Christian Porter

Remove this Banner Ad

andrewmillman said:
Who would conduct this investigation? If not the police whom ... specialise in such things.
Click to expand...
LOL....You're joking right?
You trust the NSW police?
 
Kwality said:
Where did I call an independent investigation a lynch mob?

What is an independent investigation here?
Click to expand...
You are telling the story.
It's your lynch mob.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

random260 said:
An independent investigation must be run by Labor or by Labor donors.

Police is unacceptable.


Man I'm beginning to think this independent, fair and balance investigator is a ruse.
Click to expand...
Since certain NSW police are already compromised, I would suggest a non Police body.
Like ICAC for instance.
It is not really that hard.
Are you Christian Porter or his Mum by any chance?
Or a bent NSW cop?
 
andrewmillman said:
At least i know of the police, this hypothetical "independent investigation" doesn't even have a hypothetical composition that can be scrutinised at all.
Click to expand...
Of Course.
No independent enquiry ever achieved anything the rusted on Liberal flogs ever wanted to hear.
LOL at you,
 
Stumpy Pete said:
I see Samantha Maiden is suggesting we should be concerned that some millionaire may be volunteering to pay Christian Porter’s legal bills. Got to wonder whether she has any concerns for those on the minimum wage who are being forced to pay the ABC’s legal bills.

Regards

s. Pete
Click to expand...
Huh?

It’s the ABC’s fault that Porter is sooking ?

You’re not concerned that a holder of one of the highest offices in the land could be compromised by owing his reputation to some rich person?
 
Chief said:
Huh?

It’s the ABC’s fault that Porter is sooking ?

You’re not concerned that a holder of one of the highest offices in the land could be compromised by owing his reputation to some rich person?
Click to expand...

Yes I have concerns about Porter never said I didn’t. I’m just observing that an impartial journalist might also express concern that the ABC is finding its legal case with money forcibly taken from others. When people talk about legal cases like this we often hear complaints about David v Goliath - the way this story gets framed it’s like Porter (with his privately earned salary) is Goliath and the ABC with its $1 Billion a year taxpayer back bankroll is David. It’s a bit perverse don’t you think?
Regards

s. Pete
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Stumpy Pete said:
And why not?

Regards

S. Pete
Click to expand...
Age old argument. I don’t want to spend 90 billion on submarines. You don’t want to spend a few bucks on the ABC. Tomayto, tomahto
 
Chief said:
Age old argument. I don’t want to spend 90 billion on submarines. You don’t want to spend a few bucks on the ABC. Tomayto, tomahto
Click to expand...

But that’s not my point Chief. I’m happy with how much the ABC gets in fact I’d be happy for it to get a bit more. My concern is that the ABC makes bad judgement about how to capitalise on the fact it doesn’t the commercial pressures and risk that other media entities do. I think that ABC uses its commercial risk free statement to produce controversial content that other outlets don’t make because they would otherwise face commercial repercussions such as sponsors dropping out.

I would much rather they focus their commercial risk free status by developing Australian drama, giving coverage to less popular sports and restoring local content to regional news bureaus.

in short I think ABC picks too many fights that require it to spend too much on legal advice and representation at the expense of more worthwhile causes.

Regards

S. Pete
 
Stumpy Pete said:
But that’s not my point Chief. I’m happy with how much the ABC gets in fact I’d be happy for it to get a bit more. My concern is that the ABC makes bad judgement about how to capitalise on the fact it doesn’t the commercial pressures and risk that other media entities do. I think that ABC uses its commercial risk free statement to produce controversial content that other outlets don’t make because they would otherwise face commercial repercussions such as sponsors dropping out.

I would much rather they focus their commercial risk free status by developing Australian drama, giving coverage to less popular sports and restoring local content to regional news bureaus.

in short I think ABC picks too many fights that require it to spend too much on legal advice and representation at the expense of more worthwhile causes.

Regards

S. Pete
Click to expand...

You think they have a choice of being sued?

If they settle it's taxpayers money that pays the settlement

Anyone when the pervert loses, he will be made to cover the ABC costs,.so all good
 
Stumpy Pete said:
But that’s not my point Chief. I’m happy with how much the ABC gets in fact I’d be happy for it to get a bit more. My concern is that the ABC makes bad judgement about how to capitalise on the fact it doesn’t the commercial pressures and risk that other media entities do. I think that ABC uses its commercial risk free statement to produce controversial content that other outlets don’t make because they would otherwise face commercial repercussions such as sponsors dropping out.

I would much rather they focus their commercial risk free status by developing Australian drama, giving coverage to less popular sports and restoring local content to regional news bureaus.

in short I think ABC picks too many fights that require it to spend too much on legal advice and representation at the expense of more worthwhile causes.

Regards

S. Pete
Click to expand...
Backpedaling quicker than Scummo this morning, an hour or so a go ABC funding was forcibly taken, now you want them given more.
 
Ned_Flanders said:
You think they have a choice of being sued?

If they settle it's taxpayers money that pays the settlement

Anyone when the pervert loses, he will be made to cover the ABC costs,.so all good
Click to expand...
If they didn't let Louise "seven - nillgan" post her offending story, they wouldn't have picked such an expensive and tedious battle.
 
andrewmillman said:
If they didn't let Louise "seven - nillgan" post her offending story, they wouldn't have picked such an expensive and tedious battle.
Click to expand...

So the ABC should cover up and protect porter? Good call

Thankfully the ABC isn't a fox news at a govts beckon call
 
Ned_Flanders said:
You think they have a choice of being sued?

If they settle it's taxpayers money that pays the settlement

Anyone when the pervert loses, he will be made to cover the ABC costs,.so all good
Click to expand...

Ned,

My point is they make poor choices about content because they undervalue the risk and cost of legal ramifications. I believe these poor choices are due to an under appreciation of their privileged position in terms of a highly certain funding stream.

Regards

S. PETE
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top