I never thought I would have to parse the words "wrong" and "legal", but this week's hearings in the Oliphant inquiry into the business dealings of Brian Mulroney and Karlheinz Schreiber has educated me. The inquiry has affirmed that there is nothing "wrong" in accepting a quarter of a million dollars in $20 denominations in brown envelopes in hotel rooms from an alleged international crook who is wanted in Germany on corruption and other charges. There is also nothing "wrong" in waiting six years to declare the income to Revenue Canada after being caught. And all this is perfectly "legal".

Dictionary: Wrong - not in accordance with what is morally right or good; deviating from truth or fact; etc. Ergo, what Mulroney did was moral, right and good.

Dictionary: Legal - permitted by law; recognized by law rather than equity.
Equity - something that is fair and just. Ergo, legality has nothing to do with what is fair and just and hence Mulroney is safely within the law.

I've also learned that one can lie if it cannot be positively proved that one is lying. When Mulroney stated, with his bare face hanging out, that he never discussed his tax situation with his tax lawyers, but merely handed the whole mess to them and they took care of it without him knowing what they were doing, he's stretching credibility to the breaking point. But who can prove otherwise?

Is it any wonder that he seemd so pleased with himself at the end of his six days of testimony?