First Dog socks now in stock at the Crikey Emporium!
A cautionary tale…
Utegate: Rudd orders full investigation
|
Kevin Rudd has rejected Coalition allegations of impropriety and repeated that there has been no representations from him or his office regarding donor John Grant, in a press conference in Canberra this evening. Rudd told Parliament two weeks ago that no representations had been made by him or his office. Malcolm Turnbull today demanded Rudd and Treasurer Wayne Swan resign for misleading the Parliament. It follows a remarkable Senate inquiry this afternoon. In scenes that could have been lifted from a courtroom drama, Treasury official Godwin Grech, who has worked on the OzCar proposal since its inception, stated that he had known Grant was no “normal constituent” when he was asked by Wayne Swan’s office to contact him, and that he had put more effort into dealing with Grant than he had with a car dealer referred by Swan’s office from Nationals MP Kay Hull, although their circumstances were different. Grech also said he thought, but couldn’t be sure, that the first referral of the matter had been from the Prime Minister’s Office. However, when chief Opposition inquisitor Eric Abetz, surprisingly patient and polite, tried to ask Grech whether it was Prime Ministerial staff member Andrew Charlton (economist and Ozonomics author, who says he was confronted by Malcolm Turnbull about the matter on Wednesday night) who made the representation, he was stymied both by Grech’s manager, David Martine, who insisted on answering the question and saying no contact had been received from Charlton, and Labor senators. A visibly highly-stressed Grech was eventually asked to answer the question, but deferred to his manager. Subsequently, News Ltd’s Steve Lewis contacted the Prime Minister’s Office at 4.30 this afternoon to advise News Ltd would tomorrow be publishing an email from Charlton to Grech on 19 February which asked Grech to assist Grant. Rudd has advised that neither PM&C nor Treasury can find any trace of the dispatch or receipt of the email. Grech, too, said he didn’t have any email. The Prime Minister has also requested that the Auditor-General conduct a full investigation by the end of July. The John Grant issue has now developed into a mini-crisis for Rudd, who if in the clear himself faces criticism that the Treasurer was over-zealous in looking after Grant. Subsequently, News Ltd’s Steve Lewis contacted the Prime Minister’s Office at 4.30 this afternoon to advise News Ltd would tomorrow be publishing an email from Charlton to Grech on 19 February which asked Grech to assist Grant. Rudd has advised that neither PM&C nor Treasury can find any trace of the dispatch or receipt of the email. Grech, too, said he didn’t have any email. The Prime Minister has also requested that the Auditor-General had been requested to conduct a full investigation by the end of July. The John Grant issue has now developed into a mini-crisis for Rudd, who if in the clear himself faces criticism that the Treasurer was over-zealous in looking after Grant. The broader context for such criticism is, of course, that all ministers in all governments favour government-linked constituents over those linked to the Opposition and always have. If Swan has encouraged his Department to act vigorously in Grant’s favour, he has done no more than what most ministers have done in the past for favoured constituents. However, the misleading of Parliament is a different and altogether more serious matter, and, at least in regard to Swan, has some way to play out yet. And Godwin Grech, a diligent and experienced public servant, appears to have been caught up in a scandal simply for doing his job. The Prime Minister tonight guaranteed Grech’s job position was safe, despite making it clear he thought he was very wrong. Not a good position for any public servant to be in. |
|
|
46 Comments
Try a bit of “Statement Validity Analysis” on Grech and you’ll find that he does believe there was an email.
Rudd’s gone.
Grech does “believe”, but the email is not on his computer. If this is so after the server has been checked, it never was on his computers, as servers keep copies for a very long time. As the supposed email “exists” in print form, that might be what he saw.
No one with brains uses fake emails, because they are almost impossible to erase, are easily traced, so confirmation of their existence (or lack of it) & source is easy. Once the Auditor Gen gets authority in writing, finding out if it originated from a computer using Parliamentary servers - and if so from whose to whose - is a fairly simple matter. If it’s not on those servers, it’s certainly fake. That’s where the real fun starts.
Guess which political party has a track record of idiots sending fake emails, fake flyers etc? Remember the couple of Victorian Libs who did it not so long ago? SA Liberal Martin Hamilton-Smith who faked emails re Mike Rann? Jackie Kelly’s ever so clever husband and his fake flyers?
Nor has the MSM been innocent of faking to create a story. Which “current affairs” anchor got the boot for doing it?
PS: The car dealer’s story “Canberra chat no longer safe: John Grant” is at http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25662824-5013871,00.html
“Mr Grant said he would have been happy to attend yesterday’s Senate committee inquiry into his access to the Rudd Government’s $2 billion car dealer assistance fund, but had not been invited.
“I wish they had invited me so I could have sorted things out but they didn’t,” he said. “
Reading more of today’s coverage, it may be the case that the fake email was created to set in train precisely the chain of events it did to embarrass the government.
It depends!
The questions we need are:-
How is Charlton’s email setup to send and receive emails?
How is Grech email setup to send and receive emails?
If Charlton had direct access to the internet and used Microsoft Outlook to send the disputed email to Grech then there will be no server record and emails are easily erased from a computer using Outlook.
All you have to do is follow 3 simple steps:-
1) delete the email from you Sent box;
2) empty your Deleted Email box; and
3) Run Compact Now.
Anyone with malicious intent to hide/dispute an email can do this in seconds if they use Outlook as their email program.
So, if the above is the case and the PM is only looking at Charlton’s computer then, his statement that there is noting there would be correct even though the email was sent.
On Grech’s side - I suspect that he is more likely to be accessing email through a server and there would be backups but if he also has direct access to the internet then his received copy can be erased as simply as I have explained above.
Lets all keep an open mind until we get the details of how Charlton’s and Grech’s computers were setup to send and receive emails then we can have some fact worth speculating on.
A surreal synthesis of ocker matesucking and the Austro-Hungarian empire. Franz Kafka has metamorphed into a contorted, suffering Treasury official. Godwin Grech, dwarfed by his Keeper, opens his mouth to answer questions only to be cut off by his minder. In the next Hollowman series let’s have Woody Allen as Godwin and Stuart Littlemore as Keeper.
Oh yes, and let’s have Sir Les Patterson as the car-dealer John Commonwealth Grant.
re: HOOPS
It is a bit harder than that to remove an email. Emails do not travel directly from computer to computer.
They travel via mail servers. Mail servers keep evidence of an email’s transmission (to make sure they don’t lose any), and depending on the policies set in place, keep full copies of every email transmitted (even those that have been “deleted”).
Quite correct, Adam, as many who thought their emails had disappeared later discovered to their cost (literally).
However, you have to ask “Who is the intended victim?” especially after Malcolm’s performance at the Midwinter Ball: http://www.theage.com.au/national/turnbull-offers-a-word-to-the-wise-20090619-cr9o.html Surely anyone who knew anything about computers, and about Kevin Rudd when he was Dr Death to Joh’s old Qld Public Service of the “Green & Gold Pass” era, would expect the computers to be checked thoroughly, Rudd to be very careful what he said and how he said it, and then bring on the heavy artillery - in this case, the Auditor General.
So the real victim may be Turnbull who, instead of confining his remarks to the Floor of Parliament, with its privilege, has typically shot his mouth off & bullied his target in public, including accusing Dr Charlton of lying while surrounded by others who could have heard - I suspect a few mobile phone efforts might soon surface.
PS,
Print Email Share Add to My Stories
Government slams ‘false’ OzCar email
Posted 4 hours 53 minutes ago
Updated 45 minutes ago
Mr Rudd has repeatedly denied making representations on behalf of Mr Grant
Mr Rudd has repeatedly denied making representations on behalf of Mr Grant (AAP: Alan Porritt)
* Video: Email a fake: PM (ABC News)
* Video: Rudd denies OzCar allegations (ABC News)
* Video: PM launches investigation into Ozcar claims (Lateline)
* Video: Lindsay, Abbott debate the week in politics (Lateline)
* Audio: Prime Minister and Treasurer accused of misleading Parliament (PM)
* Related Story: PM stands by OzCar denial
The Federal Government has denounced as a fake an email at the centre of accusations by Opposition Leader Malcolm Turnbull that Prime Minister Kevin Rudd misled Parliament.
News Limited papers have published the email in question, which allegedly confirms Mr Rudd gave Queensland car dealership John Grant Motors special treatment.
John Grant is Mr Rudd’s neighbour and supplied him with a free car, which Mr Rudd declared to Parliament and uses in his electorate.
Mr Rudd has repeatedly denied making representations on behalf of Mr Grant, but yesterday a Treasury official claimed the contrary.
PS: The ABC’s “Government slams ‘false’ OzCar email” http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/06/20/2603662.htm cites Lindsay Tanner:
“‘He’s [Mr Turnbull’s] been telling journalists for weeks that he’s got a copy of an email purportedly from the Prime Minister’s office to the Treasury officials involved,’ he said.
‘We believe after an exhaustive search through all the systems, the hard drives, everything there, the backups, that no such email genuinely exists, and he’s been prepared to make these extreme accusations on the basis of no substantive evidence.
‘It’s a character issue about Malcolm Turnbull now.’”
MODERATOR: This contains a considerable amount that didnt show on the panel as I typed it. Mine starts with PS. No idea how the rest got there.
If it’s a fake email (it may well be) how do explain this
“Abetz tried to ask Grech whether it was Prime Ministerial staff member Andrew Charlton who made the representation, he was stymied both by Grech’s manager, David Martine and Labor senators.
A visibly highly-stressed Grech was eventually asked to answer the question, but deferred to his manager.”?
Sounds like there was an email. And Labor has been having a few problems of staff leaks of late (Defense Minister anyone?) So I’m betting it’s real.
Sounds more like SA’s “Scientology” email, which was a fake, and the 2007 Lindsay electorate “flyer” just before Election 07, faked & distributed by Jacki Kelly’s husband & a friend. Both Liberal efforts, Joel B1, and both fakes.
Yes, it’s true that the Liberals do seem a bit nuts re fake evidence.
On the other hand Rudd is just as well known for denying and having to admit later when real evidence is provided.
So, it’ll be a fun few weeks for observers. (Although let’s face it, the AG is never going to find any “smoking” email)
“Rudd is just as well known for denying and having to admit later when real evidence is provided.”
Please provide some examples!
Well for a start, without really trying, abusing persons on RAAF plane and anzac service change.
BTW totally sick of “please explain?” statements from people who really should know better. It’s just boring.
Sorry that I don’t know better, if I’m one of those who should.
But please, really make an effort, provide every example you can of Rudd having to back down on a factual claim.
So Joel you think Rudd has the Feds in his back pocket as well as the Auditor General, entire Public Service…give me a break…by ordering these investigations he has a hell ava lot to lose, in fact everything if an email is found on the computers on the departments concerned. The Leader of the Opposition came out swinging, all barrels blazing but I suspect he has fallen into his own big hole. That fool Sen Abetz said he was referring to an email, so he knew about it, you think he had that knowledge and Turnbull didn’t. This morning Turnbull said he had never seen an email, didnt know its exact contents…pigs will bloody fly. Abbott last night practically said the email had been somehow erased forever. It cant be, how does he think the law catch perverts with kiddie porn on their hard drives. IF ITS THERE MATE IT WILL BE FOUND. Something stinks about this email and let me throw this into the pot, where are the 2 loud mouths in the Liberal Party Hockey and Pyne? Nota word, not a sqeak from them. Who have the most to gain if GTurnbull ends up in the doo doo? Ask some questions of motives. And lets not forget the poor bumbling, scared looking official who thought he knew something but he may not know as he may be wrong. Whats his game/ Why no eye contact the whole time with Abetz? There is a great deal more in this yet. I remember the dirty tricks brigade in the Liberal Party pre election 2007 in partenership with the news Ltd stable led by well guess who/ The Australian and the Telegraph. Heads will roll at the end of this and Im not sure it will be those of whom the original bullets were fired.
Whats your point Mitchell? if you have something to say spit it out. Innuendo is a dirty word.
Look fellow bloggers.
What I post might be unreasoned but it is balanced.
What most of you post is reasoned but unbalanced.
Don’t make me your “whipping boy”. Rudd is a moderate to OK politician whose best attribute so far seems to be that he’s not John Howard.
He is not god. The Labor Party is not heaven.
I’m off now, you can all circle w*nk to your hearts content knowing that no-one else is watching.
I agree Joel - you’re reasonably unbalanced. Or maybe you are balancing unreasonably? Whatever it is, no-one gives a toss about your masturbation fantasies.
It is becoming clearer that the real crisis centres on Turnbull. Hawking a fake document is even worse than making pompous pronouncements that the “Prime Minister must resign”. What we are seeing here are the same shitty tactics that he used as a corporate infighter. It is Turnbull who should be forced out, not Rudd.
David1, I am not a Rudd-watcher. I thought I might learn something.
Mitchell, perhaps learn how to phrase a question or a comment, even kick my arse, but as I said innuendo is a sly little way of saying something when you are not saying it…dont have a lend of me please, I get enough of that 8 to 5 mon to fri from the public. Rudd has come back with very good responses to the allegations which frankly if true could bring him down, which is what Turnbull is trying to do. As the day gets longer and the facts get perused, its Turnbull who needs to start providing answers. Also that Treasury whistle blower, the more I see that q and a between him and Abetz the stronger the stench becomes, he is too uncomfortable to be true. This is a senior guy with 20 years in the Dept. he is no stranger to hard questions, he had Sen Faulknor to contend with. Best he be very sure of his ground, it appears the finance minister is not at all convinced with his ‘performance’, hope Mr Godwin Grech is very sure about his emails, they are going to get the 3rd degree, you bet ya.
This is only starting people and I repeat my earlier contention, where are the big mouths of the Liberal Opposition, silence. I wonder who is feeding who, for what reason?????????
DAVID SANDERSON
I intended to comment in reply to Joel
Thanks for saving me time!
A rhetorical question.
After “Children Overboard”, Mandhu Habib Affair and the very suspect destruction of our last defence minister, ….and now this fake e-mail (would Rudd really be reckless and stupid enough to throw away his political career over this?), can anyone doubt that the Liberal Party has many members of the public service (including the defence force), in their pocket, even when they are in opposition?
Insiders carried profound footage this morning - very probative.
That fact Grech was prevented answering whether Mr Grant had been raised with him by Dr Andrew Charlton of the Prime Minister’s Office looks very bad.
It is a simple matter for Grech to be shown the text of the email terms if not the original and see if that “refreshes” his memory in a legal sense.
Certainly his recollection is that PMO contacted him, and he was prevented from responding about Charlton.
None of this turns on the email existing (anymore?) or not, really. What it turns on is whether in fact in some way or other Charlton or other PMO officer contacted Grech contrary to assurances by Rudd.
Even then Rudd is not “gone” because he most likely didn’t “deliberately mislead parliament” to quote Turnbull. But Rudd will have to grovel badly and that will throw a big chunk of his majority away in the polls in the context of all this early election talk. Very inconvenient one might think, and cause for quite some schadenfraude (spelling?) for such as senator Brown himself threatened (if not serious risk of) political termination recently.
As blogged alot this morning, Rudd’s quavering on camera 8.30 pm Fri night abc tv news update was alot different to the smooth (edited?) piece that ran on abc radio news shows next morning. Hope ABC are playing it straight here. Insiders was staunch today I thought.
LOakes went for Swan but methinks Charlton will hide behind staffer immunity and never front media or estimates. More’s the pity. Grech should just tell the truth. The country needs to expose the ALP mates political culture - everywhere. And the Coalition are no better either (AWB anyone?).
…………………….
As for the technology around emails my feeling as amateur, is the IP addresses (DNA of each computer) will be with the ISP even if deleted from hard drives by say Tracks Eraser Pro or similar - refer Majorgeeks website for instance. But then a really good geek can use an IP proxy to lay a false trail. And a really good geek can remotely get into one’s email ….. and delete a select 3 months worth (as happened to me recently, though adding a wireless password obviously helped fix that - ouch).
Way back in web pre history (2003-4) I circulated a geek report to the Australian political community, including then ALP opposition on how malware (still a fairly foreign concept) could hijack and zombify remote computers. It was taken with a grain of salt no doubt. But I thought it was essential democracy work to spread the word at the height of the security paradigm under John Howard pseudo fascist tendencies.
As to the civilised questioning by Senator Eric Abetz, for those not of a legal background, it’s a well worn path of effective barristers to go quietly when the evidence is all the hammer needed.
If the evidence is big and impacting you don’t want the theatrics of the conduit to interfere with the reception. And Godwin Grech’s evidence is way up there as impacting.
It all calls up for me the political culture of ex minister Mike Kaiser back to 1999 or so when he was forced to resign after cooking the electioneering paperwork in some way. That bespeaks a corrupt political culture in the Qld ALP, and that’s effectively what is alleged via the Grech evidence.
As they say in the classics - stay tuned ….
Good thread. Probably the first since the new Crikey……….
[edited].
I particularly enjoyed Frank Campbell’s and Tom McLoughlin’s contributions. Kudos
The treatment of Grech by his department head and Labor heavies is a disgrace and indicative of a broader more serious problem. It stands in stark relief especially because Abetz’s patience!
Finding the smoking fax is starting to look peripheral. What IS glaringly obvious is that as local MPs the PM and Treasurer are a couple of duds. Their Monty Python attempt to bail out a used car dealer who lives in the PM’s electorate involved calling on their ministerial and electorate staff as well as senior bureacrats to achieve nil, zilch, zip! As Swanee says “If you look at the emails that are on the public record, what you can see is Mr Grant didn’t receive any assistance from OzCar or Ford Credit. He didn’t receive any assistance at all”. WTF and a flaming waste of time and taxpayer dollars thanks to the ditzying PM and his Treasurer who really do need to explain why a used car dealer operating a business outside of both their electorates severely consumed their professional and working time and that of too many public servants. Their constituents must be mightily p*ssed off to think one man’s business took perceived precedence over their health, education, employment et al problems in what the PM calls ‘tough times”.
Rudd’s “deadline” approach this morning is brilliant. There is no basis whatsoever to demand that Turnbull produce the email - particularly if the Feds are investigating, but it has taken off, and distracted the media from Wayne Swan, who should be in the gun.
There are two core theories as to what happened and variations thereof.
One is that Rudd was mis-advised when he initially denied to Parliament that his office had made representations, and that having subsequently discovered that, decided to cover it up (alternatively, it is conceivable that one of his staff members is doing this without his knowledge). That would require deletion of the email in some unusual and virtually impossible way from the PM&C servers (originator) and Treasury servers (recipient). It would require the cooperation of Treasury officials and maybe PM&C officials, although that is less clear. It would be a massive cover-up involving politicians, staff and public servants, unprecedented in Australian history, all the more so for being over something so trivial.
A variation is that Rudd and/or his staff are too dumb to know that just because you delete an email from your Deleted Items or use hotmail, it won’t stop it being found, or that someone who would have needed to be involved in the cover-up, like Godwin Grech, would break.
Either way, the email will be come to light and Rudd will either have to resign or will be substantially damaged.
Second theory is that the Coalition is relying on a fake email for the basis of its attack on Rudd, and that, while they had Swan in their sights, they overreached on the basis of the email and went for Rudd too. Someone could have constructed the email for the purposes of mischief, or with the intent of damaging either the Government or the Opposition, on the same basis that someone - unclear who - faked out SA Liberal Martin Hamilton-Smith, who was so badly-damaged when he relied on a faked email to attack Mike Rann he is about to lose his leadership. The faked email was given either to the Coalition or the press or both.
The problem with that is that Godwin Grech thinks he may have been contacted by the PMO, and clearly Labor senators and Grech’s boss wanted to stop him from saying who it was - clearly the answer was going to be Andrew Charlton. So this theory relies on Grech mis-remembering.
There is a variant theory, the subject of a rumour going around today, that Grech may have retained a copy of the email despite deleting it, and leaked it. I don’t suggest this is the case at all - it is pure speculation and not meant to reflect on the man in any way. It doesn’t accord with the fact that, while probably ruining his career by being truthful on Friday afternoon, he specifically said he didn’t have the email, and told Steve Lewis that on Thursday night as well. Grech’s evidence in fact fits none of the theories.
In any event, if the email is a fake, Turnbull, even if he was not responsible for inventing the email, is seriously damaged.
Wayne Swan, meanwhile, is semantically correct when he says he didn’t mislead Parliament but he gave an impression wholly at odds with reality, and over a trivial matter. His judgment must be questioned.
Why would Rudd call the AFP in so quickly if he was in it?
I dont share Tom McLoughlan’s cosy support of Sen Abetz. I have observed the said senator examining and cross examining and heard and seen his performances in the Senate. He may well be a barrister, so that doesn’t give him divine rights. He appeared to be a person who knew a hellava lot more about the email content, than he was letting on. There are varying degrees of excellence in barristers performances, not being one I dont have any alegiance to the profession and I regard Abetz as a smart arse, coniving bully. One doesn’t have to yell and shout to bully another. I go back to a previous statement of mine, the relationship between Abetz and Grech appeared very odd. Not fear, not stood over just a strange almost resigned acceptance of the questions and I leave it there. One point I do agree with Tom on, Mr Grech’s career is stuffed.
Incidently Chris Johnson your remarks…”explain why a used car dealer operating a business outside of both their electorates severely consumed their professional and working time and that of too many public servants.
As you appear to know so much, you should know Mr Rudd has said he had NO dealings with grant. Thats no as in none. As usual your political bias gets in the way of your ability to be rational. My observations and the lengthy explanations given by both the PM and Treasurer indicate Mr Swan used the normal channels and had nothing personal to do with the application. If you know otherwise produce the evidence, will be useful to the Feds.
David1 - So who do you think raised John Grant’s issue with Ozcar, Ford and the Treasurer?. If it wasn’t Grant’s local member (the PM) and it wasn’t Graham Perrett the federal member for the electorate in which Grant’s business is registered (in fact Perrett mentions everyone on the Magic Mile other than Grant in his second reading of the Car Dealership Financing Guarantee Appropriation Bill 2009) then it must have been Swan. Why would Swan represent another MP’s constituent ? There are quite defined lines of member and ministerial representation to prevent individuals from using several MPs to lobby their issue. Eventually Grant whoever he approached would end up back with the MP who represents him personally or his business. Perrett or Rudd…take your pick.
ummm have I missed something here, dont think so. Swan has readily made it very clear his part in the handing on of grants application, that is not in dispute. Well by Mr Johnson, because he uses the time honoured Liberal diversion of, throw as much into the mix as possible, try and confuse so noone knows exactly what they are saying. Not this time buddy. Swan has been very clear thus far about his dealings and until there is some proof of wrong doing, so far there is none, just mouthing and broad accusations, I see fat boy Hockey open his big yappa this morning. He said nothing but had to make a noise as leading contender for Turnbulls job. I said earlier Mr Johnson if you have any information to prove wrong doing by either Kevin Rudd or Mr Swan then you are duty bound to give such information to the Federal Police. So far you appear to have as much as Turnbull, a big zero. Unless you care to produce anything new, frankly you seem to have caught the Abetz disease, boring and bullyish. Nothing new in the Liberal camp. Sleaze, slur, dirty tricks, we have been down that road, it wont wash this time.
This whole episode is hard to understand.
Having worked in a Government department IT section, I believe that deleting emails without trace would be extremely difficult. Even if you were sufficiently knowledgeable, with the forensic processes available today, the email, even if somehow erased would eventually be detected. Rudd would know this, so he must be very sure of his ground before setting the hounds baying.
However, creating a word processor copy looking identical to a genuine email would be very easy.
Just for one moment consider if someone quietly dropped a printout of this supposedly genuine email on Mr Grech’s desk. Shortly after, the email from the Treasurers office, arrives in Mr Grech’s inbox. Mr Grech sees a printout of an email from the “Prime Ministers” office and an email from the Treasurers staff in his inbox. This immediately appears a significant event, to the extent that it would be easy to form, “the impression (Mr Grant) wasn’t your average constituent” and the Treasurer’s staff had “made it clear (Mr Grant) was an associate of some type with the Treasurer”.
Is it surprising in those circumstances that it would be given a high priority, probably not. Is it surprising that some enterprising Treasury Official might want to advertise the fact that they had provided such good service, probably not.
Four months later if you were then asked by a reporter if you could verify the contents of an email from the PM’s department. Would it not be perfectly reasonable to think there had been such an email, after all, you saw the printout, furthermore when you searched and couldn’t find it, might you not become a little unsure. Convinced that you had seen it, unwilling to refute it on oath, but unable to find it. Sounds too far fetched, maybe not. Now who would have the most to gain from this?
Can we call on Inspector Clouseau or Ms Marple to fathom whether our PM and his Treasurer have conned the Australian public along with Opposition leader Malcolm Turnbull? After the two political parties joined in a Guantanomo-style interrogation of an Aussie public servant who’s life and career no doubt have been shaken to the core (Eric Abetz: Good on you Godwin good on you!! ) there’s few who’d empathise with a government of such tyrannical proportions. We’ve turned into a sick society when human meltdown is part of agenda-driven government. Even worse we televise human misery and some media get a buzz out of it.
Interesting, now Chris Johnson changes tack and goes into bat for the public servant. In an earlier composition, Mr Johnson was blatantly applauding Sen Abetz for his tact and wonderful court room style questioning. NOW he joined in a Guantunomo-style interrogation of the treasury person Godwin. Come on Chris one or the other? Your mates in the Liberal Party are the masters of the shifty attitudes, you do it well yourself. Things not looking good for the Libs and in tonights ABC News Turnbull has started to look like a man getting cornered. His story keeps changing.
Tonight he said he does not have the email, will neither confirm nor deny he has seen it. So while he is co operating with the Federal Police, he will do so without an email he is basing his accusations on.
Checking back on some of his earlier statements I found this on the ABC NEWS web site…He (Mr Turnbull) says he has never claimed to have a copy of the document, which he says shows Mr Rudd lobbied for his friend.
Mr Turnbull is refusing to say if anyone in the Liberal Party has ever seen the actual email.
Ok he does not have it but he can quote liberally from it and refuses to say if in fact anyone in the Liberal Party has seen it. Oh really? it appeared at the Senate enquiry on Friday Sen Abetz knew damn well what was in it and Sen Joyce, but he can be discounted as a fool. Turnbull knows he is in deep shite and the game now is evasion, his demeanor tonight was of a mean man, raised voice and looking rattled. There will be a couple of Costello men chuckling with glee
Call me obtuse but I fail to see how and why this is a major issue. My prediction is that in three months time all the key players will still be in their current positions and this matter will be largely forgotten. Turnbull will have a lingering smell around him over the perception that he relied on a false document but otherwise John Grant’s view that it is a storm in a tea cup will be the general consensus.
This matter is a textbook example of an issue that stirs up insiders and wonderfully concentrates their minds but is of no concern to the broader population.
Here here to David -
Aren’t there more important things to take up political headlines?
If the U.S. of A. had an issue similar to our ute, do you think their press would refer to it as Pick Up Gate?
RE Adam Dunsford Posted Saturday, 20 June 2009 at 10:16 am
Adam Dunsford’s comments are applicable only if there is an internal Local Area Network Mail Server involved at either end of the email chain BUT my comment that it is very easy to remove an email if both sending and receiving computers have direct access to the internet and they both use Microsoft Outlook STANDS 100% CORRECT. In the case of direct access computers above, there will be traces of emails on the respective ISP’s servers but these are not backed up - just ask your ISP - especially if days have passed.
So, as I said in my posting, lets all keep an open mind until we get the details of how Charlton’s and Grech’s computers were setup to send and receive emails then and only then will we have fact worth speculating on by people who know what they are talking about.
Rudd and Swan are GUILTY.
This issue is NOT about an email, it is about the fraud on seret backroom deals and favours and liars covering their ar*ces.
Labour and Kevin ‘bully’ Rude’s private paid PR spin team can put all the smokes and screen diversion tricks up, coz Kevin ‘BULLY’ RUDE knows he is a goner and his reptutation shot…. he cried communist red tears last night, coz his globalist dream of being head of the United Nations Security Council is slippin away
Rude and his Canberra flat mate of 10 years aka ‘Australian Treasurer’ Wayne Swan are in deep deep trouble over a scandal of favours for business dealings that could see both of them SACKED from Parliament, it has been labled as ‘Utegate’.
In Kevin Rudd’s bid to dodge fire, deflect and confuse the media reporting on the truth, he is firing furfy’s back at the main accuser Turnbull and getting his team to throw curve balls that looks like keystone cops with contradictory statements of fact and fiction.
One of them MUST go - Kevin Rudd or Wayne Swan.
It may be a dead swan song final curtain call to take the fall for his Kevin bloody Rude.
This is the Scandal of the Century as it involes LIES, DECEPTION, COVER UPS, FRAUD and PROPAGANDA SPIN at its Ruddy Best.
Read my post (the first to be posted Sunday, 21 June) above.
After today’s events I feel somewhat vindicated.
Joe Hockey to make his move on Turnbull in the not-too-distant future.
Fair comment Spike, but the AFP warrant and search of GG’s ‘puter still seems equivocal to me. Who sent it to him? Who created it? How come it came from Treasury (?) and yet we were assured even a deleted version would have already been found?
Was it a WP version only? Or maybe Gmail or such like? I give up.
GG needs a good lawyer pronto, that’s for sure. And said (!) lawyer present at any interviews with the AFP too I would say.
As Mark Riley said on 7 on Sunday night news - who ever faked this email ‘is going to gaol’. That’s grim.
Well Tom, I believe that whomever actually physically sent that e-mail would have done it on someone else’s behalf. If Joe Hockey is responsible he will have covered his tracks and someone else will take the fall for him. Look at Howard’s career to see many examples of this sort of thing.
Kevin Rude was showing his desparation last night attemptting to rid focus from himself over the relationship and favours for his car dealer mate/next door neighbour Mr Grant, and to protect his politician 2IC Wayne Swan from the firing line, Rude took an unusual turn of tactic to appear on all high profile prime time news programmes Channel 9 and 7 on Monday night, where he pleaded pathetically to the public and the interviewer that he and Swanie are not going to fess up to any inquiry on the back room wheeling and dealings for Mr Grant.
Rude should not be permitted to have carte blanche over the media to promote his propaganda.