- Joined
- 23 November 2004
- Posts
- 3,974
- Reactions
- 851
and, most importantly,Extraordinarily, his union credit card was used to withdraw $100,000 over five years from ATMs. It was also used to pay for prostitutes, and the vouchers for at least two of those payments were endorsed with his driver’s licence number and a signature that looks like his.
His mobile phone was also used to ring those escort agencies, in between calls to Labor and union powerbrokers.
One of the five payments to an escort agency was for $2475 - around five or six times more than all the other payments - suggesting more than one man was entertained. But who?
Thomson’s sketchy reply to these facts is that someone else, he won’t say who, used his card, and presumably forged his signature, presented his driver’s licence and used his phone.
If Thomson is telling the truth, a forgery was committed and union funds stolen. If he’s lying, a fraud was committed.
This is a point the government and union are not too keen to address. Perhaps they know the truth.
Heard that should he go Labor will resign from Speaker of the House position forcing Liberals to pick up the tab and nubers will add up again.
Sneaky but don't expect anything else from politicians, just too concerned about the trough, nothing else matters.
You would presume those size prostitute bills would be catering for not just one guy?
Surely not?
Well I suppose it could be classified as a Health Service
It would appear from this link, this whole affair will be dragged out for a long time by The Green/Labor socialist left government just to hold on to government.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...finished-hes-not/story-e6frgd0x-1226120770104
Labor would need to convince a Coalition or non-Labor alligned independent to be speaker.Would that work?
If Libs didnt, then a non-functional parliament may lead to an election?
but isn't it fair to say they are being pretty hypocritical in their professed outrage here?
.
Whilst it's encouraging to know the Union is doing what it should, isn't the government justified in asserting that it has remained pretty well silent about the charges on Mary Jo Fisher?
Obviously, the opposition are going to grab at the chance via Mr Thomson, to bring down the government, but isn't it fair to say they are being pretty hypocritical in their professed outrage here?
And before someone brands me as a Labor supporter, no of course I'm not, but I'm just trying to apply a little objectivity to this soap opera.
I also have to feel for Mr Thomson's wife. It must be quite hideous for her.
Whilst it's encouraging to know the Union is doing what it should, isn't the government justified in asserting that it has remained pretty well silent about the charges on Mary Jo Fisher?
Obviously, the opposition are going to grab at the chance via Mr Thomson, to bring down the government, but isn't it fair to say they are being pretty hypocritical in their professed outrage here?
And before someone brands me as a Labor supporter, no of course I'm not, but I'm just trying to apply a little objectivity to this soap opera.
I also have to feel for Mr Thomson's wife. It must be quite hideous for her.
I think the difference between Mary Jo Fisher and Thomson is that there doesn't appear to be any cover-up with Mary Jo, she has apparently already been charged and plans to contest the charges in court. It appears the allegations are for a one off offence rather than the allegations that may have spanned a few years with Mr Thomson.
"Crimes have been committed that can bring down the Gillard government, and they are dumb crimes. As a former NSW chief of detectives told me: ''We are ultimately dealing with the crimes of a fool, whomever that fool may be, who has left a documented trail like a bleeding elephant in a snowfield.''"
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?