National Response

Written By: - Date published: 10:18 am, August 14th, 2014 - 155 comments
Categories: national, scoundrels, Steven Joyce - Tags: , , , ,

I’ve just heard Nine to Noon and Matthew Hooton doing well on Danyl’s Nicky Hager Spin Bingo – as Steven Joyce did an hour or so earlier on Morning Report.

There’s nothing new here.

Left-wing

Conspiracy theorist

Not a journalist (essentially propoganda)

Everyone knew this already

Every other party does it – Labour has The Standard (apparently we have paid staffers – news to me!)

Regular for Ede to brief the blogs (not us!)

Illegally obtained material

Partisan

Work of fiction

But despite what they say there is a lot new here.

Danyl has a good list of the political side, and there’s a lot on the corporate side that also needs to be covered.  And the Port of Auckland management needs to go.

These are some of the big political things that mean Ede & Collins must go:

– declassifying and tipping off about SIS documents
– tipping off about OIAs and releasing them to Slater early
– hacking Labour’s servers
– conducting smear campaigns against public servants
– transferring a prisoner for a friend and that prisoner later attempting suicide
– discussion of illegal leaking of police evidence

 

And Jordan Williams should never have been taken seriously as head of his astroturf “Taxpayers Union” (commenting on Morning Report each morning), but the revelations of the blackmail he used against Rodney Hide and his editing of Wikipedia to write smears about Labour MPs sex lives should mean he’s treated as toxic.

Indeed I hope the police are looking into that blackmail, and Slater and Lusk’s intimidation, as revealed in the book.

And I hope National Party members are looking into how they’ve been manipulated about their candidate selections – they might be thinking about recalling Mark Mitchell for a start.

There’s much more and this must surely rumble on, but for a start can I say that I’m unaware of any passing of gossip and scuttlebutt to The Standard – even if I don’t know all the authors.  I know that a few times Labour policy has been sent to us as it was to journalists with an embargo so we can have stories ready and scheduled when it’s announced.  But nothing more than that.

So their “Labour does it through The Standard” doesn’t stack up.  There are Labour members like myself among the authors, so we’re likely to a) agree with the policy and b) be keen to promote it – but I’ve not seen any posts I thought were personal attacks on anybody (let alone the likes of public servants or scientists or other members of the public) fed by MPs or staffers.  Or supplied with material that’s meant to be for the purpose of governing. Or any sort of intimidation.

That sort of dirt is pure National.

155 comments on “National Response ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. infused 1
    14 August 2014 at 10:26 am

    As I’ve already shown http://thestandard.org.nz/hagers-dirty-politics/#comment-865822 there was no hacking of the Labour servers.

    That fact alone makes me think how much more sensationalist bs there is in the book.

    • wtl 1.1
      14 August 2014 at 10:43 am

      According to the NZ law, ‘hacking’ only requires that a person accessing a computer system knows that he or she is not authorised to access the system:

      Crimes Act 1961 Section 252:

      Accessing computer system without authorisation

      (1) Every one is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 2 years who intentionally accesses, directly or indirectly, any computer system without authorisation, knowing that he or she is not authorised to access that computer system, or being reckless as to whether or not he or she is authorised to access that computer system.

      Therefore, exploiting a misconfigured server to access documents that are clearly not meant to be publicly available could well be deemed to be hacking under the law.

      • infused 1.1.1
        14 August 2014 at 10:49 am

        I doubt you’d get that across the line. It was a public website. The information shouldn’t have been publicly exposed.

        It was retarded to have it configured in that way.

        • wtl 1.1.1.1
          14 August 2014 at 10:53 am

          I doubt you’d get that across the line. It was a public website. The information shouldn’t have been publicly exposed.

          Yes, it would be interesting to see it tested in court. What is clear, however, is that it is wrong to unequivocally state that “there was no hacking of the Labour servers” and that this claim of hacking is “sensationalist bs”.

          Edit: I should note that the reported exchange between Slater and Ede (I haven’t read the book) suggests that they knew that they were doing something wrong and were worried that their IP addresses might be exposed.

          • infused 1.1.1.1.1
            14 August 2014 at 11:49 am

            Sensationalist in the fact that there was no hacking. It was just a Labour party server, it was a public web server. So he’s trying to make it out to be much more than it is.

            Hacking is the exploitation of a vulnerability. Although, the word is being more washed out every year.

            There was no vulnerability exploited here. Just someone who configured the web server incorrectly.

            • Pascals bookie 1.1.1.1.1.1
              14 August 2014 at 11:53 am

              Graeme Edgeler initially took your position, last I saw he was rethinking that.

              Reckon you’re better on this stuff than edgeler?

            • wtl 1.1.1.1.1.2
              14 August 2014 at 11:59 am

              Hacking is the exploitation of a vulnerability.

              No, as I quoted above, NZ law defines what we would colloquially call “hacking” to be “accessing a computer system knowing that he or she is not authorised to access the system”. It says nothing about exploiting vulnerabilities.

              • McFlock …
                14 August 2014 at 1:07 pm

                Crimes act:

                248 Interpretation

                For the purposes of this section and sections 249 to 252,—

                access, in relation to any computer system, means instruct, communicate with, store data in, receive data from, or otherwise make use of any of the resources of the computer system

                authorisation includes an authorisation conferred on a person by or under an enactment or a rule of law, or by an order of a court or judicial process

                computer system—

                (a) means—

                (i) a computer; or

                (ii) 2 or more interconnected computers; or

                (iii) any communication links between computers or to remote terminals or another device; or

                (iv) 2 or more interconnected computers combined with any communication links between computers or to remote terminals or any other device; and

                (b) includes any part of the items described in paragraph (a) and all related input, output, processing, storage, software, or communication facilities, and stored data.

                […]

                252 Accessing computer system without authorisation

                (1) Every one is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 2 years who intentionally accesses, directly or indirectly, any computer system without authorisation, knowing that he or she is not authorised to access that computer system, or being reckless as to whether or not he or she is authorised to access that computer system.

                (2) To avoid doubt, subsection (1) does not apply if a person who is authorised to access a computer system accesses that computer system for a purpose other than the one for which that person was given access.

                • fisiani …
                  14 August 2014 at 5:51 pm

                  Exactly. Hagar has committed a crime by accessing Slater’s computer.
                  Hagar has jumped to conclusions and got them badly wrong.
                  Hagar has rushed out a book without checking information.
                  Whale Oil is pointing out the obvious flaws in the book.
                  This is massively rebounding on Hagar within 24 hours. Not even John Campbell could support him.
                  He is becoming a laughing stock and a byword for conspiracy theories and paranoia.
                  No wonder Labour held back initially but now bitterly regret falling for the attempted smear.
                  The public can sense the dirty politics of Hagar and it will be reflected in the next polls.

                  [lprent: He didn’t “access Slaters computer”. He may have received, just as Slater did with Blomfields computer. However as we know the police don’t lay charges for “journalists” receiving such materials. Slater proved that.

                  I don’t have time to deal with commernters being stupid at present. Banned for 6 weeks for writing defamatory statements on the site. ]

                  • tricledrown …
                    14 August 2014 at 5:57 pm

                    desperation fishy your an example of Nationals dirty tactics
                    Just keep on bullying fishy

                  • McFlock …
                    14 August 2014 at 7:28 pm

                    Hagar has committed a crime by accessing Slater’s computer.

                    That seems to me to be a defamatory comment.
                    The rest is just typical bullshit probably fed to you by somebody capable of independent thought.

              • BM …
                14 August 2014 at 1:41 pm

                Could you not argue that since the information was publicly available to anyone then everyone was authorized to see or use the information.

                If the information was private, it would have been placed in a far more secure area.

                • Tracey …
                  14 August 2014 at 1:52 pm

                  knowing that they were not authorised. ?? Is what that would turn on

                  • BM …
                    14 August 2014 at 2:11 pm

                    Since the information was publicly available, no authorization was required.

                    • Tracey …
                      14 August 2014 at 2:14 pm

                      maybe. But in the book they are very worried about taking stuff which could suggest they knew the owners didnt want them to have the stuff.

                      Id ede or the pm passed on sis stuff to smear and opponent, what do you think of that?

                    • BM …
                      14 August 2014 at 2:22 pm

                      Maybe they thought they could get prosecuted because credit card details were involved and they might be accused of stealing other peoples credit card details.?

                      I know I’d be thinking of that if I was in the same situation.

                    • Pascals bookie …
                      14 August 2014 at 3:03 pm

                      Authorization is required under the Act.

                      also:

                      “or being reckless as to whether or not he or she is authorised to access that computer system.”

                      If you suspect you might not be authorised, it looks like you have to check

                    • RJL …
                      14 August 2014 at 5:12 pm

                      @BM: “Maybe they thought they could get prosecuted because credit card details were involved and they might be accused of stealing other peoples credit card details.?”

                      Well, yes, because they were not authorised to have those details.

                      Sure, Labour apparently screwed up and made it relatively/very easy for someone unauthorised to gain access to the data. However, the test is not whether somebody technically can access data, but whether it is reasonable for that person to think they are authorised to do so. Slater and Ede purportedly did not act like people who thought they were authorised to access the data.

                • weka …
                  14 August 2014 at 3:19 pm

                  “Could you not argue that since the information was publicly available to anyone then everyone was authorized to see or use the information.”

                  It wasn’t available to anyone. AFAIK it was available to geeks who knew what they were doing. I doubt that I could have accessed it without help.

                  “If the information was private, it would have been placed in a far more secure area.”

                  No, it was information that Labour considered private but was mistakenly made or left accessible (I’ve heard varying geek opinions on why and how).

                  Myself, I wouldn’t use the word ‘hacking’ from what I have read. But that’s a technicality that is irrelevant to most people who would use the term in it’s popular sense. Remember the information that the MSD left accessible and Keith Ng found? Would you consider that to be in the public domain and ok to use anyway someone saw fit?

        • Tracey 1.1.1.2
          14 August 2014 at 1:50 pm

          if i leave my front door open, ans someone removes all my stuff, is it still theft, or not a crime because i was stupid to leave my door open?

      • felix 1.1.2
        14 August 2014 at 11:18 am

        infused probably thinks it’s not burglary if the door was left open.

      • Tom Willets 1.1.3
        14 August 2014 at 11:23 am

        So the ‘hacking’ of Slaters emails and subsequent publishing of them is acceptable?

        • Pascals bookie 1.1.3.1
          14 August 2014 at 11:55 am

          If it isn’t then WO will be in the shit for doing the same, and he is close friends with very very senior National party officials. Not a good look.

          Where did WO get those emails his defamation suit is about again?

        • adam 1.1.3.2
          14 August 2014 at 2:20 pm

          Tom, dear boy, there is a important difference. Slater and company hacked to use and abuse people. The other is being used to prove the original hacker is a user and abuser.

    • weka 1.2
      14 August 2014 at 2:01 pm

      “That fact alone makes me think how much more sensationalist bs there is in the book.”

      So Hager, who is not a geek, uses the term ‘hack’ in a popular sense rather than a technical sense, and you write off everything else he has to say in the book? Because that technicality is the really important bit 🙄 You’re a dick, but at least your agenda is transparent.

    • infused 2.1
      14 August 2014 at 10:41 am

      Hager looked like an idiot on JC and PH show last night. I think this is taking a turn for the worst for Hager.

      • Pasupial 2.1.1
        14 August 2014 at 11:18 am

        infused

        I don’t willingly subject myself to Paul Henry, but Hagar did not look to me like an idiot on the Campbell Live segment I watched last night. Perhaps you are just a biased Fuckwit with an axe to grind?

        • infused 2.1.1.1
          14 August 2014 at 11:51 am

          Hardly. He stuttered, almost sounding like he hadn’t even read the book. Keep that #votepositive message going buddy.

          • felix 2.1.1.1.1
            14 August 2014 at 11:56 am

            Yep vote positive.

            ie not for anyone who works with dirty lying fuckwits like Slater, Lusk, Ede, Farrar and Key.

          • Lanthanide 2.1.1.1.2
            14 August 2014 at 12:45 pm

            Might give you an insight as to why he’s an author, rather than a TV journalist, eh?

          • emergency mike 2.1.1.1.3
            14 August 2014 at 1:11 pm

            He stuttered? You’re going to judge his book on how telegenic he is? I guess that makes sense to a brainwashed retard.

        • Peter Matthews 2.1.1.2
          14 August 2014 at 11:56 am

          Pasupial: Or perhaps you are?

    • thatguynz 2.2
      14 August 2014 at 10:43 am

      And you believed it? Fool.

    • yeshe 2.3
      14 August 2014 at 12:07 pm

      BM .. try reading TV3news this morning. Nicky Hager ( you might want to note the correct spelling, as you seem to be wanting to write it a lot,) has told TV3News without equivocation that it was not Kim Dotcom who supplied the usb data. Further, Nicky Hager states he is willing to reveal his sources if it comes to a police case. Try keeping up and not reading Slater’s slime.

    • Tracey 2.4
      14 August 2014 at 1:54 pm

      because cameron slater whose ethics were highly questionable even before this book, says something and you assume its true? Riiiiiiiiiiiiight

    • Murray Olsen 2.5
      15 August 2014 at 4:17 am

      Nope, Blubber Boy is the one in trouble. He’s too bloody stupid to keep his misshapen mouth shut. He’s hoovering the dirt out of his grave site every time he flaps his unkissable lips.

  3. trickledrown 3
    14 August 2014 at 10:40 am

    Bought Media yeah right this is just more of the dirty tricks the emails are going to be released over the next couple of weeks they will be far more damaging than any spin that the bought off media can come up with digging a deeper hole.

    • BM 3.1
      14 August 2014 at 10:45 am

      You think making Cameron Slater the center of attention is a good thing.

      LOL, the left should be preparing for a massive amount of blow back.

      • Bunji 3.1.1
        14 August 2014 at 10:50 am

        Oh please – if Cameron has anything he just uses it, he doesn’t store it up. He’s a “let it burn” sort of guy.

        If he releases anything in response it’ll be what National’s Head Office are leaking to him now… more Dirty Politics.

        • BM 3.1.1.1
          14 August 2014 at 10:53 am

          As Slater said he gets info from all sides of the political spectrum.

          I look forward to Slater releasing a few Labour party emails to help add some balance .

          • Hanswurst 3.1.1.1.1
            14 August 2014 at 11:00 am

            If “Seeds of Discontent” is anything to go by, any Labour emails of note would have been referenced in Hager’s latest book.

            • BM 3.1.1.1.1.1
              14 August 2014 at 11:04 am

              According to the interview Slater did with Plunket, Hagar was very selective with what went in his book.

              • Pasupial …
                14 August 2014 at 11:21 am

                Yes; it’s called factchecking your sources, and is a sign of journalistic integrity. I appreciate that this may be a foreign concept to you, as your primary information source appears to be WO.

                • Pascals bookie …
                  14 August 2014 at 11:50 am

                  Correct me if I’m wrong, but would this be the same whaleoil who is quoted in a recent book saying things that he now claims are not true?

                  Seems like a pretty shitty source, best to discount to zero anything that relies on just his word.

              • Hanswurst …
                14 August 2014 at 11:44 am

                As above, Mr. Hager’s history makes it hard to see a motive for his being selective in that way. Unfortunately for Mr. Slater, it’s very easy to see what motives he might have for wanting to discredit Mr. Hager’s book.

                • Pascals bookie …
                  14 August 2014 at 3:00 pm

                  And whale is free to disclose any other incriminating emails he has to fill out the picture any time he likes. Waiting.Waiting.Waiting.Waiting.

              • appleboy …
                14 August 2014 at 12:50 pm

                BM spurts again ” According to the interview Slater did with Plunket, Hagar was very selective with what went in his book”.

                Yeah f**king right, the other emails show Slater is a nice guy and the National party has no connection to him…hmm

          • fisiani 3.1.1.1.2
            14 August 2014 at 5:55 pm

            Cameron Slater now has the perfect excuse to let Labour and the Greens have their dirty secrets exposed. TV3 went after his family and now they will see what he means by “returning the dirt twice over”

            • Weepus beard 3.1.1.1.2.1
              14 August 2014 at 6:11 pm

              I think that would make thing worse for the government because people would ask where the information came from. I don’t think the PM’s office could handle any more scrutiny.

            • You_Fool 3.1.1.1.2.2
              14 August 2014 at 8:29 pm

              So going looking for comment in the most important story of the day is “went after his family” now? There was no disrespect by TV3 journalists, they were doing their job, which was a bit of a surprise I know, but hey.

              In related news, I might have missed where Slater proved he was overseas?

      • trickledrown 3.1.2
        14 August 2014 at 11:00 am

        Bought Media that will just prove what dirty trick’s Slater is up to!

      • Macro 3.1.3
        14 August 2014 at 11:03 am

        I think BM that, as usual, you are completely misreading the implications of these revelations. This will tip the scales against National – make no mistake about that. The rumblings have been there for sometime, now the real issues of poor housing in Chch, the stumbling economy, the spying, the imperious nature of Sky City and its take-over of central Auckland, lack of empathy for the people of NZ as a whole, the treatment of the poor, and the lack of care for our environment,to name but a few issues. All these are stacking up. And people are slowly coming to the realisation that something is very rotten in NZ.

  4. CnrJoe 4
    14 August 2014 at 10:48 am

    What the hell? Radio Live has a tweet saying police are warning journalists not to turn Keysc est home visit this a.m into a circus.
    https://mobile.twitter.com/LIVENewsDesk

    • Weepus beard 4.1
      14 August 2014 at 10:58 am

      Police having to defend the PM? Interesting.

      Totalitarian state, here we come.

      Smith’s Dream, anyone?

    • Pasupial 4.2
      14 August 2014 at 11:28 am

      Just in case anyone else was having awful visuals about what a; “Keyscest home visit”, entailed (I thought he might have been hanging around with DaughterWife Whyte too much). Here is the actual twitter text:

      Police have warned journalists in Dunedin not to turn PM John Key’s visit to a rest home into a circus over Nicky Hager’s book.

      • just saying 4.2.1
        14 August 2014 at 11:45 am

        lol

      • David Thompson 4.2.2
        14 August 2014 at 2:02 pm

        So the Police are telling journalists not to report on news that isn’t favourable to the PM? Be very, very afraid.

        • McFlock 4.2.2.1
          14 August 2014 at 3:24 pm

          they also parked on a bus stop opposite the cafe he had coffee at. Poor buggers had to stand outside in the icy rainy weather while he had coffee inside.

      • weka 4.2.3
        14 August 2014 at 2:06 pm

        “Police have warned journalists in Dunedin not to turn PM John Key’s visit to a rest home into a circus over Nicky Hager’s book.”

        Ok, but if no clowns are allowed who will replace Key?

        • travellerev 4.2.3.1
          14 August 2014 at 5:25 pm

          What get’s me is that the police apparently thinks they can decide how journalists should behave and what they can and can not do to do their job properly i.e. to inform the NZ citizenry of the comings and goings of their “elected representatives”. Who do they think they are?
          And what are they going to do? Arrest the journalists for doing their job. It’s not as if John Key is accessible other than photo op shit like this. Other than that he hides behind his bully boys and bully techniques. Like he did in Helensville!

          Come on Journos grow a couple and start doing your job!!!

  5. Steve Alfreds 5
    14 August 2014 at 10:56 am

    I was watching the Paul Henry show last night and they had recruited a mysterious speed reader to read Mr Hager’s book and give his thoughts. He said there was nothing in the book to worry the government and there was nothing in it. It turns out he is Charles Finny a lobbyist and member of the PR company Saunders Unsworth with close ties to National. Maybe the people at Media Works need to lift their game a bit. Here’s a link with his lovely bio and photo:

    http://www.sul.co.nz/page/the-team.aspx

    • emergency mike 5.1
      14 August 2014 at 1:07 pm

      Well spoted Steve. From their website “Saunders Unsworth Goverment Relations Consultants” In their clients list: Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade.

      Looks like ol’ black ops McCully called in a favour. Paul Henry interviews a Govt paid PRopaganda firm ‘speed reader’ who tells us that there’s nothing to see here. Give me strength.

      The good news is that National are clearly rocked by all this. The one thing that bothers Key the most is an attack on his image. Because once that goes, National goes.

    • Tracey 5.2
      14 August 2014 at 2:00 pm

      He probably told them he used to vote Labour

      the defence seems to be,

      ” nothing new here, we have always been crooked scum dwelling people. Whats the fuss about, we expected something bad”

  6. Philj 6
    14 August 2014 at 12:18 pm

    xox
    Finney, pr spinner, was at the book launch. He looked a little uncomfortable.The wine and nibbles didn’t agree with him?
    The Standard, here and now, gets the expected blowback from National extremist trolls blowing hard like their job depends on it! How true.

  7. yeshe 7
    14 August 2014 at 12:21 pm

    Sean Plunket in a bullying and self-righteous attempt to slam on Nicky Hager this morning ..

    http://www.radiolive.co.nz/Nicky-Hager-denies-Kim-Dotcom-involvement-in-Dirty-Politics-book/tabid/506/articleID/52142/Default.aspx

    • emergency mike 7.1
      14 August 2014 at 12:54 pm

      With constant heavy breathing to boot. Comments unanimously slamming Plunket.

    • ianmac 7.2
      14 August 2014 at 2:20 pm

      Yesshe: Sean’s style is bad advert for his compere position on hid Friday night show. Only Joyce, Collins and Plunkett sound so desperate. (Thanks for the link.)
      On the other hand Nicky handled an aggressive interview well. The Right like Plunkett seem to only have “stolen emails” as a defence.

  9. emergency mike 9
    14 August 2014 at 1:24 pm

    The instant go to response from National at the moment appears to be wailing about Hager breaching their privacy and using stolen emails.

    I think they all have a print out of Danyl’s bingo card in their pockets and will decide when to move on to the next one by hand signals.

    • Pascals bookie 9.1
      14 August 2014 at 2:58 pm

      They are also claiming that the stuff in the emails is just lies being told by the well known liars Cameron Slater and Lusk.

      • emergency mike 9.1.1
        14 August 2014 at 7:15 pm

        Yeah I saw they’ve grabbed on to that one. Just a couple of lads talking shit. Some light hearted bullshit. Some harmless blackmail banter…

  10. Mike the Savage One 10
    14 August 2014 at 2:03 pm

    Yes, the Prime Minister, Ministers involved, National Party members, the right wing spin masters like Farrar, Hooton and of course the main culprit, Cameron Slater, are all in denial modus, say the book reveals nothing new, it is all just about joining dots that do not belong together, and bla, bla, bla..

    The mainstream media are treading very cautiously, and only some spend a bit more effort on Hager’s revelation, than they do on other stories most the times. Sean Plunket was as loyal as always, to his usual pro government, Key friendly line today, when conducting interviews with Slater (on the phone from Korea or so), and with Nicky Hager, and he brought up his own conspiracy theory, that Kim Dotcom must be behind it all.

    Kim Dotcom could not be reached, as he was with his kids, and for that fact alone, more suspicions were nurtured, until the end of his talk show on Radio Pacific this morning.

    Kathryn Ryan had Mike Williams and one of the many key persons mentioned in Hagar’s book on her show Nine to Noon on Radio NZ National today, and of course, Mathew Hooton was ridiculing Hager, twisting facts to suit himself, and diverting from issues that were raised.

    Apparently Mike Hosking did not allow Hager much say and credit on his morning radio show on 1ZB, and on Radio NZ National’s Morning Report Guyon Espiner was more focused on pressuring Cunliffe re what Labour will do, than what he and his Sue Ferguson asked Hagar.

    On Radio Live this morning Marcus Lush had Judith Collins as the only one on his “panel” and asked her about the book, and she was of course ridiculing Hager, diverting from facts and more.

    So it seems, that sadly most of the media are getting frustrated, and some are resigned to the fact, that nobody of the accused is willing to speak, and they move on with other “news”.

    Here is a taste of audios of various shows and interviews (via links) on Hager’s revelations in his new book:

    Radio NZ National, K. Ryan with Williams and Hooton
    http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/ninetonoon/audio/20145654/dirty-politics-nicky-hager's-book

    Radio Live – Plunket with Cam Slater:
    http://www.radiolive.co.nz/Cameron-Slater-claims-Nicky-Hager-used-hacked-emails-from-Kim-Dotcom-to-write-new-book-Dirty-Politics/tabid/506/articleID/52141/Default.aspx

    Radio Live – Sean Plunket with Nicky Hager:
    http://www.radiolive.co.nz/Nicky-Hager-denies-Kim-Dotcom-involvement-in-Dirty-Politics-book/tabid/506/articleID/52142/Default.aspx

    Radio Live with Marcus Lush and Judith Collins:
    http://www.radiolive.co.nz/Audio.aspx
    (load the audio page, and load today’s, i.e. Thursday’s audio clip from 08 :00 am, interview starts fr. about 10 min. into it) and the next audio clip from 08:15 am, from 14. 08.14)

    Mike Hosking with Hager, from this morning:
    http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/auckland/listen-on-demand/audio/1592045740-mhb—nicky-hager–dirty-politics

    Radio NZ National, G. Espiner talking with Cunliffe on Hager’s book:
    http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/morningreport/audio/20145640/opposition-leader-on-nicky-hager-book

    Radio NZ interview with Bryce Edwards on all this:
    http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/morningreport/audio/20145639/political-analysis-of-dirty-politics-book

    So we will have to see where this will go, as the media have a bloody duty to do some research and honest reporting now!!!

    • Weepus beard 10.1
      14 August 2014 at 3:24 pm

      So we will have to see where this will go, as the media have a bloody duty to do some research and honest reporting now!!!

      So many of them seem to be ideologically incapable of criticising the government to the extent to which they would have to to get to the bottom of this. It’s as if they’re too frightened to look into it because of what they might find.

      That, or they’ve all been blackmailed or paid off.

  11. emergency mike 11
    14 August 2014 at 2:32 pm

    Espiner was appalling. Hager writes a book about National abusing their governmental power to make dirty politics, and Espiner spends the interview trying to figure out if Laaabour does it too. Might be tricky without that governmental power aye Guyon? Is he really that clueless?

  12. McFlock 12
    14 August 2014 at 2:48 pm

    dunnokeyo comments in the odt:

    He again accused Nick Hager of being a left-wing conspiracy theorist and said any actions undertaken by Whale Oil blogger Cameron Slater were undertaken solely by Mr Slater and not under direction of the National Party.

    Pawn, meet bus. The tory feeding frenzy begins.

    • Psycho Milt 12.1
      14 August 2014 at 3:04 pm

      That looks promising – Key simultaneously trying to hang Slater out to dry and protect Ede is about the worst thing he could do. He’d have been better to have disowned Ede and strung him up alongside Slater.

      Oddity: the last paragraphs of the article consistently refer to Slater as “Mr Cameron” – maybe the journo is from the Middle East.

      • McFlock 12.1.1
        14 August 2014 at 3:21 pm

        lol didn’t notice that.

        Dene MacKenzie is the ODT tory cheerleader business news editor, so was probably a bit flustered at having met dunnokeyo 🙂

  13. Mike the Savage One 13
    14 August 2014 at 2:51 pm

    Yes, the ‘Dim Post’ summary from Danyl gives lots of stuff to consider.

    http://dimpost.wordpress.com/2014/08/13/dirty-politics-summary/

    I read this interesting bit:

    “Other noteworthy allegations:
    Slater has a friend who is a former-prostitute, who asks around brothels to find out if his political enemies have been to them. Len Brown, John Boscowan, Labour MPs, the Herald’s editors and Duncan Garner are all named as people Slater has attempted to ‘dig dirt’ on in this manner to ‘apply pressure’.

    Jordan Williams edits the Wikipedia pages of Labour MPs and writes smears about their sex lives

    Content on David Farrar’s Kiwiblog is written by National’s communications staffers”

    Looking at this stuff, and bearing in mind the regular contacts that John Key has to Slater, think a bit further, and remember Key’s “top drawer” remark a year or two back!

    Now, what about the “love lives” and “escapades” of various Parliamentary Press Gallery journalists? Is there perhaps stuff that Key’s Office, Slater and associates are using, to keep certain mainstream media persons “in check”???

    Does that explain why so many in the media are so “tame” and soft on the government we have?

    The mind is boggling.

    • Weepus beard 13.1
      14 August 2014 at 3:29 pm

      Does that explain why so many in the media are so “tame” and soft on the government we have?

      Yep, horrible thought.

  14. Man in a Barrel 14
    14 August 2014 at 3:04 pm

    Yup, it’s all over. Yesterday’s news, folks. It’s disappeared from ‘Stuff’ already.

    National attacked Hager for using stolen emails, the MSM gained no traction because there isn’t a single one of them worthy to kiss the feet of a Woodward or Bernstein – in fact they’d rather get at Hager for showing them up – and to most New Zealanders trying to make ends meet it’s just a storm in a tea-cup confirming that most politicians of any and all stamps are unprincipled scum, so what?

  15. TeWhareWhero 15
    14 August 2014 at 3:10 pm

    I was subjected to Sean Plunkett on Radio Live earlier when I went to visit my mother. He’s a piece of work. He has completely given up on even the pretence of being a journalist – and is happy to wallow in his role as a right wing gap filler between noisome adverts.

  16. Glenn 16
    14 August 2014 at 3:50 pm

    I visited my mother (must be a day for visiting mothers) and heard arch wanker Liarton Smith pretending to interview Hagar and really giving him a bollocking for hacking nice Camerons computer. What a bunch of tossers in the media. Goebbels would admire this lot.

  17. titirangi 17
    14 August 2014 at 4:06 pm

    Some interesting things from today.

    1. Every senior National member asked about the book has said the same thing “No I haven’t read the book” and “No I don’t plan on reading the book”.

    When commenting on the book they say “people have told me about what’s in it so I can only talk about what I’ve heard” etc.

    Then when asked pointed questions about the actual content of the book they avoid answering by just saying “well I haven’t read the book so I can’t comment”. It’s a bit transparent but still quite a good strategy.

    1. John Key threw Cameron under the bus.
    2. Cameron then threw his court case with Mathew Blomfield under the bus by saying using stolen emails was a criminal offence and the source of those stolen emails must be identified.
    3. Jason Eade has been locked in a cupboard somewhere.
  18. cricklewood 18
    14 August 2014 at 5:11 pm

    Worth noting Rodney Hide has categorically denied he was blackmailed or that anyone attempted to blackmail him. I guess the danger for Hager is that his source material isn’t exactly reliable given who’s written it…

  19. weka 19
    14 August 2014 at 5:36 pm

    “Cameron then threw his court case with Mathew Blomfield under the bus by saying using stolen emails was a criminal offence and the source of those stolen emails must be identified.”

    Has anyone in the msm talked about blomfield yet? Hard to fathom they are letting nact and Slater run the stolen email line without bringing this up.

    • cricklewood 19.1
      14 August 2014 at 6:58 pm

      I think the police decided in their infinite wisdom the drives weren’t stolen per say by the time they got to Slater. Could be completely off beam but I recall something about an unclaimed storage locker anyhows he came upon them in a way that is on the edges of law. I think discovering how that happened is driving the defamation case to some degree hence the battle over the source.

  20. outofbed 20
    14 August 2014 at 5:38 pm

    I guess Rodney is hardly likely to admit inappropriate texts to females.

    It certainly fits into the history of the Act nutjob leadership

  21. weka 21
    14 August 2014 at 5:39 pm

    I thought Goff did well on Chrckpoint over the SIS/OIA bit.

    Wondering when we get to stop calling it dirty tricks and instead call it corruption.

    • ScottGN 21.1
      14 August 2014 at 6:32 pm

      Goff did great on Checkpoint. And judging by TV3 opening item this eveing the news cycle isn’t doing Key any favours tonight.

      • karol 21.1.1
        14 August 2014 at 6:40 pm

        Goff stood out as knowing exactly what he’s talking about re-OIAs. And that the SIS buck stops with Key.

      • Kiwiri 21.1.2
        14 August 2014 at 6:42 pm

        Emails should be sent to various media tonight to ask them which side of History they are choosing to stand by their analysis and reporting of the issues.

  22. feijoa 22
    14 August 2014 at 6:19 pm

    I think we should focus on what the Natz are trying to deflect attention from. Its all about Nicky’s integrity (this is such classic Nat behaviour), or who hacked who and who’s friends with Slater….

    I think it’s the SIS stuff is what they’re trying to deflect from..

    • karol 22.1
      14 August 2014 at 6:37 pm

      Well, On 3 News tonight, Key looked about ready to throw Judith Collins under the bus. He seemed to have a fed up, don’t care attitude when questioned about Collins’ alleged crimes/misdemeanours.

      • ScottGN 22.1.1
        14 August 2014 at 6:51 pm

        You’re absolutely right Karol. He totally had his “I don’t need this I’m going to Hawaii” look on.

    • Anne 22.2
      14 August 2014 at 6:42 pm

      I think it’s the SIS stuff is what they’re trying to deflect from..

      It’s what John Key is trying to deflect from..

      Anyone else notice he was wearing his “lying face” on TV news tonight? It was so blatant, I find it hard to believe anyone could miss it, but unfortunately there will be plenty who did.

  23. Paul 23
    14 August 2014 at 7:35 pm

    Disgraceful interview by Hoskings, pimping for the Nats.
    How can he moderate debates?!

    http://tvnz.co.nz/seven-sharp/august-14-6057340

    • Anne 23.1
      14 August 2014 at 8:21 pm

      Yes saw it Paul. Disgraceful is an under-statement. I’m hoping David Cunliffe walks away from the Hosking debate on the strength of tonight’s performance. It would serve TVNZ right if they have to call it off.

      The only good that came out of it is that Hager gave back as good as he got. Did you pick up the look of fury on Hosking’s face at the end of the interview- after Hager had called him out on his “ignorant and cynical” stand?

      • Paul 23.1.1
        14 August 2014 at 8:24 pm

        I just hope Cunliffe, Norman, Turei, Harawira, Harre and Peters all show the same intestinal fortitude as Hager when dealing with bought puppets like Hosking.
        These ‘journalists’ deserve contempt and they need to be told they are failing to do their job.
        A lot of people are sick of their dishonest spinning for the rich and powerful in NZ and overseas.

      • AmaKiwi 23.1.2
        14 August 2014 at 8:36 pm

        No. Cunliffe should debate to demonstrate he is every bit the statesman many doubt he is.

        Cunliffe is a champion debater, which is why National has always been afraid of him.

        • Paul 23.1.2.1
          14 August 2014 at 8:40 pm

          Sure and he should jump on any bias or unprofessionalism by Hosking, just like Harre dealt to Rawden Christie.

        • Anne 23.1.2.2
          14 August 2014 at 9:37 pm

          Yes you’re both right. But how tempting it would have been to tell Hosking and TVNZ to go get stuffed…

    • Puddleglum 23.2
      14 August 2014 at 10:21 pm

      I had never seen an episode of Seven Sharp before (so far as I can recall)

      The trivialising item from Du-Plessis about the Judith Collins chapter was truly pathetic (I also note that Slater’s comment about Christchurch people in the worst hit parts of Christchurch was sanitised when read out). Was this an example of the famed ‘humour’ of the programme?

      The interview with Joyce and Hager, however, was just inept, incompetent and entirely predetermined by Hoskings. It was prefaced by Hoskings flatly stating that ‘we’ weren’t shocked, that there was no ‘smoking gun’ and that there was nothing here that links to John Key.

      Then he said “Steven Joyce, can I start working with you?” Indeed.

      Those first few questions to Joyce were set ups to get the rapid fire ‘No.’, ‘No.’, ‘No.’ responses to cement into viewers’ minds that the book’s allegations were baseless – without, of course, actually addressing them in any detail.

      He then turned to Hager and immediately said ‘You’ve had your chance all day to make allegations but everyone we’ve talked to has denied – ‘not true’, ‘not true’, ‘not true’ – so at the end of the day it’s ‘not true’? Excellent logic Mr Hoskings.

      I agree, Hager responded very well.

  24. weka 24
    14 August 2014 at 7:57 pm

    There’s much more and this must surely rumble on, but for a start can I say that I’m unaware of any passing of gossip and scuttlebutt to The Standard – even if I don’t know all the authors. I know that a few times Labour policy has been sent to us as it was to journalists with an embargo so we can have stories ready and scheduled when it’s announced. But nothing more than that.

    So their “Labour does it through The Standard” doesn’t stack up. There are Labour members like myself among the authors, so we’re likely to a) agree with the policy and b) be keen to promote it – but I’ve not seen any posts I thought were personal attacks on anybody (let alone the likes of public servants or scientists or other members of the public) fed by MPs or staffers. Or supplied with material that’s meant to be for the purpose of governing. Or any sort of intimidation.

    Interestingly, Pete George has been running his own little (tiny really) smear campaign about karol recently. He initially claimed that she must have close ties with the GP because she posts about their policies so much, and wanted to know why she didn’t declare interests (eg that the GP were feeding her information to post). When it was pointed that karol has always been very clear that she doesn’t belong to any political party and that she is interested in policy not the party, he went on to say since she is anonymous (sic) she can’t be trusted and implied that she is lying about having no connection with the GP. He also used the original post to attempt to malign the GP by making the connection to karol and her support of FJK.

    I had decided not to post this comment here, but then someone in OM said that PG was used by RNZ as an impartial judge on blogs today, so fuck ’em, his incompetency and duplicity need to be named (sorry karol). He’s not in Slater’s class by any means, but he’s a manipulative muck raker just the same, dressed up in middle NZ finery.

    • Anne 24.1
      14 August 2014 at 8:10 pm

      Good on you weka.

      I’ve seen some of the nasty, vindictive smears P.G.has been spreading about karol. I was tempted to cut and paste them here but decided not to give the lily-livered prick any further publicity. Not surprised he gets MSM attention. They either have very poor judgement when it comes to choosing their ‘little helpers’ or they prefer the ignorant muckrakers and liars because it suits their own agendas.

      • karol 24.1.1
        14 August 2014 at 8:16 pm

        Thanks, weka and Anne for the support.

        Can’t be bothered with the guy. (But then I’ve been critical of his slippery logic in the past….)

        And that is just so much BS. Never been fed any info from anyone, let alone the GP.

        • Paul 24.1.1.1
          14 August 2014 at 8:19 pm

          Don’t have a clue why RNZ see him as a worthwhile and/or reliable source.

          • karol 24.1.1.1.1
            14 August 2014 at 8:35 pm

            Yes. Strange. And the above argument as reported is strange. All I do is post in support of Greens policies as announced in press releases and news reports – cause I’m supporting them this election, and I would like them to do well.

            But I have also tried to be positive about all the left/opposition parties, and often linked to all their policies on a given issue.

            So, just silly speculation on his part.

            • weka 24.1.1.1.1.1
              14 August 2014 at 9:31 pm

              I think it’s good you didn’t engage with him karol. What he is doing is out and out manipulative bullshit, and you certainly don’t have to justify anything to the likes of him. Besides, your record stands here on ts just fine, and I agree, you present a range of policies and issues from across the left spectrum. I’ve been a bit perplexed at PG’s motivation, but I think its his own special brand of antipathy towards the GP and ts and anyone who supports both must be double wrong in his warped little worldview.

              It’s a real shame that RNZ consider him credible, esp when there are so many credible bloggers out there with actual integrity. I think RNZ producers have this idea that being in the middle of the political spectrum (ie centre right) is somehow equal to neutrality. One would have thought that Dunne had adequately demonstrated the uselessness of that approach, but I suppose that RNZ are looking for their own pseudo-cred via the mythical middle.

  25. emergency mike 25
    14 August 2014 at 8:02 pm

    Just watched Key’s 20min video talking to the press about the book. Sounding like a broken record saying “This is the left. Billboards, effigy, FJK, Hagar is a left wing conspiracy theorist. The left have done all of this because they don’t want to talk about policy. Nothing to do with National. The left does it too.” He repeated this to death… Seriously.

    I found it quite odd how he kept saying ‘the left’. I mean he’s banging on about conspiracy theorists, then talking like there’s a massive left wing conspiracy as if all of the above events are a coordinated attack.

    • karol 25.1
      14 August 2014 at 8:13 pm

      That is such a bare faced mis-truth to say that the left can’t win on policies, so they use smears – and at the same time as Key is repeatedly smearing the left, Hager etc.

      And which parties have been releasing all the policies so far? And how much detailed policy did the Nats announce last election? How is he allowed to spin such blatant BS?

      • emergency mike 25.1.1
        14 August 2014 at 8:26 pm

        It is a noted manipulation tactic of psychopaths to accuse an opponent (or more accurately a ‘victim’) of the very things they are guilty of. Just sayin’.

        Is there not a passage in the book where Lusk (I think) is quoted speaking about exactly that. Something about when accused of something, give it back double. The public will get tired of ‘bickering politicians’ and voter turn out will drop which is what we want. It’s the very same psychopathic manipulation concept.

        He’s explicitly pushing a tactic with the intented result of discouraging voting. Does that bother anyone?

        • karol 25.1.1.1
          14 August 2014 at 8:40 pm

          Yeah, that “double” tactic is very interesting. It is usually quoted as being said by Salter as something he learned from Judith Collins…. and what do we see, sometimes in the very same news reports…..? But Collins, Slater, key et al, responding to criticisms and accusations by giving it back double!

          That seems to be all they know how to do… tactics, spin, smears, claim the opposition have all their own faults- projection…. etc. So little honesty. No values other than wining and being top dogs.

          • Olwyn 25.1.1.1.1
            14 August 2014 at 8:56 pm

            Margaret Thatcher used to call people who were not callous enough for her liking “wets.” People of that kind seem to equate callousness and bullying with strength.

        • weka 25.1.1.2
          14 August 2014 at 8:44 pm

          Good insight em, and yes it bothers me. It’s exactly what I encounter when I try to encourage people to vote: oh there is no point, they’re all the same and as bad as each other.

    • emergency mike 25.2
      14 August 2014 at 8:18 pm

      Also, I was trying to find the old quote from Key where he said, from memory, that he talks to Slater ‘most days’ ‘everyday’ something like that. Can anyone remember that?

      Because the tune seems to have changed, in the video he says he talks to him ‘about four times a year’.

    • Weepus beard 25.3
      14 August 2014 at 9:27 pm

      He’s clearly on the defensive because he’s just started banging on about “the left” as a block. It’s really us and them to him and although his saying it out loud is new, the policy has been to divide the country all along.

      Let Winston Peters and IMP run the narrative – I don’t think Labour, nor Greens should depart from message.

      Just hope the media can keep the pressure on. They look either scared or complicit though.

      • emergency mike 25.3.1
        14 August 2014 at 10:31 pm

        Yes good ol’ divide and conquer. You’ve nailed it. He has been pushed into a corner and now his true feeling towards 50% of the people he supposedly represents is being explicitly stated. The FJK students and the dude who burned the effigy because ‘the chics threatened to leave the party coz it wuz cold’ are a part of ‘the left’. If you are against him you are part of his problem, an opponent. He will deal with you. You are in his way.

        This side of Key rises to the surface when he is challenged. He’s not a leader he’s a controller. A corporate manager. We are being managed.

  27. AmaKiwi 27
    14 August 2014 at 8:30 pm

    Stop! Get back on point.

    Nicky Hager is NOT the issue. STOP discussing him.

    Allegations are made in the book which IMO are WORSE than Watergate.

    Key says they aren’t true. OK, prove it.

    Prove the book’s evidence is faulty. Key’s strategy is as old as history: Kill the messenger so we are distracted from the disastrous news he brought.

    Stay on point, people. Did people in high places break the law? The book says, Yes.

    Demand the media be rigorous in requiring Key to present his evidence to the contrary.

    • McFlock 27.1
      14 August 2014 at 8:41 pm

      Funnily enough, they played All the President’s Men on sky tonight.

      The language attacking WaPo fills in a lot of the same bingo cards filled today.

      Looks promising 🙂

  28. Alistair Connor 28
    14 August 2014 at 8:36 pm

    This snippet from the Herald made me laugh :

    “Slater said he had 80GB of email data which meant the 8GB that Hager claimed to have was only a fraction of the content he had.”

    So it could have been ten times worse/better… the mind boggles eh.

    Or maybe it’s a veiled threat?

    I had understood that Slater was ambitious, and aimed at a career as a real politician. Now that he’s staring at the underside of the bus, he could prove extremely dangerous to all sorts of people. Mostly on his own side, I imagine.

    • AmaKiwi 28.1
      14 August 2014 at 8:40 pm

      Slater can slither away to another country and start again. Right wingers elsewhere would see his credentials as excellent.

      But what about Key? Do we have an extradition treaty with the evil empire that stole Hawaii from its First Nation people?

    • Alistair Connor 28.2
      14 August 2014 at 10:17 pm

      Oh um not only on his own side… From fairfax:
      http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/10381072/Hager-book-a-smear-campaign-Key
      “”He’s been very selective because I have sources from across the political spectrum, and outside of politics as well, and Nicky has selectively chosen ones that are damaging to the National Party but hasn’t published anything that might be damaging to the Labour Party, or the insiders I have in the Labour Party who regularly leak me information.””

      Bring it on, slater the hater!

      • Hanswurst 28.2.1
        15 August 2014 at 3:23 am

        The interesting thing about that is that, seeing as Slater apparently doesn’t know exactly which 8GB Hager received out of the approx. 80GB total, it should actually be rather hard for him to say how selective or otherwise Hager has been.

  29. philj 29
    14 August 2014 at 8:44 pm

    xox
    Heard this nin com poop interviewed on ‘National Radio’ Checkpoint, re. blogging. Only to find out at the end it was Pete George! He’ll be a regular on The Panel with Farrar. What next on NATRAD ?

  30. Alistair Connor 30
    14 August 2014 at 8:51 pm

    Another snippet that makes me laugh :
    “Hager said Mr Key had “cultivated a very respectable image of being friendly and relaxed” but in his view there was an unseen side to his politics the public needed to see before voting.

    He said links to bloggers by staff and ministers who answered to Mr Key meant he should be “accountable for … using such an ugly tool as part of his political management”.

    Slater certainly is an ugly prick, but it’s possibly libellous for Hager to say so?

    • weka 30.1
      14 August 2014 at 9:37 pm

      I doubt he meant physically. With libel the onus is on the person allegedly libelled to prove they’re not whatever was said about them. So Slater would have to prove that he is not an ugly tool. Not a shit show 😀

  31. Alistair Connor 31
    14 August 2014 at 8:57 pm

    MEDIA WATCH ALERT

    About 12 hours ago, I read a piece by John Armstrong in the Herald on line. He defended Hager’s integrity as a journalist, and said that Key had serious charges to answer, he seemed especially shocked about the SIS stuff. I was surprised and impressed.

    Now it looks like the Herald has pulled it :
    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/john-armstrong-on-politics/news/headlines.cfm?c_id=1502865

    Did anyone else read it, or was it all a dream? Did it make the print editions?

  32. meconism 32
    14 August 2014 at 8:58 pm

    Helen Kelly is at vote chat at Otago tomorrow can someone point me to a brief precis of Slater and Auckland Ports stuff, i would like to give her the opportunity to comment and she may not get asked otherwise. Thanks

  33. Alistair Connor 33
    14 August 2014 at 10:23 pm

    Oh JK, losing his legendary mojo?

    “”All of this is out there because of conspiracy theories on the left to try and damage my credibility, credibility of the National Party to try and hurt our chances in an election and New Zealanders will see through that.

    “What Nicky Hager has done is join a whole lot of dots that can’t be connected, makes wild allegations.” ”

    Cue Bart Simpson : “I didn’t do it. Nobody saw me do it. You can’t prove anything!”

  34. Alistair Connor 34
    14 August 2014 at 10:50 pm

    Oh dear I’m spending too much time on this. Slater has said he’ll force Hager to reveal his sources, on the strength of the rather strange and frightening High Court judgement forcing Kim Dotcom to hand over David Fisher’s source material for his book (legal arguments summarised here:
    http://www.dlapf.com/kim-dotcom-not-news-worthy-recent-high-court-judgment-puts-spotlight-privacy-act-exemption-news )

    I found this quote from Slater about the affair :
    [WHALEDREK ALERT]
    http://www.whaleoil.co.nz/2014/06/dotcom-research-notes-book-news/#more-141297
    “There is nothing more satisfying in journalism than to use someone’s own writings against them. The source material is indisputable. There is no hearsay or 3rd party agendas to get in the way. It’s pure and direct from the person being investigated.

    Apart from David Fisher and his ilk crying foul over some sort of perceived rights to privacy over their research, such privacy is clearly no longer upheld when the courts decide the source material is of interest to an investigation. ”

    My interpretation of this ruling is different from Slater’s, however. Rather than being forced by Slater to reveal where he got the material from, Hager could be forced by police to hand over his material if the wish to investigate the subject matter. But Hager has already said he’ll be happy to co-operate with the police !

  35. john 35
    14 August 2014 at 11:15 pm

    Interesting claim that The Standard doesn’t get tips from the Labour Party.

    Duncan Garner has said today that when he was in the press gallery The Standard was regularly getting tip offs from Labour MPs and press secretaries.

    [lprent: sigh I’ll let that one through purely to point out that what Duncan Garner actually said (paraphrasing) was that he was referred to The Standard by people in the NZLP (not that we got tips from the NZLP).

    Now here is the hard bit for you to understand (you do seem to be a fool). Most of that would have been to information that was already public at the time it was written, but which our posts had put together in a nice summarized fashion with links to supporting material.

    If you’ve ever tried to extract information from any NZ political parties web site, you’d understand why they’d send you to The Standard. We have a functioning search engine and it gets used heavily. Press releases often go out without any links at all.

    Now you’d have to find specific instances from Duncan.

    However people pointing to links to opinion, assessments, graphs, analysis, images, old articles, old posts, comments, etc etc that are already public information are not evidence of conspiracy. It usually an expression of search engine optimization and search facilities. ]