Thing is, if Abbott fucks up he'll likely (hopefully) get dumped, the new leader will win and we lose Gillard.
Last edited by Jaekus (2012-11-29 00:22:44)
Sounds like win at every level, so I'm fine with it.
Fuck Israel
Have you missed the point that it is Bishop leading the attack on this and not Abbott?
He knows that he would get egg on his face, so gave the dirty work to the fall guy.
He knows that he would get egg on his face, so gave the dirty work to the fall guy.
Abbotts whole face is an egg, it wouldn't matter.
It was handed to Bishop to avoid accusations of sexism and misogyny.
It was handed to Bishop to avoid accusations of sexism and misogyny.
Fuck Israel
Did you see the statement he made this morning to journalists in parliament corridors? He might be pitching anyone who could possibly contest leadership to do his dirty work but he won't get away with it squeaky clean, not by a long shot.AussieReaper wrote:
Have you missed the point that it is Bishop leading the attack on this and not Abbott?
He knows that he would get egg on his face, so gave the dirty work to the fall guy.
Darryl MaguireTy wrote:
Who's your current MP?
Has been Kay Hull and Michael McCormack I think
Not actually fact checking by the way*
I mean your federal MP. I've never encountered Maguire though my work used to be based in Wagga. May have been before the latest NSW election though.
--
Bishop is leading the assault but Abbott is still the leader and he has been active enough in bringing up the matter in the media. I think Dilbert's probably right, the Coalition knows that the whole misogyny thing did actually hit them pretty hard and Bishop is the ideally placed skirt to avoid that again.
Using my absolutely awesome power of thinking about things what I reckon is that Gillard was an ambitious young partner who wanted to do good for her powerful friends in the unions and at Slater & Gordon. This being the case she wanted to be their fixer, the reliable go-to person and she was willing to work in the grey areas of the law to get the job done. I don't think there was any malicious intent in her profiting from the slush fund itself, I think it was more a career building and networking move. Gillard is a ruthless and ambitious woman, I could fully see her abandoning inhibitions to work with the slimier members of the union movement if it meant she could progress herself in any way.
Thing is it's going to be very very difficult to prove Gillard knowingly or unknowingly did anything wrong and a Hell of a lot harder to prove she did anything illegal. It seems like she was just a willing tool in the whole thing, happy enough to turn a blind eye to potential dodgy dealings, but she doesn't seem like an instigator or a beneficiary and would have been a minor player at best. Ralph Blewitt and Bruce Wilson will natter and blame each other and while Blewitt may be willing to pin some of the blame on Gillard his reputation is the one that got crapped all over so nothing he says is going to mean anything. Unless he has something concrete of course, which as Bishop found out he doesn't.
It's also possible Gillard was completely unaware and innocent of the whole thing but I don't buy that for a second.
All the Coalition has is hearsay and speculation. There is no smoking gun, and if there is it should be found before people start making up stories and calling for resignations. But they don't care anyway, they just want to see how much damage this thing does to Gillard and her polling numbers. And given that there is nothing provable from it, given that investigations already found the bad guys and didn't implicate Gillard, given that it happened nearly 20 fucking years ago I think it's something that we can move on from now. Please? It's no different to that stupid mess about Tony Abbott apparently acting violent towards women in his university years. Unsubstantiated, irrelevant, unprovable, and existing for the sole purpose of slander rather than actually determining a wrongdoing.
--
Bishop is leading the assault but Abbott is still the leader and he has been active enough in bringing up the matter in the media. I think Dilbert's probably right, the Coalition knows that the whole misogyny thing did actually hit them pretty hard and Bishop is the ideally placed skirt to avoid that again.
Using my absolutely awesome power of thinking about things what I reckon is that Gillard was an ambitious young partner who wanted to do good for her powerful friends in the unions and at Slater & Gordon. This being the case she wanted to be their fixer, the reliable go-to person and she was willing to work in the grey areas of the law to get the job done. I don't think there was any malicious intent in her profiting from the slush fund itself, I think it was more a career building and networking move. Gillard is a ruthless and ambitious woman, I could fully see her abandoning inhibitions to work with the slimier members of the union movement if it meant she could progress herself in any way.
Thing is it's going to be very very difficult to prove Gillard knowingly or unknowingly did anything wrong and a Hell of a lot harder to prove she did anything illegal. It seems like she was just a willing tool in the whole thing, happy enough to turn a blind eye to potential dodgy dealings, but she doesn't seem like an instigator or a beneficiary and would have been a minor player at best. Ralph Blewitt and Bruce Wilson will natter and blame each other and while Blewitt may be willing to pin some of the blame on Gillard his reputation is the one that got crapped all over so nothing he says is going to mean anything. Unless he has something concrete of course, which as Bishop found out he doesn't.
It's also possible Gillard was completely unaware and innocent of the whole thing but I don't buy that for a second.
All the Coalition has is hearsay and speculation. There is no smoking gun, and if there is it should be found before people start making up stories and calling for resignations. But they don't care anyway, they just want to see how much damage this thing does to Gillard and her polling numbers. And given that there is nothing provable from it, given that investigations already found the bad guys and didn't implicate Gillard, given that it happened nearly 20 fucking years ago I think it's something that we can move on from now. Please? It's no different to that stupid mess about Tony Abbott apparently acting violent towards women in his university years. Unsubstantiated, irrelevant, unprovable, and existing for the sole purpose of slander rather than actually determining a wrongdoing.
[Blinking eyes thing]
Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/tzyon
Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/tzyon
Gillard facilitated the diversion of union members money to a slush fund and took a cut herself and you don't see a problem? Its theft.
She didn't open a file, she knew what she was doing.
What Tony Abbott did as a student at uni is a little different from what a qualified lawyer did with hundreds of thousands of dollars, not that I'm condoning Abbott.
Puts 'utegate' into perspective eh?
Unions are corrupt, big business is corrupt, politicians on both sides are corrupt
She didn't open a file, she knew what she was doing.
What Tony Abbott did as a student at uni is a little different from what a qualified lawyer did with hundreds of thousands of dollars, not that I'm condoning Abbott.
Puts 'utegate' into perspective eh?
Unions are corrupt, big business is corrupt, politicians on both sides are corrupt
Fuck Israel
Yeah that's the allegation but it's based on very poor information, a lot of speculation, hearsay, and an enthusiastic Coalition that will leap on the slightest thing to start calling for resignations and new elections.Dilbert_X wrote:
Gillard facilitated the diversion of union members money to a slush fund and took a cut herself and you don't see a problem? Its theft.
The thing is this was an issue when it actually happened. The only reason it wasn't such a big fucking deal then was that Gillard wasn't the Prime Minister. I'm guessing the Coalition feels cheated out of a scandal so they're dredging it up again. The only new thing that has come out is this $5000 payment and here's a couple of things about that:
- The revelation is based on a report into a diary written by Ian Cambridge in 1996 who wrote that a bloke called Wayne Hem told him that Bruce Wilson had told him to make a payment into an account he was told was Gillard's.
- It is not known why the payment was made.
- It is not known where the payment was from.
- It is not known if the account was Gillard's.
If there was anything dodgy about it than they covered their arses well enough. But this is hearsay anyway written in a 15+ year old diary about a claim from someone by someone who wasn't even involved in the scandal, (short of trying to clean it up afterwards of course.) There's nothing in it.
If it is as the Coalition is saying then yes it is serious, but let's be honest it's not going to be as they are saying. Nor is it going to be as Labor is saying with no possible wrongdoing whatsoever. It'll fall somewhere in the middle where Gillard perhaps did something not right but probably still legal that was later used by others to commit fraud. I can't see it as being much more than that. If it it is then I'm going to need some convincing but the Coalition's speculation isn't doing it for me.
Also this is quite good:
[Blinking eyes thing]
Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/tzyon
Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/tzyon
Michael MccormackTy wrote:
I mean your federal MP. I've never encountered Maguire though my work used to be based in Wagga. May have been before the latest NSW election though.
http://www.michaelmccormack.com.au/
he seems like a pretty swell dude.
in which dilbert shows that he knows nothing about law either
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
Are you even a citizen?Dilbert_X wrote:
Which law, theft or perjury?
There is no proof that any theft has taken place, at least not by Gillard. Even if she was in deep it would at most be fraud. And perjury doesn't apply to dishonesty in general, it only applies to dishonesty in the context of a trail in which it is used knowingly in a way that could determine the outcome of a case. If it applied to politicians they'd all be in prison.
[Blinking eyes thing]
Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/tzyon
Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/tzyon
Theft, accessory to theft, conspiracy to steal - its all good.
Often signing a false document can count as perjury.
Gillard's been up to her neck in it, whether its really a crime according to the statute I'm not sure, its probably unprovable in court even if it is.
Often signing a false document can count as perjury.
Gillard's been up to her neck in it, whether its really a crime according to the statute I'm not sure, its probably unprovable in court even if it is.
Fuck Israel
Lol not even a citizen and bitching about our politics.Dilbert_X wrote:
I'm British - which is better
Get out refo.
you fucker's are all up in American politics!Cybargs wrote:
Lol not even a citizen and bitching about our politics.Dilbert_X wrote:
I'm British - which is better
Get out refo.
Spoiler (highlight to read):
i know ours are painful to watch, and our sheeple insist on returning the countries most inept. but still . . .
Guilty until innocent, maybe you meant to live in China?Dilbert_X wrote:
Theft, accessory to theft, conspiracy to steal - its all good.
Often signing a false document can count as perjury.
Gillard's been up to her neck in it, whether its really a crime according to the statute I'm not sure, its probably unprovable in court even if it is.
I'm sure Santorum and Bachmann would've made fine Presidents...13urnzz wrote:
you fucker's are all up in American politics!Cybargs wrote:
Lol not even a citizen and bitching about our politics.Dilbert_X wrote:
I'm British - which is better
Get out refo.
Spoiler (highlight to read):
i know ours are painful to watch, and our sheeple insist on returning the countries most inept. but still . . .
Obviously I'm a citizen, durr.Cybargs wrote:
Lol not even a citizen and bitching about our politics.Dilbert_X wrote:
I'm British - which is better
Get out refo.
Fuck Israel
Yeah, who the fuck d'you think you are?Cybargs wrote:
Lol not even a citizen and bitching about our politics.Dilbert_X wrote:
I'm British - which is better
[Blinking eyes thing]
Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/tzyon
Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/tzyon
10 pound pom lel.Ty wrote:
Yeah, who the fuck d'you think you are?Cybargs wrote:
Lol not even a citizen and bitching about our politics.Dilbert_X wrote:
I'm British - which is better
Today Barnaby Joyce said "these hot days are proof that the carbon tax doesn't work."
He said this with a straight face.
He said this with a straight face.
[Blinking eyes thing]
Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/tzyon
Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/tzyon