Dirty politics past and present

Written By: - Date published: 12:42 pm, November 17th, 2016 - 63 comments
Categories: David Farrar, Dirty Politics, dpf, same old national, spin - Tags: , , , ,

Recent cataclysmic events, both political and geological, mean a few interesting stories have slipped under the radar. Here’s two of them.

National’s surviving dirty politics blogger chose the (NZ) day of the US election to slip out this little beauty – Trying to rehash Dirty Politics

The DIA e-mailed me this week to say that they are releasing the data below, sought by Nicky Hagar since February 2015, showing calls and texts from Jason Ede to me between January to August 2011 when Jason worked for Ministerial Services.

A table is included.

So eliminating the one minute ones which would be no answer/voicemails, this shows 13 phone calls over eight months, which is around one phone call every 19 days.

Oh yeah there were also six text messages over eight months. This will of course be breathlessly reported by Hager as proof of, well something, and repeated uncritically by some in the media.

DPF sounds a little upset – it’s just metadata – surely if he has nothing to hide he has nothing to fear? Or is it perhaps the case the metadata isn’t so harmless after all? And he tries to spin this as a non-event, but it does show regular contact with Dirty Politics HQ. Presumably most of the discussion was via email, which is not covered by this data.

For a second story, National is still up to its old tricks, trying to subvert the media –

I think we all owe it to ourselves to go and read the piece – which was not changed – that Paula Bennett didn’t want us to see – Depressed Wellington man’s impossible search for a suitable home

63 comments on “Dirty politics past and present ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. ianmac 1
    17 November 2016 at 1:40 pm

    There is a defensive tone to Farrar’s response. Of course a text message could include a chunk of dirt.

    • Muttonbird 1.1
      17 November 2016 at 9:46 pm

      Also this was DIA’ed calls from Ede to Farrar and one must assume the same number of calls went the other way, if not a lot more since Farrar was subservient in the relationship.

  2. Barfly 2
    17 November 2016 at 1:53 pm

    That’s phone calls ,,what about VOIP calls

  3. Sacha 3
    17 November 2016 at 3:01 pm

    Poor little Davey never really grasped the legal concept of ‘public interest’.

  4. James Thrace 4
    17 November 2016 at 3:48 pm

    A lot can be said in a one minute call.

    • Bearded Git 4.1
      17 November 2016 at 6:02 pm

      @JT My thoughts exactly, in 55 seconds you can say a lot-certainly not all of these can be discounted.

  5. Wayne 5
    17 November 2016 at 4:24 pm

    How is it Dirty Politics that David Farrar spoke to Jason Eade? David is a senior well connected National Party member. I would have expected him to talk to Jason Eade from time to time.

    Presumably senior Labour people or senior Green people talk to their Leader’s offices from time to time.

    • b waghorn 5.1
      17 November 2016 at 4:43 pm

      when is jason eade going to come out of hiding and clear up his side of the story

    • One Anonymous Bloke 5.2
      17 November 2016 at 4:53 pm

      Well, we already know about the Dirty Politics machine in the Prime Minister’s office. This latest is just another piece in a rather large jigsaw.

      Exhibit some personal responsibility for a change. Has no-one ever advised you to “front-foot” a problem? These mealy-mouthed denial lines just make you look shabby, Wayne.

    • RJL 5.3
      17 November 2016 at 5:17 pm

      @Wayne

      Depends on what was said and what was done as a consequence of those conversations, of course.

      DPF’s crappy blog and its apparent role as an outlet of National spin and disinformation speaks for itself.

    • Chris 5.4
      17 November 2016 at 5:33 pm

      Yeah, just business as usual for your lot. Nothing to see here, eh?

    • dukeofurl 5.5
      17 November 2016 at 5:37 pm

      Edes job was to ghost write draft articles and photoshop pictures for both Farrar and more so Slater for their blogs.
      All while on the taxpayers dollar.
      Essentially he was doing national party business rather the countries

    • Bearded Git 5.6
      17 November 2016 at 6:03 pm

      Where is Jason Ede?

    • lprent 5.7
      17 November 2016 at 7:08 pm

      Presumably senior Labour people or senior Green people talk to their Leader’s offices from time to time.

      FFS Wayne. That is a really dumbarse diversion. This wasn’t to the leaders office, it was to one particular person inside the leaders office.

      It was by a person who may have talked to other people in the leaders office frequently because of the nature of his business. Pimping for the National party as their pollster.

      However this was the person responsible for dealing with social media, and their dirty tricks via social media.

      So that kind of leaves just social media and dirty tricks for David Farrar in his role of a ‘independent’ blogger.

      It seems like pretty frequent contact to me.

      I sysop the largest labour movement blog. But I would talk to any one person using phone or text or even email in any party or leaders office a maximum of 4 times a year (and usually about 2). Most of that was usually to organise access to meetings and press standups. I don’t think that many authors here would even do that.

      I do tend to have more contact with individual MPs. That is usually when we’re organising guest posts for them.

      By my standards David Farrar would be damn near have been a close personal friend of Jason Ede. It doesn’t speak well of DPF’s ‘independence’. More like he is a dependent – which what I suspect is in fact the case.

      • stunned mullet 5.7.1
        17 November 2016 at 8:27 pm

        “But I would talk to any one person using phone or text or even email in any party or leaders office a maximum of 4 times a year (and usually about 2). ”

        Isn’t that due to the fact that most people think you’re an odious (and perhaps lovely odiferous) oik and it’s their preference to avoid you like the plague ?

        • lprent 5.7.1.1
          17 November 2016 at 9:52 pm

          Possibly. It helps with getting time to work on work AND doing a time consuming part time activity.

          But I notice that you avoided the point of my comment. Do you have YOUR head as far up John Keys arse as Farrar and Slater?

          Please tell us what it smells like…

          • stunned mullet 5.7.1.1.1
            18 November 2016 at 7:27 am

            I see you have moved on from your penis fixation to a bumhole curiosity.

            I have no interest in the stench or otherwise of Key’s poos !

          • UncookedSelachimorpha 5.7.1.1.2
            18 November 2016 at 9:35 am

            Like roses, apparently.

      • Sam C 5.7.2
        18 November 2016 at 2:33 am

        The fact that you sysop the largest labour movement blog and yet have such limited contact with party and leaders’ offices is a harbinger of why the left have been in opposition for the past 8 years and will continue to be so until at least 2020.

        You just aren’t organised. It really is men against boys. Or is that women against girls? Or transgenders against….?

      • Gosman 5.7.3
        18 November 2016 at 7:52 am

        David Farrar has stated he communicates with people from the Labour party on a similar basis. I have met him and his interactions while out and about are wide and varied. I think some e such as yourself based outside Wellington won’t understand that.

    • Robert Guyton 5.8
      17 November 2016 at 9:47 pm

      Butter wouldn’t melt here.
      Where?
      In Wayne’s gob.

  6. Chuck 6
    17 November 2016 at 4:34 pm

    Its a bit early to start making excuse’s for Labour and the Greens losing the 2017 election!

  7. Nessalt 7
    17 November 2016 at 4:47 pm

    Phil twyford losing it Andrea Vance because she didn’t run the story as he had shopped to her in their one-to-one meeting.

    • ropata 7.1
      17 November 2016 at 11:03 pm

      Vance used the centrepiece of the Labour conference to attack Labour on an irrelevant (and ultimately incorrect) point of instead of honestly reporting what Labour policy actually is

      • Nessalt 7.1.1
        18 November 2016 at 11:47 am

        Phil Twyford shopped a story to a supposedly friendly journo, then got all stroppy with her when she didn’t run it a shopped and miraculously labour supportive commenters on blogs and social media attacked said supposedly friendly Journo. Attacked for being a journalist and asking the (ultimately correct) questions necessary to be a journalist and not a MSM corporate shill.

        Apart from the order of operations, that’s pretty much DP to a T

        Just making sure it was included in the list!!

        • ropata 7.1.1.1
          19 November 2016 at 4:09 pm

          Dirty Politics is all about smearing your opponents, where did Labour do that? Oh it was actually Vance smearing Labour again.

          I think what annoyed Twyford was the fact that Vance went off on a tangent unrelated to the jobs policy Labour actually announced. She turned a news item into a hit piece on Labour with her nasty editorialising.

  8. North 8
    17 November 2016 at 4:56 pm

    Freudian slip there Chuck. And pearl-clutchy indignation from Wayne……..story is that no one even commenced a suit much less successfully sued Hager. No one either wrote a heavily documented book about DP on the Left.

  9. billmurray 9
    17 November 2016 at 5:11 pm

    NATWATCH,
    can’t get the slightest excited by your post, all politics are dirty.

    Are the Labour and Green parties politicians and advisers all angelic and pure?.

    You need to get real.

    • McFlock 9.1
      17 November 2016 at 5:17 pm

      Not one to criticise what other people get excited about, I merely suggest that if TS no longer does it for you perhaps you might consider frequenting pornhub instead?

      • billmurray 9.1.1
        17 November 2016 at 5:23 pm

        Mcflock,
        My post was a fact.
        You need to grow up and post intelligent comment to posts.
        I know that you are capable.

        pornhub? LOL you seem to know all about them.

        [“My post was a fact.” No, it wasn’t. It was an opinion. One that many people here disagree with but probably can’t be bothered rehashing for the zillionth time since Nicky Hager reported what DP is in NZ. Now, you’ve had some fun for a few days. I suggest a couple of things. One is read the About and the Policy, esp the bits about backing up statements, and not wasting moderator time. The other is have a think about whether you really want to wind people up here. We’ve just had a long period of aggravation and I doubt that letting someone come along and start flame wars is the most likely next evolution of The Standard – weka]

        [lprent: Personally I think he is simply too stupid to understand. But I guess we’ll try the gentle approach for a few more comments to see if the idiot can figure out that we don’t like astroturfing trolls. ]

        • billmurray 9.1.1.1
          17 November 2016 at 6:01 pm

          weka,
          are you seriously saying that dirty politics is not practised by all political parties?.
          I am not trying to wind people up.
          I sincerely put my viewpoints.
          I also get upset when I am told to visit a pornhub or as previously has happened called nasty names. What for?.
          I know nothing of previous aggravation.
          I understand that this site is “left” in politics, when I was a active member in the Papakura LEC we had much healthy polemic but did not threaten or suggest leaving the LEC as a answer.
          Surely the answer is reasonable and intelligent debate without the name calling.

          • weka 9.1.1.1.1
            17 November 2016 at 6:14 pm

            Myself, I always like to take the time to get to know how a new place works, what the people are like etc. I’m suggesting that you have a think about how this place works and how you can fit in. It’s not a free-for all, and as I said, some of us are enjoying the respite from aggro. And seriously, read the Policy and About.

            “are you seriously saying that dirty politics is not practised by all political parties”

            Yes, I am. DIrty politics has a specific meaning. It’s not just about politicians being liars and ratbags. It’s a range of tactics and behaviours that are specific (in NZ) to National. Hager literally wrote the book on this stuff. It’s worth getting a copy if you are going to debate the issue here.

            As b says below, how about you put up some examples. I wouldn’t even bother about Labour, just start with the Greens and give us 3 examples of where they have practiced dirty politics a la Hager’s book. Bet you can’t.

            • billmurray 9.1.1.1.1.1
              17 November 2016 at 6:36 pm

              I have read Hager book and found it to be, in my opinion, mostly his opinion.
              Of course I can’t give three example’s as le Hager’s book, nor did I say that I or anybody could prove conclusively of dirty tricks.
              Dirty tricks were Hagers words, IMO secret tricks would have been a more apt choice of words.
              Hager,s book was put together by what was allegded stolen emails.
              It is not my bible on dirty or any politics, nor will it be.

              When John Key did a dirty political deal with John Banks in the Epsom seat, Labour screamed blue heaven dirty politics, Labour and the Greens are now doing the same thing in Mt Roskill.
              I am not being critical of that fact, though I restate that all politics is dirty politics.

              [lprent: FFS – Banned for 4 weeks for

              1. what appears to be a deliberate diversion on a post topic.
              2. Making assertions without offering any proof. Exactly where did Hagar allege that the Epsom National/Act electoral deal was ‘dirty politics’. Quite simply I think you just made that up. Dirty Politics was about the arseholes of the local blogosphere and their handlers in the National party.
              3. Not reading the about and the policy.
              4. arguing with a moderator

              I think that this one just needs a double up on each subsequent ban. Reads like a classic stupid troll. ]

              • In Vino …
                17 November 2016 at 7:55 pm

                Thank you Weka and lprent. I struggle to understand your treatment of CV, but you are doing all the work and have greater background knowledge.
                My concern was that the more destructive trolls were getting off scot-free by being matey and polite… You have restored some confidence.

              • Muttonbird …
                17 November 2016 at 9:43 pm

                Bye, billmurray. I called it yesterday, and you obliged today. Like a lemming off a cliff.

                You didn’t tell me who you were though…

    • b waghorn 9.2
      17 November 2016 at 5:48 pm

      they all do it Ha! i’m all ears show me labours and the greens links to shitty attack bloggers or fuck off.

      • Chuck 9.2.1
        17 November 2016 at 7:00 pm

        All political parties use the media to get into the public arena articles that may embarrass there opponents.

        They use a “friendly reporter” to provide a Chinese’s wall between the story and the source, if required. Or it’s breaking news…etc. Its been going on for a long time.

        Bloggers are increasing becoming the new MSM.

        At the end of the day the majority of the public don’t care about “dirty politics” they know all political parties partake. They just need to watch one news for 30 second news bites of MP’s (of all parties) argue like kids in parliament, accusing each other of all sorts of things.

        I know the activist left can’t understand why Hagers book did not result in a landslide election victory, and properly never will.

        [lprent: “Bloggers are increasing becoming the new MSM.”

        Apart from one incident back in 2008 on this site that was dealt with at the time, do you have proof that this happens on this blog or for that matter with any left blog in NZ?

        As far as I am concerned you just impugned me with an assertion of fact without offering proof and any evidence. Banned for 4 weeks. And if you can point to anything, then you could try email. However if you don’t present evidence to back your assertion, I’dd just keep doubling the ban.

        I suggest that you read the policy – try searching for self-martyrdom. ]

        • b waghorn 9.2.1.1
          17 November 2016 at 7:06 pm

          as i said to to your mate bmurray show me the proof. the whole meme that they all do it is part of the nats filthy tactics.

        • UncookedSelachimorpha 9.2.1.2
          18 November 2016 at 10:17 am

          “I know the activist left can’t understand why Hagers book did not result in a landslide election victory, and properly never will.”

          No one is arguing that dirty politics isn’t effective. Doesn’t make it right.

        • weka 9.2.1.3
          18 November 2016 at 10:41 am

          “I know the activist left can’t understand why Hagers book did not result in a landslide election victory, and properly never will”

          Oh, fuck off. The activist left don’t think all the same and there are plenty of leftwing activists who understand perfectly well the dynamics of the last election, including how the DP book fits into that. And of course, no-one was suggesting a landslide election off the back of the book anyway, so well done on the troll lines and thank-you Lynn.

    • Bearded Git 9.3
      17 November 2016 at 6:11 pm

      @ billmurray The idea that all political parties are dirty is the kind of crap that you and your Crosby-Textor mates like to peddle. But it is rubbish.

      The Greens, Labour and even Winston (at times) hold principled positions on issues and do not tell lies, unlike Key and his awful acolytes who now have an 8 year track record of this.

      Incidentally lies include lies by omission, a favourite tactic of the outgoing PM; tell part of the story, leaving out inconvenient facts. Sheepgate, the RMA amendments, Jason Ede’s role are examples.

      • billmurray 9.3.1
        17 November 2016 at 6:56 pm

        Bearded Git,
        not sure who Crosby-Textor are, nor do I want to know.
        I do not share your opinions on the purity of the NZ First, Labour and Green parties.
        IMO all political parties engage , when it suits them in dirty politics.
        I also believe that most politicians lie about what they will do when elected and that the for-most goal of all politicians is to get into a safe seat of what ever political party they represent. The electorate and the country come second.

        I do agree that lie’s of omission and leaving out salient facts and other shady practices are heavily practiced in NZ politics.

        “outgoing PM” LOL, hope you are right.

        Cheers

    • Cinny 9.4
      17 November 2016 at 9:00 pm

      Bill, dude it’s not a competition on whom is worse. Cause Nat’s win hand’s down and we all know it.

      And since you mentioned the Greens and Labour, they are way more honest than the outgoing government.

      And just because some political parties are super twisted, dirty and shady it dosent mean that all parties are. Nat party tactics have been a real eye opener over the years, but hey not all parties stoop that low. JS

      That’s what you wanted yes? To get real. Glad I could help xxx

  10. james 10
    17 November 2016 at 6:54 pm

    “The Greens, Labour and even Winston (at times) hold principled positions on issues and do not tell lies, unlike Key and his awful acolytes who now have an 8 year track record of this.”

    Actually National hold principled positions on issues as well – just because you do not like them – it dosnt make them unprincipled.

    • billmurray 10.1
      17 November 2016 at 7:02 pm

      james,
      you are right:

      (at times) LOL

    • b waghorn 10.2
      17 November 2016 at 7:10 pm

      they hold positions yes ,principles they have none, where is eade ,? and how in the hell is collins not only still in government but a fucking min ister again?, sheep gate ?,
      not a murmur from a single female mp when key harassed a young lady?

      • james 10.2.1
        17 November 2016 at 7:36 pm

        Yeah – and “we” could pull out a who lot about members of the left also – its not all 100% one sided you know.

        Its just ignorant, stupid and moronic to state as an absolute that National have no principles, just as it would be for someone of the right to say that about Labour or the Greens – again, regardless of if we like them or not.

        As for Jason Ede – Who cares.

        Although I do note that someone on this blog previously commented on how it would be great if you could keep harassing him until he killed himself – and this was unchecked by other commenters – so perhaps its just as well people dont know where he lives – there are people who do seem to be willing to take things too far. (And for the record that goes across all spectrums – not just the left (I think its well proven that there are bat shit crazys on the right as well**)

        ** Not expecting any argument on that specific point 😉

        to save you asking for a cite – heres the quote:
        “Wouldn’t it be great if we could keep harassing Jason Ede, a man who no longer works in politics, until he did something like that Brenda Leyland lady.

        That would teach him.”

        [next time put in a link or expect to be moderated for wasting moderator time. I don’t know if it was you, but there have been too many people lately (mostly RWers) making accusations and using past comments as supposed back up but not providing links. And then when I go look it up it’s not what happened. Case in point, the quote above is from King Kong, a well known RWer, and he wasn’t suggesting Ede kill himself, he was trying to suggest that the left were harassing Ede into suicide. – weka]

        • Bearded Git 10.2.1.1
          17 November 2016 at 7:44 pm

          James-I will wear “ignorant, stupid and moronic” from you as a badge of honour.

        • Gabby 10.2.1.2
          17 November 2016 at 8:07 pm

          Well I’d quite like to know what Jason Evil is up to. I suspect he’s being a busy little bee.

        • b waghorn 10.2.1.3
          17 November 2016 at 8:50 pm

          i just want to know what eade was doing . and what dark hole he’s been moved to ,unless I’ve missed something it’s been an impressive vanishing act.

        • Cinny 10.2.1.4
          17 November 2016 at 9:06 pm

          I’d say the outgoing government has always had questionable principles and practices.

        • lprent 10.2.1.5
          17 November 2016 at 10:03 pm

          Don’t be a fool. You know better than to take a single instance and running your inflator over it.

          Moderators deal with things when we see them. Sometimes we simply don’t see them. There are a lot of comments on this site, and usually not enough moderator time.

          Commenters tend to ignore people doing something that moderators will probably deal with.

          Personally I have banned at least hundreds of people for making light of or threatening violence. Probably more for accusing us of hypocrisy.

          Do it again and I may feel like giving you a hypocrites departure from the site. But I have had too many wines tonight to make judgement now. So you get a pass.

          • In Vino 10.2.1.5.1
            17 November 2016 at 10:30 pm

            I believe that was aimed at you, James, just in case the thread went on too long for you… lprent must deserve a wine or two. (Bon courage!)

    • mpledger 10.3
      17 November 2016 at 10:00 pm

      The mess Key has made over getting the men out of the Pike River Mine is hardly principled – he was able to slide off the hook because he expresses himself so poorly in English, both in content and delivery. But sliding off hooks, his “go to” strategy when he gets himself into trouble, is hardly principled.

  11. Murray Simmonds 11
    18 November 2016 at 9:52 am

    “So eliminating the one minute ones which would be no answer/voicemails, this shows 13 phone calls over eight months, . . . ”

    Bullshit. Once upon a time, the standard advertising slot on NZBC/TVNZ was 30 seconds. So that wasn’t long enough to get a message across?

    What was the length of the Christchurch earthquake again, could someone remind me? I know that it was long enough for me to offer a few expletives, get up and close the China cabinet door, do a few other things in quick succession.

    One minute is actually quite a long time. I wish I could still remember the average number of words per minute for Radio NZ news broadcasts, but I seem to recall that its actually quite high.

    So come on twitty little boy. Give us the figure INCLUDING the calls of a minute or less. We are not as stupid as you might like to think on this side of the line.

  12. Murray Simmonds 12
    18 November 2016 at 10:44 am

    According to the National Center for Voice and Speech (http://www.ncvs.org/ncvs/tutoria…) the average rate for English speakers in the US is about 150 wpm. Interestingly, publishers recommend books on tape to be voiced at 150-160 wpm ( . . . ., auctioneers are generally 250-400 wpm (http://wn.com/World%27s_Fastest_…) while the average reading rate is about 200-300 wpm.

    https://www.quora.com/Speeches-For-the-average-person-speaking-at-a-normal-pace-what-is-the-typical-number-of-words-they-can-say-in-one-minute

    “Open office” Word count shows the above document is 56 word long (excluding this sentence!)