FriendlyJordies- and friends

Remove this Banner Ad



John Barilaro using the word "trauma" to describe what he has experienced is a disgrace.

I think you meant 'Consequences', Bruz.


come on mate - give it context.

he said he will reveal his 3rd Referee after lunch once he has time to contact them to confirm its ok. This was agreed by all as fair and reasonable.

If your gonna bash the bloke at least be fair about it rofl.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Festerz

Brownlow Medallist
May 20, 2019
11,311
32,066
///comet.repair.export
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
PAFC Maggies SANFL, ASU Sun Devils
he said he will reveal his 3rd Referee after lunch


The context is that he refused to reveal that third reference, stated it was not relevant and insisted that he did not have to.

It was only AFTER this exchange that he reluctantly agreed:

Labor’s Daniel Mookhey says it is a lawful and relevant question.

“You’re the person who got the job, your referee was highly influential... The final report that was signed makes it very clear that your referees were a very important consideration [in getting the job],”


There's your context for you. And why journalist Sam Maiden highlighted it in her tweet. But hey, keep 'rofling'. :rolleyes:

From her article just posted:

QUESTION BARILARO REFUSED TO ANSWER

Mr Barilaro declined to tell the committee the name of one of his referees for the New York job.

The inquiry has previously heard Mr Barilaro’s references were a significant factor behind the recruitment panel’s decision to hire him.

Two of the referees have been revealed previously: Australian ambassador to the US Arthur Sinodinos, and Regional NSW secretary Gary Barnes.

But Mr Barilaro would not reveal who the third referee was.

“I shouldn’t have to,” he said.

The committee chair warned him he might be compelled to answer the question at a later date.


The members then agreed with Mr Barilaro to give him a chance to discuss the matter with the referee during the lunch break before deciding on whether to answer the question.
 
Last edited:
The context is that he refused to reveal that third reference, stated it was not relevant and insisted that he did not have to.

It was only AFTER this exchange that he reluctantly agreed:

Labor’s Daniel Mookhey says it is a lawful and relevant question.

“You’re the person who got the job, your referee was highly influential... The final report that was signed makes it very clear that your referees were a very important consideration [in getting the job],”


There's your context for you. And why journalist Sam Maiden highlighted it in her tweet.

Actually no, the chair said he did not have to reveal it but that the committee had the right to summons him later to reveal it.

He than agreed after consulting the referee during lunch.
 
come on mate - give it context.

he said he will reveal his 3rd Referee after lunch once he has time to contact them to confirm its ok. This was agreed by all as fair and reasonable.

If your gonna bash the bloke at least be fair about it rofl.

He will reveal his 3rd referee after he has had a chance to call them and get their story straight.

The first two referees were a senior public service official that Bruz appointed and is also caught up in the Maguire/Berejiklian enquiry, and a former LNP senator who was known for having his snout in the trough and has been a recipient of jobs for the boys.

Rotten to the core.
 

fs88

Club Legend
Nov 3, 2011
1,677
3,791
Victoria
AFL Club
West Coast
not sure they are all black and white lol
one of the questions was 'when did you ask him to be your reference?'. 'I don't recall' is a crock. You'll have phone or email records. He could've easily said 'let me check my records and get back to you' but chose to lie through his teeth.

I don't communicate with my job references regularly so I'd be able to find the exact date pretty quickly if I had to scroll through my records.
 
He will reveal his 3rd referee after he has had a chance to call them and get their story straight.

The first two referees were a senior public service official that Bruz appointed and is also caught up in the Maguire/Berejiklian enquiry, and a former LNP senator who was known for having his snout in the trough and has been a recipient of jobs for the boys.

Rotten to the core.

Hey I’m not saying old John isn’t a rat, I’m just saying be accurate to what’s actually occurring in the hearing is all.
 

Festerz

Brownlow Medallist
May 20, 2019
11,311
32,066
///comet.repair.export
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
PAFC Maggies SANFL, ASU Sun Devils
Actually no, the chair said he did not have to reveal it but that the committee had the right to summons him later to reveal it.

He than agreed after consulting the referee during lunch.
Untrue - he made no such agreement.

He only agreed he will consult and will come back after lunch with his decision after the committee chair warned him he might be compelled to answer the question at a later date.

Or has senior NewsCorp political reporter Sam Maiden and state reporter Anton Nilsson got that 'context' wrong as well?


 
Last edited:
Untrue - he made no such agreement.

He only agreed he will consult and will come back after lunch with his decision after the committee chair warned him he might be compelled to answer the question at a later date.

Or has senior NewsCorp political reporter Sam Maiden and state reporter Anton Nilsson got that 'context' wrong as well?



that is exactly what i said?

so i think we agree?

You didn't include this bit in your original post? (you edited it in AFTER i quoted you) (that's all i said) Also the chair is a women, so my bad on that BTW. I think I said "he"
 

Festerz

Brownlow Medallist
May 20, 2019
11,311
32,066
///comet.repair.export
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
PAFC Maggies SANFL, ASU Sun Devils
that is exactly what i said?

so i think we agree?

You didn't include this bit in your original post? (you edited it in AFTER i quoted you) (that's all i said) Also the chair is a women, so my bad on that BTW. I think I said "he"
FFS.

Yes I edited it - not by removing anything but by adding to it. Specifically to directly cut and paste the full reporting from the the source and the comments they used. For accuracy and context and to refute your narrative.

Given you attacked me for not understanding the 'context' with this comment:

come on mate - give it context.

You wanted context - you got context. Word for word in sequence from the journalists present. With direct comments from the source and a link to support it.

not sure wtf your issue with that is.
 
FFS.

Yes I edited it - not by removing anything but by adding to it. Specifically to directly cut and paste the full reporting from the the source and the comments they used. For accuracy and context and to refute your narrative.

Given you attacked me for not understanding the 'context' with this comment:



You wanted context - you got context. Word for word in sequence from the journalists present. With direct comments from the source and a link to support it.

not sure wtf your issue with that is.

How have i attacked you? Jesus.

All i said was you need to give the entire context of the discussion to what went on in the hearing. Which you have now to which I agree with you.

Your first post made zero mention of the fact the chair of the hearing said he was not obligated to provide the 3rd referee, however in the future they may summons him to reveal it.

Not sure why you are getting so offended rofl. You have provided the required context that was missing, so the case is closed.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Festerz

Brownlow Medallist
May 20, 2019
11,311
32,066
///comet.repair.export
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
PAFC Maggies SANFL, ASU Sun Devils
"I'm the victim, not the perpetrator"
And..

"I went through as Joe Citizen .. this was not a job for the boys it was not a captain's pick. I went through an independent process and I got the job"

What did I do wrong? I got offered a job. I accepted a job


Totally deluded.
 
May 13, 2008
36,201
57,585
Melbourne
AFL Club
Hawthorn
And..

"I went through as Joe Citizen .. this was not a job for the boys it was not a captain's pick. I went through an independent process and I got the job"

What did I do wrong? I got offered a job. I accepted a job


Totally deluded.
Are we completely overlooking the fact someone else had already been appointed for the job before Bruz "applied" now?
 
Two of Bruz's three reference both appeared before ICAC due to involvement with Australian Water Holdings, while the other appeared before ICAC for the Gladbag case.

Their experience will come in handy.
 
was anyone else listening when the live stream feed bugged out and when to a reporters attempts to record a news piece?

wtf
 

Fire

Brownlow Medallist
Mar 12, 2003
11,361
5,953
New York
AFL Club
North Melbourne
FFS.

Yes I edited it - not by removing anything but by adding to it. Specifically to directly cut and paste the full reporting from the the source and the comments they used. For accuracy and context and to refute your narrative.

Given you attacked me for not understanding the 'context' with this comment:



You wanted context - you got context. Word for word in sequence from the journalists present. With direct comments from the source and a link to support it.

not sure wtf your issue with that is.
Dude, the original context was correct. You're the one innacuratley framing events and have been caught out for it. Either admit you got it wrong or simply stop replying about it. This is just pathetic.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back