Does “Revenge for Airbus” mean anything to anyone?

Kate draws attention to today’s disturbing testimony at Chuck Guite’s fraud trial:

A former vice-president of Groupaction, told Charles Guité’s fraud trial Wednesday that he feared for his life if he were to blow the whistle on what he saw as suspicious goings on between his ad agency and former prime minister Jean Chretien’s office.

“I wasn’t interested in having a hunting accident in my living room,” he testified. Lambert, who quit Groupaction in 2001, said he felt like his was trapped in a system with many tentacles, at the centre of which was Chretien.

This is in addition to yesterday’s revelation:

When Guite cross-examined Conway, he made two points with the help of only two pieces of paper.

Guite pointed to the signature of former prime minister Jean Chretien at the bottom of a Treasury Board request to finance the sponsorship program.

Guite asked Conway if it was normal the prime minister would personally sign such a document.

“It’s extremely unusual,” said Conway, a top civil servant at Public Works. “In fact I have never seen it.”

The question is: How are these new suspicions about Chretien going to be resolved? For some reason, the persecution of Brian Mulroney over the Airbus nonsense is forefront in my mind right now.