Slush fund story now 'over' says Burke

[Rorschach]

You telling me defrauding union membership and others of $400,000-$1,000,000 is not a serious offence?
Thing is Arsie... this was not the only "slush" fund they had access to, and if Gillard had come forward instead of just dumping her boyfriend more fraud/theft and deception would have been uncovered sooner.

[mellie]

You telling me defrauding union membership and others of $400,000-$1,000,000 is not a serious offence?

Well apparently not, and not even serious enough to warrant parliamentary scrutiny/questioning over according to our fragile and victimised delicate little flower Gillard.

Shhh, best not we take too much notice, or make too much noise, we don't want to upset baby.

Such a princess!

[Aussie]

Generally and legally...

the solicitor discloses the information to a particular person in circumstances in which the solicitor believes on reasonable grounds that the law would compel its disclosure to that person, whether or not a client makes a claim of legal professional privilege or confidentiality

the solicitor discloses the information to a particular person in circumstances in which the solicitor believes on reasonable grounds that it is necessary to disclose that information to that person for the sole purpose of avoiding the probable commission of a serious offence;

What are the sources of those quotes?

[Aussie]

You telling me defrauding union membership and others of $400,000-$1,000,000 is not a serious offence?

Show us any evidence you have which links Gillard with that defrauding. And please, don't try the 'guilt by association' rubbish.

Thing is Arsie... this was not the only "slush" fund they had access to,

....Really? And that has exactly what to do with Gillard?

.......and if Gillard had come forward instead of just dumping her boyfriend more fraud/theft and deception would have been uncovered sooner.

What exactly was she supposed to 'come forward' about, and exactly when? Not even Bishop is running that line. For all I know she may have dumped Wilson 'cause he was lousy in bed. Not my business.

[mellie]

Gillard was invited to discuss the matter formally during Question Time, this and put the matter to rest by openly answering questions put forth by members of her parliament to which she declined by way of stating she believed she had already answered these questions at a press conference she held just prior to Question Time.

She is dishonest, evasive and sly.

Are these the qualities we want in our nations leader?

If she were innocent, then what has she got to hide, why not just answer these questions in parliament where her responses may be formally documented in parliamentary hansards for future reference?

Her party's attitude towards this whole affair is "So what Australia, you cant prove it"..when it should be "We will do our best to answer these questions so as to finally put the matter to bed once and for all."

The thing is Aussie, in doing so, they will have to concede that Gillard was at the very least incompetent.

Labour are a pack of slippery cowards, and even if they manage to avoid criminal charges, the way this affair has been managed has left a bad taste in voters mouths for they know a rat when they smell one.

[Aussie]

Her party's attitude towards this whole affair is "So what Australia, you cant prove it"..when it should be "We will do our best to answer these questions so as to finally put the matter to bed once and for all."

That is incorrect. I can find nothing anywhere where anyone, including Gillard, has taken the position "So what Australia, you can't prove it." What has occurred has been a consistency of requests for an allegation of wrong doing, and provision of the supporting evidence. That has not occurred over a period of 20 years, and even after, in the last couple of days, the vixen Bishop actually had a secret meeting with the sleazeball Blewitt. Even Blewitt could not give her anything of value to use against Gillard. Instead the LNP have embarked on a smoke and mirrors witch-hunt and they manage to link her to fraud because of her personal association with a person who later became involved in fraud (or so it seems) and then carped, "You set it all up for him knowing what he intended," yet there is nothing which remotely goes to substantiate that she did know he intended to use the organisation as a vehicle to syphon off funds.

Gillard now has held two extensive Press Conferences, and took every question seasoned and up to speed journalists could throw at her. I would have thought that was a far better thing to do for transparency purposes than deal with it all withing the confines of a rowdy kindergarten Question Time in Parliament, one in which, the Leader of the Opposition took no part, and it could be argued, was thus distancing himself from the matter. If she lied during those Conferences (and there is no-one suggesting she did) then the political consequences will be no different than if she had 'lied' in Parliament.

As evidence, for how long now have we seen her say, "There will be no carbon tax under a Government I lead," and that was not made to Parliament. The political fall-out is exactly the same as if she had said it in Parliament, some would argue that it was very useful that she made the statement outside Parliament to the schmedia.

Bishop has now dragged out the old Pasquerelli (sp.) Stat. Dec. from Bob Kernohan. and Gillard dealt with it directly.

[Neferti]

Her party's attitude towards this whole affair is "So what Australia, you cant prove it"..when it should be "We will do our best to answer these questions so as to finally put the matter to bed once and for all."

That is incorrect. I can find nothing anywhere where anyone, including Gillard, has taken the position "So what Australia, you can't prove it." What has occurred has been a consistency of requests for an allegation of wrong doing, and provision of the supporting evidence. That has not occurred over a period of 20 years, and even after, in the last couple of days, the vixen Bishop actually had a secret meeting with the sleazeball Blewitt. Even Blewitt could not give her anything of value to use against Gillard. Instead the LNP have embarked on a smoke and mirrors witch-hunt and they manage to link her to fraud because of her personal association with a person who later became involved in fraud (or so it seems) and then carped, "You set it all up for him knowing what he intended," yet there is nothing which remotely goes to substantiate that she did know he intended to use the organisation as a vehicle to syphon off funds.

Evidence? With links please.

Gillard now has held two extensive Press Conferences, and took every question seasoned and up to speed journalists could throw at her. I would have thought that was a far better thing to do for transparency purposes than deal with it all withing the confines of a rowdy kindergarten Question Time in Parliament, one in which, the Leader of the Opposition took no part, and it could be argued, was thus distancing himself from the matter. If she lied during those Conferences (and there is no-one suggesting she did) then the political consequences will be no different than if she had 'lied' in Parliament.

Ha ha ha! What she tells the journos is off the record, if she says that in Parliament it is recorded and if her replies are found incorrect, Big Trouble. This woman is very sly.

As evidence, for how long now have we seen her say, "There will be no carbon tax under a Government I lead," and that was not made to Parliament. The political fall-out is exactly the same as if she had said it in Parliament, some would argue that it was very useful that she made the statement outside Parliament to the schmedia.

OFF TOPIC. This thread is about the AWU, not the rest of Gillard's lies.

Oh, by the way the Victorian Police FRAUD Squad are investigating this matter. Gillard's involvement as well. There is a paper trail that has Gillard's fingerprints all over it. She is not fit to be our Prime Minister and should resign.

PS Word around Canberra is that the Departments have been told to prepare for a March 16 Election.

[Aussie]

Here is a link confirming the secret meeting the vixen held with the sleazeball.

What is said to a Press Conference by anyone, including Gillard, is ON the record for us all to see.

[Rorschach]

What are the sources of those quotes?

I thought you were a Lawyer Arsie... surely you recognise the rules solicitors must abide by in Australia.

Don't you have a book with them in it?

Don't you know the rules?

Are you incapable of googling them? I wasn't.

Personally I can't believe any sane person would be trying to defend her on these points.
Looks like another Arsie argument, shot down.

[Aussie]

What are the sources of those quotes?

I thought you were a Lawyer Arsie... surely you recognise the rules solicitors must abide by in Australia.

Don't you have a book with them in it?

Don't you know the rules?

Are you incapable of googling them? I wasn't.

Personally I can't believe any sane person would be trying to defend her on these points.
Looks like another Arsie argument, shot down.

Shot down, really?

Post the links to those quotes, Roach. Until you do, we will all know who has been unable to substantiate their 'quotes' as being authoritative.