Friends,

Circumstances have changed.

Ahern has been shown to have lied under oath. We have long suspected it. But it is now certain.

My suggestion is the following.

In order to apply maximum pressure. We meet tomorrow in Drumcondra outside St Luke’s. We will try to get the press involved. We would only need 100 people at about 2pm, taking up to an hour or maybe two. It could make the Sunday papers.

Please contact me directly if you are interested. I need big signs and big numbers - a brief messaging saying ‘yes’ would let me know if this idea is viable.

Kind regards

Gavin Sheridan
www.gavinsblog.com

Log onto the Facebook Group and leave a message if you intend to go along or email Gavin (contact details on his blog.)

The following is an article on the evidence of Ms. Gráinne Carruth, Bertie’s former secetary, who is due back at the tribunal today having “considered” her evidence overnight at the direction of Judge Alan Mahon, from The Irish Times (emphasis mine).

GRÁINNE CARRUTH, former secretary to Taoiseach Bertie Ahern, has denied she carried out sterling transactions on behalf of Mr Ahern, but accepts that previous evidence she gave to the tribunal was incorrect.

An occasionally tearful Ms Carruth, who worked at Mr Ahern’s constituency office St Luke’s from 1987 to 1999, was questioned about four lodgements to Mr Ahern’s account in the Irish Permanent Building Society.

She was also asked about lodgements to the accounts of Mr Ahern’s daughters. The lodgements totalled more than IR£15,500 and appeared to emanate from sterling conversions.

One lodgement of IR£4,119.59, was made on March 9th, 1994, after £4,000 stg was converted to Irish pounds, producing IR£4,119.59. Two lodgements of more than IR£1,028 each were also made to the accounts of Mr Ahern’s daughters, Cecelia and Georgina. They appeared to emanate from £1,000 stg conversions, the tribunal was told.

Ms Carruth’s name and address were on the lodgement slips for the transactions. Other lodgements made on May 9th and October 28th and which coincided with sterling transactions were also examined.

Ms Carruth initially denied that she had made any of the lodgements. However, after questioning from the three tribunal judges, she conceded she must have done, since her name was on the documents. However, when asked about the sterling conversions, she repeatedly said she had no recollection of ever dealing with sterling.

Commenting on the March 9th transactions, Judge Mary Faherty said that according to Ms Carruth’s evidence, it appeared that somebody presented sterling to the bank, then Ms Carruth lodged Irish.

“They then step out, it would appear from the documentation, and you step in again,” the judge said. She said the process would then be repeated.

“It seems completely illogical that that sequence of events could have happened on that day, Ms Carruth,” the judge said.

“I accept that, thank you, judge,” Ms Carruth responded.

Judge Alan Mahon said it was unlikely that Ms Carruth would have lodged two exact sums of IR£1,028 on March 9th to Mr Ahern’s daughters’ accounts.

“It seems a strange amount, Judge,” Ms Carruth said.

Judge Gerald Keyes said all they wanted was the truth.

Counsel for the tribunal, Des O’Neill SC, said that it would follow that someone gave Ms Carruth £6,000 stg on March 9th and told her to lodge it to the three accounts.

“That’s the only logical sequence that can happen, isn’t that right?” Mr O’Neill asked.

“I have no recollection of sterling ever being in my hands,” Ms Carruth insisted. She accepted that evidence she had given to the tribunal on a previous occasion was incorrect. She had stated the only transactions she carried out for Mr Ahern were to change his salary cheques for him and lodge money to his daughters’ accounts.

Mr O’Neill said Ms Carruth responds “no” to every question until such time that “incontrovertible” evidence was put to her, and then she said she couldn’t recollect. He said that at the time, she was earning IR£66 a week and could not possibly forget dealing with large amounts of cash.

He asked Ms Carruth if she was surprised when documents came out to her from the tribunal showing she had made large cash lodgements to Mr Ahern’s account.

“I shook for two hours,” Ms Carruth said. She acknowledged that anything she was asked to do in banking terms “was for Bertie”.

(Please support the work of The Irish Times’ journalists by subscribing to Ireland.com)

We’ve also seen some traffic coming our way from Government Buildings, so hello to everyone over there too. If you guys haven’t see the Resign, Mr. Ahern Facebook group (now with over 2,000 members) yet, please check it out. You’ll also be able to see the discussions relating to the Transparency in Politics event on Facebook (almost 200 confirmed attendees and another 500 maybe attendees). Please do feel free to come along, everyone is welcome - this event is non-partisan, peaceful and a healthy act of democracy.

Taniste and Deputy Leader of Fianna Fail Brian Cowen would also seem to be weighing up his options and has been spending more time throwing jibes in the direction of the opposition than defending and supporting his boss. Still, I’m sure Ahern would have been more worried to receive the dreaded vote of confidence while out of the country.

In the middle of the week Ahern then suggested that he would remain in office until 2012. On hearing this John Gormley almost choked on his lentils. Well who wouldn’t! Once he had recovered, he then obediently distanced himself from commenting on the ethics of his government partners. This despite the fact that he’d previously said that Ahern’s problems were a distraction for the government.

All three deputies, Dan, Brian and John are invited to come along to the Accountability in Politics march organised by the Resign, Mr. Ahern group of Facebook. The group now has over 2,000 members, if you aren’t already in the group, please take a couple of minutes and sign up today.

Date:	Saturday, April 12, 2008
Time:	1:00pm - 4:00pm
Location:	Parnell Square to Dail Eireann?
City/Town:	Dublin

Trials and tribulations

The Taoiseach would have the public believe he is anxious to answer all and every question from the Mahon tribunal concerning his unorthodox financial affairs while minister for finance, as well as deal comprehensively with a series of statements he made publicly and in the Dáil on these matters. Does he take us for complete fools? The latest High Court action launched by Mr Ahern has been specifically designed to prevent tribunal lawyers asking him awkward or damaging questions.

It is a shabby and demeaning business. It puts further strain on the growing credibility problem the Taoiseach has with a bemused electorate. And it poses risks to the authority of Government. The High Court challenge would appear, at least in part, to be a time-buying exercise designed to spin out and neutralise the effects of a robust investigation into the Taoiseach’s extraordinary financial dealings. If a judgment is appealed to the Supreme Court, the work of the tribunal could be delayed by at least six months and probably longer.

Just two weeks ago, under pressure from Opposition parties, the Coalition Government voted confidence in the work of the Mahon tribunal; noted its rising costs and extensive agenda, and urged it to complete its work expeditiously so that the Dáil could debate its conclusions. That formal position flies in the face of the extra costs and delays that are now likely to transpire because of the Taoiseach’s actions. Was the Cabinet informed of this imminent court challenge?

In 2006, the Mahon tribunal drew the Taoiseach’s attention to what it believed were factually erroneous statements made by him to the Dáil and elsewhere on payments into his accounts. And it signalled a desire to examine in detail two specific payments that may have involved $45,000 and £25,000 sterling. Mr Ahern is disputing the contentions of the tribunal in these matters and, in heated evidence given before Christmas, he accused its lawyers of “trying to stitch him up”.

The Taoiseach’s explanations of his financial dealings have been contradictory and, at times, partial. He has adopted a strategy designed to confuse and obfuscate. It is the clear duty of the tribunal, appointed by the Oireachtas to investigate planning matters involving some of its own members, to follow the money trail. Dáil privilege was hardly designed to prevent a review of his public explanations, but Mr Ahern could still win the case. The High Court challenge has been justified on the grounds that legal advice made it impossible for him to do otherwise. That is self-serving cant. Legal advice is simply that - advice - and it can be accepted or rejected.

A similarly legalistic approach was adopted by Cardinal Connell when opposing the release of contentious sexual abuse files from the Dublin archdiocese. But he was prevailed upon to change his mind in the interest of the greater good. The Taoiseach would do politics a service by following that example. The sooner these issues are disposed of, the better.

Hear, hear!

Paste the following code into your blog template to link here - (see the Other Links section on the right for an example):

<ul><li><a href=”http://www.resignmrahern.com” title=”Resign, Mr. Ahern”><img src=”http://www.resignmrahern.com/images/resign_mr_ahern.png” alt=”Resign, Mr. Ahern” border=”0″ height=”15″ width=”80″></a></li>
</ul>