Taylor VS Moore
Forum rules
Don't poop in these threads. This isn't Europe, okay? There are rules here!
Don't poop in these threads. This isn't Europe, okay? There are rules here!
- Neferti
- Posts: 18113
- Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2011 3:26 pm
Re: Taylor VS Moore
I feel sorry for Albo. Hair or no hair. He hasn't got the charisma to sway any swinging voters to vote Labor. Morrison doesn't do it for the real Liberals either. I sort of liked Angus Taylor as a potential leader but he seems to have stuffed up.
- Black Orchid
- Posts: 25701
- Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 1:10 am
Re: Taylor VS Moore
Albo doesn't really have a comb over. Dutton must have forgotten what it's like to have any hair.
- Redneck
- Posts: 6275
- Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2014 12:28 pm
Re: Taylor VS Moore
Well thats what I thought, it didnt look like one to mean!Black Orchid wrote: ↑Wed Dec 04, 2019 5:21 pmAlbo doesn't really have a comb over. Dutton must have forgotten what it's like to have any hair.
Just sh1t stirring on 2GB I guess !!
- Neferti
- Posts: 18113
- Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2011 3:26 pm
Re: Taylor VS Moore
Question Time is like a bunch of schoolkids trying to outdo each other. I don't watch it any more. Pathetic bunch of people.
-
- Posts: 82
- Joined: Sun Oct 13, 2019 8:03 pm
Re: Taylor VS Moore
Well at least they aren’t making it up, eh???
Umm, he didn't just read it out. He ridiculed Sydney city council in the house and in the media. I love the fact you find incompetence and possible fraud as just trivia.Juliar wrote: ↑Wed Dec 04, 2019 10:48 amThis is such a trivial bit of nothing compared to Labor's gross disregard for any sort of decency with Gillard, Shorten, Thommo, Slipper, etc.
It is like Malcolm's Gotcha Gretch moment of insanity.
Tatylor was given some "news" which was deliberately or accidentally misread from the Clover NoMore Web Site.
I would also suspect, with the flagrant dismissal of such as simply trivia, you were loud demanding Gillard, Thompson and Slipper should have been removed. No matter what you say about me, I am at least consistent as I did as well. As for Shorten, well no matter what you think of Albo, HUGE improvement.
While attacking Albonese I believe you made my point. This fool has to go and not only that, clearly the Prime Minister has crossed the line by interfering in an active investigation.Juliar wrote: ↑Wed Dec 04, 2019 10:48 amUnfortunately, just like Malcolm, in the heat of the moment he didn't stop to check.
Taylor has apologized to Clover NoMore and so the matter ends except in the Albo Schoolboy's muddled mind as he is desperately clinging to this dried up morsel somehow imagining it is a big distraction to take attention away from Labor's own shambolic brothel.
Albo is showing that he is an amateur schoolboy trying to mix it with the big boys. He was even chastised like a naughty boy for wasting parliament's time and even his comb over was ruffled.
One thing, Paraphrasing “ oh, he mislead parliament, he mislead the people, he ridiculed Moore and her mob, but he said sorry so nothing to see here” So many people are accused of terrible things totally devoid of fact or reality which destroys lives. Sure some accusers said sorry so the matter should have ended there. Unfortunately, it does not.
Simply sitting there, telling the world “he said sorry” does not cut it. This didn’t happen yesterday, he had time to check, yet he chose not to. No, he should go…
-
- Posts: 82
- Joined: Sun Oct 13, 2019 8:03 pm
Re: Taylor VS Moore
Apparently, Australia is nothing of substance. He is bald, she is ugly, he has a comb over and shit just look at that fool in the back row picking his nose... Whether or not they are capable of doing the job of representing the peoples wishes is just a convenience. Australia votes for drama queens... I think the swing voters take these shots as serious as a fart in a jar. I should know, I am one of them… LOL
Cheap shot??? No, I think it shows shallowness of the debater.
-
- Posts: 1355
- Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 10:56 am
Re: Taylor VS Moore
Angus is pretty safe as the Speaker will decide when to declare Labor's accusations are all bulldust compared to their disgraceful handling of Gillard and Shorten and Thommo and Slipper and....
Speaker to decide if Taylor misled chamber
By AAP 6:06pm Dec 5, 2019
Speaker Tony Smith will report back next year as to whether embattled Energy Minister Angus Taylor could be in contempt of parliament.
Mr Taylor has faced a series of scandals and is under police investigation for using doctored documents to attack the Sydney lord mayor.
Manager of opposition business Tony Burke on Thursday accused Mr Taylor of deliberately misleading parliament multiple times.
He has asked the speaker to consider whether Mr Taylor is in contempt of parliament.
Labor is piling pressure on the prime minister to sack his embattled cabinet colleague.
Scott Morrison has confirmed the embattled energy minister will be keeping his job, even as major changes are made to his department.
Mr Morrison is consolidating the energy, industry, science and resources departments into a single mega agency.
But Mr Taylor will maintain ministerial responsibility for energy and carbon emissions.
"Why would he not?" the prime minister told reporters on Thursday.
"If the prime minister had any courage he would enforce his ministerial standards and sack Angus Taylor," Labor frontbencher Tanya Plibersek said.
"He must account for the fact that he has used a document that is plainly a forgery and the prime minister needs to make him account for that."
As the police investigation continues, a Labor and Greens-dominated Senate committee has found Mr Taylor breached ministerial standards in a separate incident.
The committee investigated Mr Taylor's private financial interests in Jam Land Pty Ltd, a family company subject to a compliance investigation by his own department.
In an interim report released on Wednesday night, the committee found Mr Taylor failed to disclosed his interests and sought to use his position to obtain special treatment.
"Mr Taylor's actions represent not only a contravention of the Morrison government's own ministerial standards, but have also fallen well short of the public expectations of the integrity of the government and parliament," the report said.
Unsurprisingly, coalition members of the committee issued a dissenting report.
They accused Labor and the Greens of a "blatant abuse and misuse" of the Senate committee process.
Mr Taylor has consistently said he complied with the rules around the declaration of personal interests.
© AAP 2019
https://www.9news.com.au/national/labor ... a3704980ff
Speaker to decide if Taylor misled chamber
By AAP 6:06pm Dec 5, 2019
Speaker Tony Smith will report back next year as to whether embattled Energy Minister Angus Taylor could be in contempt of parliament.
Mr Taylor has faced a series of scandals and is under police investigation for using doctored documents to attack the Sydney lord mayor.
Manager of opposition business Tony Burke on Thursday accused Mr Taylor of deliberately misleading parliament multiple times.
He has asked the speaker to consider whether Mr Taylor is in contempt of parliament.
Labor is piling pressure on the prime minister to sack his embattled cabinet colleague.
Scott Morrison has confirmed the embattled energy minister will be keeping his job, even as major changes are made to his department.
Mr Morrison is consolidating the energy, industry, science and resources departments into a single mega agency.
But Mr Taylor will maintain ministerial responsibility for energy and carbon emissions.
"Why would he not?" the prime minister told reporters on Thursday.
"If the prime minister had any courage he would enforce his ministerial standards and sack Angus Taylor," Labor frontbencher Tanya Plibersek said.
"He must account for the fact that he has used a document that is plainly a forgery and the prime minister needs to make him account for that."
As the police investigation continues, a Labor and Greens-dominated Senate committee has found Mr Taylor breached ministerial standards in a separate incident.
The committee investigated Mr Taylor's private financial interests in Jam Land Pty Ltd, a family company subject to a compliance investigation by his own department.
In an interim report released on Wednesday night, the committee found Mr Taylor failed to disclosed his interests and sought to use his position to obtain special treatment.
"Mr Taylor's actions represent not only a contravention of the Morrison government's own ministerial standards, but have also fallen well short of the public expectations of the integrity of the government and parliament," the report said.
Unsurprisingly, coalition members of the committee issued a dissenting report.
They accused Labor and the Greens of a "blatant abuse and misuse" of the Senate committee process.
Mr Taylor has consistently said he complied with the rules around the declaration of personal interests.
© AAP 2019
https://www.9news.com.au/national/labor ... a3704980ff
- Neferti
- Posts: 18113
- Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2011 3:26 pm
Re: Taylor VS Moore
I like Angus Taylor. He could be my 42nd cousin, since I have Scottish Taylor in my ancestry.
- Bobby
- Posts: 18296
- Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2017 8:09 pm
Re: Taylor VS Moore
Juliar wrote: ↑Fri Dec 06, 2019 4:12 pmAngus is pretty safe as the Speaker will decide when to declare Labor's accusations are all bulldust compared to their disgraceful handling of Gillard and Shorten and Thommo and Slipper and....
Speaker to decide if Taylor misled chamber
By AAP 6:06pm Dec 5, 2019
Speaker Tony Smith will report back next year as to whether embattled Energy Minister Angus Taylor could be in contempt of parliament.
Mr Taylor has faced a series of scandals and is under police investigation for using doctored documents to attack the Sydney lord mayor.
Manager of opposition business Tony Burke on Thursday accused Mr Taylor of deliberately misleading parliament multiple times.
He has asked the speaker to consider whether Mr Taylor is in contempt of parliament.
Labor is piling pressure on the prime minister to sack his embattled cabinet colleague.
Scott Morrison has confirmed the embattled energy minister will be keeping his job, even as major changes are made to his department.
Mr Morrison is consolidating the energy, industry, science and resources departments into a single mega agency.
But Mr Taylor will maintain ministerial responsibility for energy and carbon emissions.
"Why would he not?" the prime minister told reporters on Thursday.
"If the prime minister had any courage he would enforce his ministerial standards and sack Angus Taylor," Labor frontbencher Tanya Plibersek said.
"He must account for the fact that he has used a document that is plainly a forgery and the prime minister needs to make him account for that."
As the police investigation continues, a Labor and Greens-dominated Senate committee has found Mr Taylor breached ministerial standards in a separate incident.
The committee investigated Mr Taylor's private financial interests in Jam Land Pty Ltd, a family company subject to a compliance investigation by his own department.
In an interim report released on Wednesday night, the committee found Mr Taylor failed to disclosed his interests and sought to use his position to obtain special treatment.
"Mr Taylor's actions represent not only a contravention of the Morrison government's own ministerial standards, but have also fallen well short of the public expectations of the integrity of the government and parliament," the report said.
Unsurprisingly, coalition members of the committee issued a dissenting report.
They accused Labor and the Greens of a "blatant abuse and misuse" of the Senate committee process.
Mr Taylor has consistently said he complied with the rules around the declaration of personal interests.
© AAP 2019
https://www.9news.com.au/national/labor ... a3704980ff
Hi Juliar -
how come you're not posting at the other place?
cheers
Bobby
-
- Posts: 82
- Joined: Sun Oct 13, 2019 8:03 pm
Re: Taylor VS Moore
Like the person or not. I don't know him, but clearly as a representative of the Australian people he is completely inept. Had this been the private sector his career would be washed out. He would have been sacked, not just asked to resign. Since it is government, he would be sent to the back bench where he will have another chance to rise.
Since he is incapable of actually doing the smallest act of discovering the fact of claim and would rather accuse, rave and disparage other elected officials in parliament and in media on every public forum he could find at the time... He should be stood aside for that misrepresentation, misleading and fabrication.
The question of legality is something else, considering how the paper was used it could well be illegal, but only if it was used in certain ways. Otherwise, it would be just ministerial standards being abused of which I think is the case.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Bobby and 80 guests