Has Kevin Rudd misled parliament?

[trainspotter]

Actually utegate week was a good week for the country. At the rate the Rudd government has been getting the country into debt, a week of doing nothing has saved the taxpayers billions of dollars.

Loving it Calliope, just loving it. And somehow strangely true. :iagree:

 

[rederob]

To imply that a "lie" has been somehow misconstrued "throughout" this thread is by far one of the better goading positions I have seen by anyone let alone a lawyer. Do I need your approval to suggest my history is somehow flawed? Tsk tsk old boy ... you should read some more lawyer books to do better than that.

You had the opportunity to retract when you posted the "Galaxy" table: You did not, until it was pointed out to you again that you had erred.
You had ample opportunity to check your facts, but you did not.
If your business transactions are as shoddy as your approach here I feel some compassion for your clients having to deal with such impairment.
In relation to the thread proper some may have seen Media Watch tonight. It is moot that Grech's testimony to the Senate has been poorly conveyed to the public: In that Grech had 4 conversations with Steve Lewis (News Limited) the day prior to Grech's testimony. Of what little we can be certain, Lewis, who published the email in his paper, knows much more but is not telling. At least not yet.
At an ethical level it is also moot that privileged, or confidential sources, in some jurisdictions lose their right to anonymity if it is shown they have lied, acted out of spite or malice, or otherwise chose to create a false truth. The question Turnbull must grapple with is if his faith in protecting a liar will be to his continued detriment, or not.
From a strictly moral perspective there is no dilemma in outing a liar irrespective of any supposed protection that may have been originally available to them - ie, the ideal that the source shall never be revealed. That is because the "liar" chose to knowingly deceive from the outset, negating any sanctity of a trusting relationship from that point onward.
Unless Turnbull is already too deeply compromised via his relationship with Grech, his best course of action - should he wish to have a political future - is to come clean. Unless, again, his utterances would in fact be more harmful to the Party than to Turnbull himself.
At this point I see trainspotter making special delivery of a sword to a certain politician.

 

[moXJO]

Oh dear you are not at all bright!
That's a "Galaxy" poll you have tabled, and Coorey has quoted from a separate one. There was also a third poll.
I merely indicated that your statement about Labor losing ground was incorrect.
So to is your attribution to Coorey.
It's becoming a bit of a trend in this thread to tell lies, isn't it?

Am I missing something red, or are you taking points out of Labors spin manual?

Attack the person
Tell everyone they are telling lies
Change the direction of the thread to focus on the lie.
Raise doubt about their character.

The Labor force is strong in this one:

Hmmm name Rederrob, also a lawyer and adept at political spin.
Your not really Julia Gillard are you

 

[rederob]

Am I missing something red, or are you taking points out of Labors spin manual?

Attack the person
Tell everyone they are telling lies
Change the direction of the thread to focus on the lie.
Raise doubt about their character.

The Labor force is strong in this one:

Hmmm name Rederrob, also a lawyer and adept at political spin.
Your not really Julia Gillard are you

Sadly, MoXJO, you are.
It would be called relevance.
This thread is specifically about our Prime Minister potentially misleading Parliament.
In presenting their cases against Rudd, and Swan, posters have been extremely thin on substance. A greater element of their position is smear and character assassination. There is certainly no evidence that Rudd has misled Parliament, while the case against Swan hinges on whether or not the additional care taken of a constituent by his Department can be attributed to Swan's intervention. On this latter point the argument is petty and Turnbull's case has disintegrated into repetition and inference, without evidence.
It is interesting that you choose to single out my approach in the way you have.
Mr Burns has for the moment left this thread, but in terms of attacking the person he gets full marks.
Calliope, who comes to the defence of posters when I call them for telling lies, has many times stated that Rudd and Swan have been lying to Parliament. Yet that is a lie as he has no evidence against Rudd, and simply hopes there might be something against Swan.
It may be that I have changed the direction of this thread to focus on a lie, but as this thread seems to be about whether or not a lie has been told, should we allow the pot to call the kettle black?
In terms of raising doubt about a poster's character I would hope that the evidence is available here so that others can draw their own conclusions. For example, we have Julia suggesting the AFP and Audit may not do their job credibly; implying they will protect any corrupt behaviour that might implicate Labor: I called that laughable. We had trainspotter's foray into this thread suggesting that "A" was Andrew Thomas. I went kindly on him to begin, but have escalated my response to his nonsense when he stupidly neglected to check his facts on poll results, and subsequently tried to claim that published information was simply his opinion and he got it wrong.

Back onto relevance.
Is there anything in relation to utegate that you wish to comment on, or would you rather be a commentator on those who do?

 

[moXJO]

Sadly, MoXJO, you are.
It would be called relevance.
?

Oh and you’re not guilty of that

We have a bit of a wait before we will see any surface scratching of what went on behind the scenes. I do think there was an issue involving the PM that was buried in the spin. I also think TBull was an idiot for running into battle naked. The issue has been turned on its head for now. But labor holds deep internal grudges, and I would not be surprised if something more were to leak out.

Back onto relevance.
Is there anything in relation to utegate that you wish to comment on, or would you rather be a commentator on those who do?

What more is there to say at this stage?

You sure went to a lot of trouble to defend and explain your position for an offhand comment I made. I do think you are associated to labor in some way (you seem a bit passionate not to be linked). And I think the way you are pushing certain comments is a reflection of the Labor spin machine. You don't need to defend Rudd against every attack if it's just pi$$ taking.

As for the above question I have to go for option B.

 

[rederob]

You sure went to a lot of trouble to defend and explain your position for an offhand comment I made. I do think you are associated to labor in some way (you seem a bit passionate not to be linked). And I think the way you are pushing certain comments is a reflection of the Labor spin machine. You don't need to defend Rudd against every attack if it's just pi$$ taking.

You are confusing an attempt to inject some balance and informed debate into this thread with "passion".
You can infer what you like about my "associations", but they are not relevant to what has transpired.
As I posted yesterday evening, Media Watch added an extra dimension to this topic. I expected some comment from the Turnbull camp, but maybe they have run out of mud to throw or lies to trot out

 

[Gamblor]

It's funny how you diehard liberals seem to ignore the fact that it's a taxation revenue shortfall that is responsible for the vast majority of the debt. Every economist will tell you the liberal party would be indebt.. welll over 100 billion as well. The fact Turnbull and Hockey dodge the question on how much debt they would be in is funny, and misleads the Australian public. I personally find that more offensive than this silly utegate affair.

I swear the diehard liberals and the diehard labor unionists are as dopey as one another. They should get a room and make an army of retarded mutants we can put to work in sweat shops.

 

[trainspotter]

Ooooooer rederob. Remind me to never engage your legal capacity. In any capacity. Once again I reiterate "WHAT PART OF MY POST DO YOU FAIL TO UNDERSTAND?"

I placed the Galaxy poll to evidence the lack of support for the two party preferred vote. It had nothing to do with Phillip Coorey, who took his information from the Herald/Neilsen poll. Why did I need to retract it? I also wrote that ALL the polls would show that Malcolm Turnbull had lost traction and credibility. Once again I reiterate "WHAT PART OF MY POST DO YOU FAIL TO UNDERSTAND?"

YES rederob you ubiquitous jurisprudent, I did write in here that Labor had slipped in the same poll. The information at hand was from the channel 9 news. You claim I had ample time to "fix" or retract this statement. Ummm ... I believe that I performed this sorry task a couple of responses ago. Once again I reiterate "WHAT PART OF MY POST DO YOU FAIL TO UNDERSTAND?"

On the matter of telling "lies". The contempt that you show for your fellow ASFers is deplorable. Never before have I come across a person devoted to being so desperate to appear to have the upper hand.

LMAO at you claiming to be a lawyer. It appears (under advice from my lawyers) that you have comitted slander in regards to my business acumen.

If your business transactions are as shoddy as your approach here I feel some compassion for your clients having to deal with such impairment."

You of all people claiming to be a lawyer should know far better than to commit to the written word on such matters.

Funny how you always play the man and not the ball too I noticed. I joined this thread and made some positive suggestions. You went, how did you type it? "I went kindly on him to begin with". I did not realise that this thread was for your personal character attacks on the other ASFers in here. No matter if they are right or wrong, they are still entitled to an opinion.

Now back to me. Cause I just love me. My original post that you decided to excrete your venom on was in regards to the alleged email from the Treasury, which was purported to be written by Andrew Thomas. This information was taken from column of the News Limited journalist Steve Lewis.

NOW onto the facts that this thread is all about:

Kevin Rudd misled Parliament with the statements listed below:-

“I have been advised that neither I nor my office have ever spoken with Mr Grant in relation to OzCar; neither I nor my office have ever made any representations on his behalf; and I have not been aware of any representations on his behalf made by anyone in the government, including the referral referred to before by the Treasurer’s office.”

And that my friends is the close of this sordid little chapter. Guilty as charged your Honour.

 

[rederob]

trainspotter
It is poor form say your lawyers have advised that I have slandered you.
Or
Your lawyers are as incompetent as you appear to be.

On topic, you conclude with a statement Rudd made in the House that even Turnbull cannot fault.
As I contend, you and your ilk fail to produce the evidence, and fail to maintain any semblance of an argument that is yet worthy of a decent hearing.

 

[trainspotter]

Hey rederob. I have just realised after you wrote this:

"I expected some comment from the Turnbull camp, but maybe they have run out of mud to throw or lies to trot out"

You have no clue as to how to converse with people do you? That is sad. I now have decided that you are looking for the fight rather than creating objective criticism. It is in your nature to head straight for the gutter. You cannot help it. You use emotive words to cast conjecture and aspersions on anyone and everybody. Purely to get a kneejerk response. Like a schoolyard bully who cannot get his own way you lash out once cornered. I pity you. Soon there will be no more toys in the sandpit to play with rederob. No one to respond to your vexatious, fulminatious retorts. The what will you do? Sit on your castle on nigh and proclaim to no one that you are king? Congratulations to you rederob, my sincere condolonces as well.

You might want to read this:

http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/06/22/utegate-explained/

 

[trainspotter]

trainspotter
It is poor form say your lawyers have advised that I have slandered you.
Or
Your lawyers are as incompetent as you appear to be.

On topic, you conclude with a statement Rudd made in the House that even Turnbull cannot fault.
As I contend, you and your ilk fail to produce the evidence, and fail to maintain any semblance of an argument that is yet worthy of a decent hearing.

Poor form? Poor form? You have commited the spoken word to type for all to see. This is slander. I now expect it from you. You claim to be a lawyer, not a single lawyer I know would be prepared to commit to caling another lawyers firm "incompetent". It is like the hypocratic oath. You just don't do it. Deary me you are not what you seem at all are you?

 

[MrBurns]

A lawyer that supports labor ?, rederob you must be on the Govt gravy train , you know the one where failed or incompetent lawyers get a job in the sheltered workshop of Govt employment giving ****house advice to the underprivileged.

And from your bitterness I'm guessing that the REAL lawyers driving past in their BMW's piss themselves laughing at you as they watch you stagger home in your 1975 Nissan Pintara, don't worry we know you're special

Well done It's good to see people find their rightful place in society.

 

[kincella]

saw in the news today...pollies getting an extra $80 a day for meals...just for turning up....wow....single pensioners wait until Sept for 30 pw....the unemployed get nothing....and these freekin hyenas get 400pw for meals....

and no one here cares as rudd smirks 24/7 at the fools.....but the big problem with costello is he has an occasional smirk....give me a break
I am praying for Costello to come back....every day another billion dollars wasted on something foolish...
every baby will have an ear test and get a cochlear implant......
but people dying as a bed in hospital is not available....forget that...whats more important....
grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

 

[trainspotter]

For all to see"

Kevin Rudd misled Parliament with the statements listed below:-

“I have been advised that neither I nor my office have ever spoken with Mr Grant in relation to OzCar; neither I nor my office have ever made any representations on his behalf; and I have not been aware of any representations on his behalf made by anyone in the government, including the referral referred to before by the Treasurer’s office.”

Taken from Hansard.

And that my friends is the close of this sordid little chapter. Guilty as charged your Honour.

 

[Calliope]

Calliope, who comes to the defence of posters when I call them for telling lies, has many times stated that Rudd and Swan have been lying to Parliament. Yet that is a lie as he has no evidence against Rudd, and simply hopes there might be something against Swan.

Strangely enough you haven't refuted my assertion that Rudd is a serial liar. I think you are on very flimsy grounds in this thread, but that's OK. For a man with so little sense of humour, you at least keep me entertained, with you weird notion that you are never wrong.

 

[rederob]

Poor form? Poor form? You have commited the spoken word to type for all to see. This is slander. I now expect it from you. You claim to be a lawyer, not a single lawyer I know would be prepared to commit to caling another lawyers firm "incompetent". It is like the hypocratic oath. You just don't do it. Deary me you are not what you seem at all are you?

I would urge you to tell the truth. A man with business acumen who does not tell the truth will run into trouble in their subsequent dealings with clients. It is advice from one who knows the importance of telling the truth. If you are asked about something important, perhaps very important indeed, remember to always tell the truth.

I could ask which lawyer gave you the advice on slander quoted earlier so that I could set them straight, but I fear that would place you in the position that Turnbull now finds himself in.

With respect to your repetitive post from Hansard, which part of it has been shown to be incorrect? If you have some knowledge that Turnbull does not, I will gladly pass on his contact details. He is in a desperate bind. Or rather, his kingdom for a sword?

By the way, where does one go to take the hypocratic oath? Is there a society of hypocrites you belong to?

 

[trainspotter]

Laughing at you now rederob. You are really clutching at straws. To private message me in regards to the split definitive over slander and libel proves to me how desperate you have become.

You just don't get it do you?

My apologies for the hypocratic oath comment. It should have been "THE HIPPOCRATIC OATH". I have never heard/read/seen a lawyer written or otherwise state categorically that another firm is incompetent.

The long bow I was drawing is that Drs. do not reveal patients confidentiality. Just like lawyers refrain form criticising other lawyers. Well, at least all the lawyers/barristers/notary of the publics, right down to the artilce clerks, I know that is.

You have written in this thread that my business transactions are as shoddy as my approach in here. And you are the one to argue poor form? Huh, I must have been behind the door when they handed out "brains" as you so objectively compared me with Phillip Coorey. Please "go lightly" on me rederob, I beg of you. Pffffffffffftttttt ! Your clumsy attempts at proving yourslef right all the time is becoming dreary and tedious. Not only to me but to quite a few who bother to respond to your comments.

I concur that Mr Rudd and Mr Swan will walk away form this whole debacle scot free and Mr Turnbull will more than likely lose his mantle as the opposition leader. This is not the topic of the thread. And neither are we.

The topic of the thread is "Has Kevin Rudd misled parliament" and YES he has. I will not bother to post the three statements he made in regards to his department or his governments position in this matter. As you say, it has become repetitive and is there for all to see.

 

[rederob]

The topic of the thread is "Has Kevin Rudd misled parliament" and YES he has. I will not bother to post the three statements he made in regards to his department or his governments position in this matter. As you say, it has become repetitive and is there for all to see.

Mr Turnbull will be very interested to see your evidence as it will see Rudd make an apology to Parliament, and likely stand down as leader.
Presently you have the track record of a Grech, so do make sure that what you have does not slip through your fingers.
You could of course also post that evidence here and give ASF readers a scoop, but that's your call.

 

[Calliope]

Laughing at you now rederob. You are really clutching at straws. To private message me in regards to the split definitive over slander and libel proves to me how desperate you have become.

You just don't get it do you?

I can see that you have got Red's measure. His tactics have always been to cotton on to a trivial error in the opposing argument and nag, and nag and nag

Like Rudd he is a toxic bore and a toxic nagger. But we shouldn't be too hard on him. He probably has no interests outside politics, and he is not really doing any harm.

 

[Gamblor]

The topic of the thread is "Has Kevin Rudd misled parliament" and YES he has. I will not bother to post the three statements he made in regards to his department or his governments position in this matter. As you say, it has become repetitive and is there for all to see.

If there was a case against Kevin Rudd misleading parliment you can bet Turnbull wouldn't have let up and we would still be hearing about it now.

Sorry but you don't have a leg to stand on here