- Oct 20, 2014
- 18,429
- 19,570
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- Liverpool
Where is the evidence?The 'truth' came out in the senate investigation. Brandis is a liar.
No right of left in it.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Weekly Prize - Join Any Time - Tip Round 9
The Golden Ticket - MCG and Marvel Medallion Club tickets and Corporate Box tickets at the Gabba, MCG and Marvel.
Where is the evidence?The 'truth' came out in the senate investigation. Brandis is a liar.
No right of left in it.
Where is the evidence?
Did the enquiry state that he lied?Oh come on! You are full of comment but clearly didnt listen to the testimony given at the enquiry. It was clear Brandis lied about the use of the SG advice.
Brandis got some advice, but then rewrote the bill (about marriage equality & citizenship, also the attempt to gag the SG from giving advice direct to members except through the AG) to the parliament & said he had discussed that with the SG. He clearly did not discuss the rewritten bill which was different to the information the SG was asked about.
That is a lie. Brandis is misusing the AG advice.
Evidence.
Did the enquiry state that he lied?
Did the enquiry say he lied? It isn't a ******* hard question.Its an unparliamentary word. & its not an enquiry on who lied.
However I will state that you are lazy & just making side comment like you do does not pass as discussion.
If you dont care about what was said. Or about the consequences of Brandis actions, then dont engage in the thread.
Did the enquiry say he lied? It isn't a ******* hard question.
You mean the CLP loaded enquiry?Did the enquiry state that he lied?
Some people have better or more important things to do like golf, work and/or family commitments. I asked for proof and nothing was provided. This is an issue that seems to be running down party lines as to who was in the wrong. If you can't provide any evidence then it is obvious that the blame lays with the SG or both of them at the very least.You mean the CLP loaded enquiry?
They weren't really listening to answers they were more concerned about the various definitions of 'consult' as proffered by Baldy Brandis.
Why do you not fully inform yourself and watch these enquires so that you make up your own mind and not be influenced by your own bias and media reports?
Nah, you are game playing. Not sure you want proof if playing golf is more important.Some people have better or more important things to do like golf, work and/or family commitments. I asked for proof and nothing was provided. This is an issue that seems to be running down party lines as to who was in the wrong. If you can't provide any evidence then it is obvious that the blame lays with the SG or both of them at the very least.
Please explain the logic behind this nonsense?Some people have better or more important things to do like golf, work and/or family commitments. I asked for proof and nothing was provided. This is an issue that seems to be running down party lines as to who was in the wrong. If you can't provide any evidence then it is obvious that the blame lays with the SG or both of them at the very least.
Since you muppets have no evidence that the AG lied, the SG must be wrong. He resigned because he is a pussy. I don't know why I tried to concede that they both might be in the wrong. The evidence must clearly contradict this as I am still waiting.Please explain the logic behind this nonsense?
Without evidence to the contrary, my team is right?
If there's no evidence, then surely either side could be to blame.
Since you have no evidence the SG lied, the AG must be wrong? Am I doing this right?Since you muppets have no evidence that the AG lied, the SG must be wrong. He resigned because he is a pussy. I don't know why I tried to concede that they both might be in the wrong. The evidence must clearly contradict this as I am still waiting.
Okay, can you supply positive proof that Brandis is telling the truth?Since you muppets have no evidence that the AG lied, the SG must be wrong. He resigned because he is a pussy. I don't know why I tried to concede that they both might be in the wrong. The evidence must clearly contradict this as I am still waiting.
No. Although, if you choose to make accusations against someone, you need to be able to prove it.Okay, can you supply positive proof that Brandis is telling the truth?
But weren't you implying that it was honest George that was the truthful one and the SG was lying?No. Although, if you choose to make accusations against someone, you need to be able to prove it.
Gough, I never thought that Gillard actually did anything wrong. I am sure that I posted that at the time. I am pretty sure that I said that I hope that she would be guilty of criminal behaviour though!Just like Gillard, and the AWU hey? Brandis is a liar who misled Parliament.
Since you muppets have no evidence that the AG lied, the SG must be wrong. He resigned because he is a pussy. I don't know why I tried to concede that they both might be in the wrong. The evidence must clearly contradict this as I am still waiting.
The behaviour by Liberal Party members when questioning Gleeson and Triggs was disgraceful and says more about them than it does about Gleeson or Triggs. Just childish behaviour from people who are supposed to hold a position of authority.The trouble with Senate Inquiries like this one is that one side of the panel makes one report and the other makes a dissenting report. There is no real fact finding in these matters, such as the interpretation on them by both sides.
There does seem to be an issue in how the hearings were conducted, whereby Brandis was rightfully given respect by all panel members whereas Gleeson was interrupted and haranagued throughout. So there are questions as to the conduct of the actual proceedings themselves.
For all we know either party or both are wrong - that cannot be established under the process that has been undertaken thus far.
The behaviour by Liberal Party members when questioning Gleeson and Triggs was disgraceful and says more about them than it does about Gleeson or Triggs. Just childish behaviour from people who are supposed to hold a position of authority.
Since you muppets have no evidence that the AG lied, the SG must be wrong. He resigned because he is a pussy. I don't know why I tried to concede that they both might be in the wrong. The evidence must clearly contradict this as I am still waiting.
Haha. Just like Chief's gutfeel would of put Gable Tostee in prison.why do anyone need evidence? some times you just need to listen to your gut. It's plain and obvious.
Brandis is obviously lying one this one. Yup there is no direct evidence other than the SG word. However Brandis track record.
It was deliberate but not sure it was cool and calm. Reynolds and the guy on the left (can't recall his name) was petulant and disruptive, McDonald was his usual self so I would call that childish.There was nothing childish about it.
It was a deliberate, cool, calm and collected attack, orchestrated and led by MacDonald, the coalition's Chief Attack Pig.
The aim was to disrupt the proceedings in order to prevent the messages of Gleeson and Trigg being heard.