If ever there was a classic case of shooting the messenger, I'm it. Isn't this case supposed to be a legal case between Harper and the Liberals about something that appeared on the Liberal's website? If so, why is Harper's legal counsel systematically throwing kitchen sink after kitchen sink at me?
I think I can answer that question. In focusing almost entirely on this tape, the obsession is an admission of it's potential damage. One aspect that seems to be lost here, you don't throw the "kitchen sink" at something that is really much ado about nothing, as Harper's defenders have consistently argued. It really is a risky game for Harper, because the entire underlying premise of all the attacks is an implicit recognition that the tapes contents, if credible, clearly show Harper implicating himself. It's just common sense really, the tape must be savaged, because if it is left to stand as is, it raises serious questions, which apparently don't come with adequate answers.
If Harper really did make benign comments on this tape, which surrogates like Moore have repeated over and over, then the explanations are simple, nothing to worry about. If however, and the assault on Zytaruk speaks to this, the comments are quite suspicious, somewhat indefensible, then your only recourse is too "shoot the messenger". Focus all of your legal firepower on throwing the "evidence" into question, then the focus becomes a discussion of believability, rather than what the contents say. It's a dangerous tactic for Harper, because if Zytaruk is able to maintain his credibility, then it is the Conservatives who have elevated the contents to a higher level. It's an aggressive strategy, I see it as a desperate one, but it has real potential for blow back, because it essentially acknowledges what a huge PROBLEM this tape is for Harper, as it exists today.