What a circus:
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNew...hub=TopStories
Quote:
The author who recorded an interview with Prime Minister Stephen Harper about alleged "financial considerations" offered to the late MP Chuck Cadman has categorically denied the tape was doctored.
....
He said the only break in his tape may have occurred during the interview when Harper appeared to have ended the conversation. But Harper then turned back to add something to the interview and Zytaruk said he immediately turned his recorder back on.
....
In a taped interview with Zytaruk, Harper allegedly says, "The offer to Chuck was that it was only to replace financial considerations he might lose due to an election.''
Directly answering the question if he had made any changes to the tape, Zytaruk said flatly: "I would have to have rocks in my head to do something like that. Certainly, all of Canada would agree."
....
Moore added that two audio recording experts his party has consulted are prepared to testify that "the tapes have been altered in a way that misrepresents the original conversation."
....
Earlier on Wednesday, Moore had said the tape was incomplete. He said the "tape was doctored by inserting a sound clip that was fabricated."
....
Cadman's daughter said her father told her, on his deathbed, about an offer of an insurance policy and other enticements in exchange for his vote on a 2005 budget vote.
"My father told me directly that he had been offered a million-dollar life insurance policy by the Conservatives," Jodi Cadman said.
|
(a) If the author merely turned the tape recorder off and then on, how did the 'fabricated sound clip' get added?
(b) On the recording (doctored or not), does it actually say anything about an insurance policy or just 'financial considerations', which is about as vague as someone can get?
Obviously, we're never going to get the proof needed to confirm or deny this one way or another. It's turned into a "He-said She-said battle", which we all know goes no where.