Dotcom’s extradition and the 2014 general election

94 comments on “Dotcom’s extradition and the 2014 general election ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Enough is Enough 1

   12 February 2014 at 12:07 pm

   Gower is a real hurdle to democracy in this country. That is a fact.

   However, David really needs to learn (in a hurry) how to deal with the little dickhead. The removal of the word “but” from any sentence should really be the first thing he learns. He needs to make clear concise unconditional statements about what he would do. If there are any buts involved Gower will run with them.

   Gower has an agenda and there is no use crying about that. Cunliffe simply needs to be better at dealing with him.

   David has been found wanting on Dotcom and the baby bonus in this respect.

   Look to Norman or Turei for how to be more decisive
   • Colonial Viper 1.1

     12 February 2014 at 12:17 pm

     As I’ve said before, Gowers top tier access can be seriously curtailed if required.
     • grumpy 1.1.1

       12 February 2014 at 1:23 pm

       Really?????Why would Labour want to do that?
       • One Anonymous Bloke 1.1.1.1

         12 February 2014 at 5:31 pm

         For one thing, the opposition is tax-payer funded, and Paddy Gower is a delusional conspiracy theorist who wants to be the story. There are plenty of journalists in the queue in front of wannabe gonzos.
2. One Anonymous Bloke 2

   12 February 2014 at 12:08 pm

   Given the crown’s illegal warrant, police perjury and breach of a sealed evidence room, what chance the minister will even have to decide?
   • mickysavage 2.1

     12 February 2014 at 12:23 pm

     It may not be enough. The Courts may be able to exclude some of the evidence but I suspect there is still enough for them to pass the threshold.

     Then the Minister can consider the “good faith” provisions but to allege the US Government was not acting in good faith will require considerable political guts. The fact that he was charged with racketeering when he was at worst involved in copyright breaches could be evidence of bad faith however.

     Then there is the residuary discretion that the Minister has and a variety of considerations could arise.

     I see the situation as complex. I am sure the lawyers are having a good time though!
     • Enough is Enough 2.1.1

       12 February 2014 at 2:00 pm

       I dont actually see it as that complex.

       I can’t seem to find examples of where the Minister has refused an extradition order. I would expect the only time they exercise that discretion would be on humanitarian grounds.

       If Dotcom was in line for 50 lashes and 10 years of hard labour I think a Minister should intervene if it is breach of international laws.

       Nothwithstanding the motivations of the US government, if the evidence stack up in the New Zealand court then on your bike dotcom. The Minister should not intervene.
       • One Anonymous Bloke 2.1.1.1

         12 February 2014 at 3:27 pm

         According to you the minister has no function, since if the courts pass the warrant the minister shouldn’t intervene, and if the courts don’t pass it the minister won’t be involved at all.

         The minister has a statutory duty to perform that the court cannot.
         • PapaMike 2.1.1.1.1

           12 February 2014 at 3:43 pm

           Not always so – there was an emigration case against a Sri Lankan girl which was overturned by the Minister a few years ago, although the Department felt it was unjust in the threat or being raped if she was sent back – she was sent back in spite of an uproar.
           • One Anonymous Bloke 2.1.1.1.1.1

             12 February 2014 at 4:24 pm

             Yes, I recall that now you mention it. Thanks.
       • Matthew Whitehead 2.1.1.2

         12 February 2014 at 10:53 pm

         Actually I think it would be personally reasonable to refuse extradition simply because the MoJ doesn’t feel he will receive a fair and unbiased trial, regardless of whether the potential outcome of losing said trial would be humane or not.
     • One Anonymous Bloke 2.1.2

       12 February 2014 at 3:29 pm

       Mickey, can’t the court consider the bogus charges?
       • mickysavage 2.1.2.1

         12 February 2014 at 7:21 pm

         The quality of the charges is a relevant consideration for the Minister. The Court probably has the chance to consider the quality of evidence but the charge itself seems to have to be considered at face value by the Court.
   • PapaMike 2.2

     12 February 2014 at 3:40 pm

     The case for extradition is a very difficult and complex one, and the warrant only has to show that the country applying for the extradition has lawful ground for doing so.
     Nothing else really matters
     • One Anonymous Bloke 2.2.1

       12 February 2014 at 3:42 pm

       Lawful ground doesn’t sound very much like a bogus racketeering charge, but I get your point.
3. ianmac 3

   12 February 2014 at 12:10 pm

   Well said Micky and Andrew Geddis also has posted a very legal view of the Dotcom situation on Pundit. He agrees that Cunliffe words are correct and that Norman’s are a little loose/unwise.
   http://www.pundit.co.nz/content/will-no-one-rid-me-of-this-turbulent-german
4. Lanthanide 4

   12 February 2014 at 12:38 pm

   The other angle not mentioned in this post is that Kim Dotcom says he has proof that John Key knew who he was before the day of the mansion raid, which is something Key categorically denies.

   So if Key is found to be lying on this point, it’s a big black eye for him. The sort of thing a US president would be impeached on.

   The angle seems to be that John Key knew who Dotcom was and did a secret dirty deal with the yanks to have him extradited to face jail in the US. Lets hope that whatever Dotcom has, it is compelling and incontrovertible.
   • alwyn 4.1

     12 February 2014 at 2:08 pm

     You are getting a bit carried away aren’t you?

     “If Key is found to be lying at this point, it’s a big black eye for him”.
     So far, so good but did you have to continue with the next sentence?
     “The sort of thing a US President would be impeached on”.

     Get real. You are aware, aren’t you, that only two presidents have ever been impeached. They were Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton. Are you really suggesting that none of the others lied, and that that fact was not widely known? Can you seriously claim that a President would be impeached just for a lie?

     Note this is not a comment on whether or not Key might have been aware of who Dotcom was. It is only a comment on the realism of an impeachment.

     Personally I think that most, if not all, politicians lie. They don’t admit it of course but they do.
     • blue leopard (Get Lost GCSB Bill) 4.1.1

       12 February 2014 at 2:56 pm

       Yes, I was just talking with someone the other day who said just that ‘ah well, politicians lie’

       When asking this person ‘but don’t you think that Key is particularly dishonest – infact the most dishonest PM we have had”

       They didn’t seem to think so – it appeared more important to them to think Key was ‘just a common garden lying politician’ than to see things as they really are.

       I take this to be evidence of the workings of the toad in hot water – turning up the heat slowly – this is how seriously terrible political approaches get accepted – by increments.

       Fortunately this person doesn’t approve of Key enough to vote for him.

       I suspect that the rightwing are unconcerned about dishonesty in politicians – they expect it -as long as these politicians can dishonestly convince them that they are working in their interests – ‘it dunt matta if itz troo or not’ – they can then feel secure in their fragile little world of smoke and mirrors – comforted by the cooing of lies – there really is no reasoning with some people…how does the left counter such delusional creatures?
       • alwyn 4.1.1.1

         12 February 2014 at 3:49 pm

         “When asking this person ‘But don’t you think that Key is particularly dishonest'” … “They didn’t seem to think so”.

         Of course they wouldn’t think so, at least if they had lived in New Zealand at any time between 1999 and 2008. We had, during that time, the most dishonest Prime Minister we have ever had. Well she was the most dishonest of any we have had since the Second World War. I can’t comment on the ones prior to that. We had a PM who, given the choice of telling the truth or making up a complicated lie would ALWAYS choose to tell a lie.

         It is wonderful to have a PM for the last five years who is honest. He may have some slips of the tongue, and an occasional slip during casual, unprepared speech but he doesn’t lie for the sake of lying like the leading figures in the parties of the left. I suppose they saw that HC was successful for a while and think it will continue to work for them.
         • Lanthanide 4.1.1.1.1

           12 February 2014 at 4:31 pm

           🙄
         • blue leopard (Get Lost GCSB Bill) 4.1.1.1.2

           12 February 2014 at 4:36 pm

           Oh? so it has gone from ‘most MPs are liars’ to ‘John Key is honest’. Is he really? ‘Doesn’t lie for lying’s sake’ – Yes, correct; not many lying MPs do – they do it for their masters’ agenda.

           Heck Alwyn – what to say? You live in a fantasy world and appear rather committed to it It is hard to believe it possible that people are swallowing the crap you and your ilk are propagating , yet I am sure many will; as bereft of critical facilities as they would have to be. I guess that is why the National govt cut out all those informative TV channels, cut education support, are systematically undermining the higher education system and are tardy with paying teachers, [their enemies] No, they wouldn’t want people actually learning to think and must hate those that aim to do just that.

           As I said in my last comment – it is hard to know how to address people who are actively comforted by lies; prefer the world of smoke and mirrors to the uncertainty of the real world – except to say:

           ‘John Key is honest’ – Alwyn

           Thanks for giving me a laugh 😆
         • You_Fool 4.1.1.1.3

           13 February 2014 at 7:51 am

           error: citation needed for comment that black is white
           • blue leopard (Get Lost GCSB Bill) 4.1.1.1.3.1

             13 February 2014 at 2:47 pm

             @ You_Fool

             Yes, I await in great anticipation of Chris73 supplying the impossible link.

             While waiting I supply here a link to a book that provides categorical proof the John Key is a severely duplicitous man:

             The Hollow Men

             Conveniently this kills two birds because that such a book exists also supplies proof that Chris73 is not one to allow facts to get in the way of his delusional view on Mr Key.
     • Lanthanide 4.1.2

       12 February 2014 at 3:02 pm

       Bill Clinton wasn’t impeached for telling a lie, so much as for telling a lie about an important incident and repeating it.

       Much as John Key has done with this. Go watch his Campbell Live interview when the thing broke, the whole segment was about 20 minutes long, with Key on for 10 minutes denying over and over again that he had ever heard of KDC before the day of the raid.

       If it turns out maybe Key did know of him, but it was just in-passing or in a name in GCSB briefing as may have happened, it’s no big deal at all, you’re right.

       But if Key did know about it, because he specifically did a deal with the yanks to put KDC behind bars, then it is a big deal because it looks like corruption and lying to the public in order to cover it up.
       • felix 4.1.2.1

         13 February 2014 at 5:56 am

         Nah, he might get away with having heard of him once in passing if he’d only denied it once in passing.

         But he has categorically, unequivocally, deliberately, and repeatedly denied it.

         That can never be spun as a casual oversight. If it turns out not to be true, it’s a massive deliberate lie over and over and over again.
         • You_Fool 4.1.2.1.1

           13 February 2014 at 7:53 am

           but for Smile and wave it was just a casual mention, he will be comfortable with the fact that he didn’t really take much notice to the name, I mean he gets mentioned lots of names to him everyday, and do we expect him to mention every name mentioned in his hearing ever? Smile and wave doesn’t have the memory for that! He hardly remembers when he has lunch with an old school friend…
     • One Anonymous Bloke 4.1.3

       12 February 2014 at 3:55 pm

       “All politicians lie” has dubious value as an aphorism.

       All people tell lies. Politicians are no different. Questions arise, however. Is the lie substantive, based on honest opinion or a deliberate attempt to deceive? Is there a pattern of falsehood?

       …everyone makes some mistakes. And as historian of science Daniel Kevles showed so effectively in his book The Baltimore Affair, it can be hard to detect a fraudulent signal within the background noise of sloppiness… the question is, do the data and interpretations show signs of intentional distortion? When an independent committee established to investigate potential fraud scrutinized a set of research notes in Nobel laureate David Baltimore’s laboratory, it revealed a surprising number of mistakes. Baltimore was exonerated because his lab’s mistakes were random and nondirectional.

       Michael Shermer.
   • PapaMike 4.2

     12 February 2014 at 3:46 pm

     Doubt it’s relevance to the case before the courts, as not relevant to case of extradition.
     Too many red herrings around.
     • Lanthanide 4.2.1

       12 February 2014 at 4:34 pm

       It could easily be relevant to the case of extradition, if it transpires that Key agreed with the yanks to get KDM arrested and extradited in advance of the raid.

       It puts the motives of the whole case into question: is KDM being extradited because he broke the law, or is he being extradited because some very powerful people didn’t like what he was doing and so used an extra-legal process to try and get the outcome they wanted.
       • One Anonymous Bloke 4.2.1.1

         12 February 2014 at 4:48 pm

         In Lanth’s scenario, to run the risk of leaving Dotcom’s extradition up to a National Party enabler justice minister would be a breach of natural justice, because the National Party trades in New Zealand legislation whenever it is in government.
5. Phaedrus 5

   12 February 2014 at 12:47 pm

   There’s also the issue that the Internet Party will be able to advertise during the campaign and one doesn’t need to be a rocket scientist to guess what the ads will target.
   • mickysavage 5.1

     12 February 2014 at 1:09 pm

     And National will regret that it had gutted the EFA so badly. By the looks of it Dotcom will not be able to advertise himself but no doubt someone will pop up to do the job. There is also an exception to the restrictions on advertising for “any publication on the Internet, or other electronic medium, of personal political views by an individual who does not make or receive a payment in respect of the publication of those views.” I am sure Dotcom will make sure that he can express his views in a legal way.
6. AWW 6

   12 February 2014 at 2:17 pm

   I like DotCom. He’s a great character in a mostly boring country : )
   • minarch 6.1

     12 February 2014 at 4:04 pm

     I think DotCom is simply a very bored, very wealthy man

     There isn’t a lot to do here in NZ if you have a lot of money (and are under 65) just ask any international student from a wealthy background,

     Obviously Mr DotCom cant just jump in the Cessna for a couple of nights clubbing in Ibiza anymore, so this seems to me to be just him getting his jollies at the expense of the integrity of our political system…
     • Colonial Viper 6.1.1

       12 February 2014 at 5:29 pm

       Not sure why you are being so cynical. The issues of internet freedom, data privacy, protection of journalists, and prevention of arbitrary search and seizure are critical ones for the 21st Century.

       Yes, KDC is under the equivalent of house arrest – but I can think of no better country in the world for someone who is a family man – to be resident in.
       • minarch 6.1.1.1

         13 February 2014 at 11:56 am

         I can think of several better places to raise kids

         just a matter of my opinion, of course but I see no real future for my children here in NZ
     • weka 6.1.2

       12 February 2014 at 7:53 pm

       “There isn’t a lot to do here in NZ if you have a lot of money (and are under 65) just ask any international student from a wealthy background,”

       There isn’t a lot to do here in NZ if you have a lot of money and don’t like being outside.

       fify

       Plenty of very rich people in NZ having a good time.
       • minarch 6.1.2.1

         13 February 2014 at 11:58 am

         you mean plenty of rich people in NZ dodging tax ?

         sounds like a good time to some i suppose..

         If you ask around Its a fairly common complaint, in fact KDC has stated as much himself.
         • weka 6.1.2.1.1

           13 February 2014 at 2:23 pm

           Yes, but my point was that it’s the people that want city lives that complain. If you want that kind of life why would you come to NZ? The uber rich in NZ that are having a good time aren’t relying on city life.
7. Puckish Rogue 7

   12 February 2014 at 3:18 pm

   This is going to bite the Greens big time
   • alwyn 7.1

     12 February 2014 at 4:09 pm

     One would like to think so PR but if you have a bunch of supporters like theirs, who seem to be able to believe almost anything that the party leaders feed them, I don’t think it will have that great an effect.

     Anyone who can believe that GM food will poison you, or that we can lead the world in producing and selling “Green” windpower technology, or that the people in the Sea Shepherd organisation are heroes, or that Assange is a leader in saving the world, is totally incapable of being discomforted by Norman’s behaviour.

     I have one acquaintance who is a strong Green Party supporter. She refuses to believe, in spite of all the evidence, that Norman is an economic illiterate whose ideas will wreck the New Zealand economy.
     As a retired public servant she gets her superannuation paid tax free. That is quite fair, in her view, and of course she shouldn’t have to pay tax. Tax is for other people to pay. I point out that the reason given for this absence of tax is the claim that it is a return of capital from the fund, and capital gains are not taxed. If a Green Party policy of taxation of capital gains will be implemented she tells me it won’t apply to her as “I’ve got a contract”. She ignores the fact that any contract can, and probably will, be broken by a Green Government.

     The fact that Norman appears to be open to being bribed won’t worry the Green Party members. The only thing that will bite the Greens is if the Dotcom party actually does get going and takes away some of their votes.
     • One Anonymous Bloke 7.1.1

       12 February 2014 at 4:17 pm

       Duh. I am living proof of your delusions.

       I share Geddis’ view of Norman’s ill-considered remarks, but as for the other items in your little litany, Tory terror of the Greens is so cute. please keep displaying it.
       • alwyn 7.1.1.1

         12 February 2014 at 4:31 pm

         “I am living proof”.
         Well that was quick. Somebody who is not worried by what Russel has been up to with his secret dealings with the big fat fellow. That demonstrates very clearly that my comments are not “delusions”. They really are the way that Green acolytes think.
         Q.E.D. (quad erat demonstrandum)

         [lprent: Or it could just indicate that you’re a bit of an idiot since you managed to trigger 3 moderator responses in one wee comment. I could have overlooked any one. But three !

         1. I’ve never noticed that OAB leaning strongly green. So trying to say that he represents green voters is more than a stretch. It is simply stupid. Basically you appear to be making up a story (ie lying) rather than sticking to facts and/or opinion. I take a dim view of unsubstantiated opinions of fact..

         2. As far as I’m aware Russell didn’t have “secret” meetings with KDC – that is simply crap. He had meetings with someone like most MPs do. By your logic every time I have a meeting with a MP it is both “secret” and suspicious. Reality is that it is part of their job. I’d have to class this as a lie as well.

         3. You’re appear to be trying for a variant of the pwned heresy as a spin line with assertions of fact. I don’t like those as they cause silly flamewars. It also is a symptomatic of a usual election year habit that I like crushing.

         Q.E.D. (quad erat demonstrandum). Indeed. Banned for 3 * 2 weeks. ]
         • One Anonymous Bloke 7.1.1.1.1

           12 February 2014 at 4:37 pm

           Are you a bit English comprehension challenged, Ally Wally? Perhaps I should spell it out. You don’t get to define green politics, because you’re a partisan Tory shill. I reject your false narrative entirely, and yet, Wormtongue, that still gives me plenty of time and space to think that Norman’s statements and actions may be ill-advised.
         • View Balanced 7.1.1.1.2

           12 February 2014 at 8:16 pm

           [deleted – look it is balanced view who is banned but using a new name running the same old troll lines – MS]
           • Blue 7.1.1.1.2.1

             12 February 2014 at 8:51 pm

             Ha hilarious VB. Your accuracy in observation is truly life affirming but doomed to failure and a disproportionate level of abuse. You know you’re not allowed to offer a contrary view. Cue ban in 3…2…1….
     • Puckish Rogue 7.1.2

       12 February 2014 at 4:26 pm

       Probably won’t change the hard core voters minds but the soft voters may well think twice about voting for an aussie import willing to sell out NZ law to a german convicted criminal just to gain power
       • Grantoc 7.1.2.1

         12 February 2014 at 4:42 pm

         ” An aussie import willing to sell out NZ law to a german convicted criminal just to gain power”

         A good line for that nats to take into the election campaign.

         Is there such a thing as left wing cronyism? I suspect there is and I suspect Norman’s opposition to extradition proceedings for DC’s political patronage and money falls within it.

         Norman appears to also be having brain fades I see. He’s in good company – John Banks comes to mind.
         • One Anonymous Bloke 7.1.2.1.1

           12 February 2014 at 4:56 pm

           So, National will sell the nation’s laws, and The Greens will sell Dotcom’s freedom.

           Best vote Labour.
           • Blue 7.1.2.1.1.1

             12 February 2014 at 8:57 pm

             No. The Greens will sell their principles in return for keeping a hedonist multimillionaire off the charges he faces in the US, and the cheque he writes them, and supposed support his Internet party has. This just looks shabby. As shabby as dealing with Act in Epsom.

             It seems the unbridled and unprincipled pursuit of power is worth the loss of their values.
             • One Anonymous Bloke …

               13 February 2014 at 8:09 am

               Okay, okay, The Greens will sell their principles in return for keeping a hedonist multimillionaire off the charges he faces in the US, and the cheque he writes them, and supposed support his Internet party has, and National will continue its usual practice of selling New Zealand legislation to its campaign donors.

               Best vote Labour.
         • You_Fool 7.1.2.1.2

           13 February 2014 at 8:01 am

           Or John Key, he has the best brain fades!
       • One Anonymous Bloke 7.1.2.2

         12 February 2014 at 4:42 pm

         If that were true you’d have a point, but I think you’ll find that Green party policy is decided by the members, not the leaders.

         Of course, in a democratic party like National, the members have no say whatsoever in policy development. That is left to the party’s clients to buy.
   • SHG (not Colonial Viper) 7.2

     12 February 2014 at 4:13 pm

     IS biting.

     http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11200793
   • McFlock 7.3

     12 February 2014 at 4:32 pm

     how can it bite the greens “big time”?

     On planet key the Greens aren’t likely to be particularly popular, anyway. The only way they could sustain significant damage is if they currently have a significant amount of support.
   • aerobubble 7.4

     12 February 2014 at 4:48 pm

     Oh, rubbish. Its everyones right to talk to politicians in confidence, and nobody is talking about what DotCom and Banks agree upon.

     So its ludicrous now. Of course everyone knows it may potentially harm Lab-Green prospects if a lot of young voters vote for dotcom. Duh.

     Its not journalism to suggest that senior MPs would want to look the guy in the eye, if they were going to back his case, and stop extradition. If anything its a bloody good idea.

     Are we going to get a innuendo driven diatribe of what Key and Ashcroft were up to???
     Please, politicians seek to do their jobs is not corrupt practice. And especially not the Greens
     since their stand issues, co-leadership and consensus, would make it impossible for Norman
     to do such a deal.

     Dotcom battle is political-economic in nature and means that Key’s use of the full force of government has political and economic dimensions, compromises to NZ sovereignty to
     bend over for private big media interests. How is that not corrupt?

     So when Norman does sign off on stopped the extradiction get back to us about corrupt practices, and start dealing to the current government DotCom case and its corrupt overtones.
     • aerobubble 7.4.1

       12 February 2014 at 4:55 pm

       This is timeless, classic political analysis from lazy journalists, nothing has happened yet, whilst the government has mired our justice system in a joke of the DotCom case. All because Dotcom did not read all the private information in his archives and when he found copyrighted material tell authorities. Hardly a high crime, I pretty much want my postie to keep his nose out.
       • aerobubble 7.4.1.1

         12 February 2014 at 4:59 pm

         Wait, but its worse!

         Why is nobody asking questions about some Key minion telling Dotcom he can get off by starting a party and keeping Key in power. Key’s team could then trip up the already tainted
         investigation. And we should all remember where DotCom’s politics initial preferences fell,
         by association yea will be damned, BANKS.

         If Peter, if Norman, why not also Key?
8. marty mars 8

   12 February 2014 at 4:24 pm

   So we have Norman, Peters and Brash (peters not) admitting they have all popped in to the Dotcom mansion – ffs has any political leader not been in to say ‘hello’ apart from that liar key? I sure as hell hope Hone doesn’t come out and say he’s been there – please say it ain’t so Hone.

   If you have the money everyone gives you the honey – embarrassing, the whole fucken greasy lot of them imo.

   http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/9713751/Peters-visited-Dotcom-3-times-Key
   • karol 8.1

     12 February 2014 at 4:25 pm

     Yeah. Agreed marty. The Dotcom extradition court case etc, is important, and John key’s role a major issue.

     But I’d prefer tat the leaders of opposition parties didn’t give the impression their policies or support of the wealthy are up for sale.
   • One Anonymous Bloke 8.2

     12 February 2014 at 5:03 pm

     Watch the wingnuts howl in outrage at Dotcom wanting to buy anyone’s influence but theirs. Fucking hypocrites. The National Party openly sells our gambling laws and any other damn thing its clients want. Private prisons, private schools, yes boss, three bags full boss.
9. chris73 9

   12 February 2014 at 5:19 pm

   Its more the utter hypocracy of Russel Norman thats causing the outrage
   • McFlock 9.1

     12 February 2014 at 5:27 pm

     With the nactoids in charge we live in an hypocracy (lit. “rule by hypocrites”), typified by tories like you trying to fluff up some outrage about hypocrisy.
     • chris73 9.1.1

       12 February 2014 at 5:33 pm

       We’ll see how it plays out in the media, I suspect it’ll be bad for the left
       • blue leopard (Get Lost GCSB Bill) 9.1.1.1

         12 February 2014 at 5:38 pm

         Well that is the general trend of the media’s attitude toward the left so you really aren’t saying anything profound or difficult to predict at all there, C73
         • chris73 9.1.1.1.1

           12 February 2014 at 5:47 pm

           Not trying to be profound, just pointing out that the chickens are now coming home to roost for those who thought KDC would take down JK (I’d say lay down with dogs and you get fleas but my dogs certainly don’t have fleas)

           http://liberation.typepad.com/liberation/2014/02/top-tweets-about-dotcom-the-internet-party-and-deals-with-other-parties.html
           • blue leopard (Get Lost GCSB Bill) 9.1.1.1.1.1

             12 February 2014 at 6:13 pm

             We’ll see how it plays out in the media, I suspect it’ll be bad for the left

             No, you were attempting to sound knowledgable and predict something which is obviously going to happen.

             Then you supply me with a pile of hyperbolic witterings – and expect that proves something – it doesn’t

             Please try a little harder, C73 – this is embarrassing for you
             • chris73 …

               12 February 2014 at 6:21 pm

               Not as embarrassing as it is for David Cunliffe and Winston Peters but even worse for Russell Norman

               I don’t have to try hard when the left generally are try hards
               • blue leopard (Get Lost GCSB Bill) …

                 12 February 2014 at 8:50 pm

                 Stop trying to fool yourself Chris73, what you have attempted is substantially more embarrassing than some drama made up by jonolist-types…I mean fancy trying to sound knowledgable and like an expert on something so predictable…lol…and to make matters worse, thentrying to deflect the issue onto 3 professionals that are skilled at what they do…Oh dear me no, please stop you are simply digging a deeper hole for yourself….
               • mickysavage …

                 12 February 2014 at 10:15 pm

                 Chris73 you will have to try harder. The day MPs stop talking to people in the community is the day that we should give up on democracy.
                 • chris73 …

                   13 February 2014 at 7:30 am

                   Does that also apply to “chinless scarf wearers”?
                   • blue leopard (Get Lost GCSB Bill) …

                     13 February 2014 at 2:10 pm

                     I don’t think it really serves your purpose to make references the National Party’s deceitful activities in 2004/5 with regard to the Exclusive Brethren.

                     This reminds us all how deceitful and dishonest the National party were in 2004/5 toward the NZ public in the name of pushing agendas that they knew the NZ public would reject.

                     It brings to mind the secret meetings that were being conducted by Brash with American war hawks and brings to mind Brash’s comment made to American warmongers “Gone by lunchtime”: made in reference to our nuclear-free policy.

                     These issues lost the National party the election.

                     It is a pity that the public don’t appear to realise that all the main players bar Brash are still currently main players in the National party: Key, McCully, Joyce to name a few.

                     The Hollow Men are still doing the dirty on us and New Zealand’s polls indicate that we are a dangerously misinformed, making us a severely malleable and overly trusting bunch of people.

                     Gee, No wonder Steven Joyce is acting to degenerate our higher education system he is acting to ensure we are even more misinformed.

                     Thanks for the reminder Chris73
           • Tracey 9.1.1.1.1.2

             13 February 2014 at 7:34 am

             whereas deliberately deleting information relevant to a court proceeding is… non flea-like?
       • McFlock 9.1.1.2

         12 February 2014 at 5:42 pm

         You’re using the future tense now? But you said it was already “causing outrage”. So who is currently “outraged”? Bear in mind that tory shills like you don’t count, because your “outrage” is simply a duplicitous pretence that is caused by your blind faith in dunnokeyo.

         You want to see hypocrisy? Look at all the ladder-kickers who think that the assistance they personally received as children or young parents should not be provided to anyone else. But are you outraged about that? Noooooooooooooooooooooo.
         • chris73 9.1.1.2.1

           12 February 2014 at 5:50 pm

           Nice attempt at diversion but thats not the issue 🙂
           • McFlock 9.1.1.2.1.1

             12 February 2014 at 11:09 pm

             pointing out your transition from “are now” to “will maybe” is a diversion?

             You need to learn to read.
             • chris73 …

               13 February 2014 at 7:32 am

               Keep dancing on the head of a pin it may take the heat of Norman (I doubt it but you never know 🙂 )
               • Tracey …

                 13 February 2014 at 7:36 am

                 Could be worse, could have been colluding with an anonymous group to get campaign exposure while promising to deny any collusion. Two people in the top four ministerial positions did just this…. but you trust them aye chris.
               • McFlock …

                 13 February 2014 at 12:39 pm

                 There’s no “heat”. There will be no “heat”. You claimed that there was heat, then that there will be heat, but you are simply lying.

                 “Heat” is protests in the street, falling popularity, degrading relationships with the media, and having to admit that one misled parliament. Those seem to be largely the domain of our prime minister rather than anyone in the opposition.
10. xtasy 10

    12 February 2014 at 5:53 pm

    Sorry, I cannot help it, and cannot resist throwing in my comment on this. The election late this year seems to already have been decided, and whatever else Labour, Greens, NZ First and Mana or Maori Party may come up with, it will not matter, as it will all be shot to pieces by the MSM, as usual.

    My impression is it is a lost battle. That is at least on the media front. The privately, largely corporate owned and controlled mainstream media is staffed with all these “press gallery hacks”, various young, opportunistic, partly desperate journalists and the known “media personalities”, who are all in the pocket of their bosses (“do not bite the hand that feeds me”). They are almost all exclusively rather well to do, middle class, career minded “professionals”, who have their own dim views of anything “left”.

    The younger ones grew up with the neo-liberal system we have had for decades, where you fend for yourselves. If a person cannot make it, for whatever reason, at best she/he gets “pity”, but none else, and the losers will be forgotten and shun, like the poor in society. They simply do NOT identify with a society the Greens and Labour would prefer to create.

    Just listen to how MSM Radio Live report on events in Parliament, where Paula Bennett and the Prime Minister were today grilled on child poverty and the newest report out from the Salvation Army. Radio Live’s “Parliamentary reporter” Tom Fruean makes NO mention of that, and all that the public are told and informed about is how Winston Peters and the Speaker got head to head, and how Peters was thrown out of Parliament.

    http://www.radiolive.co.nz/Audio.aspx

    Put in the time 16:30 h for today (12.02.14) and listen from about 11 minutes and 35 seconds on in that audio track (total length 15 minutes).

    ALSO listen to Duncan Garner’s spin on political events today, implicating Peters in “murky” connections with Dotcom, starting a bit after 16:45 h (starting from about 11 minutes into that 15 min. recording).

    And note also: There are virtually NO liberal, left leaning or “green” friendly media staff out there in the MSM, well, I certainly do not see or hear them.

    The MSM, and Radio Live are just a small part of the lot, are all more or less focused on these side shows, on alleged “connections”, “deals”, “murky dealings” and scandals, that senior opposition MPs are now being dragged into. Key is quoted as challenging Norman to come and answer questions re his visits to the Dotcom mansion, so they are now also hunting down Peters and others.

    Yes, it is a perhaps mistake for the opposition to talk too much with Kim Dotcom, and it back-fires in such ways, but does nobody notice, the one sidedness of these media reports. Key has heaps of stuff to answer for, but he just smirks, shrugs and walks off, and they all let him get away with it.

    The truth is, there is an AGENDA, and it does not look good for the opposition. The MSM are not going to allow a Labour Green government, got the message? They will do all to rubbish anything that Labour, Greens, NZ First and so will come up with, and shoot it to pieces. On the other hand many of the “media personalities” are “matey” with Key, Joyce, Collins and others.

    No matter how good Cunliffe tries to present himself to the media, I see too many only looking for any angle to dismantle him. Indeed, it may be better to fully boycotte the MSM and follow a totally different strategy for this election campaign, which is already getting more dirty and nasty than anything I have heard and seen during the climax of any pre election period of past years.

    So I would not put too much hope into Dotcom being able to expose too much during the trial coming up. The MSM have apparently got over the “honeymoon period” they had with him, and are now rather looking at “exposing” and discrediting him, which again may well be due to it having been determined to be part of the “campaign” to keep the “good forces” in government (maintaining and promoting the commercial interests of the business forces controlling society as it is now).
    • mickysavage 10.1

      12 February 2014 at 10:19 pm

      Agreed xtasy and I am beginning to regret my Key is a shapeshifter reptilian post. It seems to me that the really important news about child poverty has been obliterated by a whole lot of other stuff.
      • tc 10.1.1

        13 February 2014 at 7:07 am

        Yes mickey,keep it serious and focused that is more like a WO post.
    • tc 10.2

      13 February 2014 at 7:05 am

      Xtasy nails it, Garner, Gower, RNZ now diluting the effective checkpoint with Moro to add to Gluon etc……teapot tapes was a marker for how under the thumb the MSM are.
    • Tracey 10.3

      13 February 2014 at 7:37 am

      The funny thing it is KEY who has said he will work with Winston, not labour and greens SO where are the retorts from labour and Green to ask Mr Key

      “If he is so concerned about Winston meeting with DotCom, will he rule out working with him in government post 2014 election?”
11. Old Tony 11

    12 February 2014 at 5:53 pm

    The “selling laws” line was a cute little nonsense that the Left got some traction with in relation to Sky City. Of course it overlooks the fact that the Labour Party was founded on the principle of selling employment relations law to the union movement. Ditto National to the Employers. Its called being in Government. But good to see the Greens now descending into the same muddied waters as the other parties.
    • karol 11.1

      12 February 2014 at 5:59 pm

      False equivalence.
    • One Anonymous Bloke 11.2

      12 February 2014 at 6:23 pm

      …Labour Party was founded on the principle of selling employment relations law to the union movement…

      No, you are mistaken. Unity is strength, the ability of unions to organise a government is testament to that.

      Freedom of expression and association.

      Choke on it, Old Tony, and don’t complain if your friend is unable to perform the Heimlich maneuver.
12. hoom 12

    12 February 2014 at 7:53 pm

    Does anyone know if its possible to extradite a sitting MP?
    Just saying…
13. xtasy 13

    12 February 2014 at 10:56 pm

    More MSM attacks:

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=11200875

    They seem to forget, that Banks had questions to answer re allegedly wrongly declared political donations to the tune of 50,000 dollars.

    So to treat these contacts that certain opposition MPs seem to have had with Dotcom in the same manner, as of being of the same kind of importance, is a bit “bizarre”, to say the least.

    It is not a good look for Norman, Peters and possibly some others having visited Dotcom to discuss his political party ambitions and other matters. But is it forbidden to visit persons of such calibre? Now, who has Key visited “in private” over the years? Who have other government ministers had contact with “in private” over the years, including high ranking business persons?

    Audrey Young, get real, while Peters should have fronted, it is just another media hype to whip this up in this form. Where are the tough questions asked to John Key, dear MSM???
    • Sanctuary 13.1

      13 February 2014 at 7:40 am

      John Armstrong is nothing if he isn’t the accurate reflection/mouthpiece of the entrenched political/business establishment. I am not about to claim Kim Dotcom is a selfless hero – far from it – but he is a complete outsider to the political establishment, an outsider who who seems rather effective at shining a torch on the venality, unethical behaviour, insider trading and rorting that is business as usual for the New Zealand political/business establishment. And for that, anyone who thinks of themselves as a player in the political/business establishment hate Dotcom with a passion. Winston Peters, another outsider, is also loathed for the same reasons and the Greens – who promise to bring at least some people (like Julie Anne Genter) into power who will upset some very cosy nudge nudge wink wink relationships are getting the same treatment.Pablo over at kiwipolitico frequently lambasts the casual corruption, inability to admit error and authoritarian impulses of the NZ political establishment in a security context, but the same traits are evident everywhere.

      I often ask people who posture outrage at Kim Dotcoms “interference” in our politics whether or not they consider our political establishment is worth defending from someone who so clearly exposes it for what it is. that usually shuts them up.
      • One Anonymous Bloke 13.1.1

        13 February 2014 at 8:26 am

        Well put.
    • James N 13.2

      13 February 2014 at 9:00 am

      Why isn’t anybody asking just how JK knew with such certainty that Norman and Peters had visited Kim.com and exactly how many times in each case when such a exciting titbit had apparently escaped the vigilance of the MSM? GCSB anyone? I presume the boys in the anoraks monitor K.C but surely they wouldn’t be monitoring the movements of the Nact’s political opponents as well.
14. Mr Tank 14

    12 February 2014 at 11:18 pm

    This Paddy Gower seems like a right cunt. As to Za German being a PR genius give me a break. So far it has been like shooting fish in a barrel. Nothing I have seen leads me to expect anything stand out regarding his “party” or his supposed power to influence. Comrade Chairman Davo got it right. Thank F**k there is at least one grown up in the room.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS