Slush fund story now 'over' says Burke

[mellie]

I don't believe Gillard knew much, or cared about this fund. She did a favour for her b/f by setting it up. What she does have to explain - and at the time it was probably unimportant, why the ad described the fund differently to the reason given for it's registration. That was incompetence/slackness.

These sort of companies are set up all the time for churches, charities, businessmen, lay people etc. Solicitors aren't paid to follow up after a job and see whether the directors/trustees/owners etc. are adhering to the rules set out by the corporations/business act and using the business lawfully.

Crooks would rarely confide in their female partners about their criminal activities. If they did - why aren't the gaols filled with the wives/g/f's of fraudulent, crooked businessmen? Why are only the males charged?

Mantra, the fact that she helped set this slush-fund up this and has a history for being dishonest 'interpersonally' ie, sleeping with married men and others known to be shady, 'corrupt' men should tell you that our angelic buttercup is no stranger to this particular element, this and knew exactly what she was doing particularly when one of them deposited $5000 into her bank account, a transaction Ms Gillard doesn't seem to be able to recall.

Get real!!

Noones that bloody naive.

She knew fine well what she was doing, it's just she didn't think it would come back to bite her on the ass 17 years later.
Moral to the story, if you are going to muck wrack, dredge up your opponents (Tony Abbott) past, make sure your own backyards clean and tidy first.

For a lawyer, she's not overly bright.

lol

[mellie]

why aren't the gaols filled with the wives/g/f's of fraudulent, crooked businessmen? Why are only the males charged?

-Mantra

Because apart from our justice system being mildly sexist, (historically, more lenient sentences for females) ..someone has to stay home and take care of the kids.

[mantra]

Mantra, the fact that she helped set this slush-fund up this and has a history for being dishonest 'interpersonally' ie, sleeping with married men and other known to be shady, 'corrupt' men should tell you that our angelic buttercup is no stranger to this particular element, this and knew exactly what she was doing particularly when one of them deposited $5000 into her bank account, a transaction Ms Gillard doesn't seem to be able to recall.

Get real!!

Noones that bloody naive.

If a woman sleeps with a married man - who's at fault? She owes the wife nothing, but hubbie does.

$5000 is nothing. It was a wad of cash allegedly deposited by a criminal into her a/c on behalf of her b/f 20 years ago. There could be a hundred simple explanations for the origins of this cash and the reason it was deposited - if it actually did happen.

She knew fine well what she was doing, it's just she didn't think it would come back to bite her on the ass 17 years later.
Moral to the story, if you are going to muck wrack, dredge up your opponents (Tony Abbott) past, make sure your own backyards clean and tidy first.

For a lawyer, she's not overly bright.

lol

Many lawyers aren't bright unfortunately. They are slow, lazy and procastinate. Gillard, being a female, was possibly a bit brighter, but even I'll admit that she's not very competent. What she did can probably fall into a few negative categories, but there is no evidence that she was Wilson's partner in crime.

[mellie]

Mantra, the fact that she owes the wife nothing doesn't detract from the blatant fact she's of a certain 'dishonest' and 'lacking-in-morals' inclination, historically...

Gillard, being a female, was possibly a bit brighter

-Mantra
Furthermore, just because she's female, doesn't mean she's smarter.

Sorry!



A naive little buttercup she was not.


And..

but even I'll admit that she's not very competent.

- Mantra

Like I said, at the very least, (best) she's very incompetent, a desirable attribute we want observed in our PM?

Look, she's disgraced herself, time she left the building.

Dont worry, Bill Shorten will see to it that she does, because he has his sights set on being next batter up, not that his past marital indiscretions are something to be proud of either.

[Rorschach]

but there is no evidence that she was Wilson's partner in crime.

Yet, but she could be.
I've never expected that, but unlike you I don't dismiss the idea that she did shonky things and possibly illegal things and certainly morally dubious things re the AWU scandal...

[mantra]

why aren't the gaols filled with the wives/g/f's of fraudulent, crooked businessmen? Why are only the males charged?

-Mantra

Because apart from our justice system being mildly sexist, (historically, more lenient sentences for females) ..someone has to stay home and take care of the kids.

I'm sure if the wives were as guilty as their husbands, we would hear about it through the media. Generally women would be shocked at what their partners did behind their backs.

[mantra]

but there is no evidence that she was Wilson's partner in crime.

Yet, but she could be.
I've never expected that, but unlike you I don't dismiss the idea that she did shonky things and possibly illegal things and certainly morally dubious things re the AWU scandal...

I agree with you, but we will never know for sure. Unless we're certain of the facts - we can't pronounce her guilty.

[mellie]

why aren't the gaols filled with the wives/g/f's of fraudulent, crooked businessmen? Why are only the males charged?

-Mantra

Because apart from our justice system being mildly sexist, (historically, more lenient sentences for females) ..someone has to stay home and take care of the kids.

I'm sure if the wives were as guilty as their husbands, we would hear about it through the media. Generally women would be shocked at what their partners did behind their backs.

Of course, because all woman are innocent this and don't know anything about how it was their hubbies suddenly managed to pay the mortgage off with the snap of his fingers, yes?

Mantra, they pretend not to know because it suits them.

Ask yourself, why is it the wives of gangsters manage to avoid prison?

Because they had no idea what their husbands were doing either?
lol..

[mantra]

Mantra, the fact that she owes the wife nothing doesn't detract from the blatant fact she's of a certain 'dishonest' and 'lacking-in-morals' inclination, historically...

Gillard, being a female, was possibly a bit brighter

-Mantra
Furthermore, just because she's female, doesn't mean she's smarter.

Sorry!

I was being sexist.

but even I'll admit that she's not very competent.

- Mantra

Like I said, at the very least, (best) she's very incompetent, a desirable attribute we want observed in our PM?

Look, she's disgraced herself, time she left the building.

Dont worry, Bill Shorten will see to it that she does, because he has his sights set on being next batter up, not that his past marital indiscretions are something to be proud of either.

I can't see Bill Shorten being next in line.

[mellie]

I can't see Bill Shorten being next in line.

- Mantra.

But Bill Shorten does.