Eye of the storm

Written By: - Date published: 10:31 am, October 27th, 2018 - 106 comments
Categories: Dirty Politics, internet, Judith Collins, Media, national, paula bennett, same old national, Simon Bridges, twitter, you couldn't make this shit up - Tags:

Graham Adams has written this interesting article in Noted about Simon Bridges’s current predicament. He refers to Simon Bridges’ acknowledgment that things have been rough for him and his reference to being in the “eye of the storm”. This was a very poorly chosen metaphor. Bridges obviously meant to say that he was through the storm.  Unfortunately for him the eye in the storm is the middle of a cyclone where things are calm and peaceful, but only for a while.  When the eye passes you are back into the hurricane.

As noted by Adams:

National is, in fact, in the eye of the storm right now, when Jami-Lee Ross is away recovering at an undisclosed location after his brief stay in Middlemore Hospital and has gone silent. But the chances of him — or his allies — staying quiet for long are very small.

Once Ross recovers from his illness, he will still be in an unrivalled position to expose what goes on in National if he wishes to, given he was the party’s hitman and bagman. He knows where both the bodies and the treasure are buried. He knows all the tricks by which his former colleagues stifle dissent and rid themselves of mutinous MPs because he played that role himself for years.

Adams points out that there are some big questions still  to be answered.  For instance did the partitioning of the $100,000 donation into smaller donations complied with the Electoral Act’s contributions requirements.  I am finding it really difficult to see how it did.  I am cautiously confident that the Electoral Commission and the Police will see things the same way.

And there is this troubling stench of money for positions with the payment apparently being a way to start a parliamentary career.

And what damage to National’s relationship with the ethnic communities through its two Chinese MPs are better than two Indian MPs?

And what role did National have in getting Ross sanctioned?  And what happened to his phone.  If you think this is verging into tinfoil hat territory read this compelling post by Selwyn Manning and then think again.

Over at the blog that shall not be referred to these questions and some answers are being investigated in some detail.  Sure there has to be caution in the information being supplied.  But hey it is like Alex Jones attacking Donald Trump.  It is a great time to be a spectator.

Some think that there is too much attention is being paid to the issue.  I beg to differ.  It is hard to ignore civil war erupting in National’s ranks and witnessing its own leadership being brought down by dirty politics.  The irony …

And meanwhile Judith is getting ready …

 

106 comments on “Eye of the storm”

  1. Maria Sherwood 1

    I’ve read an article from Slater today, with screenshots of texts from Bridges and the woman MP, I am still shocked, tbh.

    So many questions, too few answers.

  2. dV 2

    getting Ross sanctioned

    Did you mean sectioned?

    • veutoviper 2.1

      Just my opinion and not trying to ‘womansplain’ MS, but I think he was quite deliberate in using ‘sanctioned’ ass opposed to ‘sectioned’.

      There has been no proof that JLR was actually formally sectioned – and I doubt whether this will ever be made public UNLESS Ross himself agrees to the release of this or any other aspects of his personal medical records.

      IMO there has been far too much loose wording and misuse of what is very specific vocabulary and language used in relation to this whole situation.

      As to Ross’s phone or at least his texts, these seem to readily available going by WO’s latest post.

      • Dukeofurl 2.1.1

        What difference does ‘being formally sectioned ‘ make.

        He was detained by police and taken to the nearest acute mental health clinic ( Waikato DHB).
        That is broadly what is allowed under Mental Health (Compulsory Assessment and Treatment) Act 1992

        Clearly he was taken for assessment which is the first step ( for any sort of patient), and compulsory treatment would come after that.

        There is so much legalese around Compulsory treatment side of things , the precise point of being ‘sectioned’ doesnt matter ( these days Drug and alchohol addictions are included , and probably more common)

        • veutoviper 2.1.1.1

          How many times do we have to go around this mulberry bush?

          “Sectioned” has a very specific meaning and relates to a very formal legal process – and the short time that Ross was in mental health care is a reasonably good indication that he probably was not “sectioned”.

          Here are some new links for anyone who has not already caught up with what “sectioned” means.

          https://www.thespinoff.co.nz/society/23-10-2018/what-does-it-mean-to-be-sectioned/

          http://www.mentalhealthaccesspack.org/practical-tips/law-and-rights/

          https://www.rethink.org/carers-family-friends/brothers-and-sisters-siblings-network/get-info-and-advice/sibling-faqs/what-does-being-sectioned-mean

          While as you say, “the legalese around Compulsory treatment side of things , the precise point of being ‘sectioned’ doesn’t matter” to most people, nevertheless a lot of stigma also goes with the term – and its use is yet another stress on the person concerned, particularly for a person in the public eye such as Ross.

          So:

          1. We do not know whether he actually was “sectioned”.

          2. Let’s not fall into the trap of yet adding more stress and stigma to the situation.

          • Lucy 2.1.1.1.1

            Think that he specifically wasn’t sectioned as this gives the Speaker assess to him at a time when National wants him to be on ice. Also it puts action on his seat on hold for six months which National would want to stop.

          • Dukeofurl 2.1.1.1.2

            So you disagree by repeating my arguements?
            The coercive elements of the Mental Health Act were used. The clue is in the Name
            Compulsory Assessment and Treatment Act
            He was Compulsorily Assessed

            • McFlock 2.1.1.1.2.1

              If that were the case, then he was released, so huzzah the system works.

              And he’s free to comment when he’s ready.

              • Incognito

                Uhhmm, no, he’s been gagged, drugged, and his phone got confiscated and wiped. Please keep up, dear chap.

                • JohnSelway

                  He’s probably being “re-educated” right now

                • McFlock

                  lol

                  Mallard has a very special set of skills.
                  Skills that make someone like him a nightmare for people like nats.
                  He is cycling to the house that has the dungeon at this very minute.
                  I can write this freely: if they know he’s coming, it won’t help them.
                  His wrath is inexorable.

                  He will rescue any MP who has been Taken.

                  • JohnSelway

                    It’ll make clockwork orange look like a summer holiday.

                    When Ross does surface his responses to all questions will just be a blank full moon face, dead eyes and repeating over and over. “The party is all that matters. I’m here for the party. I love Simon.”

          • Psych nurse 2.1.1.1.3

            Why are you quoting and providing links to UK law.
            I have long experience of mental health both in NZ and overseas, here we use the terms Informal meaning a voluntary admission or Formal meaning a committal under the Mental Health Act.

          • JohnSelway 2.1.1.1.4

            Fucking hell – this shit again.

            Duke – give it up. You’ve been prove. Wrong over and over again.

          • cleangreen 2.1.1.1.5

            100% veutoviper. @ 2.1.1.1

            Agreed.

    • mickysavage 2.2

      DV

      Both!

  3. Dennis Frank 3

    Critical analysis of the current Nat situation here: https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-zealand/john-armstrong-opinion-sad-truth-simon-bridges-vast-proportion-public-simply-dont-like-him

    “Some blame should be sheeted home to Sir John Key… [JLR] “has lifted the lid on the very toxic culture that continues to pervade the National Party.” “Hager’s revelations should have been cue for a post-election clean-out of National’s Aegean stables. That did not happen… in part due to the National Party hierarchy losing – to borrow Ross’s term – its moral compass. This deficiency was glaringly apparent in the party OKing a confidentiality agreement in order to restrain a woman who claimed she had been harassed by Ross from going public.”

    • Stuart Munro 3.1

      Augean John – when you steal classical thunder you look damned silly misspelling it.

      • veutoviper 3.1.1

        ‘John’? People seems to be all at sea today.

        • Stuart Munro 3.1.1.1

          Armstrong – Dennis caught it 😉

          • veutoviper 3.1.1.1.1

            So did I – after I could no longer edit! LOL

            • Dukeofurl 3.1.1.1.1.1

              The Aegean stables sounds like something on the Greek Isles- Mykonos maybe ?

              As for King Augeas, this part of the myth seems prescient
              “Augeas reacted angrily because he had promised Heracles one tenth of his cattle if the job was finished in one day. He refused to honor the agreement, and Heracles killed him after completing the tasks.”

              All those promises Bridges made to his ‘numbers man’ that werent honoured ?
              Will Bridges end up like Augeas ?

      • Dennis Frank 3.1.2

        He could be talking to TVNZ viewers in words they can understand. But I agree readers of Greek mythistory deserve literacy in such references. And building stables in the Aegean would be tricky unless you could find a sufficiently sheltered bay, but the sea-horses would be ever so grateful…

      • Matiri 3.1.3

        Augean stables were for cattle which had never been cleaned out which is rather apt!

    • Draco T Bastard 3.2

      That did not happen… in part due to the National Party hierarchy losing – to borrow Ross’s term – its moral compass.

      This assumes that they had a moral compass to begin with and I can’t think of there being any evidence to even suggest that they did.

      • Sacha 3.2.1

        Admitting the emperor never had any clothes the whole time would require knave Armstrong to confess that his fawning fashion critiques over the years helped fool the citizens. Old man’s pride.

  4. Fireblade 4

    Sport of the Day: Walking on Eggshells.

  5. Draco T Bastard 6

    Some think that there is too much attention is being paid to the issue. I beg to differ.

    So do I.

    We most definitely should not be ignoring National’s corruption and the debilitating effect it will have on our democracy. As far as I’m concerned we’re actually seeing treason by National here.

    • Kat 6.1

      “As far as I’m concerned we’re actually seeing treason by National here”

      Along with a fair number of members of the fourth estate. I my view the msm are as culpable as the National party in their treasonous role to destroy democracy in this country.

    • patricia bremner 6.2

      Or “Behaviour unbecoming of a Parliamentarian” at least.

  6. JustMe 7

    I was trying to think of an apt word to describe the NZ National Party right now and that is ‘malevolent’. And thanks to Google these are: synonyms: malicious, spiteful, hostile, evil-minded, baleful, bitter, evil-intentioned, poisonous, venomous, evil, malign, malignant, rancorous, vicious, vindictive, revengeful, vengeful, pernicious; cruel, fierce, nasty, unfriendly, unkind, ill-natured;
    literarymalefic, maleficent.

    May I suggest the NZ National Party changes its motto to the above words as they(the words above) now seem perfectly suitable for such a political party.

    There are two main malevolent with associated synonyms senior persons in the NZ National Party that are doing a superb(may I congratulate both Simon Bridges and Paula Bennett?)job in destroying National so effectively from within. Keep up the good work you two and you will have achieved the result that is so needed i.e the destruction of a political party that lost direction over the past 9 years it was in government.

    After reading Cameron Slater’s article today I was surprised and yet not surprised at the dirty under-handed and disgusting actions both Bridges and Bennett got up to over the past so many months to make a scapegoat out of Jami-Lee Ross.

    Now even though I am not a National Party supporter(I am in fact Labour Party)I would probably have provided JLR a place to sleep if he was homeless. It’s human nature to want to help others. However where National is concerned human-nature just doesn’t exist in their books. Hence them deserving the Moniker of Malevolent and its related synonyms.

  7. Drowsy M. Kram 8

    When this ‘storm’ eventually peters out, would it be too much to hope for a Royal Commission of Inquiry into how current (Bridges, Bennett, Collins et al.) and former (Key, English, Ross et al.) MPs destroyed the National party?

    • JC 8.1

      And if so … Would the “terms of Reference” include; “how current (Bridges, Bennett, Collins et al.) and former (Key, English, Ross, Goodfellow et al.) Corruption destroyed NZ governance, and society during their 9 year tenure?

    • Treetop 8.2

      I do not think a Royal Commission of Inquiry would get to the truth.

      Sir Alfred North’s Inquiry in December 1976 did not reveal who the initial leaker was. It would have been someone in the police. Within days the story of an MP asking an undercover cop to go to his home in Oriental Parade was doing the rounds in police stations and in parliament.

      The 21 year old cop still on probation in June 1975 was used for political purposes when the incident was raised in parliament on 4 November 1976. The initial leaker would have been in the police.

      In 1995 the cop told me he thinks there was a mole in the police. Cop was doing an INCIS course in Septimber 1995.

      The cop involved in the June 1975 incident has a lot to answer for and so do the many cops I dealt with.

      I intend to reopen my grievances with the police in the near future. I dated the cop involved in the June 1975 incident for the first 6 months in 1976. The police had a wrong notion that I was the jilted girlfriend. I was the ex girlfriend who had to be silenced. The police have many tactics they can use to protect one of their own and to have you silenced.

      I am about to find out if Bush will give me a fair go.

      • Dennis Frank 8.2.1

        Do you have good legal advice or are you just doing it on your own? If the latter, I hope you have a support system (friends/family). Will be difficult for the authorities to go back more than 40 years, even presuming records have been kept and are accessible. Some of those involved may be dead. Hope your grievance is worth the effort, & good luck…

        • Treetop 8.2.1.1

          I cannot air my grievances at the Standard NZ.

          Something will need to be sorted out as my history with my cycles of police complaints is relevant to an ACC claim.

      • Anne 8.2.2

        Treetop, you do know that the scandal started with a hoax phone-call to Moyle when he was working alone late one evening in his ministerial office.

        The hoaxer claimed he had information concerning fraudulent activity (something like that) inside the Defence Force and my understanding is, he arranged to meet Moyle and give him some documentation. Moyle went to the rendezvous spot but of course the caller never turned up. Instead, a police patrol car happened by and picked up Moyle not initially knowing who he was. When they returned with Moyle to police HQ, he was questioned and released. That would have been the end of the matter, but someone whispered into someone else’s ear etc… and eventually the story reached Muldoon.

        Muldoon himself became the victim of a hoax a few years later. There were a couple of serial political hoaxers on the loose during those years. I was also one of their victims a few years later. Yes, I know who they were.

        I understand why Moyle felt unable to tell the truth about why he went to that particular part of Wellington because it is humiliating and very embarrassing to have to admit to falling for a hoax. The culprits should never have been allowed to get away with it.

        • Treetop 8.2.2.1

          The cop was on foot. The cop contacted his Sgt, Sgt Burr, the incident was mentioned at the 10 police briefing at the end of the shift, (probably a 2 am finish).

          The next day Moyle went to see Superintendent Kelly as he knew the incident would be reported.

          Anne I nearly sent you a small version of North’s inquiry. I was going to ask the Standard to pass it on to you.

          What you say is one of the four explanations Moyle gave. The thing is he was not charged with anything.

          The inquiry had some holes in it, such as no one from 10 policing was interviewed apart from Burr and the cop.

          I know one of the 10 policing is now a seventh day adventist pastor or was one. I couldn’t make this shit up.

          • Treetop 8.2.2.1.1

            Correction a mormon pastor.

            Not much difference between seventh day adventist and mormon, they both donate to the Nats.

  8. Dukeofurl 9

    The Slater “saga” of who called Ross that night backs one of my contentions.

    ” He turns his phone on and off over the next three hours. At one stage, a journalist communicates with him. as her company had someone stationed near his house and had observed a Police i-car turn up. [WO: The journalist concerned has contacted me to clarify this situation. I am satisfied that there was no company watcher in place She was concerned.
    [Of course that could be a different media group – NZME who did have a company watcher in place]

    That journalist was one of the people in a romantic involvement with Ross. For various reasons the ‘ 3 wronged woman’ of the Melanie Read story fit the category of an Mp and 2 other parliament support staff’ The 4th woman and where she fits in isnt identified by Slater.

    Im sure I know who it is but all the story isnt out yet which might confirm my view.

    • veutoviper 9.1

      Mulberry Bush – again.

      And for anyone reading the above, the quote from Whaleoil’s latest post ends at “… She was concerned.”

      It does not include “‘[Of course … in place]”. That seems to be the views of the writer of the comment but with no evidence that NZME did have a company watcher in place.

      The remainder is a repeat of a long discourse yesterday in the Duped post below 7.1.1

      • Dukeofurl 9.1.1

        I’ve been right about the deep involvement of the national party in Ross being detained for assessment in a clinic by the police. As I said all the story hasn’t been revealed about a journalists close involvement with Ross.
        Are you ready to bin your claim a previous story was just luck from being on ‘ shift duty’. LoL
        If you don’t agree , fine. But make up foolish claims is bizarre when you are well known for valuble and interesting pov.

  9. ianmac 10

    Somehow Slater’s post seems credible and seems backed by facts.
    Bridge makes a big thing about acting on the JLR bad behaviours as soon as he heard about them. This does not match the Slater Timeline. Can’t both be right.

    We have come to trust David Fisher but this time he might need to respond to the differences.

    • Dennis Frank 10.1

      Yeah, my impression too. “Simon Bridges and Paula Bennett have misled media constantly, denied knowledge of things that are now proved to have occurred prior to their claimed knowledge and continued to obfuscate. Unlike other media, I have used facts, data, call logs and text messages to prove my claims. They have nothing but unnamed “sources”. Sources that are inconveniently close to Simon Bridges or Paula Bennett.”

      “Before anyone thinks that I am sticking up for Jami-Lee Ross, I reiterate that I think that some of his actions and deeds as portrayed in media are reprehensible. He has to own those actions. He is working through that. However, what Jami-Lee Ross did and is accused of doing is no different from what many other MPs across the house have done. If the Paula Bennett test were applied to other National MPs there would likely be only about 10 MPs left. She’d be gone for sure, so would Bridges and many others. Very few are squeaky clean with their domestic arrangements. That’s why Labour MPs are very, very quiet; they have their own dirt they want kept quiet.”

      “I, however, am not part of the beltway. I live in Auckland. I’m not compromised like some of the media and politicians, but I do know who is compromised. When one journalist had the cheek to call me about Jami-Lee’s affairs, I had to point out to him what I knew about his. He quickly changed the subject.”

      • Chris T 10.1.1

        “I, however, am not part of the beltway. I live in Auckland. I’m not compromised like some of the media and politicians,…”

        Lol Lol

        • Muttonbird 10.1.1.1

          Fascinating to see commenters from the right now in total opposition to Cameron Slater when at one time they were defending his collaboration and communication with John Key.

          • Chris T 10.1.1.1.1

            a) I’m not particularly right

            b) I have never defended Slater in my entire life. I have in fact been at pains to avoid anything the bloke says, as he has always seemed out for himself and a bit narcissistic

            • Muttonbird 10.1.1.1.1.1

              a) Ok, but saying you are “not particularly right” does actually mean you are from the right.

              b) Not saying you defended Slater, just that you defended Key in his communications with Slater. I have no proof of that either, though…

              • Chris T

                a) I don’t even think we particularly have a “left” or “right” in NZ at the moment.

                Some of Labours policy I agree with, some not, same the other way

                b) No. I didn’t. I think Key having anything to do with the bloke was as fricken stupid as his ill thought out comments at the time of the Pike explosion

                • solkta

                  The Greens are the left wing of NZ politics.

                  • Chris T

                    Sorry

                    Should have said the two main parties that make up either govt.

                    But you are right. Greens are left. But then they are largely sterile in this set up.

                    And Winston is whatever is best for Winston on any given day

                  • Muttonbird

                    That’s true. And it is a particularly barren place right now. We all have our hit points with the Green Party.

                    For me it is tenancy reform and minimum standards for housing which enables all communities to be stable communities and for all children to have the best chance to make good connections with their peers early, and be healthy in their homes.

                    For others it is welfare reform.

                    For others still it is climate change.

                    They really do hit on something for everyone on the left but the sum of their parts currently is much less than the whole, unfortunately.

                • Muttonbird

                  a) I think partisanship is alive more than ever. That’s the continued two-solution Americanisation of New Zealand. Apologies if I have missed your comments agreeing with Labour policy.

                  b) I was probably talking the general ‘you’ here. After Dirty Politics there was much effort by the Nats and their supporters to minimise the relevancy of intimate contact between Slater and the Prime Minister of New Zealand. Bizarre then that Simon Bridges, a man auditioning for the job, would go back to that well and call him direct.

    • Carolyn_Nth 10.2

      But there are things that aren’t backed by facts, and probably some stuff left out or airbrushed.

      So, we only have Slater/JLR’s word for it that he accessed the August text from his ex last weekend and that triggered suicidal thoughts.

      The big bit left out is Slater’/Lusk/JLR’s involvement in trying to undermine Bridges (for the benefit of JC.

      JLR has admitted to doing some dirty deeds for National in the past but not so much in the present.

      Also, given that JLR seems to not admit to any bullying or harassment, while numerous people are claiming experience of him harassing them – there’s likely some airbrushing going on by Slater/JLR.

      Weren’t there claims of JLR using the ex and others to get info on other Nats – and the exchange was a bit of a leg up the Nat ladder for the ex.

      AAlso, Slater/JLR/Lusk is blaming the ex and Bridges for JLR’s break down. But, some of the blame may be due go to JLR/Slater/Lusk – JLR was being undermined by Bridges because they were possibly trying to oust Bridges by some pretty covert means?

      Some of the texts also make Bridges and Bennett look pretty underhand in their tactics

      • Treetop 10.2.1

        Do you think Bridges thought I will get JLR before he gets me, using the report into the leak of expenses which is inconclusive.

        And

        That Bridges thought that JLR would not raise anything Bridges may have been involved with, which could implicate JLR.

        And

        Then the reputation assassination, inappropriate behaviour toward 4 woman and raising the mental health of JLR and targeting him over it.

        Collins is yet to make her move. Bridges needs to be in a weaker position.

        Slater and Lusk are using JLR to get rid of Bridges. Both have not said a word against Collins.

        Group therapy session required for some National Party MPs. There is a culture of trying to destroy careers and/or being a passive bystander.

        These MPs need to seriously start considering who is going to be collateral damage. Family members will be affected, if not now, down the track cannot be ruled out.

        The irrational and vindictive behaviour needs to stop. The wise National MPs need to sort out the shit stirrers/out of control MPs in their caucas.

        There is no leadership in the National Party. This has been absent for years.

      • Ankerrawshark 10.2.2

        I doubt reading the text triggered the thoughts as such. Things were going horribly wrong and he was experiencing multiple loss events. Reading the ex text more like last straw stuff, but again I am just speculating

        • Carolyn_Nth 10.2.2.1

          Well, given that JLR does a lot of texting, and the text from his ex was from about August, why would he randomly access her text at that point?

          My guess is that he remembered that text, went back and checked it, and decided to use it as revenge against her for speaking out against him – taking everyone down with him. Basically saying to her, “I’m gonna top myself, and it’s your fault.”

          • Tricledrown 10.2.2.1.1

            CNth you are reading to much into what happened.
            JLR had a massive upheaval in his life.
            Marriage Career just speculating in a derogatory manner shows more about you and your agenda.

            • Carolyn_Nth 10.2.2.1.1.1

              I just read the media, and the sub texts.

              People said something similar when my reading of reports of JLR being sectioned, was that it looked like it was the Nat party who called in the mental health services and police. And that turned out to be true.

              Again I ask, why would JLR randomly access an old tweet from his ex at that particular point?

    • WeTheBleeple 10.3

      Cameron has been dragged off to court several times lately.

      I’m thinking we’re seeing a more cautious Cameron now. Anyone can learn as they go and I’d like to give him the benefit of the doubt – aka this change ushers in a less contemptuous WO.

      But watching the bulk of journalists settle for copy and paste, sensationalism, catchy headlines, controversy, and no substance… He’s in the company of fools, it will likely rub off again.

      • Tricledrown 10.3.1

        We the bleeping Slater is now on a mission he won’t go away.

        • Carolyn_Nth 10.3.1.1

          It’s all about power and control – for the well off, while keeping less well off people struggling and unable to participate in democracy.

          Both right wing sides will use people, and undermine other’s mental health and well being, to achieve their aims.

          Slater has not changed at all. Is just doubling down.

          • Tricledrown 10.3.1.1.1

            The Slater Lusk brigade want rid of the moderates and want their teaparty fundamentalists ACT types to takeover the National Party it has backfired badly 2 of their diehard fundies have been outed so the Slater/Lusk Dirty Politics main operators have lost a lot of leverage leaving Collins faction isolated and having to fall into line behind Bridges.
            The civil war will continue until Bridges is gone

  10. Philj 11

    National Party, ” Reports of my death are greatly exaggerated “

    • Incognito 11.1

      43% in latest poll, 44.4% in latest general election (that is the 2017 General Election). Enough said.

      • Dennis Frank 11.1.1

        Nevertheless, I suspect the effect of this thing could be analogous to a tsunami. Even when the wave that breaks at the leading edge is only three metres high, the mile or so of incoming ocean behind it is what surges inland. So if a Reid Research poll arrives in a couple of weeks, a further drop is more likely than not, I reckon.

        • Incognito 11.1.1.1

          Poll support for National has remained stubbornly high over the last 10 years or so no matter what, it seems. What is that telling us? The Reid Poll in May had National at 45.1%.

        • Tricledrown 11.1.1.2

          Petrol prices will stop Nationals fall.
          It’s the economy stupid.

      • Stuart Munro 11.1.2

        The anti-Corbyn polls looked pretty solid too, but weren’t. Nothing with a sample size of 900 or so is particularly robust when the don’t knows are routinely elided.

        I’d expect slightly more volatility after a scandal like JLR, and if the polling doesn’t show that, it may not be representative. The fairly common suggestion that polls were being held back for “sunnier weather” tends to indicate that their primary focus is more motivated than objective.

      • Muttonbird 11.1.3

        Interesting that Farrar feared nothing more than consistent small drops in polling. A big 10% drop he could handle because he said it was likely to bounce back in the next poll. But several small drops in successive polls indicated a much more difficult position.

        I was lucky enough to be in the same room as JA yesterday and it was an amazing experience. She walked on stage at exactly the scheduled time and the theatre erupted. That is big for New Zealand because we don’t erupt as a rule.

        She spoke as minister for Arts, culture and heritage for 20 mins without referring to notes and without one mistake. I don’t know how these people do it.

        She remained backstage in that theatre for at least an hour afterwards before moving to the next engagement, preparing and resting.

        She’s just had a baby and she does this for the country. What a woman.

        • Incognito 11.1.3.1

          Haven’t we hit peak-JA yet and nadir-National in the polls?

          In any case, this is comparing a person with a party and I think there are some issues with framing in this way.

          • Muttonbird 11.1.3.1.1

            I don’t think we’ve reached peak JA at all. But my comment was simply telling a personal experience I was lucky enough to have had with her.

            Comparing a person with a party is the way politics was done under John Key. The difference being John Key’s government was one of dirty politics and corruption and JA’s government is one of kindness and honesty.

            You are pushing shit uphill if you think leader appeal needs to be divorced from party appeal.

            • Incognito 11.1.3.1.1.1

              I liked your personal anecdote of the meeting with JA but I didn’t feel the need to comment on it 🙂

              You are pushing shit uphill if you think leader appeal needs to be divorced from party appeal.

              I didn’t say that, did I? Anyway, this statement confuses me; Simon Bridges polls at 7% IIRC and ‘his’ party at 43%. Even JA’s preferential polling is different from Labour’s in the party stakes.

              As far as I can tell, they are apples & oranges but in case I do have got that wrong I’ll get some extra toilet paper handy 😉

      • Tricledrown 11.1.4

        43% is not a low number between elections a few more Petrol price rises and The shine will go off any govt.

        • Incognito 11.1.4.1

          Indeed, 43% is not low by any means, which is/was my point.

          I am no economist but the economy seems to be doing rather well according to the usual economic indicators (aggregate numbers). If rising petrol prices were to have that much influence on opinion polls I’d say that somebody is manipulating public opinion in a very devious way. Now, who would (want to) do such a thing and who would be capable of it?

  11. outofbed 12

    Somewhere sometime …way down south

    [husband] Hi Darling, Good to see you home for the weekend

    [husband] I thought we would have Indian takeaways tonight and the maybe an early night??

    [name redacted] Actually I prefer Chinese you get so much more .

    [name redacted] And I don’t think I feel like an ‘early night’ it has been a “rough” week

    [husband] You poor thing you have been looking a bit tired lately

    [name redacted] Yes I had to sit next to fucking useless Mp today it was terrible

    [husband] Let me guess a Green?

    [name redacted] No worse. one of ours!

    [name redacted] Sometimes they behave so badly I could kill them!

    [husband] Let me guess Labour?

    [name redacted] No worse, one of ours!

    [name redacted] Some of them are just plain liars

    [husband] New Zealand First?.

    [name redacted] No most of ours actually

    [husband] You sound very stressed, maybe you should get another job ?

    [name redacted] No darling I am making a difference to people lives.

    to be continued..

    • Treetop 12.1

      I needed a good laugh.

      I have been in the position when sex has been mixed up with a political scandal. I was only 16 and really naive working at a police barracks.

  12. Chris T 13

    So much sudden love and respect for Slater on here.

    Both humorous and embarrassing to watch at the same time

    • In Vino 13.1

      Chris T – such exaggeration makes your sniping seem downright silly.

      • Chris T 13.1.1

        Just an observation

        Think the bloke is playing people like fools

        • McFlock 13.1.1.1

          With all the lies and distortions we’ve seen him invent regarding the left and the labour movement in general, I don’t understand why anyone here would think he was telling the truth just because he’s fighting a clique of the nats this time.

          • Muttonbird 13.1.1.1.1

            He’s closer to the source more than ever before with access to all Ross’ digital info. That is one difference.

            I don’t think theres any “love and respect’ for Slater here. That’s just a desperate spew from Chris T. It is simply not true. What is true is a guarded reading if what this informant brings to the table of truth.

            • Sacha 13.1.1.1.1.1

              “with access to all Ross’ digital info” – *how* would be an interesting question.

            • McFlock 13.1.1.1.1.2

              OK.

              Let’s assume you’re completely correct in that.

              The problem I have is that even if he was in a position to know what he was talking about, Slater has been part of a group that isolated and manipulated an emotionally vulnerable person for their own ends, well documented in DP.

              Do you really think he wouldn’t fabricate or add lines to a text? Or maybe release a response without releasing the even more extreme communications that provoked that response? Do you believe Slater would not push a vulnerable person into exagerrating or fabricating something against their own best interests and long term career, just to serve his own ends?

              It might be that Slater is telling the simple truth and acting as a faithful servant to JLR’s wishes. But if you can’t stand hand-on-heart and say that you believe Slater is above doing any such thing, even truth is useless when he is the only source.

    • UncookedSelachimorpha 13.2

      Don’t think so.

      But even a broken clock is right twice each day.

  13. Muttonbird 14

    With reference to the image in the post, Trevett’s headline today is accurate, even if mistakenly so…

    Ahoy! One year down but pirates ahead for PM Jacinda Ardern

    https://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=12149349

  14. Fireblade 15

    Jami-Lee Ross: New text from ‘homeless’ MP reveals the tipping point.
    27 Oct, 2018 6:25pm
    By: David Fisher

    https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12149924

    • I feel love 15.1

      So basically National are wonderful and can do no wrong and acted ethically towards Ross and the donations were legal and Slater has mental health issues and is delusional with an axe to grind. But not David Fisher or the Herald.

      • Carolyn_Nth 15.1.1

        Fisher is one of the NZ Herald investigative reporters who does tend to follow the evidence, and, by his own admission, can be misled by at least one source.

        Earlier DF had questioned the Nats’ version of the JLR story:

        “Holes emerging in National’s chain of events around Jami-Lee Ross and his adverse behaviour”: 19 October 2018

        In his latest article, DF quotes extensively from Slater’s dirty politics as exposed by Nicky Hager. After Hager’s book was published, DF did a mea culpa – admitting to using Slater/WO as a source, and having allowed himself to be compromised in order to get the low down Slater was offering. So now he clearly does not trust any version of events Slater tells.

        I don’t either. It doesn’t mean I therefore accept everything said by the Nats’ hierarchy either.

        DF makes some good points about what the information released by Slater shows, and what it doesn’t show. He’s not particularly taking the Nat’s word for their version either – just printing what the Nats’ said about it.

        The article begins:

        Blogger Cameron Slater has published some of the text messages in a bid to advance his claim the National Party is to blame for Ross’ condition. The Herald cannot confirm the text messages are genuine. The blogger did not respond to a request for comment.

        The new text messages appeared to show the former lover acting with urgency at signs of distress.

        The rest of the article reports Slater’s version, then the Nats version – DF is trying to establish what did happen based on the evidence. He ends with a lot about Slater’s track record of Dirty Politics, indicating what he doesn’t trust Slater.

        • Graeme 15.1.1.1

          There isn’t a good / bad, or right / wrong distinctions between narratives or individuals in this sorry saga.

          Everything and everyone is bad and wrong.

  15. cleangreen 16

    National = “no moral compass”.

  16. JustMe 17

    In his recent article Nicky Hager used the type of tactics/politics conducted by National as being Attack Politics. Attack Politics being a US import.
    Remember the US being the country John Key just so loves and cannot find anything about the country he doesn’t love eg attack politics(as shown by Donald Trump), school yard killings and just today news of a synagogue shooting where 11 people have been shot dead. John Key so loves America that one can imagine he takes whatever America tells him as unquestioned Gospel.
    Recently Simon Bridges announced he would be having an Inquiry into the NZ National Party in regards to its ‘culture’.
    I can only assume that with Attack Politics now being such a natural part of the NZ National Party that in the end the so-called “Inquiry” will find nothing untoward or wrong within such a malevolent party as National.
    The track record of National and especially since 2008 through to now is to demean, belittle, knock back, attack, bully, intimidate etc,etc,etc anyone or any group of people that question or criticise it.
    We have seen time and again of instances where National Party MPs have deliberately breached the right to privacy of so many NZ citizens because a number of those NZ citizens criticised say Paula Bennett. Perhaps it looks like even recently the NZ National Party have breached JLR’s right to privacy by spreading to the NZ Media his private details and discussions with his doctor.
    There is a bad malevolent culture that has completely satuated the NZ National Party. If any heads should roll it should be Simon Bridges, Paula Bennett, Judith Collins and all the others that have shown themselves as just nothing short of being self-serving rat-bags who would do anything just to keep being in power(within the NZ National Party).

  17. SPC 18

    As to the donations.

    Organisations (fronts) are used to provide a standing to those using money to build influence (they are also means to public recognition).

    A significant person in such an organisation is known as the source of the large donation – but others in it sign off on the under $15,000 amount shares. Thus a party is beholden to one man, but the public has no idea who this is.

    A clear subversion of the intent of the rules.

    As to identifying the facts of it. Follow the money trail. And it there is no money trail (via bank accounts of those named) – wonder at the source of the laundered cash (and inform IRD).

    Did one man take $100,000 – from an account and disperse it into smaller amounts (into the accounts of 6 others)? Did he hand it over in cash (unidentifiable source) and they deposited it into their own accounts before donating? Or just pass it on in a cash to bank cheque form. In what payment form did National receive it?

    Note, if they caught out here, next time donors will simply fund a way to hide it better next time.

    Then of course there is the issue of laundering offshore money (less likely given the wealth of the operatives and how business favours are the payoffs).

Leave a Comment

Show Tags

Recent Comments

Recent Posts