Gillard's AWU/Wilson past about to haunt her?

[Arrow25]

I think he meant exactly what he said. As a one off sure ...WTF ?
I have no objection to it either ...but in the end, it would be another lie. And unless she wants a list read out about things people have said abput her, frankly, she should just shut her mouth.
And that goes to character.

I mean I can understand someone having an affair with a married person as something that just happens and does not necessarily mean that they have no real intention to be a homewrecker etc. Isn't great - but we all make mistakes. What I have a real problem with is someone who consistently cohabitates with people married to others. That, in my view, is a real character flaw.

I am stunned about the lesbian comment - I have seen Gillard interact with men and women, and frankly I would be amazed if she loved anything other than penis. But again it is her business - just don't do it with married people!

 

[Arrow25]

Arrow25, are you going to back up your claims or are we supposed to just take your word for it?

which particular claims would you like backed up?

 

[subaru]

I mean I can understand someone having an affair with a married person as something that just happens and does not necessarily mean that they have no real intention to be a homewrecker etc. Isn't great - but we all make mistakes. What I have a real problem with is someone who consistently cohabitates with people married to others. That, in my view, is a real character flaw.

I am stunned about the lesbian comment - I have seen Gillard interact with men and women, and frankly I would be amazed if she loved anything other than penis. But again it is her business - just don't do it with married people!

It's the being less than truthful...but that's old news isn't it.

 

[Gough]

How about everything that you have said, up to and including that you are in contact with the producers at Sky News (my personal favourite), because so far, you have provided absolutely nothing apart from voicing your opinion as fact.
I accept that the language you use is clever and guarded and I like the Socratic method of argument too, but so far little you have said in your 72 posts is particularly credible.

 

[Arrow25]

How about everything that you have said, up to and including that you are in contact with the producers at Sky News (my personal favourite), because so far, you have provided absolutely nothing apart from voicing your opinion as fact.
I accept that the language you use is clever and guarded and I like the Socratic method of argument too, but so far little you have said in your 72 posts is particularly credible.

Yes and we judge credibility by someone who takes the name of one of the worst PMs in our history (though given the current mob has slid from 2nd worst behind Fraser, to probably 3rd/4th).

As a viewer I called Sky News last night upon hearing Latham's rant. I witnessed his attack on Chris Kenny a few weeks ago and was astonished that he was allowed to continue on the network. Last night was enough, so I called through and spoke with the news producer - something anyone can do if you care to look up the number for the newsroom and ask for the right people. He was very candid and said he thought Latham over stepped the mark and they were very worried about the consequences. He asked me to put my complaint in writing, which I did and I then received a call this morning from a very senior exec, who again was extremely candid in his concern.

So this is first hand experience. Would you like an affidavit? Or is it just that you are too lazy or intelligent to pick up a phone and make a call if you don't like something?

 

[Arrow25]

How about everything that you have said, up to and including that you are in contact with the producers at Sky News (my personal favourite), because so far, you have provided absolutely nothing apart from voicing your opinion as fact.
I accept that the language you use is clever and guarded and I like the Socratic method of argument too, but so far little you have said in your 72 posts is particularly credible.

I also suspect you judge credibility based on whether someone agrees with your views or not. Very immature thinking.

As I said on Monday Gillard's ethics as a lawyer will become an issue - the next day it was covered in both Fairfax and News Ltd press. That is only the beginning.

 

[Xsess]

at best, these are allegations that can't possibly be proven and at worst they are just outright bullshit from a few dinosaurs who still can't handle a chick running the shop.

Ben Cousins got delisted by the AFL for 12 months without ever failing a drugs test, based on him bringing the game into disrepute. A large part of that was dodgy associations he kept. Yes Julia might be teflon with all this corruption and dodgy dealings swirling all around her and it may also be that she is very very lucky that a certain couple of files are missing... but one thing that cant be covered up is her very close associations with the likes of Slipper, Thomson, Blewett and Wilson. Smoke. Fire . .. !

 

[Arrow25]

What you have done here, is taken a statement from Blewitt, and without questioning it, have accepted it as truth, and asked "if Gillard was home at the time".
So you trust Blewitt? You believe what he says?
I find that remarkably interesting after you have claimed your love for ethics.

I don't take the guys word for anything. But then I didn't spend 4 years as his bestie - what does that say about character?

I haven't accepted his comment as fact, but I think the PM needs to be asked to comment on it. Just as the ALP and media have sought to use Wilson's comments in defence of JG, they should also be answerable to Blewitt's.

One thing I note, Blewitt has given a sworn statement to police. Why wasn't Wilson asked by the ABC to do this?

So, what did Bishop state? And how is that evidence that the media supports the ALP?

Re-read my post. When she first questioned Gillard in parliament about the AWU not one ABC journo called her for comment. Nor did Press Gallery stalwarts like Gratton, Middleton, Taylor etc.

When Labor raised the issue of her work for CSR she had so many calls from those people for comment she couldn't keep up.

Doesn't that show that they have an inherent bias where they will try to run down a story when the ALP points the finger?

This is the problem, you have come on here, and stated many things and declared them as factual. And told people to trust you.

Actually I have said people can see how this plays out and then judge my posts based on what happens.

Anyone can throw their opinion around and make things up, but for discussion and learning, it helps to show where you receive your information and views. So others may look at the information and make up their own mind, rather than have you tell them what to think.
If you stand by your convictions, you wouldn't have a problem with showing where your views are from, because you will strongly feel that it would sway the views of others.

SOme of us aren't employed in public service jobs and so can't spend time linking to different websites. I spend 3 hours per day reading at least 5 newspapers and various websites - then I work at least another 10 hours (usually 12-14). Sorry but I don't have time to link everything single point to satisfy some anal blogger.

All class....

I don't think there is anything classless about saying that. Are you that immature that using the proper word for a man's genitals offends you?

 

[Arrow25]

Well then, as you are ahead of it all, why not tell us what comes next? If it's only the beginning you must have tons more information you would like to leak, ahead of time!

Please, go ahead!

I suspect the letter Gillard wrote the WA department verifying the validity of the association will surface, and/or the full transcript of the SG exit interview where she discusses this will be leaked. That will be documentary proof that she mislead the WA department on the nature of the association and call into question her credibility. When that happens her inability to clearly rule out the payment of her renovations will gather steam. The renovations allegation will never be proven one way or another. But what we will see is a further open questioning of her credibility as a person.

I suspect in the new year she will also be interviewed by police over these matters, and if the ALP gets wind that will happen before the election, watch them knife her.

There is a reason Wayne Swan has been silent on this since Sunday - he made the mistake of attacking NSB, and was quickly put back in his box. If NSB releases the full file he has on JG then the least of her problems will be whether she remains as PM.

Remember the criticism Fairfax received for intiatially publishing the Thomson allegations and then when he sued, it all came out? Before they published those allegations, their law firm checked everything very thoroughly.

I understand (and I stress this firm is not my law firm at all) that the same law firm that nailed the Thomson saga has reviewed material from NSB in relation to JG and the only reason it was not been printed, is because NSB won't authorise it. But if he gets dragged into this then Fairfax is potentially looking at the material that could bring down the PM.

Hence why Latham attacked Michael Smith and the Press Gallery are going for Bishop to try and shut this whole thing down. Because if Bishop gets the documents, the ALP is stuffed.

NSB won't release them because to do so would be to breach client confidentiality. Though let's see how long that lasts. Now the press is turning the heat up on SG - there may be only so much they, as a listed entity, can take.

Long term I think JG will be rolled as PM over this if she waits until beyond March to go to an election. I think in the second half of next year criminal charges against her will be discussed in the media, but eventually I think the conclussion will be that you can't prove said charges beyond reasonable doubt, but that at the very least she was extrmeely negligent.

 

[Arrow25]

Ben Cousins got delisted by the AFL for 12 months without ever failing a drugs test, based on him bringing the game into disrepute. A large part of that was dodgy associations he kept. Yes Julia might be teflon with all this corruption and dodgy dealings swirling all around her and it may also be that she is very very lucky that a certain couple of files are missing... but one thing that cant be covered up is her very close associations with the likes of Slipper, Thomson, Blewett and Wilson. Smoke. Fire . .. !

yes how dare Julie Bishop speak with Ralph Blewitt, the man the PM was besties with for 4 years. Not to mention the fraudster she shagged for 4 years!

 

[Upton Sinclair]

yes how dare Julie Bishop speak with Ralph Blewitt, the man the PM was besties with for 4 years. Not to mention the fraudster she shagged for 4 years!

Blewitt wasn't a self-confessed crook at that point, just an ordinary crook, and while we don't know for sure whether Gillard knew him to be a crook when she associated with him we do know that Bishop most definitely did.

 

[Upton Sinclair]

Long term I think JG will be rolled as PM over this if she waits until beyond March to go to an election. I think in the second half of next year criminal charges against her will be discussed in the media, but eventually I think the conclussion will be that you can't prove said charges beyond reasonable doubt, but that at the very least she was extrmeely negligent.

I look forward to bumping this thread in April so we can all point and laugh at your wild-eyed predictions

 

[Arrow25]

I look forward to bumping this thread in April so we can all point and laugh at your wild-eyed predictions

For the sake of Gillard personally, I hope I am wrong.

Also for the sake of all good union officials out there (of which there are plenty), I also hope I am wrong.

 

[mantis]

For the sake of Gillard personally, I hope I am wrong.

Also for the sake of all good union officials out there (of which there are plenty), I also hope I am wrong.

Why do I not believe one thing you have said in this post?

 

[Contra Mundum]

I may have read the press release wrongly. However, it seems to me that S&G stopped acting for all parties. Now if one were to read that meant the AWU one would think that would be a rather large (and probably very profitable) client. One assumes lawyers being lawyers they wouldnt say goodbye to cash other than for a good reason

Contra Mundum

Do you know if that is correct ie S&G gave up the AWU account?

It did but that is partially explained by the fact that Blewett and and what's his name were the first and only time a hard left mob had control of an AWU Branch (as horrible as that is to articulate in writing)

Blewett and co were under investigation by the Federal AWU at the time (Bill Ludwig even then!) so it reverted back to their lawyers at Maurie B's who the federal office lawyers following Bernard Murphy there

Blewett was then, is now and forever will be an utter amoral grub

Some of the things Julie Bishop goes on about are bullshit thought- how many partners in law firms are involved in nickel and dime conveyancing! The law clerk does it all

 

[harmesy 37]

Look, people can continue to spin this story, because in the end it cannot be proven either way,

So just one question for you with a simple yes or no answer:-

Do you believe that Gillard misled the WA Corporate Affairs Commission when she prepared documents that stated that the aim of the association was workplace safety and reform?

Just a simple yes or no please for starters.



If you say "no" then I am guessing you believe a "slushfund" is compatible with workplace safety and reform


or

that you believe Gillard knew nothing about it. So Wilson hired a lawyer (without the AWU's knowledge) to draw up documents about something she knew nothing about. why ask her to do the job and why ask her to go to a WA union meeting to appease restless unions who smelt a rat then? did she still know nothing at this meeting as well. She seems to get by not knowing not a lot.


or

alternatively you think she is a modern day sgt schultz who knew nothing at all. Perhaps she didn't even prepare the documents, or perhaps she didn't even know it was a slush fund even though miraculously in 1995 she worked out it was a slush fund. How did she work this out whilst knowing "nothing" and doing "nothing wrong"?



You are asking people to suspend a lot of common sense to follow your line that Gillard is innocent and a poor, naive victim.

Here's a quote for you from Gillard:

"My understanding is that the purpose of the association was to support the re-election of a team of union officials and their pursuit of the policies that they would stand for re-election on…"

where is the workplace safety and reform in that sentence?

 

[Upton Sinclair]

Why do I not believe one thing you have said in this post?

Its all pretty transparent, isn't it

 

[GuruJane]

It did but that is partially explained by the fact that Blewett and and what's his name were the first and only time a hard left mob had control of an AWU Branch (as horrible as that is to articulate in writing)

are you talking about WA branch of AWU or Vic?

 

[Contra Mundum]

are you talking about WA branch of AWU or Vic?

Victoria - the AWU has been the factory for right wing politicians since Bill Ludwig became Federal President in the early seventies. The only people who get groomed are fellow travellers

 

[Gough]

harmesy 37 Nowhere have I said that I think she is innocent, if you had quoted the whole sentence you would have seen that I said it was possible that she is guilty. My point is on proof, I'm not at all convinced there is enough proof to declare her guilty, a view that I seem to share with Julie Bishop, if yesterday afternoon's presser was anything to go by.

 

[Dry Rot]

Michael Smith has picked up a few interesting points from Wilson last night.

One is that he has waived his client confidentiality by discussing his instructions.

He also showed Gillard lied to the two partners re Blewitt and the Kerr Street house purchase.

http://www.michaelsmithnews.com/201...wilsons-admissions-on-abc-730-last-night.html

 

[GuruJane]

Victoria - the AWU has been the factory for right wing politicians since Bill Ludwig became Federal President in the early seventies. The only people who get groomed are fellow travellers

Well Blewitt was in WA - so it must be Wilson you mean?

And was Gillard in the hard left faction then?

 

[Xsess]

Julia Gillard's confused & unclear approach to her work as a solicitor has been replicated in her role as PM. The tragic aspect of this whole matter is that her dysfunctional and chaotic tenure as PM could have been avoided had those who knew about her travails as a solicitor spoken up before it was too late. Her incompetence was on the record. It's a terrible failure of journalistic standards in this country that such a woefully careless person of such poor judgment could have slipped under the radar & ascended to the Lodge. A potential Coalition leader would not have so easily escaped press scrutiny.

 

[noddy]

What you have shown here is that you have zero credibility as a poster.

You accuse Bishop for speaking with Blewitt, the man the PM was close friends with for four years. You neglect to mention Wilson, the man she bedded for 4 years and is an accused fraudster!

You then comment on the Mark Latham interview, where even most Labor people are saying Latham came across as completely unhinged. His conduct is already the subject of a Press Council complaint and I know, from speaking with them last night, that senior producers at Sky News are very worried about a defamation claim coming their way. I have also reviewed Latham's critique of Smith's website posting - it is factually wrong. Smith's "smile" comment was in relation to the mainstream media finally starting to cover the AWU scandal, not the post by some idiot in the comments section.

Brandis was annoyed last night because of the aggressive and unprofessional manner in which Latham acted. I bet you Latham never appears on Sky again and I understand the AFR is presently considering terminating his contract.

You miss the very interesting point from Showdown last night (which I note most of the media has missed, including Mr Smith) - Blewitt actually said he withdrew money from the fund at the direction of Wilson and delivered to Wilson at Gillard's residence. I wonder if Gillard was home at the time?

Gillard did not know Blewitt or for that matter Wilson were accused fraudsters back before she cut ties with them whereas Bishop knew full well before her meetings with Blewitt that he was a self confessed fraudster so don't lecture me on credibility.

As for last nights Showdown that is the second version of the Latham/Kroger (who are in my opinion are both loud mouth boffer boys) sideshow put on by Sky & this one was as bad as the first with Kroger just as bad as Latham & i will be surprised if we see a third.

Seeing as you know all about the Smith web site can you also find the minor detail of the piece that is now missing concerning the PM, the Taliban, snipers & Smith having a wet dream of the outcome as Latham has alleged? plus can you also deny that Smith is being investigated by the Fed Police for posting an inflammatory article on his web set which Latham also has alleged?

 

[Arrow25]

Gillard did not know Blewitt or for that matter Wilson were accused fraudsters back before she cut ties with them whereas Bishop knew full well before her meetings with Blewitt that he was a self confessed fraudster so don't lecture me on credibility.

As for last nights Showdown that is the second version of the Latham/Kroger (who are in my opinion are both loud mouth boffer boys) sideshow put on by Sky & this one was as bad as the first with Kroger just as bad as Latham & i will be surprised if we see a third.

Seeing as you know all about the Smith web site can you also find the minor detail of the piece that is now missing concerning the PM, the Taliban, snipers & Smith having a wet dream of the outcome as Latham has alleged? plus can you also deny that Smith is being investigated by the Fed Police for posting an inflammatory article on his web set which Latham also has alleged?

No she just hang out with them whilst they were committing the offences. And she had complete confidence in Craig Thomson. I mean for Gillard and the ALP to criticise Bishop for this is sheer hypocrisy. It is akin to Costello accusing someone of being arrogant.

Kroger isn't my cup of tea but he did not behave in the aggressive and abusive manner Latham did.

I have the Smith piece on file - I remember reading the comment from the poster at the time and thinking what an idiot. But let's be clear - Smith made a blog post saying he was going to bed with a smile because the mainstream media was starting to investigate this. Some moron then made the taliban post and so Smith removed the whole thing.

As for the federal police investigation - no idea. I suspect only the AFP know that. But Latham has form in making crap up so if you want to hang your hat on his credibility be my guest.

I do know that Smith has spoken to a solicitor this morning and Sky News has actually made the first approach to him to discuss an apology. Latham was meant to appear on Paul Murray's radio show on 2UE at 3pm - that has been cancelled.