Key’s Nixon moment

Written By: - Date published: 6:15 am, April 11th, 2013 - 55 comments
Categories: accountability, brand key, john key, law, making shit up, spin - Tags: , , ,

“When the president does it, that means that it is not illegal”
– Richard Nixon

John Key would have you believe the same thing, that when his agency, the GCSB, has been breaking the law, the problem lies with the law. No – the problem lies with the GCSB and its oversight.

The law is not unclear. Part 3 of the Act (ht The Jackal, see the full Government Communications Security Bureau Act 2003 PDF) makes it perfectly clear that the purpose of the Act is to obtain foreign intelligence. Section 14 is core, and is explicitly referred to by other sections:

Restrictions imposed on interceptions

14 Interceptions not to target domestic communications

Neither the Director, nor an employee of the Bureau, nor a person acting on behalf of the Bureau may authorise or take any action for the purpose of intercepting the communications of a person (not being a foreign organisation or a foreign person) who is a New Zealand citizen or a permanent resident.

What’s unclear about that? Hello reporters – there is no “doubt” over the spy agency role. Key’s plan to allow the GCSB to spy on Kiwis is not “cementing” its powers, it is creating them! Key and those who are blaming the law are just making excuses to try and confuse the fact that they have been breaking it.

Shorter Key: “When the PM does it that means that it is not illegal”. Rounding off our Nixon connection, we have this interesting tweet from Kim Dotcom last night…

dotcom-tweet

Stay tuned.

55 comments on “Key’s Nixon moment”

  1. Jenny 1

    Nixon headed up team, that with the relatively primitive technology of the time, illegally spied on the Democrats in the Watergate Hotel.

    Nixon took the fall.

    But today with the advances in electronic snooping, presumably the GSCB didn’t have to illegally break into hotel rooms.

    But who knows?

    What other illegal activities they are up to?

    We only know of these ones because they have been brought to light in the fall out of the Dotcom affair.

    The message Key is giving the secret police, (and the regular police) is that law breaking is all right. If it is done by you guys. And if you are caught in the committing of them. The laws will be changed to allow you to get away with it.

    A law change to protect law breakers. These criminals now know that they will not be reprimanded if they break the laws of the land, there will be no consequences. Just make greater efforts not to be caught.

    That this will happen is guaranteed. Because those agents who have committed these crimes. (And they were crimes.) Are to be left in their posts, hidden behind their secret identities to carry on their criminality unchecked.

    • “The laws will be changed to allow you to get away with it.”

      Parliament can’t do the impossible. Conspiracy against the common good is never lawful regardless of how many times the media pontificates that new policy was “passed into law”.

  2. Craig Glen viper 2

    I hope you are right Anthony that this is Key’s Nixon moment. The Nats have resorted to the when all else fails line of “blame Helen Clarke” as reported in the Granny Heralds article today “Key slammed over spying”
    The white paper that Dotcom refers to could be interesting?

  3. rosy 3

    Total nonsense as a reason for breaking the law

    But Deputy Prime Minister Bill English said Section 14 of the 2003 act, which prevented the bureau spying on New Zealanders, was only included in the legislation by then Prime Minister Helen Clark “to get the votes in the House”.

    Let the law enforcement agencies ignore any law that was inserted only to get votes in the house, shall we? E.g. why not ignore Key’s insertion into s59 “where the offence is considered to be so inconsequential that there is no public interest in proceeding with a prosecution” and go straight back to interpreting the law as Sue Bradford’s original, because that line was only inserted “to get votes in the house”.

    Sheesh.

    • felix 3.1

      Yep, right there is Bill English saying what he really thinks of democracy. If it’s just something you did to get votes, it doesn’t count.

      • Draco T Bastard 3.1.1

        National has never liked democracy as it prevents their rich mates doing whatever they want.

      • Pascal's bookie 3.1.2

        What a tool. someone should call him out on that. The bill passed with near full support, the Greens forgot to vote or something, but everyone else voted for it.

        So who is he talking about that section being inserted for?

        Similar bullshit with Key saying he didn;t mislead anyone because “his” legal team told him they didn’t bleieve there was any unlawful spying going on. Who is he talking about? Crown law would be the PMs legal team I guess, but turns out he was talking about the SIS and GCSB’s legal teams.

        It’s like a policeman saying they didn’t think there was any crimes done because he had a word with the defence lawyer who advised nah all good mate.

  4. freedom 4

    If what we heard in Parliament QT yesterday is accurate, and why would it not be, can anyone explain why the DotCom saga was specifically excluded from the report’s mission?

  5. BM 5

    When’s the fat German getting kicked out the door?

    • Galeandra 5.1

      Hurry along, BM, or you’ll be late for school.

    • One Anonymous Knucklehead 5.2

      I can’t decide whether watching the so-called freedom loving Right reveal their true nature is hilarious or sickening.

      • Kevin Welsh 5.2.1

        You have to bear-in-mind that every time the Right mention ‘freedom’, they are only talking about theirs, not everyone else’s.

  6. I never thought that I would support a wealthy right wing german with a shadowy past …

    • BM 6.1

      You’d support Satan if it got your team back in power.

      • One Anonymous Knucklehead 6.1.1

        And you’d support domestic surveillance by a secret organisation, controlled by the Prime Minister, and then have the imbecility to talk about the Stasi.

        • BM 6.1.1.1

          Bit like the Clark years then.

          • felix 6.1.1.1.1

            Thanks for playing along so well.

          • One Anonymous Knucklehead 6.1.1.1.2

            Yes, BM, and if you’d discovered it then you would have been wetting your pants and squealing, but you’re such a Quisling hypocrite you’re defending it because your lying Prime Minister is implicated too.

            I’m pleased to say I don’t suffer from your double standards.

            • BM 6.1.1.1.2.1

              No where near as much as Clark though.
              If I took a punt I’d say the numbers would be
              Clark-84
              Key-1

              Interesting thing is how involved Grant Robinson is in all of this, from some of the stuff I’ve read, he’s right up to his neck.

              • Colonial Viper

                Clark lost her Prime Ministership.

                Now it’s John Key’s turn. You agree, right?

                • felix

                  Course he does. It’s not like he’s a brainless fuckwit who came here with the sole desperate motivation of defending his hero at any cost.

                  • freedom

                    BM is trippin’
                    but it is not unrealistic to consider that a clear timeline of those 88 instances would make interesting reading

              • One Anonymous Knucklehead

                Grant Robertson has perjured himself the way John Key has?

                Doubt it.

                You’re dreaming if you think there was only one case over the last four years, but seriously, who cares what an apologist for the Stasi thinks?

                • felix

                  I think BM has good reason to be irritable today.

                  From some of the stuff I’ve read, he shat his pants this morning and rolled around in them.

              • Draco T Bastard

                If I took a punt I’d say the numbers would be
                Clark-84
                Key-1

                I believe over half happened under Key.

      • freedom 6.1.2

        use of the word “team” only highlights exactly why this country is so fucked!

        They are groups who supposedly wish to become Representatives of the People in a functional Democracy and need to start being reminded of this fact. The obsession of modern politics is personality and the sporting culture crossover is not helpful in restricting the growth of this material toxin.

      • Northshoreguynz 6.1.3

        You already do, Mephistopheles too.

  7. freedom 7

    “That is not advice there is a problem. In fact, the advice I got from my legal people was there wasn’t a problem.” – John Key

    If legal advice state there was not a problem, this suggests at some point there was a concern that there may be a problem, which is when the Minister who is tasked with “control” of the GCSB is meant to go to the Crown Law office for advice.

    Cabinet rules require that legal opinion is to be sought in the first part from the Crown Law office and according to recent questions in Parliament, this never happened. So who did Key get advice from?

  8. felix 8

    This whole Key scandal has been reminding me of something else (Oliver Stone’s) Nixon said.

    It’s the lie that gets you: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pKbmNIneR7M

    Funny how the righties never want to talk about the lie, eh?

    • freedom 8.1

      LIE, a word that still has not been used in the msm.
      In what way is Key’s claim about not knowing anything till September not a lie?

      “mislead the Country” at least that part is accurate and can be applied to Key’s Government in its entirety

      • Draco T Bastard 8.1.1

        It hasn’t been used by the opposition either and it won’t be. Some tradition about not calling people in government liars even when it’s obvious that they lied.

    • One Anonymous Knucklehead 8.2

      Spot on Felix.

      Issue 1: the GCSB is out of control.

      Issue 2: The Prime Minister lied to Parliament and the public about it.

      They broke the crimes act and their own governing legislation. He perjured himself.

      • Anne 8.2.1

        the GCSB is out of control.

        What’s the bet that if a full, independent inquiry was carried out we would find that the GCSB only became seriously out of control after the change of government.

        Which is probably the reason why Key doesn’t want a full, independent inquiry – with the emphasis on the word independent.

    • Ennui 8.3

      Gotta admit Tricky Dicky was so much more fun than Key!

      Saw Kissinger in the background, so if Henry was Punch to Dicky’s Judy who is Keys Punch?

  9. Rodel 9

    It’s KEY..KEY…KEY!

    Rhonda Farr said: ‘Publicity, darling. Just publicity. Any kind is better than none at all.’
    [1933 R. Chandler in Black Mask Dec. 26]

  10. Red Rosa 10

    Classic Nixon. Key has been very touchy about this issue and DotCom, right from the start. Now that it is really unravelling, someone with time and energy needs to dig back a couple of years and get a full timeline together. Even the public record is damning.

    It seems increasingly likely that Key has been taking orders from the US on DotCom, since maybe early 2011. He would have been well briefed on how to go about it, and the sort of statements need to cover his tracks.

    Possible also that Shearer was set up for humiliation in the House by a ‘leak’ of planted false info, which he naively swallowed.

    The NZ law, as can be seen above, is plain and simple. Extraordinary that DotCom has more credibility now than the Prime Minister.

    Interesting times.

    • Colonial Viper 10.1

      Now that it is really unravelling, someone with time and energy needs to dig back a couple of years and get a full timeline together.

      Hmmmmm…it seems to me that Dotcom’s staff have the time, energy and money needed to do a thorough background investigation like this. Dang it.

    • Anne 10.2

      It seems increasingly likely that Key has been taking orders from the US on DotCom, since maybe early 2011.

      I would go further and say it was a certainty. The Hobbit controversy started around Aug/Sept. 2010, and Key would have been ‘communicating’ with his Hollywood mates – in particular Warner bros.- before it even hit the media spotlight. I wouldn’t be surprised if they gave Key a heads-up on Dotcom at the same time.

    • Draco T Bastard 10.3

      It seems increasingly likely that Key has been taking orders from the US on DotCom, since maybe early 2011.

      IMO, Key has been taking orders from the US since before he returned to NZ. In fact, I think his return to NZ was an order.

      • Anne 10.3.1

        Exactly my thoughts too DTB.

        There’s a very interesting pattern developing… and it looks like it began around the start of Labour’s third term in office. The demonising of Helen Clark and her ministers, Key’s rapid rise through the ranks, the ever accelerating progress towards the ‘privatising’ of NZ and now the ‘secret’ collaborations between Key and members of the US based international corporate giants.

        And it’s beginning to look like the GCSB boss, Ian Fletcher is complicit in the cover-up over the obvious on-going ‘friendship’ he and John Key have enjoyed for years.

        Our very own Watergate it may turn out to be…

        • North 10.3.1.1

          Oh for a whistleblower then. If this stuff has happened there is knowledge of it somewhere.

  11. ianmac 11

    Is it possible that Key talking of making GCSB spying on NZers legal, is an attempt to out-manoeuvre the Dotcom team? Kim has said that he has proof that Key was lying about his involvement and somehow there is a connection, perhaps, maybe?

    • freedom 11.1

      there is no way they will try to make it a retro-active law, surely not
      that is low even for the parasitic molluscs that they are

      -apologies to molluscs

      • Colonial Viper 11.1.1

        The spin is this:

        Key is trying to get his mates off charges

        We need a full criminal investigation now

        Only the police can decide if charges should be laid or not as per normal criminal investigation procedure; not the PM

        • karol 11.1.1.1

          How do we trust that the police don’t just fall in behind the PM?

          On Citizen A tonight, Selwyn Manning said it requires a full, independent investigation overseen by someone independent with a solid legal background. Sounds like a good plan to me.

          • Colonial Viper 11.1.1.1.1

            How do we trust that the police don’t just fall in behind the PM?

            Ahhhhh yes that’s a significant point in due course but not important at this juncture in terms of spin; all that is important PR wise is that John Key is painted as interfering with what should be a criminal investigation, because he is trying to protect his mates.

            ONCE the PM accepts that he needs to step back and that a police investigation is required THEN calls for an independent investigation start

            Its death by a thousand cuts you see

  12. freedom 12

    Couldn’t resist

    if this crosses some legal line please feel free to delete it
    but i clearly state it is an altered original

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

  • Swiss tax agreement tightens net
    Opportunities to dodge tax are shrinking with the completion of a new tax agreement with Switzerland, Revenue Minister Stuart Nash announced today. Mr Nash and the Swiss Ambassador David Vogelsanger have today signed documents to update the double tax agreement (DTA). The previous DTA was signed in 1980. “Double tax ...
    2 weeks ago