Sideshow

36 comments on “Sideshow ”

• Comments are now closed

1. barnsleybill 1

   11 September 2008 at 1:12 pm

   ex winebox lawyer or expert witness in tax law?
   at least make an effort to have a grain of truth in your smears.
2. Jeeves 2

   11 September 2008 at 1:13 pm

   I have seen Harley and Glenn together in Auckland Uni alumni photos, so they could be chums in a non-conspiracy sense.
3. Billy 3

   11 September 2008 at 1:19 pm

   all_your_base, are you Winston?
4. Greg 4

   11 September 2008 at 1:28 pm

   When you have two conflicting stories you look at the motivation behind them. Glenn has no reason to lie, Clark and Williams on the other hand……….
5. Matthew Pilott 5

   11 September 2008 at 1:37 pm

   So Greg, if Glenn had no motivation to lie, why, for example, did he make it up that Williams turned up uninvited earlier this year? Or name the EB as the reason for a donation, when it hadn’t come to light at that time?

   That line of reasoning only works when someone hasn’t been proven to be saying things that are ‘inconsistent’.
6. all_your_base 6

   11 September 2008 at 1:38 pm

   Nope Billy, I’m old enough to be Winston’s father and prefer I Speyside malts. We’re both snappy dressers though.
7. the dude abides 7

   11 September 2008 at 1:44 pm

   The last Winston supporter, The Standard, Sept 11, 2008. One for the history books.
8. Robinsod 8

   11 September 2008 at 1:47 pm

   Billy – I’m Winston. And you write on my blog (which is funded from secret racing donations). You should be ashamed of yourself.
9. Billy 9

   11 September 2008 at 1:59 pm

   ‘sod, I am. Daily.
10. Santi 10

    11 September 2008 at 2:01 pm

    Biting the hand who feeds you?
    Yes, that appears to be a great personality trait of all socialists.
11. Pascal's bookie 11

    11 September 2008 at 2:06 pm

    Santi, we are all aware that the National Party is much more deferential to it’s donors. No Brash No cash.
12. killinginthenameof 12

    11 September 2008 at 2:32 pm

    “barnsleybill
    September 11, 2008 at 1:12 pm
    ex winebox lawyer or expert witness in tax law?
    at least make an effort to have a grain of truth in your smears.”

    Its not a smear, a smear would me be calling you a rapist (unless I happened to be right). Anyway, smears is last months meme, get with the program.
13. Crank 13

    11 September 2008 at 2:34 pm

    Perhaps we can now use this phrase when talking about the Prime ministers support for her cabinet;

    “No fellon, No Helen”
14. Pascal's bookie 14

    11 September 2008 at 2:37 pm

    You could Crank, but it wouldn’t make sense.
15. monkey-boy 15

    11 September 2008 at 3:02 pm

    Did Mike Williams offer his resignation earlier this year after he’d been caught lying?

    http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2008/04/mike_williams_caught_lying_-_again.html
16. ghostwhowalks 16

    11 September 2008 at 3:03 pm

    Crank is good at making it up.

    The No Brash No Cash moniker was actually used by his supporters at the time.

    What could poor old Simon English ( good to see the elocution lessons have seen him back near the top)offer instead.

    However the chance of Key offering cabinet positions to convicted MPs Nick Smith and Gerry ‘brownshirt’ Brownlee would be intersting
17. insider 17

    11 September 2008 at 3:08 pm

    I dnon’t think harley was a winebox lawyer – as in arguing the case – but in fact an expert witness.
18. ghostwhowalks 18

    11 September 2008 at 3:12 pm

    Considering the winebox participants and FR lost every substantive question that went to the courts their ‘expert’ witnesses should have paid their fees back
19. Pascal's bookie 19

    11 September 2008 at 3:16 pm

    Considering the winebox participants and FR lost every substantive question that went to the courts

    But, but, but Hooten says the opposite. Though to be fair he openly admits that he posts about things he doesn’t know anything about.
20. higherstandard 20

    11 September 2008 at 3:19 pm

    GWW

    You make the assertion that having convicted MPs in cabinet would be a novelty in NZ ….. sadly that is not the case.
21. ghostwhowalks 21

    11 September 2008 at 3:26 pm

    Assault during a public election meeting and inteferring with a complainant DURING a court case arent the norm are they?
22. bill brown 22

    11 September 2008 at 3:27 pm

    PB, be warned Hooton is a self confessed stalker. I would avoid posting on his blog if you value your anonymity.
23. Lampie 23

    11 September 2008 at 3:36 pm

    Something about this “smells”. Possible setup. ho hum
24. higherstandard 24

    11 September 2008 at 3:40 pm

    GWW

    No however screeching at each other across a debating chamber and avoiding simple questions does appear to be.

    Sadly assault and associated behaviours during public political meetings is not unusual for NZ and has occurred a number of times, we can also add convicted drunk driving, fisticuffs outside the debating chamber and a number of other examples of poor behaviour which I’d like our MPs not to be associated with.

    Perhaps it’s just me but sometimes I think the standard of our MPs is getting worse the older I get (probably me just getting more grumpy though).

    captch – executives suck
25. ghostwhowalks 25

    11 September 2008 at 3:46 pm

    screeching !! Quelle horreur
26. Inventory2 26

    11 September 2008 at 3:47 pm

    Sheesh a_y_b – your allegations are almost verbatim to those made in the House at QT this afternoon – inside information eh 😉
27. Vanilla Eis 27

    11 September 2008 at 3:47 pm

    HS: It sounds like I’m a fair bit younger than you (young enough to still have a student loan!) and I’ve been to the chamber a couple of times and come away disgusted every time (Barring Nandors valedictorian, actually. That was quite special).

    I don’t think it’s just you.
28. Quoth the Raven 28

    11 September 2008 at 4:13 pm

    Nope Billy, I’m old enough to be Winston’s father and prefer I Speyside malts. We’re both snappy dressers though.

    I wouldn’t have thought anyone older than Winston would have known about the all your base are belong to us thing. National’s billboards are almost as bad as it.
    In A.D. 2101
    War was beginning.
    Captain: What happen ?
    Mechanic: Somebody set up us the bomb.
    Operator: We get signal.
    Captain: What !
    Operator: Main screen turn on.
    Captain: It’s you !!
    CATS: How are you gentlemen !!
    CATS: All your base are belong to us.
29. Pascal's bookie 29

    11 September 2008 at 8:06 pm

    Bill Brown, ta.

    He really is touchy about that wages quote thingy though, every time I brought up the letter from the Herald Journalists chapter he runs away.

    Tim Ellis did a similar disappearing act after calling me a liar about it. Sad really.
30. jaymam 30

    11 September 2008 at 8:39 pm

    “Thirty Pieces of Silver” pages 154-157

    … Geoffrey John Harley had prepared on behalf of the Utu [movie] investors a five page letter of objection to the [IRD] assessments dated 22 December 1986.
    …
    The Department said that the “expenditure” based on the limited recourse “lending” was utterly phony; that it was not having a bar of it, and that, if the investors wished to complain, the Department would see them in court.
31. deemac 31

    11 September 2008 at 8:42 pm

    It has been shown that Glenn gets confused over timelines etc. This is not a crime, it may not be deliberate. We all misremember things from time to time. But it does make him an unreliable witness. That is not to say that Winston is therefore telling the truth, but it does mean we still await actual proof of wrongdoing.
32. mike 32

    11 September 2008 at 8:53 pm

    So the word has gone out to smear labours biggest donor because he’s flown home after shitting on helen.

    Very brave stuff from the socialists indeed.

    But I hope she doesn’t sack winnie as he’s worth much more to the right lashed to helen and mike w.
33. Ianmac 33

    11 September 2008 at 8:58 pm

    Have you read Gordon Campbell’s Scoop 08, assessment on Peters. He unpicks and examines each point that Peters made last night.

    http://election08.scoop.co.nz/
34. T-Rex 34

    11 September 2008 at 9:08 pm

    I think Glenn is a bit of a show boat.

    He’s decided to sulk because Clark didn’t back him on his “I’d be the bestest transport minister in the whole school” bullsh*t several months back, and ditto on the Monaco position.

    He reminds me of Peter Leitch. Probably a pretty nice guy, but of a bullsh*tter, likes to be centre of attention.

    I think Labours treatment of him has been lousy, but that doesn’t mean that everything he says is true (especially since there is ample evidence of cases where he’s been completely wrong).

    The EB donation thing is not a case of “confusing timelines”, it’s a case of talking absolute crap about motivations.
35. jaymam 35

    11 September 2008 at 9:57 pm

    What did Owen Glenn say when someone in the privileges committee asked him about the EB donation thing? Or didn’t anyone ask? If not, why not?
36. bill brown 36

    12 September 2008 at 9:45 am

    I’m not normally a conspiracy theorist, however listening to Trainer Stands By Statement on NatRad yesterday afternoon, the whole thing just starts to feel a bit “set up”.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS