One video exposes Key, GCSB’s & Banks’ Dotcom lies

Written By: - Date published: 7:35 am, October 4th, 2012 - 115 comments
Categories: john banks, john key, Spying - Tags: ,

Watch this video of John Key being interviewed by the media on January 24th – four days after the Dotcom raid. First point: Key is clearly well-briefed on Dotcom. Second: he knows that Dotcom is a resident, so why didn’t he raise that a month later with GCSB? Third: How did Key know that Dotcom was a resident and GCSB didn’t? Fourth: Banks has told media he had dined at the mansion with Dotcom – months before denying remembering that meeting.

The fallout from this video will be massive.

Key is going to have to explain how he was so clearly well-briefed on Dotcom and the raid on January 24th, yet no-one had briefed him on the GCSB’s involvement.

He’s going to have to explain how, having already been aware of Dotcom’s residency by January 24th, he didn’t raise that as a problem with the GCSB when they told him they had been involved in the raid on February 29th – was he not paying attention, was he not aware of the law, did he already know, did he not care?

GCSB is going to have to explain how they could be unaware that Dotcom was a permanent resident until September (yeah, right) when Key knew immediately after the raid.

Banks. Well, Banks is screwed. There he is in January, telling media that he had eaten at Dotcom’s. Months later, he denied remembering that event. This is incontrovertible proof that Banks lied when his donations from Dotcom started to become exposed. He lied while he was a minister to the media and to New Zealand.

We knew this – but Key refused to know it. We had Dotcom’s lawyer’s statement – but Key said ‘that’s just one person’s statement’. Now, we have Key, on video, engaging in and acknowledging the fact that Banks remembered his dealings with Dotcom. Key can no longer pretend ignorance of the fact that Banks has lied to us all.

Pack your bags, Banksie. If it weren’t for the storm swirling around Key himself, Banks might still have survived this with Key’s resolute protection. Now, Key needs someone to throw under the bus.

115 comments on “One video exposes Key, GCSB’s & Banks’ Dotcom lies ”

  • Comments are now closed

  2. Nick K 2
    4 October 2012 at 7:54 am

    Banks never received a donation from Dotcom. You can’t even get that right.
    [Banks didn’t get a donation from Dotcom? lolz. come on, what’s your semantic game on that one? Eddie]

    • toad 2.1
      4 October 2012 at 8:00 am

      Maybe on Planet Key.

    • framu 2.2
      4 October 2012 at 8:12 am

      really? do go on – im all ears

      hold on…….

      ………ok ive got my popcorn

    • Kotahi Tāne Huna 2.3
      4 October 2012 at 8:16 am

      Yah c’mon Nick K, I’m avid to hear this one too. Please don’t tell me it’s because the cheque was made out to “Team Banksie”! Please tell me you’ve come up with something more imaginative.

    • Nick K 2.4
      4 October 2012 at 8:29 am

      Megaupload Limited is not Kim Dotcom.

      • Kotahi Tāne Huna 2.4.1
        4 October 2012 at 8:31 am

        That’s…underwhelming. Please try harder.

      • Te Reo Putake 2.4.2
        4 October 2012 at 8:34 am

        Sunsilk have some excellent products for repairing split hairs, Nick. And you might want to consider whose signature is on the cheque before you comment again!

        • Nick K 2.4.2.1
          4 October 2012 at 8:50 am

          Banks never saw any cheque so how would he know whose signature it was?

          • Lanthanide 2.4.2.1.1
            4 October 2012 at 9:28 am

            So if you don’t see something that you received, it means you didn’t receive it? That’s the logical conclusion we can draw from your latest statement, as you woefully try to backpeddle to show your initial statement at #2 is ‘correct’.

            Face it – Banks campaign deposited cheques with Kim’s signature on them. Bank’s campaign received cheques from Kim.

            • Nick K 2.4.2.1.1.1
              4 October 2012 at 12:01 pm

              Kim Dotcom is not a director of Megaupload Limited so couldn’t have signed the cheque.

              • Te Reo Putake …
                4 October 2012 at 12:15 pm

                🙄
                 
                Weakest. Excuse. Ever.

              • Pascal's bookie …
                4 October 2012 at 12:19 pm

                Yawn.

                Why do you reckon ol ‘nothing to fear nothing to hide’ told the police not to release his sworn statement?

                The only answer I can think of is that it contradicts his non sworn public statements, but I’m open to other theories. Got any?

              • Dv …
                4 October 2012 at 12:30 pm

                So THAT is his defence against againt extradition.

              • Fortran …
                4 October 2012 at 1:15 pm

                Nick K

                Dotcom does not have to be a director to sign a cheque, as long as he has signing rights.

              • lprent …
                4 October 2012 at 2:34 pm

                Kim Dotcom is not a director of Megaupload Limited so couldn’t have signed the cheque.

                Bullshit…

                1. Being a director of a companies is not requirement to sign cheques for the company. It is whoever has cheque signing authority at the bank.

                2. It was not Megaupload that the cheque was drawn on. It was some other company in the group that (from memory) was a private firm that looks like it was for holding dotcoms share earnings.

                Please don’t waste everyone’s time with being a simple and stupid parrot and repeating crap you haven’t checked. This bit of diversion waffle has all of the signatures of being from the mouthpiece puppets of National or Act… Just enough selectively picked fact and a whole lot of implicit not quite lying.

                Edit: I see that Fortran and Lanth have picked up the same points… Oh well.

                • Nick K …
                  4 October 2012 at 2:37 pm

                  So you think a human being and a company are the same thing?

                  • McFlock …
                    4 October 2012 at 3:42 pm

                    part of the degeneracy of the kleptocracy is the belief that ordering or authorising your company to do something is fundamentally different from doing it oneself.
                           
                    Sort of a reverse-Nuremberg: “I was only issuing orders”. 

                  • mickysavage …
                    4 October 2012 at 7:40 pm

                    Spoken like a lawyer Nick.

                    Did you know that 99% of lawyers give the rest a bad name? 

                    • Nick K …
                      4 October 2012 at 9:38 pm

                      You’ve been around long enough in politics to know that a donation from a company is absolutely not the same thing as a donation from an individual, and is also different to a donation from a trust. Companies have their own separate legal personality. I realise you are all playing politics with this and it’s politically expedient to say Dotcom gave Banks a $50k donation, but in terms of electoral law and common law, he didn’t. Plain and simple. You’ve written enough letters Greg to get the legal wording right. And you know Dotcom is not Megstuff Limited, despite the shareholding. In fact, if someone other than Dotcom had signing authority that makes it less clear. I realise the general public don’t care; and they don’t get the nuances. But you do. And so do I. And it annoys me when the chatter is that Dotcom gave Banks $50k when he did nothing of the thing. Fact.

                    • Pascal's bookie …
                      4 October 2012 at 9:53 pm

                      It’s a meaningless nuance Nick.

                      What person decided that Banks would get the money? The same person that Banks asked, and later thanked, for the money.

                      Christ.

                      It was DotCom who was locked up in jail, and who Banks said he couldn’t help because of the donation.

                      It was Dotcom that Banks said he would like to help if elected, and that some money would help with that.

                      Some nuances might be cleared up if Banks would release his sworn statement; but he won’t, for fairly obvious reasons.

                  • David H …
                    4 October 2012 at 8:19 pm

                    Next he’ll be saying that the Standard is a living breathing entity just because humans are using it.

                    On a brighter note nice to see Media Works have paid back the 32mil+ that they owed 2 years early. Now they can really get their teeth into Key and co.

                    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=10838337

                    • Nick K …
                      4 October 2012 at 10:07 pm

                      @ Pascal’s bookie – sure. But I’m a pedant when it comes to things like this. One reason why I’d be a crap politican.

          • mike e 2.4.2.1.2
            4 October 2012 at 11:32 am

            Just dig a bigger hole in the sand Nick to bury your swollen head ostrich syndrome!

        • Kotahi Tāne Huna 2.4.2.2
          4 October 2012 at 8:51 am

          Banks/Team Banksie
          Kim.com/Megaupload

          A fine example of tetrapyloctomy.

      • Lightly 2.4.3
        4 October 2012 at 8:52 am

        lolz.

        It’s like you know how a comedian lays out the joke and that builds the the punchline, which is the big moment in the story? What you just did was the opposite of that.

      • mike e 2.4.4
        4 October 2012 at 11:30 am

        just like the National party is not Conmankey

    • Frank Macskasy 2.5
      4 October 2012 at 8:45 am

      Well, Nick, that little ‘grenade’ went off with a splutter…

    • Frank Macskasy 2.6
      4 October 2012 at 8:46 am

      Key seems to be making a regular thing of forgetting stuff…

    • Georgecom 2.7
      4 October 2012 at 9:13 pm

      Go easy on Nick folks, he is making his statement tongue in cheek. The irony and sarcasm are dripping from his comment.

      Nick, one suggestion however, next time you make a tonhue in cheek comments use ‘ ‘ around the part you are emphasising for ironic value. Makes it easier to follow along, your sense of humour might be a little dry for some to grasp.

      That aside, nice joke. Good one.

  3. Kotahi Tāne Huna 3
    4 October 2012 at 8:09 am

    Gott im Himmel! Er ist abgeschlossen.

  4. Kotahi Tāne Huna 4
    4 October 2012 at 8:14 am

    So, the whole time Banks was faking amnesia, the Herald had this video? Slack!

  5. deuto 5
    4 October 2012 at 8:16 am

    Thanks for putting this video up as a post, Eddie. And also thanks to Zorr for providing it at 25.1 on the Convenient Amnesia post last night.

    IMO Key’s knowledgeable comments in the video ( particularly about 2 minutes in) prove that he had been well briefed on KDC and his residency status.

    And this was just one month before the GCSB presentation on 29 February – the latter date being the same day as two High Court hearings were held on the KDC case with an appeal against the Feb 22 bail release being dismissed and $300,000 being released to KDC.

    29 Feb Herald article – http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/video.cfm?c_id=1&gal_objectid=10781209&gallery_id=123534

    And Key couldn’t remember? Yeah right.

  6. uke 6
    4 October 2012 at 8:19 am

    “Banks. Well, Banks is screwed. There he is in January, telling media that he had eaten at Dotcom’s.”

    But Banks does not appear on the video, only a reporter quoting what he apparently said. (?)

    • deuto 6.1
      4 October 2012 at 8:24 am

      Suggest you watch the video – its Key being interviewed, not Banks, nor a reporter saying that.

      It would also help if you used the reply button to keep comments together. Thanks.

      • uke 6.1.1
        4 October 2012 at 9:09 am

        I did watch the video and of course saw it was Key. The salient section is:
         
        Reporter: John Banks has said today he actually went to dinner at the Dotcom mansion, as it were, and had… er… socialised with him there. Have you or any of your other ministers…?
         
        Key: Not to the… well, I certainly haven’t… not to the best of my knowledge… [etc.]
         
         
        Now, I’m not saying the reporter didn’t have good reason to ask this question, but to my mind having a recording of the original Banks comment would better fit the Standard article description of this being the “incontrovertible truth” of Banks lying. Otherwise Banks might still be able to deny it by saying the reporter misunderstood, etc. etc.
         
        Also, that was my query, I was not replying to any other comment as it seemed that nobody had made that point yet. Perhaps you or somebody else had. Sorry if I missed it.

        • mike 6.1.1.1
          4 October 2012 at 6:04 pm

          While I quite enjoy Key’s expression at 0:35 as the reporter is asking the question, (like ‘damn it Banks…’), I also don’t see how this video is a gotcha for Banks unless the reporter can produce evidence that Banks really said that. Otherwise Banks can just deny he said that or say she got it wrong. I don’t see Key here confirming anything on that matter.

          So who is the reporter? Anyone?

          Although, I’m a bit confused. Here is a Herald article (by Claire Trevett, same reporter?) from January where Banks is quoted about having dinner at the Dotcom mansion.

          He was later invited out to dinner at the dotcom mansion, although he could not remember the date or the occasion.

          “I enjoyed the occasion. Yes I went and I stayed for a short while, as I do.

          “I don’t know what we had for dinner, but it was a very pleasant occasion because I’m a car enthusiast and he had a nice collection of cars. I enjoyed looking at those in the garages. I got to speak to him for about five minutes.”

          http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10780709

          I know Banks has claimed (tellingly and ridiculously) that he can’t remember whether or not he flew his helicopter to the Dotcom mansion, but has he really also claimed amnesia about the dinner since this article?

          On other points as mentioned in the OP this video is embarrassing for Key though.

          • mike 6.1.1.1.1
            4 October 2012 at 6:07 pm

            Oops I wanted to put the section “He was later…about five minutes” in blockquotes.

    • Te Reo Putake 6.2
      4 October 2012 at 8:26 am

      Key seems to confirm it, then he goes on to say that no other ministers had met with Dotcom as far as he knew. ie at the time of the interview, Key knew that Banks had a relationship of sorts with Dotcom.

      • Lanthanide 6.2.1
        4 October 2012 at 9:30 am

        “Key knew that Banks had a relationship of sorts with Dotcom.”

        If Uke’s transcription at 6.1.1 is correct then I don’t agree with this inference.

      • uke 6.2.2
        4 October 2012 at 9:56 am

        As you say, “seems to confirm it”. Key’s little nods and “yep” (sorry didn’t transcribe that) could indicate prior knowledge of the Dotcom/Banks socialising.
         
        But it could also be interpreted as conversational filler, just confirming that he is listening to the reporter and understood what she has said. Who knows?

        • Te Reo Putake 6.2.2.1
          4 October 2012 at 10:06 am

          Well, while I agree that he might have nodded his head as acknowlegement of the question, he literally answers ‘yeah/yep’. Usually, when he disagrees with the premise of a question, Key (and Bennett, noticeably) replies with the word ‘so’. ie ‘So, what I think is important …’ ‘so, what parents want to know …’ That sort of thing.
           

    • Kotahi Tāne Huna 6.3
      4 October 2012 at 8:26 am

      A reporter quoting that as fact in a question to the PM? It’s not like they prepare background material beforehand or anything…

      Or perhaps she just made it up on the spot. Which seems more likely?

      Actually with our MSM you’d have to say 50/50 but… 😈

  7. Kotahi Tāne Huna 7
    4 October 2012 at 8:22 am

    Look closely at the video after Key says he’d never heard of Kim.com until briefed by the Solicitor General. The little in-breath hiss: his “tell” is showing. From about 0:40 onwards…

    D’oh!

  8. Red Rosa 8
    4 October 2012 at 8:24 am

    Gotcha.

    The only credible explanation is that Key has been taking orders from the US all along the line on this whole Dotcom affair. That was why he looked so rattled last week, it wasn’t following his script.

    Fit Fergusson (ex-US ambassador) into the picture, check out the critical dates for the TPP negotiations, recall the Hobbit union crushing, Panetta visit…

    The NBR has some interesting comments on its article this morning, mostly from hardened cynics who know a con job when they see one.

    Police minister Ann Tolley in deeper water than she ever envisaged…will take all the skills of this Kristy McDonald dame to whitewash this one…

    Gets better and better.

    But seriously, are we run from Wellington or Washington?

    • Enough is Enough 8.1
      4 October 2012 at 11:04 am

      GOTCHA all right.

      The National Party, even with all their inherent and institutional corruption, cannot ignore this video.

      Half of the sitting MP’s face being sacked at the next election by the electorate if they do not remove Key immediatley.

      They are all self serving individuals. They know what has to be done to keep their cushy lifestyles.

      Key will be rolled. Probably while he is out of the country in the next couple of days.

      • Draco T Bastard 8.1.1
        4 October 2012 at 2:42 pm

        Key will be rolled. Probably while he is out of the country in the next couple of days.

        Don’t count on it – Key is still the only reason why they have such good poll ratings. He’s the only one of the lot of them that even comes close to looking like he has any competence. Unfortunately for him, it seems that he only has competence in lying.

        • mickysavage 8.1.1.1
          4 October 2012 at 7:46 pm

          Agreed.

          If Key goes who are they going to choose as leader?

          Joyce?  His mother would have problems voting for him.

          Collins?  Way too scary.

          Bennett? Has hell frozen over yet.

          Who else? 

          • Anne 8.1.1.1.1
            4 October 2012 at 8:15 pm

            Hekia Parata of course. Aren’t they grooming her for the role?

          • David H 8.1.1.1.2
            4 October 2012 at 9:17 pm

            Tolley? Yeah right a walking TUI ad.

            Parata Thinks she can smile away anything.

            Brownlee?? He’s just alienated CHCH

            Bridges Guy ???

            And lets be honest here how many of them are looking at Key and shaking their heads, and saying FFS. Shut UP!! because they are down the bottom of the list and they will also pay for Keys folly, not just Key.

            They have a long tail so could be vulnerable for a cross the floor play by a back bencher who gets the blame for another Key fuck up and say well I’m gone, so i’ll take the idiot with me.

        • Josh 8.1.1.2
          4 October 2012 at 8:38 pm

          Key can’t handle the pressure. It’s starting to take a toll on him, mentally and physically. That’s why he is out of the country so often. It’s only going to get worse from here. I can’t see him leading National into the next election.

          That isn’t to say he will get rolled. But he might decide to pack it in while he’s still reasonably popular. I reckon he’s just waiting for Mighty River Power to be floated.

          As for who replaces him, I would have thought English. He’s got the experience, the profile, and is palatable enough to the public. Sure, he took them to their worst defeat in 2002, but he’d be a safe pair of hands in government.

    • Laura 8.2
      4 October 2012 at 12:28 pm

      We are being run from Washington, if you think this cover-up is bad, just wait until the truth comes out about the TPPA, how Key knows that there are strong links to the powerful corporate lobby group ALEC, and that Key knows exactly what he is doing as he sells us out to corporate interests….

  9. Te Reo Putake 9
    4 October 2012 at 8:38 am

    My favourite bit is a wide eyed Key saying what an unusual name Dotcom is. Yet when briefed by the GCSB a month later, he appears to have forgetten the name all together. And the fact that Dotcom was a resident. And the fact that the GCSB isn’t supposed to spy on residents.

    • Kotahi Tāne Huna 9.1
      4 October 2012 at 8:47 am

      Good points all. The lies are unravelling. Up until this point I thought there was a possibility that Key was simply incompetent, but he’s up to his neck in this.

      PS: and still incompetent – as you rightly point out he’s on camera admitting that which he denies knowledge of a month later.

    • tc 9.2
      4 October 2012 at 9:18 am

      A resident in his own electorate richer than he is with some pretty prominent behaviour like his fast cars scaring the locals horses, which they’d already been complaining about and that inflatable tank on the lawn.

      Could be one lie too many for johnny sparkles and this was one he didn’t really need to tell, not like tranzrail or blind trusts where he was desperate to deflect those stinkers or not knowing what your view on the 81 tour etc.

      I see Dunny boy out there playing his part on RNZ this morning, in between taxing carparks, yeah Petey Boy those hollowmen fleas do get itchy don’t they.

  10. ak 10
    4 October 2012 at 8:42 am

    Media studies 101:

    Two leaders of right-wing parties caught red-handed in repeated, blatant, bare-faced lies.

    Left-wing leader seeks to curb unfair election propaganda domination by wealthy.

    Unprecedented red “DEMOCRACY UNDER ATTACK” front page and graphic comparison to archaic communist bogeymen.

    Minor header: “Dotcom brief was not memorable” – PM”

    Compare and contrast.

  11. deuto 11
    4 October 2012 at 8:48 am

    Good interview with David Shearer on RNZ National this morning on the call for a wider enquiry –
    http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/morningreport/audio/2534498/key's-story-on-gcsb-'unravelling'-says-shearer.asx

    Towards the end, they discuss the similarities to the enquiry undertaken in 1975 (?) into the various secuity agencies, their roles and accountability and oversight. Shearer and Robertson (at about 4.45 min) discuss who could do the enquiry – eg the Ombudsman, Beverley Wakem. Shearer raises Sir Anand Satyanand, former G-G and judge as a possibility. A good choice IMO.

    • Jim Nald 11.1
      4 October 2012 at 9:35 am

      Or the Rt Hon Sir Ted Thomas, retired Court of Appeal judge and former acting judge of the Supreme Court:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edmund_Thomas

      • deuto 11.1.1
        4 October 2012 at 9:56 am

        He would be an excellent choice, also. The one reservation I would have with Sir Anand , as the immediate last G-G, is that possibly the current G-G would need to be brought into the enquiry due to the timing of his being involved with the GCSB in 2011. Not that I think Sir Anand would be influenced; but for perception/separation reasons, this could be seen as too close etc. Sir Ted does not appear to present any such issues, imo.

  12. outofbed 12
    4 October 2012 at 9:15 am

    I think its a masterstoke from Key..
    Nobody is talking about asset sales anymore 🙂

    • tc 12.1
      4 October 2012 at 9:20 am

      Yup and he’ll be meeting with his bosses in hollywood to rehearse his next few scenes and get his lines right.

    • Craig Glen Eden 12.2
      4 October 2012 at 9:38 am

      Its a stroke all right nothing master about it but perhaps John Key has been having TIAs (little) strokes for months him and Mr Banks, oh heck what was in the tea?

  13. ianmac 13
    4 October 2012 at 9:50 am

    Wonder how members of the National Caucus are viewing all this?

    • Red Rosa 13.1
      4 October 2012 at 11:21 am

      Good question, ianmac.

      One recalls Ian Templeton’s book on the Muldoon years – ‘All Honourable Men’. To a large extent, politics aside, the old 70s Nats had some sense of right and wrong, though sadly misled by Rob.

      Maybe the same is true of the current Nats. We’ll see. Here they are confronted by a series of the worst debacles for many years. Their very own Key, Parata, Wilkinson and Tolley have stuffed up dramatically in just the last few days.

      But worse, the Dotcom saga should leave them pondering some basic issues of NZ sovereignty, and an evasive PM more than usually economical with the truth.

      Will we see one of these ‘honourable men’ (or women) stand up to back the PM immediately, and in public?

      Somehow I doubt it. But their reactions will be interesting to watch.

      Resignation(s) a real possibility.

  15. deuto 15
    4 October 2012 at 10:20 am

    An exceptionally weak article by John Armstrong in today’s Herald on the subject which ends with these pearls:

    Key is likely to feel obliged to apologise to Parliament for the inaccuracy of some of his statements to the House. But the worst looks to be over for National.

    Armstrong is obviously back on Planet Key.

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=10838274

  16. xtasy 16
    4 October 2012 at 10:30 am

    Re the ‘Day of Action’ against the WELFARE ATTACKS by National, ACT, United Future – headed by Minister Paula Bennett – see a few more links with info for events in Hamilton, Christchurch and Dunedin:

    http://www.facebook.com/events/406160476105876/
    http://www.facebook.com/events/359769487433655/
    https://www.facebook.com/events/284916358279500/

    I hope that students may also join in, given the fact there is a holiday break and time available.

    Stop Bennett and dogdy John to hammer the poor, weak, sick and disabled, while their government cannot even offer fair chances and employment to those who are fit and willing to work!

    It is time to take a firm and solid stand.

    In Henderson, Auckland, participants will gather at Catherine Place, outside the Westfield Mall, I understand at 12 noon.

    A march to the local WINZ office, protest there, and also a march to Paula Bennett’s electorate office are planned. Let’s hope for good weather, but rain or shine, be there, if you can.

    ***Sorry, wrong thread, is it possible to move this to open mike?***Messed up, sorry***

  17. deuto 17
    4 October 2012 at 11:50 am

    And another “keep it in the family” gaff that will stir the pot?

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/7768251/Ex-GCSB-head-to-helm-Rena-review

    The man who presided over illegal spying at the GCSB will head the independent review of Maritime New Zealand’s response to the Rena grounding.

    Simon Murdoch was director of the Government Security Communications Bureau for six months last year, when internet millionaire Kim Dotcom was placed under illegal surveillance. He was the acting director from July 1 to December 19 last year. ….

  18. Red Rosa 18
    4 October 2012 at 12:23 pm

    ‘Keep it in the family’ seems to be flavour of the month.

    This (eventually) re Kristy McDonald, the GCSB ‘investigator’…’fixer’ seems more likely

    http://laudafinem.wordpress.com/2012/02/03/the-reaa-liesdelusion-politicians-and-willful-blindness/

    And the NBR has more

    http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/lawyer-adds-gcsbdotcom-inquiry-large-portfolio-govt-jobs-rh-p-129996

  19. freedom 19
    4 October 2012 at 12:42 pm

    da dada da
    da da da
    da dada da
    da da
    Kontrol to Agent Key: Your mission should you choose to corrupt it
    http://postimage.org/image/j8fks7vsz/

  20. Quentin Findlay 20
    4 October 2012 at 1:05 pm

    This would suggest that Key has mislead the House which is a serious offence. In the UK and in Europe the pressure would already be on him to resign over this issue.

    • tc 20.1
      4 October 2012 at 1:37 pm

      That requires an effective opposition, speaker, some due process and an MSM who can smell the blood and don’t let up.

  21. the sprout 21
    4 October 2012 at 1:31 pm

    that NZH link doesn’t seem to be working anymore.
    here’s another…

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OHoHqZdZDLA

    btw, why was grant robertson commenting on this on last night’s news and not shearer?
    the PM misleading the House seems like a kinda big issue to me, maybe one the leader of the opposition should be all over.

    • mickysavage 21.1
      4 October 2012 at 8:01 pm

      Yep. Um. What can I say?

      • Anne 21.1.1
        4 October 2012 at 8:10 pm

        To be fair, Shearer was interviewed at length on the Dotcom affair on both breakfast programmes in the past couple of days. The one I saw online (think it was TV3) he did a very good job – clear, concise and no stammer. I hope this means his speech training with Ian Fraser is starting to pay dividends.

  22. yeshe 22
    4 October 2012 at 2:01 pm

    Help me out here someone .. repeatedly I have read that GCSB became involved to establish the whereabouts of Kim Dotcom — how can this be when most of NZ knew he was living in the mansion at Coatesville. Seriously, how can we expected to believe any of this ?

    Thx Eddie, a superb ‘outing’ of the liars.

    • karol 22.1
      4 October 2012 at 9:31 pm

      As I recall, it had to do with wanting to know specifically where Dotcom was at the time of the raid.  I guess it would have been a bit embarrassing, if they had gone in all commando fashion, and Dotcom wasn’t home – maybe down at the supermarket  or summat.
       
      Well, it was embarrassing anyway.  They could’ve just gone and knocked on the door from what I hear.

    • David H 22.2
      4 October 2012 at 9:53 pm

      Well obviously like Key, they also cannot read.

  23. BLiP 23
    4 October 2012 at 2:49 pm

    .

    Ten internets to Zorr.

    I’m sure John Key can worm his way out of acknowledging the earlier information about John Bank’s lies, to be fair it can, kinda, sorta, be interpreted that he was simply going along with rather than agreeing to the reporter’s statement about the dinner date at the mansion. But he’s snared by the balls on knowing Mr Dotcom was a New Zealand resident. Gotchya, indeed. But its bigger than just Dotcom. From now on, and after three – count ’em – three “corrections” in the House, anything and everything John Key says is suspect and will be checked. It has got to be playing on his mind and I have little doubt that from now on his press conferences will more and more look like this:

    http://youtu.be/xkqpzHS0MI8

  25. Logie97 25
    4 October 2012 at 5:05 pm

    When is the report on the immigration issue with Shane Jones due.
    Watch the media go for that when it comes out.

  26. Dr Terry 26
    4 October 2012 at 5:28 pm

    All we seem to be assured of is whitewashes absolutely everywhere, and this is why Key can carry on smirking in reasonable comfort. Can all these dread instances simply go on and on being blown over in short time? Even deeply unconscious National supporters (of whom there are plenty) are surely going to wake up one of these days!

  27. Treetop 27
    4 October 2012 at 8:40 pm

    I have found the best timeline/chronology re Dotcom Vs NZ Goverment. I would like to see this updated under possibly Sunday Reading or it’s own slot when required.

    http://www.listener.co.nz/commentary/the-internaut/kim-dotcom-megaupload-new-zealand-timeline/

    Hopefully link works

    Yesterdays revelation is not yet added.

    On having a quick look at the timeline I find since Justice Winkelman’s rulings that it has been going belly up for the government. I really hope that Justice Winkelman lets everyone know that it is her court room. Davidson is doing a good job in infiltrating those who have something to hide as he asks the right questions and gets an obscured answer.

  28. Pete 28
    4 October 2012 at 10:47 pm

    I put Key’s and Dotcom’s names into Google Trends. Quite a few peaks and troughs are shared between them. It seems their destinies are intertwined.

  29. Adele 29
    5 October 2012 at 7:10 am

    This passage from the original Grand Jury of Virginia, USA indictment date stamped 5th January 2012:

    “KIM DOTCOM, who has also been known as KIM SCHMITZ and KIM TIM
    JIM VESTOR, is a resident of both Hong Kong and New Zealand, and a dual citizen of Finland and Germany. DOTCOM is the founder of MEGAUPLOAD LIMITED (“MUL”) and Megamedia Limited (“MMG”). Until on or about August 14, 2011, DOTCOM was the Chief Executive Officer for MUL, and he is currently MUL’s Chief Innovation Officer…”    (page 13).

    It appears that the whole world knows about the residency status of Dotcom with the exception of our Prime Minister, our Government, our Police and our Spy Agencies. Forget Echelon…use Google.

Links to post