to take off his coat and ensure that he wasn’t carrying a body pack.

This is just the beginning of Brault's testimony.

RE: Canada's Corruption Scandal Breaks Wide Open: I believe, over decades, Canadians have been quietly socialized to become, more complacent, government dependent, uninvolved, blind followers, towards a more leftist leaning socialist-style government/society. In fact, I believe, Canadian Conservatives are further to the left than U.S. Democrats. There are consistently, publication bans on everything of significance in Canada; this is presented under the guise of, protecting the innocent until proven guilty and/or not tainting potential evidence for pending trials. I believe, the Sponsorship Scandal "Adscam" is one scandal among many, which have been suppressed from public scrutiny in Canada. The occasional, motivated journalist, who does try to Access Information is blacklisted and ostracized. Common citizens and professionals, who fight for disclosure are similarly, blacklisted, suppressed, ostracized and/or ruined. In addition, I believe most Canadians are placated and patronized by their Government Leader's for specific benefits. I believe Canadians believe they are, so-called, more polite, courteous and possess higher, more positive morals or more considerate, caring values than most people, especially U.S. citizens. The point is, CANADIANS don't get involved because they are kept in the dark, afraid or punished, when they do express dissenting opinions. Leading news media stations/programs, in many cases, are in part or in whole, government funded; journalists and money is limited; nepotism, favouritism and protectionism is rampant in the news media business, government offices and especially public sector business. The aforementioned follow the "interpreted" rules of the day without question. BUT now, BLOGGERS have ruined the day....the truth begins to seep to the surface....and of course, disclosure is initiated from the U.S. Canadians began to question and complain about issues and the pear-heads in Canada, again, gagged disclosure. My opinion is, if you are guilty, you are guilty; the Canadian government is not interested in protecting the rule of law or civil/criminal procedure, as they represent; they are really interested in hiding the truth and hiding the process in which they have and will continue to corrupt the law and misrepresent the facts. THANK GOD for the BLOGGERS!! However, believe me, related politician's, public servants and their cronies, will desperately try to shut the bloggers up, BY ANY MEANS!! In fact, recent reports disclose this posting by me, could get me charged. go figure!!!

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.