Thommo is going to run as an independent at the next election and when he gets flogged he'll receive a truckload of money.
Thommo has taken a leaf out of Phony Tonys dodgy play book  ;D

adelcrow wrote on May 16^th, 2013 at 4:34pm:

Thommo is going to run as an independent at the next election and when he gets flogged he'll receive a truckload of money. Thommo has taken a leaf out of Phony Tonys dodgy play book  ;D

Isn't he in trouble for getting flogged on credit....?  ;D

Swagman wrote on May 16^th, 2013 at 4:36pm:

adelcrow wrote on May 16th, 2013 at 4:34pm: Thommo is going to run as an independent at the next election and when he gets flogged he'll receive a truckload of money. Thommo has taken a leaf out of Phony Tonys dodgy play book  ;D Isn't he in trouble for getting flogged on credit....?  ;D

I am glad you know what he is talking about.. dont ya know we already have a thread on this guy adel???..

how will THOMO get a truck load of money...??? how does he figure that out?

We all know the truckload of money is the reason Howard hung on to his post even though he knew he was going to be flogged so Thommo is only doing the same thing as the greatest PM who ever lived  ;D

cods wrote on May 16^th, 2013 at 4:43pm:

Swagman wrote on May 16th, 2013 at 4:36pm: adelcrow wrote on May 16th, 2013 at 4:34pm: Thommo is going to run as an independent at the next election and when he gets flogged he'll receive a truckload of money. Thommo has taken a leaf out of Phony Tonys dodgy play book  ;D Isn't he in trouble for getting flogged on credit....?  ;D I am glad you know what he is talking about.. dont ya know we already have a thread on this guy adel???.. how will THOMO get a truck load of money...??? how does he figure that out?

Same reason Pauline Hanson runs with no chance of success Cods.....If you get enough cretins to vote for you then you are entitled to election funding....So much per vote above a quota means cash for nothing.....Thomson has Buckley's chance of winning but might get enough votes to claim a taxpayer funded pay day!!!

>:( >:( >:(

philperth2010 wrote on May 16^th, 2013 at 4:50pm:

cods wrote on May 16th, 2013 at 4:43pm: Swagman wrote on May 16th, 2013 at 4:36pm: adelcrow wrote on May 16th, 2013 at 4:34pm: Thommo is going to run as an independent at the next election and when he gets flogged he'll receive a truckload of money. Thommo has taken a leaf out of Phony Tonys dodgy play book  ;D Isn't he in trouble for getting flogged on credit....?  ;D I am glad you know what he is talking about.. dont ya know we already have a thread on this guy adel???.. how will THOMO get a truck load of money...??? how does he figure that out? Same reason Pauline Hanson runs with no chance of success Cods.....If you get enough cretins to vote for you then you are entitled to election funding....So much per vote above a quota means cash for nothing.....Thomson has Buckley's chance of winning but might get enough votes to claim a taxpayer funded pay day!!! >:( >:( >:(

well yes I did know that.. but THOMO come on??..

I just tried finding what they get back it say if they receive 4% of the primary votes they get back their deposit..in the HOR thats $1000..

but it doesnt say anything else about truckloads or how many votes wins you truckloads.???

Hanson has always had a good following..she did very well with One Nation the first time.. but did THOMO get voted because he was THOMO or Labor??? and will he do as well this time round???... 88000 voters in Dobell.

http://www.aec.gov.au/parties_and_representatives/public_funding/files/election-funding-guide-072010.pdf

Amount of Election Funding
The amount of the funding entitlement is calculated by multiplying the number of formal first preference votes achieved by a candidate (or by all the candidates in a Senate group) by the current election funding rate. The funding rate is reviewed every 6 months in line with increases in the consumer price index. For the period 1 July to 31 December 2010, the funding rate is $2.31191 per eligible vote. Both the current election funding rate and historical rates are available at – http://www.aec.gov.au/Parties_and_ Representatives/public funding/index.htm.

Payment of Election Funding
At least 95% of the election funding entitlement is paid in the 4th week after polling day, on the basis of votes counted as at the 20th day after polling day. The balance is paid when the counting of votes is finalised and the final entitlement is known. The election funding entitlements of candidates endorsed by a federally registered political party are paid to the political party. The entitlements of unendorsed (independent) candidates are paid to the candidate or their agent.

Payment is made:
■■ electronically to a bank account nominated by the party agent for this purpose (see next section for requirements applying to bank accounts);

philperth2010 wrote on May 16^th, 2013 at 4:50pm:

cods wrote on May 16th, 2013 at 4:43pm: Swagman wrote on May 16th, 2013 at 4:36pm: adelcrow wrote on May 16th, 2013 at 4:34pm: Thommo is going to run as an independent at the next election and when he gets flogged he'll receive a truckload of money. Thommo has taken a leaf out of Phony Tonys dodgy play book  ;D Isn't he in trouble for getting flogged on credit....?  ;D I am glad you know what he is talking about.. dont ya know we already have a thread on this guy adel???.. how will THOMO get a truck load of money...??? how does he figure that out? Same reason Pauline Hanson runs with no chance of success Cods.....If you get enough cretins to vote for you then you are entitled to election funding....So much per vote above a quota means cash for nothing.....Thomson has Buckley's chance of winning but might get enough votes to claim a taxpayer funded pay day!!! >:( >:( >:(

I thought the Thread was about Parliamentary entitlements when a sitting Member is defeated....and nil to do with electoral funding.

:o

Aussie wrote on May 16^th, 2013 at 5:46pm:

philperth2010 wrote on May 16th, 2013 at 4:50pm: cods wrote on May 16th, 2013 at 4:43pm: Swagman wrote on May 16th, 2013 at 4:36pm: adelcrow wrote on May 16th, 2013 at 4:34pm: Thommo is going to run as an independent at the next election and when he gets flogged he'll receive a truckload of money. Thommo has taken a leaf out of Phony Tonys dodgy play book  ;D Isn't he in trouble for getting flogged on credit....?  ;D I am glad you know what he is talking about.. dont ya know we already have a thread on this guy adel???.. how will THOMO get a truck load of money...??? how does he figure that out? Same reason Pauline Hanson runs with no chance of success Cods.....If you get enough cretins to vote for you then you are entitled to election funding....So much per vote above a quota means cash for nothing.....Thomson has Buckley's chance of winning but might get enough votes to claim a taxpayer funded pay day!!! >:( >:( >:( I thought the Thread was about Parliamentary entitlements when a sitting Member is defeated....and nil to do with electoral funding. :o

If a sitting member contests their seat and loses they get a huge compensation payment where as if they just simply slink away when its obvious they are going to get beaten they miss out on that compensation.

Aussie wrote on May 16^th, 2013 at 5:46pm:

philperth2010 wrote on May 16th, 2013 at 4:50pm: cods wrote on May 16th, 2013 at 4:43pm: Swagman wrote on May 16th, 2013 at 4:36pm: adelcrow wrote on May 16th, 2013 at 4:34pm: Thommo is going to run as an independent at the next election and when he gets flogged he'll receive a truckload of money. Thommo has taken a leaf out of Phony Tonys dodgy play book  ;D Isn't he in trouble for getting flogged on credit....?  ;D I am glad you know what he is talking about.. dont ya know we already have a thread on this guy adel???.. how will THOMO get a truck load of money...??? how does he figure that out? Same reason Pauline Hanson runs with no chance of success Cods.....If you get enough cretins to vote for you then you are entitled to election funding....So much per vote above a quota means cash for nothing.....Thomson has Buckley's chance of winning but might get enough votes to claim a taxpayer funded pay day!!! >:( >:( >:( I thought the Thread was about Parliamentary entitlements when a sitting Member is defeated....and nil to do with electoral funding. :o

Then you would be wrong!!!


Quote:

Thommo is going to run as an independent at the next election and when he gets flogged he'll receive a truckload of money.

Your mistake not mine!!!

::) ::) ::)

So those prepared to have a laughing fit when their most hated pollies re-contest their seats and lose just think a little about whose really having the last laugh  :D

Quote:

Then you would be wrong!!!

Maybe....but I reckon a truckload of money is more likely to be Parliamentary entitlements, than the spoon full a losing candidate gets from the Electoral Commission based on vote numbers.

But.....have it your way.  Either way, Thommo benefits financially by running and losing.

philperth2010 wrote on May 16^th, 2013 at 4:50pm:

cods wrote on May 16th, 2013 at 4:43pm: Swagman wrote on May 16th, 2013 at 4:36pm: adelcrow wrote on May 16th, 2013 at 4:34pm: Thommo is going to run as an independent at the next election and when he gets flogged he'll receive a truckload of money. Thommo has taken a leaf out of Phony Tonys dodgy play book  ;D Isn't he in trouble for getting flogged on credit....?  ;D I am glad you know what he is talking about.. dont ya know we already have a thread on this guy adel???.. how will THOMO get a truck load of money...??? how does he figure that out? Same reason Pauline Hanson runs with no chance of success Cods.....If you get enough cretins to vote for you then you are entitled to election funding....So much per vote above a quota means cash for nothing.....Thomson has Buckley's chance of winning but might get enough votes to claim a taxpayer funded pay day!!! >:( >:( >:(

you have to get over 4% to get any funding and its like $2 a vote plus it is $1000 to stand. How many votes does he really think he will get???  there could not be a more discredited candidate in the country!!

Aussie wrote on May 16^th, 2013 at 6:05pm:

Quote: Then you would be wrong!!! Maybe....but I reckon a truckload of money is more likely to be Parliamentary entitlements, than the spoon full a losing candidate gets from the Electoral Commission based on vote numbers. But.....have it your way.  Either way, Thommo benefits financially by running and losing.

You are correct that Thomo will receive his Parliamentary benefits which will be considerable.....He will also gain a benefit from running as an Independent.....He had better hope he is not convicted of a crime before then or he is in danger of getting SFA.....One can only hope!!!

;) ;) ;)

Quote:

You are correct that Thomo will receive his Parliamentary benefits which will be considerable.

And much more 'considerable' than if he does not run at all in September, 2013..............that is the point, Mr. Perth.

:)

In short a person would be mad not to re-contest their seat in the full knowledge that they are in for a hiding because they would be giving up a truckload of cash for doing and risking nothing.

I do not see the benefit in him running. He cannot win and he will be convicted of a crime and disqualified in the next year. the payment for getting over 4% is not very high given that it would be lucky to exceed his campaigning costs.  His parliamentary pension is based on being elected, not standing.

so does anyone have any idea exactly what he has to gain by standing in an election he cant win and will cost him money?

adelcrow wrote on May 16^th, 2013 at 5:49pm:

Aussie wrote on May 16th, 2013 at 5:46pm: philperth2010 wrote on May 16th, 2013 at 4:50pm: cods wrote on May 16th, 2013 at 4:43pm: Swagman wrote on May 16th, 2013 at 4:36pm: adelcrow wrote on May 16th, 2013 at 4:34pm: Thommo is going to run as an independent at the next election and when he gets flogged he'll receive a truckload of money. Thommo has taken a leaf out of Phony Tonys dodgy play book  ;D Isn't he in trouble for getting flogged on credit....?  ;D I am glad you know what he is talking about.. dont ya know we already have a thread on this guy adel???.. how will THOMO get a truck load of money...??? how does he figure that out? Same reason Pauline Hanson runs with no chance of success Cods.....If you get enough cretins to vote for you then you are entitled to election funding....So much per vote above a quota means cash for nothing.....Thomson has Buckley's chance of winning but might get enough votes to claim a taxpayer funded pay day!!! >:( >:( >:( I thought the Thread was about Parliamentary entitlements when a sitting Member is defeated....and nil to do with electoral funding. :o If a sitting member contests their seat and loses they get a huge compensation payment where as if they just simply slink away when its obvious they are going to get beaten they miss out on that compensation.

I think they are entitled to 8 weeks redundancy pay and that is all.

philperth2010 wrote on May 16^th, 2013 at 5:43pm:

http://www.aec.gov.au/parties_and_representatives/public_funding/files/election-funding-guide-072010.pdf Amount of Election Funding The amount of the funding entitlement is calculated by multiplying the number of formal first preference votes achieved by a candidate (or by all the candidates in a Senate group) by the current election funding rate. The funding rate is reviewed every 6 months in line with increases in the consumer price index. For the period 1 July to 31 December 2010, the funding rate is $2.31191 per eligible vote. Both the current election funding rate and historical rates are available at – http://www.aec.gov.au/Parties_and_ Representatives/public funding/index.htm. Payment of Election Funding At least 95% of the election funding entitlement is paid in the 4th week after polling day, on the basis of votes counted as at the 20th day after polling day. The balance is paid when the counting of votes is finalised and the final entitlement is known. The election funding entitlements of candidates endorsed by a federally registered political party are paid to the political party. The entitlements of unendorsed (independent) candidates are paid to the candidate or their agent. Payment is made: ■■ electronically to a bank account nominated by the party agent for this purpose (see next section for requirements applying to bank accounts);

thanks phil but this is more about what they receive when they DONT GET ELECTED..

its not about what they get to help with their election...

it says he will get his deposit back if he gets at least 4% of the primary vote.. first preference..

but where does the bucketful come in????

adelcrow wrote on May 16^th, 2013 at 6:27pm:

In short a person would be mad not to re-contest their seat in the full knowledge that they are in for a hiding because they would be giving up a truckload of cash for doing and risking nothing.

explain the truckload you keep on about I would like to see a link to that.

philperth2010 wrote on May 16^th, 2013 at 6:12pm:

Aussie wrote on May 16th, 2013 at 6:05pm: Quote: Then you would be wrong!!! Maybe....but I reckon a truckload of money is more likely to be Parliamentary entitlements, than the spoon full a losing candidate gets from the Electoral Commission based on vote numbers. But.....have it your way.  Either way, Thommo benefits financially by running and losing. You are correct that Thomo will receive his Parliamentary benefits which will be considerable.....He will also gain a benefit from running as an Independent.....He had better hope he is not convicted of a crime before then or he is in danger of getting SFA.....One can only hope!!! ;) ;) ;)

His 'considerable parliamentary benefits will thankfully amount to $0.

You have to be in for three terms or more to get any benefits.

longweekend58 wrote on May 16^th, 2013 at 6:10pm:

philperth2010 wrote on May 16th, 2013 at 4:50pm: cods wrote on May 16th, 2013 at 4:43pm: Swagman wrote on May 16th, 2013 at 4:36pm: adelcrow wrote on May 16th, 2013 at 4:34pm: Thommo is going to run as an independent at the next election and when he gets flogged he'll receive a truckload of money. Thommo has taken a leaf out of Phony Tonys dodgy play book  ;D Isn't he in trouble for getting flogged on credit....?  ;D I am glad you know what he is talking about.. dont ya know we already have a thread on this guy adel???.. how will THOMO get a truck load of money...??? how does he figure that out? Same reason Pauline Hanson runs with no chance of success Cods.....If you get enough cretins to vote for you then you are entitled to election funding....So much per vote above a quota means cash for nothing.....Thomson has Buckley's chance of winning but might get enough votes to claim a taxpayer funded pay day!!! you have to get over 4% to get any funding and its like $2 a vote plus it is $1000 to stand. How many votes does he really think he will get???  there could not be a more discredited candidate in the country!!

Recent polling indicated that he would beat the liberal candidate in his seat.

john_g wrote on May 16^th, 2013 at 9:00pm:

philperth2010 wrote on May 16th, 2013 at 6:12pm: Aussie wrote on May 16th, 2013 at 6:05pm: Quote: Then you would be wrong!!! Maybe....but I reckon a truckload of money is more likely to be Parliamentary entitlements, than the spoon full a losing candidate gets from the Electoral Commission based on vote numbers. But.....have it your way.  Either way, Thommo benefits financially by running and losing. You are correct that Thomo will receive his Parliamentary benefits which will be considerable.....He will also gain a benefit from running as an Independent.....He had better hope he is not convicted of a crime before then or he is in danger of getting SFA.....One can only hope!!! ;) ;) ;) His 'considerable parliamentary benefits will thankfully amount to $0. You have to be in for three terms or more to get any benefits.

That is good to hear.....I think Thomson should clear his name before he runs for Parliament again.....It would be the decent thing to do!!!

philperth2010 wrote on May 16^th, 2013 at 9:19pm:

john_g wrote on May 16th, 2013 at 9:00pm: philperth2010 wrote on May 16th, 2013 at 6:12pm: Aussie wrote on May 16th, 2013 at 6:05pm: Quote: Then you would be wrong!!! Maybe....but I reckon a truckload of money is more likely to be Parliamentary entitlements, than the spoon full a losing candidate gets from the Electoral Commission based on vote numbers. But.....have it your way.  Either way, Thommo benefits financially by running and losing. You are correct that Thomo will receive his Parliamentary benefits which will be considerable.....He will also gain a benefit from running as an Independent.....He had better hope he is not convicted of a crime before then or he is in danger of getting SFA.....One can only hope!!! ;) ;) ;) His 'considerable parliamentary benefits will thankfully amount to $0. You have to be in for three terms or more to get any benefits. That is good to hear.....I think Thomson should clear his name before he runs for Parliament again.....It would be the decent thing to do!!!

The most decent thing for him to do would to just leave now.

I saw him today on sky, and I honestly think he may be mentally ill.

He just seems out of it, and could barely open his eyes.

john_g wrote on May 16^th, 2013 at 9:00pm:

philperth2010 wrote on May 16th, 2013 at 6:12pm: Aussie wrote on May 16th, 2013 at 6:05pm: Quote: Then you would be wrong!!! Maybe....but I reckon a truckload of money is more likely to be Parliamentary entitlements, than the spoon full a losing candidate gets from the Electoral Commission based on vote numbers. But.....have it your way.  Either way, Thommo benefits financially by running and losing. You are correct that Thomo will receive his Parliamentary benefits which will be considerable.....He will also gain a benefit from running as an Independent.....He had better hope he is not convicted of a crime before then or he is in danger of getting SFA.....One can only hope!!! ;) ;) ;) His 'considerable parliamentary benefits will thankfully amount to $0. You have to be in for three terms or more to get any benefits.

No...all he has to do is run, and his truck load increases.  Slipper will run for exactly the same reason.

Aussie wrote on May 16^th, 2013 at 9:39pm:

john_g wrote on May 16th, 2013 at 9:00pm: philperth2010 wrote on May 16th, 2013 at 6:12pm: Aussie wrote on May 16th, 2013 at 6:05pm: Quote: Then you would be wrong!!! Maybe....but I reckon a truckload of money is more likely to be Parliamentary entitlements, than the spoon full a losing candidate gets from the Electoral Commission based on vote numbers. But.....have it your way.  Either way, Thommo benefits financially by running and losing. You are correct that Thomo will receive his Parliamentary benefits which will be considerable.....He will also gain a benefit from running as an Independent.....He had better hope he is not convicted of a crime before then or he is in danger of getting SFA.....One can only hope!!! ;) ;) ;) His 'considerable parliamentary benefits will thankfully amount to $0. You have to be in for three terms or more to get any benefits. No...all he has to do is run, and his truck load increases.  Slipper will run for exactly the same reason.

I mean he gets no super.

He won't get a truckload at all.

$2 a vote, and how many votes will he get anyway?

john_g wrote on May 16^th, 2013 at 9:43pm:

Aussie wrote on May 16th, 2013 at 9:39pm: john_g wrote on May 16th, 2013 at 9:00pm: philperth2010 wrote on May 16th, 2013 at 6:12pm: Aussie wrote on May 16th, 2013 at 6:05pm: Quote: Then you would be wrong!!! Maybe....but I reckon a truckload of money is more likely to be Parliamentary entitlements, than the spoon full a losing candidate gets from the Electoral Commission based on vote numbers. But.....have it your way.  Either way, Thommo benefits financially by running and losing. You are correct that Thomo will receive his Parliamentary benefits which will be considerable.....He will also gain a benefit from running as an Independent.....He had better hope he is not convicted of a crime before then or he is in danger of getting SFA.....One can only hope!!! ;) ;) ;) His 'considerable parliamentary benefits will thankfully amount to $0. You have to be in for three terms or more to get any benefits. No...all he has to do is run, and his truck load increases.  Slipper will run for exactly the same reason. I mean he gets no super. He won't get a truckload at all. $2 a vote, and how many votes will he get anyway?

At 4% about 10 grand.....10% to 20% could see him earn up to 40 grand.....Not bad for nothing!!!

Dnarever wrote on May 16^th, 2013 at 9:10pm:

longweekend58 wrote on May 16th, 2013 at 6:10pm: philperth2010 wrote on May 16th, 2013 at 4:50pm: cods wrote on May 16th, 2013 at 4:43pm: Swagman wrote on May 16th, 2013 at 4:36pm: adelcrow wrote on May 16th, 2013 at 4:34pm: Thommo is going to run as an independent at the next election and when he gets flogged he'll receive a truckload of money. Thommo has taken a leaf out of Phony Tonys dodgy play book  ;D Isn't he in trouble for getting flogged on credit....?  ;D I am glad you know what he is talking about.. dont ya know we already have a thread on this guy adel???.. how will THOMO get a truck load of money...??? how does he figure that out? Same reason Pauline Hanson runs with no chance of success Cods.....If you get enough cretins to vote for you then you are entitled to election funding....So much per vote above a quota means cash for nothing.....Thomson has Buckley's chance of winning but might get enough votes to claim a taxpayer funded pay day!!! you have to get over 4% to get any funding and its like $2 a vote plus it is $1000 to stand. How many votes does he really think he will get???  there could not be a more discredited candidate in the country!! Recent polling indicated that he would beat the liberal candidate in his seat.

actually, the most recent polling showed that ALL labor marginals would be lost be hefty margins. And seriously DNA, bias and all, how do you figure in the face of an 8% swing against labor that a seat with a mere 5% margin will be saved when the candidate is facing 150 criminal charges, a similar amount of industrial civil charges and is more than likely to be sent to jail in the next year??  ARE YOU NUTS????

philperth2010 wrote on May 16^th, 2013 at 9:48pm:

john_g wrote on May 16th, 2013 at 9:43pm: Aussie wrote on May 16th, 2013 at 9:39pm: john_g wrote on May 16th, 2013 at 9:00pm: philperth2010 wrote on May 16th, 2013 at 6:12pm: Aussie wrote on May 16th, 2013 at 6:05pm: Quote: Then you would be wrong!!! Maybe....but I reckon a truckload of money is more likely to be Parliamentary entitlements, than the spoon full a losing candidate gets from the Electoral Commission based on vote numbers. But.....have it your way.  Either way, Thommo benefits financially by running and losing. You are correct that Thomo will receive his Parliamentary benefits which will be considerable.....He will also gain a benefit from running as an Independent.....He had better hope he is not convicted of a crime before then or he is in danger of getting SFA.....One can only hope!!! ;) ;) ;) His 'considerable parliamentary benefits will thankfully amount to $0. You have to be in for three terms or more to get any benefits. No...all he has to do is run, and his truck load increases.  Slipper will run for exactly the same reason. I mean he gets no super. He won't get a truckload at all. $2 a vote, and how many votes will he get anyway? At 4% about 10 grand.....10% to 20% could see him earn up to 40 grand.....Not bad for nothing!!!

and his campaign will cost at least $20K and more likely twice that. so the profit is nil and he still needs to get that 20%. I tip he will be lucky to get 2%

This is for all the idiots that questioned Adel yesterday when he said THOMO would benefit from running, even if loses.

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/thomson-has-100000-good-reasons-to-be-smiling-20130516-2jpal.html

skippy. wrote on May 17^th, 2013 at 8:17am:

This is for all the idiots that questioned Adel yesterday when he said THOMO would benefit from running, even if loses. http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/thomson-has-100000-good-reasons-to-be-smiling-20130516-2jpal.html

Ya see melielongtime, some people actually know what they are talking about.

:P

It is such a dodgy system. Pauline Hanson has made a living out if it since losing in 1998. She's stood at every election since then, except 2010, and always gets heaps of votes, enough to make a lot of money, but not enough to get elected. Not that it's her fault, blame the system. Why should the taxpayer be expected to pay when someone loses?

skippy. wrote on May 17^th, 2013 at 8:17am:

This is for all the idiots that questioned Adel yesterday when he said THOMO would benefit from running, even if loses. http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/thomson-has-100000-good-reasons-to-be-smiling-20130516-2jpal.html

Craig Thomson stands to pocket more than $100,000 from the Australian taxpayer by running as an independent.
The scandal-plagued NSW MP has backed away from his explosive claim that Labor offered him a deal not to contest his NSW seat of Dobell - but acknowledged that he weighed up the financial implications of running in September.


Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/thomson-has-100000-good-reasons-to-be-smiling-20130516-2jpal.html#ixzz2TVsNT6DR



are we really this mad???? have we really allowed our politicians to cover their backsides like this...no matter which way they go they come out winning????..

thats appalling... and that goes for all of them independents the works they all know about this...

he cant lose can he?????.. I know thats a feather in the caps of you lefties.. but we all know how it will be if a righty does the same thing and gets away with murder...you wont like it at all...


its disgraceful... I said it a long time ago... we seem to REWARD the worst of people in this business.. they leave under all sorts of clouds and mismanagement but somehow they still hang on for huge hand outs...

why is it I dont see any lefty complainin g about that?????

why do you all seem so pleased to read where this man will come out on top its your money after all.... does he really deserve this? lets face it no good asking for it back if he does have to do time in jail..

TheGreenLight wrote on May 17^th, 2013 at 11:57am:

It is such a dodgy system. Pauline Hanson has made a living out if it since losing in 1998. She's stood at every election since then, except 2010, and always gets heaps of votes, enough to make a lot of money, but not enough to get elected. Not that it's her fault, blame the system. Why should the taxpayer be expected to pay when someone loses?

EXACTLY... how m any people know about this though thats the point?? it isnt exactly advertised come election time is it??????

lets see the banners around the booths or even headlines in the paper the week before..

telling people what their vote is actually worth in cold hard cash if their fav doesnt win....they come out with a motza...

we need to know! we should know!.. if there is nothing wrong with this... why is it so secret??

I have been voting a long time and its the first I have heard of it.........and I can thank THOMO for that...ye gods and little fishes makes me wonder what else we dont know...what other little perks do they get..

now we know why the rush to stand as an Independent even if they dont stand a chance its not about saving us it about saving them...

longweekend58 wrote on May 16^th, 2013 at 11:44pm:

Dnarever wrote on May 16th, 2013 at 9:10pm: longweekend58 wrote on May 16th, 2013 at 6:10pm: philperth2010 wrote on May 16th, 2013 at 4:50pm: cods wrote on May 16th, 2013 at 4:43pm: Swagman wrote on May 16th, 2013 at 4:36pm: adelcrow wrote on May 16th, 2013 at 4:34pm: Thommo is going to run as an independent at the next election and when he gets flogged he'll receive a truckload of money. Thommo has taken a leaf out of Phony Tonys dodgy play book  ;D Isn't he in trouble for getting flogged on credit....?  ;D I am glad you know what he is talking about.. dont ya know we already have a thread on this guy adel???.. how will THOMO get a truck load of money...??? how does he figure that out? Same reason Pauline Hanson runs with no chance of success Cods.....If you get enough cretins to vote for you then you are entitled to election funding....So much per vote above a quota means cash for nothing.....Thomson has Buckley's chance of winning but might get enough votes to claim a taxpayer funded pay day!!! you have to get over 4% to get any funding and its like $2 a vote plus it is $1000 to stand. How many votes does he really think he will get???  there could not be a more discredited candidate in the country!! Recent polling indicated that he would beat the liberal candidate in his seat. actually, the most recent polling showed that ALL labor marginals would be lost be hefty margins. And seriously DNA, bias and all, how do you figure in the face of an 8% swing against labor that a seat with a mere 5% margin will be saved when the candidate is facing 150 criminal charges, a similar amount of industrial civil charges and is more than likely to be sent to jail in the next year??  ARE YOU NUTS????

Quote:

''This won't please some of my colleagues when I say it . . . but people including Labor party members may greatly fear Tony Abbott as prime minister but there are great reservations about the leadership of the Labor party,'' he said. Mr Thomson's exit means Labor will need to endorse a new candidate for the marginal NSW Central Coast seat of Dobell, where polls have put the incumbent ahead of the Coalition. Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/thomson-to-stand-as-independent-20130516-2jneo.html#ixzz2TWafKFGC

cods wrote on May 17^th, 2013 at 12:34pm:

skippy. wrote on May 17th, 2013 at 8:17am: This is for all the idiots that questioned Adel yesterday when he said THOMO would benefit from running, even if loses. http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/thomson-has-100000-good-reasons-to-be-smiling-20130516-2jpal.html Craig Thomson stands to pocket more than $100,000 from the Australian taxpayer by running as an independent. The scandal-plagued NSW MP has backed away from his explosive claim that Labor offered him a deal not to contest his NSW seat of Dobell - but acknowledged that he weighed up the financial implications of running in September. Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/thomson-has-100000-good-reasons-to-be-smiling-20130516-2jpal.html#ixzz2TVsNT6DR are we really this mad???? have we really allowed our politicians to cover their backsides like this...no matter which way they go they come out winning????.. thats appalling... and that goes for all of them independents the works they all know about this... he cant lose can he?????.. I know thats a feather in the caps of you lefties.. but we all know how it will be if a righty does the same thing and gets away with murder...you wont like it at all... ..

A righty does do it cods, Hanson does it every bloody election. Ill put it back on you, how often do you whinge about her doing it?
Of course it's wrong no matter what side of politics they are from.

To cods and skippy, it is totally ludicrous, no matter who it is. Who made this in the first place and why does it still persist today?

TheGreenLight wrote on May 17^th, 2013 at 4:56pm:

To cods and skippy, it is totally ludicrous, no matter who it is. Who made this in the first place and why does it still persist today?

I expect the two major parties coluded to have it made law. Of course it's ludicrous. Funny how no body bothered to whinge about it for the past ten or more years Hanson has been doing it in both federal AND state elections, it's a  scam.

skippy. wrote on May 17^th, 2013 at 5:02pm:

TheGreenLight wrote on May 17th, 2013 at 4:56pm: To cods and skippy, it is totally ludicrous, no matter who it is. Who made this in the first place and why does it still persist today? I expect the two major parties coluded to have it made law. Of course it's ludicrous. Funny how no body bothered to whinge about it for the past ten or more years Hanson has been doing it in both federal AND state elections, it's a  scam.

You're probably right. But to be completely objective, it isn't like the Greens and independents or anyone has ever stood up against it. Barely anyone even knows about it. Hanson has probably made $500000 or more out of it.

skippy. wrote on May 17^th, 2013 at 5:02pm:

TheGreenLight wrote on May 17th, 2013 at 4:56pm: To cods and skippy, it is totally ludicrous, no matter who it is. Who made this in the first place and why does it still persist today? I expect the two major parties coluded to have it made law. Of course it's ludicrous. Funny how no body bothered to whinge about it for the past ten or more years Hanson has been doing it in both federal AND state elections, it's a  scam.

What are you referring to skippy?  The money paid to ALL candidates (the winner and the losers) by the Electoral Commission based on the votes they received...or the much, much larger extra money a losing candidate gets from Government if they held their seat for two terms, but lost it as a failed candidate for the third term?

cods wrote on May 17^th, 2013 at 12:40pm:

TheGreenLight wrote on May 17th, 2013 at 11:57am: It is such a dodgy system. Pauline Hanson has made a living out if it since losing in 1998. She's stood at every election since then, except 2010, and always gets heaps of votes, enough to make a lot of money, but not enough to get elected. Not that it's her fault, blame the system. Why should the taxpayer be expected to pay when someone loses? EXACTLY... how m any people know about this though thats the point?? it isnt exactly advertised come election time is it?????? lets see the banners around the booths or even headlines in the paper the week before.. telling people what their vote is actually worth in cold hard cash if their fav doesnt win....they come out with a motza... we need to know! we should know!.. if there is nothing wrong with this... why is it so secret?? I have been voting a long time and its the first I have heard of it.........and I can thank THOMO for that...ye gods and little fishes makes me wonder what else we dont know...what other little perks do they get.. now we know why the rush to stand as an Independent even if they dont stand a chance its not about saving us it about saving them...

Lets face it Cods..all the pollies are having a lend of the public

Actually this payout system is the IMPROVED one that Howard put in place. formerly an MP who made two terms was given a pension for life. this payout system is markedly smaller than the previous one.   But there is still something fundamentally wrong with a system that gives someone a payout for merely standing for election and losing. Im pretty sure no one foresaw this loophole!!  I wonder if parliament will move to close this loophole?

longweekend58 wrote on May 17^th, 2013 at 5:12pm:

Actually this payout system is the IMPROVED one that Howard put in place. formerly an MP who made two terms was given a pension for life. this payout system is markedly smaller than the previous one.   But there is still something fundamentally wrong with a system that gives someone a payout for merely standing for election and losing. Im pretty sure no one foresaw this loophole!!  I wonder if parliament will move to close this loophole?

It's no 'loophole.'  It has been in place for a while, and although no examples immediately come to mind (I'll do a google) it has been in the public political debating domain previously.

PS....google was not my friend.

longweekend58 wrote on May 17^th, 2013 at 5:12pm:

Actually this payout system is the IMPROVED one that Howard put in place. formerly an MP who made two terms was given a pension for life. this payout system is markedly smaller than the previous one.   But there is still something fundamentally wrong with a system that gives someone a payout for merely standing for election and losing. Im pretty sure no one foresaw this loophole!!  I wonder if parliament will move to close this loophole?

It still sucks, and is a pox on politicians of all persuasions.

Aussie wrote on May 17^th, 2013 at 5:20pm:

longweekend58 wrote on May 17th, 2013 at 5:12pm: Actually this payout system is the IMPROVED one that Howard put in place. formerly an MP who made two terms was given a pension for life. this payout system is markedly smaller than the previous one.   But there is still something fundamentally wrong with a system that gives someone a payout for merely standing for election and losing. Im pretty sure no one foresaw this loophole!!  I wonder if parliament will move to close this loophole? It's no 'loophole.'  It has been in place for a while, and although no examples immediately come to mind (I'll do a google) it has been in the public political debating domain previously. PS....google was not my friend.

I cant think of a single example of someone running for parliament, hoping to lose in order to get a payout. I am sure the rules didn't envisage it.

Quote:

I cant think of a single example of someone running for parliament, hoping to lose in order to get a payout. I am sure the rules didn't envisage it.

When did hoping to lose enter the discussion?

Aussie wrote on May 17^th, 2013 at 5:09pm:

skippy. wrote on May 17th, 2013 at 5:02pm: TheGreenLight wrote on May 17th, 2013 at 4:56pm: To cods and skippy, it is totally ludicrous, no matter who it is. Who made this in the first place and why does it still persist today? I expect the two major parties coluded to have it made law. Of course it's ludicrous. Funny how no body bothered to whinge about it for the past ten or more years Hanson has been doing it in both federal AND state elections, it's a  scam. What are you referring to skippy?  The money paid to ALL candidates (the winner and the losers) by the Electoral Commission based on the votes they received...or the much, much larger extra money a losing candidate gets from Government if they held their seat for two terms, but lost it as a failed candidate for the third term?

Both, really Aussie. To get money just because you run, or to get a deal because you lasted two terms are both leaches on OUR taxes.

I'm not really referring to the allowance you get from the Electoral Commission.  But....I reckon if you have made your contribution for two terms as a politician serving your voters, and you get shown the door as the political tide turns, there has to be some sort of handshake on departure.

Aussie wrote on May 17^th, 2013 at 6:39pm:

I'm not really referring to the allowance you get from the Electoral Commission.  But....I reckon if you have made your contribution for two terms as a politician serving your voters, and you get shown the door as the political tide turns, there has to be some sort of handshake on departure.

Their $180,000 pa for life is a good enough handshake.

skippy. wrote on May 17^th, 2013 at 4:50pm:

cods wrote on May 17th, 2013 at 12:34pm: skippy. wrote on May 17th, 2013 at 8:17am: This is for all the idiots that questioned Adel yesterday when he said THOMO would benefit from running, even if loses. http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/thomson-has-100000-good-reasons-to-be-smiling-20130516-2jpal.html Craig Thomson stands to pocket more than $100,000 from the Australian taxpayer by running as an independent. The scandal-plagued NSW MP has backed away from his explosive claim that Labor offered him a deal not to contest his NSW seat of Dobell - but acknowledged that he weighed up the financial implications of running in September. Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/thomson-has-100000-good-reasons-to-be-smiling-20130516-2jpal.html#ixzz2TVsNT6DR are we really this mad???? have we really allowed our politicians to cover their backsides like this...no matter which way they go they come out winning????.. thats appalling... and that goes for all of them independents the works they all know about this... he cant lose can he?????.. I know thats a feather in the caps of you lefties.. but we all know how it will be if a righty does the same thing and gets away with murder...you wont like it at all... .. A righty does do it cods, Hanson does it every bloody election. Ill put it back on you, how often do you whinge about her doing it? Of course it's wrong no matter what side of politics they are from.

you dont read too good do you I SAID I HAD NEVER HEARD OF IT>..

I have known about them getting money for losing if thats the right way of putting it... but read what the difference is if THOMO runs  as an independent....

thats what I am on about... at least hansen hasnt left a party then gone straight to an independent like he is doing and that makes one lhell of a differnce..

this guy is talking about resigning from the ALP.. and according to the Telegraph the union is up in arms they say he should be sacked and not allowed to run against a member of the ALP...its against their protocol.




The Daily Telegraph has learnt a special hearing is expected to be held within days to expel Mr Thomson after he announced he would run as an independent in the seat of Dobell.

NSW ALP assistant secretary John Graham has brought charges against Mr Thomson under rules forbidding Labor members standing against the party.

"I don't think Craig Thomson should be lecturing federal Labor on standards," Mr Graham said last night.

While suspended since last May, Mr Thomson is still technically a Labor member. Memberships cannot be cancelled without approval of the party's administration.

"I do not believe Craig Thomson should be allowed to simply resign from the Labor Party. The branch should expel him prior to any such resignation being permitted to take effect," Mr Graham said. Federal police yesterday said they wanted more details on a closed-door meeting between Mr Thomson and NSW ALP secretary Sam Dastyari last week where Mr Thomson claimed he was offered the option of running in a Labor preselection ballot and losing - a move that would qualify him for a parliamentary redundancy worth up to $100,000.

An AFP spokeswoman said yesterday they would then assess whether or not to investigate the allegations. Mr Thomson said he declined the offer and would run as an independent, as revealed by The Daily Telegraph yesterday.

Opposition legal affairs spokesman George Brandis yest



so what are you doing to stop people like Hanson reaping huge benefits for doing basically bugger all?????????????????????..

at least I am complaining about it and now I kn ow more I shall be telling all and sundry...

so dont have a go at me for not knowing this is one big joke..because i dont see you doing anything..and you seemed quite jubilant when adel was proved right... your happy he is right... god help us.

Aussie wrote on May 17^th, 2013 at 5:41pm:

Quote: I cant think of a single example of someone running for parliament, hoping to lose in order to get a payout. I am sure the rules didn't envisage it. When did hoping to lose enter the discussion?

well now I do wonder!!!!!!!!!

take Hanson for instance....mainly because she has been there done that more than once..

she shops around for a seat doesnt she????? even moves State.....does she look to see how close the vote is and how the preferences work out.. shes pretty cluey you know..maybe thats how she chooses the seat to lose... I am just thinking..


you do have me wondering??????.....

mantra wrote on May 17^th, 2013 at 6:52pm:

Aussie wrote on May 17th, 2013 at 6:39pm: I'm not really referring to the allowance you get from the Electoral Commission.  But....I reckon if you have made your contribution for two terms as a politician serving your voters, and you get shown the door as the political tide turns, there has to be some sort of handshake on departure. Their $180,000 pa for life is a good enough handshake.

I think that that's only for serving three terms. One and two get nothing. I am a pensioner in my 60s and I get nowhere near as much.

cods wrote on May 17^th, 2013 at 7:03pm:

Aussie wrote on May 17th, 2013 at 5:41pm: Quote: I cant think of a single example of someone running for parliament, hoping to lose in order to get a payout. I am sure the rules didn't envisage it. When did hoping to lose enter the discussion? well now I do wonder!!!!!!!!! take Hanson for instance....mainly because she has been there done that more than once.. she shops around for a seat doesnt she????? even moves State.....does she look to see how close the vote is and how the preferences work out.. shes pretty cluey you know..maybe thats how she chooses the seat to lose... I am just thinking.. you do have me wondering??????.....

She's always been a lot, lot s,after than she's given credit for her. She's used it to great advantage too. She has stood for the Senate in every election since she lost in 1998, and three state elections two, only once did she stand in the Lower House. So that's 6 elections, 7 if you count 1998, that she's stood and made a motza for just standing.

Aussie wrote on May 17^th, 2013 at 5:41pm:

Quote: I cant think of a single example of someone running for parliament, hoping to lose in order to get a payout. I am sure the rules didn't envisage it. When did hoping to lose enter the discussion?

well he has ZERO chance of winning. but he doesn't want to win since he will be going to jail soon and have the ignominy of being THROWN out.

longweekend58 wrote on May 17^th, 2013 at 5:12pm:

But there is still something fundamentally wrong with a system that gives someone a payout for merely standing for election and losing. Im pretty sure no one foresaw this loophole!!  I wonder if parliament will move to close this loophole?

Didn't you say earlier that it would cost him money?

TheGreenLight wrote on May 17^th, 2013 at 7:30pm:

cods wrote on May 17th, 2013 at 7:03pm: Aussie wrote on May 17th, 2013 at 5:41pm: Quote: I cant think of a single example of someone running for parliament, hoping to lose in order to get a payout. I am sure the rules didn't envisage it. When did hoping to lose enter the discussion? well now I do wonder!!!!!!!!! take Hanson for instance....mainly because she has been there done that more than once.. she shops around for a seat doesnt she????? even moves State.....does she look to see how close the vote is and how the preferences work out.. shes pretty cluey you know..maybe thats how she chooses the seat to lose... I am just thinking.. you do have me wondering??????..... She's always been a lot, lot s,after than she's given credit for her. She's used it to great advantage too. She has stood for the Senate in every election since she lost in 1998, and three state elections two, only once did she stand in the Lower House. So that's 6 elections, 7 if you count 1998, that she's stood and made a motza for just standing.

so whats the reward for NOT WINNING a senate seat???? do you know?

cods wrote on May 17^th, 2013 at 11:25pm:

TheGreenLight wrote on May 17th, 2013 at 7:30pm: cods wrote on May 17th, 2013 at 7:03pm: Aussie wrote on May 17th, 2013 at 5:41pm: Quote: I cant think of a single example of someone running for parliament, hoping to lose in order to get a payout. I am sure the rules didn't envisage it. When did hoping to lose enter the discussion? well now I do wonder!!!!!!!!! take Hanson for instance....mainly because she has been there done that more than once.. she shops around for a seat doesnt she????? even moves State.....does she look to see how close the vote is and how the preferences work out.. shes pretty cluey you know..maybe thats how she chooses the seat to lose... I am just thinking.. you do have me wondering??????..... She's always been a lot, lot s,after than she's given credit for her. She's used it to great advantage too. She has stood for the Senate in every election since she lost in 1998, and three state elections two, only once did she stand in the Lower House. So that's 6 elections, 7 if you count 1998, that she's stood and made a motza for just standing. so whats the reward for NOT WINNING a senate seat???? do you know?

the same for senators first elected after howards changes.

longweekend58 wrote on May 17^th, 2013 at 8:13pm:

Aussie wrote on May 17th, 2013 at 5:41pm: Quote: I cant think of a single example of someone running for parliament, hoping to lose in order to get a payout. I am sure the rules didn't envisage it. When did hoping to lose enter the discussion? well he has ZERO chance of winning. but he doesn't want to win since he will be going to jail soon and have the ignominy of being THROWN out.

he will be going to jail soon

We will see ?

Dnarever wrote on May 18^th, 2013 at 2:52pm:

longweekend58 wrote on May 17th, 2013 at 8:13pm: Aussie wrote on May 17th, 2013 at 5:41pm: Quote: I cant think of a single example of someone running for parliament, hoping to lose in order to get a payout. I am sure the rules didn't envisage it. When did hoping to lose enter the discussion? well he has ZERO chance of winning. but he doesn't want to win since he will be going to jail soon and have the ignominy of being THROWN out. he will be going to jail soon We will see ?

it is very highly likely.

longweekend58 wrote on May 18^th, 2013 at 4:45pm:

Dnarever wrote on May 18th, 2013 at 2:52pm: longweekend58 wrote on May 17th, 2013 at 8:13pm: Aussie wrote on May 17th, 2013 at 5:41pm: Quote: I cant think of a single example of someone running for parliament, hoping to lose in order to get a payout. I am sure the rules didn't envisage it. When did hoping to lose enter the discussion? well he has ZERO chance of winning. but he doesn't want to win since he will be going to jail soon and have the ignominy of being THROWN out. he will be going to jail soon We will see ? it is very highly likely.

I don't know but most of the supposed evidence released into the public domain looks to have been significantly flawed.

Dnarever wrote on May 18^th, 2013 at 5:23pm:

longweekend58 wrote on May 18th, 2013 at 4:45pm: Dnarever wrote on May 18th, 2013 at 2:52pm: longweekend58 wrote on May 17th, 2013 at 8:13pm: Aussie wrote on May 17th, 2013 at 5:41pm: Quote: I cant think of a single example of someone running for parliament, hoping to lose in order to get a payout. I am sure the rules didn't envisage it. When did hoping to lose enter the discussion? well he has ZERO chance of winning. but he doesn't want to win since he will be going to jail soon and have the ignominy of being THROWN out. he will be going to jail soon We will see ? it is very highly likely. I don't know but most of the supposed evidence released into the public domain looks to have been significantly flawed.

based on your broad understanding of the evidence? And the $500,000 that has gone missing? you have zero interest in that?  I think you are almost at the stage where you would excuse labor ANYTHING. and that of course is precisely how they get so many scandals and rapists in their midst - because people like you don't really care what your MPs do as long as they win. I'm sure that somewhere in your offline world you possess scruples, morals, standards and principles. Why don't you bring them here as well?

longweekend58 wrote on May 18^th, 2013 at 5:48pm:

Dnarever wrote on May 18th, 2013 at 5:23pm: longweekend58 wrote on May 18th, 2013 at 4:45pm: Dnarever wrote on May 18th, 2013 at 2:52pm: longweekend58 wrote on May 17th, 2013 at 8:13pm: Aussie wrote on May 17th, 2013 at 5:41pm: Quote: I cant think of a single example of someone running for parliament, hoping to lose in order to get a payout. I am sure the rules didn't envisage it. When did hoping to lose enter the discussion? well he has ZERO chance of winning. but he doesn't want to win since he will be going to jail soon and have the ignominy of being THROWN out. he will be going to jail soon We will see ? it is very highly likely. I don't know but most of the supposed evidence released into the public domain looks to have been significantly flawed. based on your broad understanding of the evidence? And the $500,000 that has gone missing? you have zero interest in that?  I think you are almost at the stage where you would excuse labor ANYTHING. and that of course is precisely how they get so many scandals and rapists in their midst - because people like you don't really care what your MPs do as long as they win. I'm sure that somewhere in your offline world you possess scruples, morals, standards and principles. Why don't you bring them here as well?

because people like you don't really care what your MPs do as long as they win

And you suipport Tony Abbott ?????

based on your broad understanding of the evidence? And the $500,000 that has gone missing?

I can only comment on what I have seen and know about, I have never said that he is innocent or guilty - I simply do not know.

Unlike you, Tony and the Liberals I have not Judged sentenced and executed him before his case is heard.

I would not be shocked if it turns out that he is in fact not guilty.

longweekend58 wrote on May 18^th, 2013 at 5:48pm:

Dnarever wrote on May 18th, 2013 at 5:23pm: longweekend58 wrote on May 18th, 2013 at 4:45pm: Dnarever wrote on May 18th, 2013 at 2:52pm: longweekend58 wrote on May 17th, 2013 at 8:13pm: Aussie wrote on May 17th, 2013 at 5:41pm: Quote: I cant think of a single example of someone running for parliament, hoping to lose in order to get a payout. I am sure the rules didn't envisage it. When did hoping to lose enter the discussion? well he has ZERO chance of winning. but he doesn't want to win since he will be going to jail soon and have the ignominy of being THROWN out. he will be going to jail soon We will see ? it is very highly likely. I don't know but most of the supposed evidence released into the public domain looks to have been significantly flawed. based on your broad understanding of the evidence? And the $500,000 that has gone missing? you have zero interest in that?  I think you are almost at the stage where you would excuse labor ANYTHING. and that of course is precisely how they get so many scandals and rapists in their midst - because people like you don't really care what your MPs do as long as they win. I'm sure that somewhere in your offline world you possess scruples, morals, standards and principles. Why don't you bring them here as well?

OUCH!

true but

OUCH!

cods wrote on May 18^th, 2013 at 10:21pm:

longweekend58 wrote on May 18th, 2013 at 5:48pm: Dnarever wrote on May 18th, 2013 at 5:23pm: longweekend58 wrote on May 18th, 2013 at 4:45pm: Dnarever wrote on May 18th, 2013 at 2:52pm: longweekend58 wrote on May 17th, 2013 at 8:13pm: Aussie wrote on May 17th, 2013 at 5:41pm: Quote: I cant think of a single example of someone running for parliament, hoping to lose in order to get a payout. I am sure the rules didn't envisage it. When did hoping to lose enter the discussion? well he has ZERO chance of winning. but he doesn't want to win since he will be going to jail soon and have the ignominy of being THROWN out. he will be going to jail soon We will see ? it is very highly likely. I don't know but most of the supposed evidence released into the public domain looks to have been significantly flawed. based on your broad understanding of the evidence? And the $500,000 that has gone missing? you have zero interest in that?  I think you are almost at the stage where you would excuse labor ANYTHING. and that of course is precisely how they get so many scandals and rapists in their midst - because people like you don't really care what your MPs do as long as they win. I'm sure that somewhere in your offline world you possess scruples, morals, standards and principles. Why don't you bring them here as well? OUCH! true but OUCH!

I wonder why they are bothering with a court case?? you guys have obviously already found him guilty.

Just string him up and be done with it, don't worry about if he is actually guilty or not.


Quote:

because people like you don't really care what your MPs do as long as they win. OUCH! true but OUCH

Another one going to vote for Abbott and talking about anything to win and morals.

Dnarever wrote on May 18^th, 2013 at 10:45pm:

cods wrote on May 18th, 2013 at 10:21pm: longweekend58 wrote on May 18th, 2013 at 5:48pm: Dnarever wrote on May 18th, 2013 at 5:23pm: longweekend58 wrote on May 18th, 2013 at 4:45pm: Dnarever wrote on May 18th, 2013 at 2:52pm: longweekend58 wrote on May 17th, 2013 at 8:13pm: Aussie wrote on May 17th, 2013 at 5:41pm: Quote: I cant think of a single example of someone running for parliament, hoping to lose in order to get a payout. I am sure the rules didn't envisage it. When did hoping to lose enter the discussion? well he has ZERO chance of winning. but he doesn't want to win since he will be going to jail soon and have the ignominy of being THROWN out. he will be going to jail soon We will see ? it is very highly likely. I don't know but most of the supposed evidence released into the public domain looks to have been significantly flawed. based on your broad understanding of the evidence? And the $500,000 that has gone missing? you have zero interest in that?  I think you are almost at the stage where you would excuse labor ANYTHING. and that of course is precisely how they get so many scandals and rapists in their midst - because people like you don't really care what your MPs do as long as they win. I'm sure that somewhere in your offline world you possess scruples, morals, standards and principles. Why don't you bring them here as well? OUCH! true but OUCH! I wonder why they are bothering with a court case?? you guys have obviously already found him guilty. Just string him up and be done with it, don't worry about if he is actually guilty or not. [quote]because people like you don't really care what your MPs do as long as they win. OUCH! true but OUCH

Another one going to vote for Abbott and talking about anything to win and morals.[/quote]




OOOOOOOO OUCH!



.





.





.
sourgrapes.

cods wrote on May 18^th, 2013 at 10:51pm:

Dnarever wrote on May 18th, 2013 at 10:45pm: cods wrote on May 18th, 2013 at 10:21pm: longweekend58 wrote on May 18th, 2013 at 5:48pm: Dnarever wrote on May 18th, 2013 at 5:23pm: longweekend58 wrote on May 18th, 2013 at 4:45pm: Dnarever wrote on May 18th, 2013 at 2:52pm: longweekend58 wrote on May 17th, 2013 at 8:13pm: Aussie wrote on May 17th, 2013 at 5:41pm: Quote: I cant think of a single example of someone running for parliament, hoping to lose in order to get a payout. I am sure the rules didn't envisage it. When did hoping to lose enter the discussion? well he has ZERO chance of winning. but he doesn't want to win since he will be going to jail soon and have the ignominy of being THROWN out. he will be going to jail soon We will see ? it is very highly likely. I don't know but most of the supposed evidence released into the public domain looks to have been significantly flawed. based on your broad understanding of the evidence? And the $500,000 that has gone missing? you have zero interest in that?  I think you are almost at the stage where you would excuse labor ANYTHING. and that of course is precisely how they get so many scandals and rapists in their midst - because people like you don't really care what your MPs do as long as they win. I'm sure that somewhere in your offline world you possess scruples, morals, standards and principles. Why don't you bring them here as well? OUCH! true but OUCH! I wonder why they are bothering with a court case?? you guys have obviously already found him guilty. Just string him up and be done with it, don't worry about if he is actually guilty or not. [quote]because people like you don't really care what your MPs do as long as they win. OUCH! true but OUCH Another one going to vote for Abbott and talking about anything to win and morals.

OOOOOOOO OUCH!


sourgrapes.


[/quote]



You know there was a time when I thought that we all believed in fair trials and the rules of law?

Goes to show how wrong you can be.

Liberals : Supporting the Lynch mob mentality since 1945

Dnarever wrote on May 19^th, 2013 at 10:12am:

ou know there was a time when I thought that we all believed in fair trials and the rules of law? Goes to show how wrong you can be. Liberals : Supporting the Lynch mob mentality since 1945

ohh boohoo.. you sound so phony dont recall you coming in and saying all that when Mary Jo Fisher was on the line....funny that...

I would like to believe all that what you say dna but when its only said for your own side it kind of loses something.....

especially when you talk about mob mentality.l.. and look what we have had said to us on here b y lefties.... look what your mate adel says about Abbott....thats ok though isnt it???

I have yet to see you put a lefty in his place...n o matter how vile it is....


btw dna stop stretching it we are not trying anyone on here we are n ot the court and judge for goodness sake its all opinions...

stop being so bloody sanctimonious.[when it suits]

cods wrote on May 19^th, 2013 at 11:06am:

Dnarever wrote on May 19th, 2013 at 10:12am: ou know there was a time when I thought that we all believed in fair trials and the rules of law? Goes to show how wrong you can be. Liberals : Supporting the Lynch mob mentality since 1945 ohh boohoo.. you sound so phony dont recall you coming in and saying all that when Mary Jo Fisher was on the line....funny that... I would like to believe all that what you say dna but when its only said for your own side it kind of loses something..... especially when you talk about mob mentality.l.. and look what we have had said to us on here b y lefties.... look what your mate adel says about Abbott....thats ok though isnt it??? I have yet to see you put a lefty in his place...n o matter how vile it is.... btw dna stop stretching it we are not trying anyone on here we are n ot the court and judge for goodness sake its all opinions... stop being so bloody sanctimonious.[when it suits]

dont recall you coming in and saying all that when Mary Jo Fisher was on the line....funny that.

Actually I did.

My only comment about Mary Jo on her first charge was one of sympathy for her condition, she was obviously unwell.

I have yet to see you put a lefty in his place...n o matter how vile it is....

You don't look hard enough - I even defended you once.

Looks like the Tele got it wrong again.....George I have NFI Brandis has once again come out and made a complete idiot of himself.....


Quote:

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/opinion/political-news/thomson-denies-alp-encouraged-him-to-seek-preselection-payout-20130516-2jnwa.html Craig Thomson says he does not feel the ALP’s NSW general secretary Sam Dastyari was trying to ‘‘induce’’ him to stand for Labor preselection in Dobell when the two met last week. The embattled MP’s denials come in response to reports claiming that the ALP had suggested that Mr Thomson should stand for Labor preselection in his seat on the basis that he would qualify for a redundancy payment if he failed. Mr Thomson, who announced on Thursday he would stand as an independent at the federal election, said he met Mr Dastyari last week. During the meeting, Mr Thomson says he told Mr Dastyari that he would not stand for the Labor Party. Mr Thomson was suspended from the ALP last year over allegations he misused union funds, but says it had been his decision to quit the party. ‘‘We had a quick discussion about that and in that context [Mr Dastyari] said if you’re not looking at running, the issues with redundancy come up,’’ he told Fairfax Media’s Breaking Politics program. According to Mr Thomson, this included his entitlements if he was beaten in a preselection or if he was defeated at the election. ‘‘Sam made it clear that if I wanted to stand for preselection I could do so, and if the party didn’t preselect me, I would be entitled to redundancy,’’ he said. But the independent MP, who is facing civil and criminal charges, said there was nothing ‘‘sinister’’ about the discussion. ‘‘I didn’t feel in any sense that Sam was trying to induce me to take a particular course of action, he was advising me as to what I [would] be entitled to under different circumstances.’’ Mr Thomson later added: ‘‘But Sam was also, I think, trying to persuade me not to stand as an independent.’’ On Thursday, Mr Dastyari contradicted this account with the tweet: ‘‘Craig Thomson’s membership of the Labor Party was suspended a year ago. You can’t contest a preselection if you are suspended.’’ He also told Fairfax Media that Mr Thomson’s account did not make any sense. Brandis writes to AFP On Thursday morning, the government blocked an opposition attempt to force Mr Thomson to make a statement to Parliament over a News Ltd report that the ALP offered him an ‘‘inducement’’ to retire from his seat. Shadow attorney-general George Brandis later said he had written to Australian Federal Police Commissioner Tony Negus on Thursday asking him to investigate the matter. Senator Brandis referred specifically to a claim reported in a News Ltd newspaper that Mr Thomson ‘‘rejected an offer from the NSW Labor Party to allow him to be beaten in a Labor preselection contest – a move which would have qualified him for the politician’s equivalent of a six-month redundancy worth up to $100,000’’. Senator Brandis said that if this was true, then a person or persons within the ALP had sought to induce Mr Thomson to undergo a ‘‘sham preselection process for the purpose of fraudulently increasing his severance entitlements’’. Senator Brandis suggested that this breached sections of the Criminal Code and Commonwealth Electoral Acts. Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus accused Senator Brandis of a stunt by releasing the letter to the AFP. ‘‘It’s an abuse of the right of any citizen to complain to the police,’’ he told reporters in Canberra. Mr Dreyfus said any person had the right to lodge a complaint: ‘‘What they don’t do is have the right to release it to the media and make a stunt out of it.’’ If Mr Thomson loses his seat on September 14, he stands to gain up to six months’ pay in a resettlement allowance that can be paid to MPs who are defeated at an election. Mr Thomson told Breaking Politics he was entitled to a similar payment regardless of whether he lost the Labor preselection or stood for Dobell and lost as an independent. ‘‘There’s no material advantage in either of those things,’’ he said before insisting that the money was not much of a consideration for him. ‘‘The money, all those options, haven’t been much of a consideration, which is why I went through with what happened with Sam Dastyari,  they are not the motivations for me in terms of this.’’

The only evidence Brandis has is an alleged statement from Craig Thomson....Thomson has denied any inducement was offered.....The Coalition are becoming adept at making baseless allegations......This is not a good look for George Brandis is it???

::) ::) ::)

cods wrote on May 19^th, 2013 at 11:06am:

you sound so phony dont recall you coming in and saying all that when Mary Jo Fisher was on the line

mary joe was busted red handed


Dnarever wrote on May 19^th, 2013 at 3:17pm:

- I even defended you once.

that'll teach you.

philperth2010 wrote on May 19^th, 2013 at 7:29pm:

Looks like the Tele got it wrong again.....George I have NFI Brandis has once again come out and made a complete idiot of himself..... Quote: http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/opinion/political-news/thomson-denies-alp-encouraged-him-to-seek-preselection-payout-20130516-2jnwa.html Craig Thomson says he does not feel the ALP’s NSW general secretary Sam Dastyari was trying to ‘‘induce’’ him to stand for Labor preselection in Dobell when the two met last week. The embattled MP’s denials come in response to reports claiming that the ALP had suggested that Mr Thomson should stand for Labor preselection in his seat on the basis that he would qualify for a redundancy payment if he failed. Mr Thomson, who announced on Thursday he would stand as an independent at the federal election, said he met Mr Dastyari last week. During the meeting, Mr Thomson says he told Mr Dastyari that he would not stand for the Labor Party. Mr Thomson was suspended from the ALP last year over allegations he misused union funds, but says it had been his decision to quit the party. ‘‘We had a quick discussion about that and in that context [Mr Dastyari] said if you’re not looking at running, the issues with redundancy come up,’’ he told Fairfax Media’s Breaking Politics program. According to Mr Thomson, this included his entitlements if he was beaten in a preselection or if he was defeated at the election. ‘‘Sam made it clear that if I wanted to stand for preselection I could do so, and if the party didn’t preselect me, I would be entitled to redundancy,’’ he said. But the independent MP, who is facing civil and criminal charges, said there was nothing ‘‘sinister’’ about the discussion. ‘‘I didn’t feel in any sense that Sam was trying to induce me to take a particular course of action, he was advising me as to what I [would] be entitled to under different circumstances.’’ Mr Thomson later added: ‘‘But Sam was also, I think, trying to persuade me not to stand as an independent.’’ On Thursday, Mr Dastyari contradicted this account with the tweet: ‘‘Craig Thomson’s membership of the Labor Party was suspended a year ago. You can’t contest a preselection if you are suspended.’’ He also told Fairfax Media that Mr Thomson’s account did not make any sense. Brandis writes to AFP On Thursday morning, the government blocked an opposition attempt to force Mr Thomson to make a statement to Parliament over a News Ltd report that the ALP offered him an ‘‘inducement’’ to retire from his seat. Shadow attorney-general George Brandis later said he had written to Australian Federal Police Commissioner Tony Negus on Thursday asking him to investigate the matter. Senator Brandis referred specifically to a claim reported in a News Ltd newspaper that Mr Thomson ‘‘rejected an offer from the NSW Labor Party to allow him to be beaten in a Labor preselection contest – a move which would have qualified him for the politician’s equivalent of a six-month redundancy worth up to $100,000’’. Senator Brandis said that if this was true, then a person or persons within the ALP had sought to induce Mr Thomson to undergo a ‘‘sham preselection process for the purpose of fraudulently increasing his severance entitlements’’. Senator Brandis suggested that this breached sections of the Criminal Code and Commonwealth Electoral Acts. Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus accused Senator Brandis of a stunt by releasing the letter to the AFP. ‘‘It’s an abuse of the right of any citizen to complain to the police,’’ he told reporters in Canberra. Mr Dreyfus said any person had the right to lodge a complaint: ‘‘What they don’t do is have the right to release it to the media and make a stunt out of it.’’ If Mr Thomson loses his seat on September 14, he stands to gain up to six months’ pay in a resettlement allowance that can be paid to MPs who are defeated at an election. Mr Thomson told Breaking Politics he was entitled to a similar payment regardless of whether he lost the Labor preselection or stood for Dobell and lost as an independent. ‘‘There’s no material advantage in either of those things,’’ he said before insisting that the money was not much of a consideration for him. ‘‘The money, all those options, haven’t been much of a consideration, which is why I went through with what happened with Sam Dastyari,  they are not the motivations for me in terms of this.’’ The only evidence Brandis has is an alleged statement from Craig Thomson....Thomson has denied any inducement was offered.....The Coalition are becoming adept at making baseless allegations......This is not a good look for George Brandis is it??? ::) ::) ::)

Thomson made the statement and later retracted it. what does that tell you? HE IS LYING.

longweekend58 wrote on May 19^th, 2013 at 8:02pm:

philperth2010 wrote on May 19th, 2013 at 7:29pm: Looks like the Tele got it wrong again.....George I have NFI Brandis has once again come out and made a complete idiot of himself..... Quote: http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/opinion/political-news/thomson-denies-alp-encouraged-him-to-seek-preselection-payout-20130516-2jnwa.html Craig Thomson says he does not feel the ALP’s NSW general secretary Sam Dastyari was trying to ‘‘induce’’ him to stand for Labor preselection in Dobell when the two met last week. The embattled MP’s denials come in response to reports claiming that the ALP had suggested that Mr Thomson should stand for Labor preselection in his seat on the basis that he would qualify for a redundancy payment if he failed. Mr Thomson, who announced on Thursday he would stand as an independent at the federal election, said he met Mr Dastyari last week. During the meeting, Mr Thomson says he told Mr Dastyari that he would not stand for the Labor Party. Mr Thomson was suspended from the ALP last year over allegations he misused union funds, but says it had been his decision to quit the party. ‘‘We had a quick discussion about that and in that context [Mr Dastyari] said if you’re not looking at running, the issues with redundancy come up,’’ he told Fairfax Media’s Breaking Politics program. According to Mr Thomson, this included his entitlements if he was beaten in a preselection or if he was defeated at the election. ‘‘Sam made it clear that if I wanted to stand for preselection I could do so, and if the party didn’t preselect me, I would be entitled to redundancy,’’ he said. But the independent MP, who is facing civil and criminal charges, said there was nothing ‘‘sinister’’ about the discussion. ‘‘I didn’t feel in any sense that Sam was trying to induce me to take a particular course of action, he was advising me as to what I [would] be entitled to under different circumstances.’’ Mr Thomson later added: ‘‘But Sam was also, I think, trying to persuade me not to stand as an independent.’’ On Thursday, Mr Dastyari contradicted this account with the tweet: ‘‘Craig Thomson’s membership of the Labor Party was suspended a year ago. You can’t contest a preselection if you are suspended.’’ He also told Fairfax Media that Mr Thomson’s account did not make any sense. Brandis writes to AFP On Thursday morning, the government blocked an opposition attempt to force Mr Thomson to make a statement to Parliament over a News Ltd report that the ALP offered him an ‘‘inducement’’ to retire from his seat. Shadow attorney-general George Brandis later said he had written to Australian Federal Police Commissioner Tony Negus on Thursday asking him to investigate the matter. Senator Brandis referred specifically to a claim reported in a News Ltd newspaper that Mr Thomson ‘‘rejected an offer from the NSW Labor Party to allow him to be beaten in a Labor preselection contest – a move which would have qualified him for the politician’s equivalent of a six-month redundancy worth up to $100,000’’. Senator Brandis said that if this was true, then a person or persons within the ALP had sought to induce Mr Thomson to undergo a ‘‘sham preselection process for the purpose of fraudulently increasing his severance entitlements’’. Senator Brandis suggested that this breached sections of the Criminal Code and Commonwealth Electoral Acts. Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus accused Senator Brandis of a stunt by releasing the letter to the AFP. ‘‘It’s an abuse of the right of any citizen to complain to the police,’’ he told reporters in Canberra. Mr Dreyfus said any person had the right to lodge a complaint: ‘‘What they don’t do is have the right to release it to the media and make a stunt out of it.’’ If Mr Thomson loses his seat on September 14, he stands to gain up to six months’ pay in a resettlement allowance that can be paid to MPs who are defeated at an election. Mr Thomson told Breaking Politics he was entitled to a similar payment regardless of whether he lost the Labor preselection or stood for Dobell and lost as an independent. ‘‘There’s no material advantage in either of those things,’’ he said before insisting that the money was not much of a consideration for him. ‘‘The money, all those options, haven’t been much of a consideration, which is why I went through with what happened with Sam Dastyari,  they are not the motivations for me in terms of this.’’ The only evidence Brandis has is an alleged statement from Craig Thomson....Thomson has denied any inducement was offered.....The Coalition are becoming adept at making baseless allegations......This is not a good look for George Brandis is it??? ::) ::) ::) Thomson made the statement and later retracted it. what does that tell you? HE IS LYING.

Exactly.....Yet George I have NFI Brandis took his word for it.....Let that be a lesson for him.....Even if Thomson had stuck to his story do you think anyone accept George I have NFI Brandis would believe it.....The Coalition are making a habit of jumping the gun before they have all the facts.....Keep it up!!!

[smiley=lolk.gif] [smiley=lolk.gif] [smiley=lolk.gif]

Quote:

Thomson made the statement and later retracted it. what does that tell you? HE IS LYING.

He made exactly what statement, and where did he retract that statement, melielongtime?

I don't know..

nothing much about it in the NEWS ...no daily updates of the progress,  the pillaring has ceased,  NO SENSATIONAL STORY to play with.. no News...

...GUESS he is INNOCENT. !!   :P

'course I don't KNOW this...   ::) ::)

And all you scum bags here citisise what a unemployed person might get in a government handout. But its acceptable for a badly performing politician to get a generous hand out.

philperth2010 wrote on May 19^th, 2013 at 8:07pm:

longweekend58 wrote on May 19th, 2013 at 8:02pm: philperth2010 wrote on May 19th, 2013 at 7:29pm: Looks like the Tele got it wrong again.....George I have NFI Brandis has once again come out and made a complete idiot of himself..... Quote: http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/opinion/political-news/thomson-denies-alp-encouraged-him-to-seek-preselection-payout-20130516-2jnwa.html Craig Thomson says he does not feel the ALP’s NSW general secretary Sam Dastyari was trying to ‘‘induce’’ him to stand for Labor preselection in Dobell when the two met last week. The embattled MP’s denials come in response to reports claiming that the ALP had suggested that Mr Thomson should stand for Labor preselection in his seat on the basis that he would qualify for a redundancy payment if he failed. Mr Thomson, who announced on Thursday he would stand as an independent at the federal election, said he met Mr Dastyari last week. During the meeting, Mr Thomson says he told Mr Dastyari that he would not stand for the Labor Party. Mr Thomson was suspended from the ALP last year over allegations he misused union funds, but says it had been his decision to quit the party. ‘‘We had a quick discussion about that and in that context [Mr Dastyari] said if you’re not looking at running, the issues with redundancy come up,’’ he told Fairfax Media’s Breaking Politics program. According to Mr Thomson, this included his entitlements if he was beaten in a preselection or if he was defeated at the election. ‘‘Sam made it clear that if I wanted to stand for preselection I could do so, and if the party didn’t preselect me, I would be entitled to redundancy,’’ he said. But the independent MP, who is facing civil and criminal charges, said there was nothing ‘‘sinister’’ about the discussion. ‘‘I didn’t feel in any sense that Sam was trying to induce me to take a particular course of action, he was advising me as to what I [would] be entitled to under different circumstances.’’ Mr Thomson later added: ‘‘But Sam was also, I think, trying to persuade me not to stand as an independent.’’ On Thursday, Mr Dastyari contradicted this account with the tweet: ‘‘Craig Thomson’s membership of the Labor Party was suspended a year ago. You can’t contest a preselection if you are suspended.’’ He also told Fairfax Media that Mr Thomson’s account did not make any sense. Brandis writes to AFP On Thursday morning, the government blocked an opposition attempt to force Mr Thomson to make a statement to Parliament over a News Ltd report that the ALP offered him an ‘‘inducement’’ to retire from his seat. Shadow attorney-general George Brandis later said he had written to Australian Federal Police Commissioner Tony Negus on Thursday asking him to investigate the matter. Senator Brandis referred specifically to a claim reported in a News Ltd newspaper that Mr Thomson ‘‘rejected an offer from the NSW Labor Party to allow him to be beaten in a Labor preselection contest – a move which would have qualified him for the politician’s equivalent of a six-month redundancy worth up to $100,000’’. Senator Brandis said that if this was true, then a person or persons within the ALP had sought to induce Mr Thomson to undergo a ‘‘sham preselection process for the purpose of fraudulently increasing his severance entitlements’’. Senator Brandis suggested that this breached sections of the Criminal Code and Commonwealth Electoral Acts. Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus accused Senator Brandis of a stunt by releasing the letter to the AFP. ‘‘It’s an abuse of the right of any citizen to complain to the police,’’ he told reporters in Canberra. Mr Dreyfus said any person had the right to lodge a complaint: ‘‘What they don’t do is have the right to release it to the media and make a stunt out of it.’’ ‘‘There’s no material advantage in either of those things,’’ he said before insisting that the money was not much of a consideration for him. ‘‘The money, all those options, haven’t been much of a consideration, which is why I went through with what happened with Sam Dastyari,  they are not the motivations for me in terms of this.’’ The only evidence Brandis has is an alleged statement from Craig Thomson....Thomson has denied any inducement was offered.....The Coalition are becoming adept at making baseless allegations......This is not a good look for George Brandis is it??? ::) ::) ::) Thomson made the statement and later retracted it. what does that tell you? HE IS LYING. Exactly.....Yet George I have NFI Brandis took his word for it.....Let that be a lesson for him.....Even if Thomson had stuck to his story do you think anyone accept George I have NFI Brandis would believe it.....The Coalition are making a habit of jumping the gun before they have all the facts.....Keep it up!!! [smiley=lolk.gif] [smiley=lolk.gif] [smiley=lolk.gif]

for goodness sake phil, he made an allegation of criminal activity and then said 'oopsies, I changed my mind (and story)". what do you expect was going to happen????

dont recall you coming in and saying all that when Mary Jo Fisher was on the line....funny that.

Actually I did.

My only comment about Mary Jo on her first charge was one of sympathy for her condition, she was obviously unwell.

I have yet to see you put a lefty in his place...n o matter how vile it is....

You don't look hard enough - I even defended you once.


its interesting as how you never have the proof more like greenwhine every day...

you dont mind if I dont \believe that though do you...

as fpor MJ no one knew about her condition until she went to court the first tiome so leave it alone..

your so good at giving yourself credit as well as supporting the unsupportable..


you defend me!!!!!.. that will be the day...

your getting more and more up yourself dna... you never used to be like that..

the misery of losing must be affecting you as well as all your chums on here..I have noticed a distinct downward tone with the leftside...oh well we kind of expect it..

or goodness sake phil, he made an allegation of criminal activity and then said 'oopsies, I changed my mind (and story)". what do you expect was going to happen????


longy when are you going to get it???

the left dont see a crime or corruption with offering a bribe or what could be seen as a bribe..

its all legal in their court of the ALP.. its what they do on  day to day business .

now of course they will kill the messenger in this case Brandis...how dare he think this need looking at dreadful man.. now if it was about UTE!!!!!!!! ::) ::)