Australian Politics Forum - Why would anyone support Thommo?

Aussie Gold Member Offline OzPolitic Posts: 38876 Gender:	Re: Why would anyone support Thommo? Reply #60 - Jul 27^th, 2013 at 4:17pm Quote: I am criticising the idiotic claims in a prior post. The only idiotic claims in prior posts are (a) Thomson is pleading guilty, (b) 'he's more or less admitted that he did do it,' (c) and that Thomson is not contesting the charges. Do you agree those are false claims?
Back to top	IP Logged

Lobo

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 7407
Sydney
Gender: male

Re: Why would anyone support Thommo?
Reply #61 - Jul 27^th, 2013 at 4:22pm

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 27^th, 2013 at 4:12pm:

Lobo wrote on Jul 27^th, 2013 at 4:00pm:

Innocent until PROVEN guilty!!!

As opposed to....

Guilty 'because I say he is'; for political purposes...

when I hear you say that about a Liberal charged with a serious crime, I will believe you. For now, you are merely trotting out a principle that supports your bias and therefor is not a principle at all.

Whatever floats your boat.

I believe, contrary to what you would try to push as to my principles, that justice should be allowed to run its course WITHOUT any outside interference.

As for YOU believing ME???

Do you really think I give a rat's ar$e??

Cheesy

Back to top

"What's in store for me in the direction I don't take?"-Jack Kerouac.

IP Logged

Dnarever

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 59448
Here
Gender: male

Re: Why would anyone support Thommo?
Reply #62 - Jul 27^th, 2013 at 5:21pm

Lobo wrote on Jul 27^th, 2013 at 3:09pm:

matty wrote on Jul 27^th, 2013 at 12:00am:

Lobo wrote on Jul 26^th, 2013 at 5:12pm:

matty wrote on Jul 26^th, 2013 at 1:56pm:

Dnarever wrote on Jul 26^th, 2013 at 12:55pm:

Why would anyone support Thommo?

Maybe they think he is innocent ??

I could equally ask how anyone could support Abbott I don't understand that either.

1. He's more or less admitted that he did do it.
2. What has Abbott done on the same level?

He has??

'More or less', eh???

Do tell......

He's pleading guilty to the charges.

He is??

"Embattled federal MP Craig Thomson has signalled for the first time he may be willing to make concessions over his alleged use of a union credit card to pay for porn and prostitutes, and his legal team has successfully argued for the case to be heard in a lower court."

In his own words "I am not making any admissions"

The Judge's words: Mr Rozencwajg said he did not regard the case as a complex one, with or without a concession that Mr Thomson had used the credit cards as alleged.

Quote:

"Despite some media reports, I am not making any admissions. But there is a threshold issue of who had authority to use the credit card, which must be heard first.

"This is an efficient use of court time and because of my limited personal resources, also an appropriate approach.

"If the Crown cannot prove its case on this issue, all other charges become null and void."

Mr Rozencwajg's decision to hear the case will mean a swifter conclusion and a lesser penalty if Mr Thomson is found guilty.

Mr Rozencwajg said he did not regard the case as a complex one, with or without a concession that Mr Thomson had used the credit cards as alleged.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/in-depth/thomson-may-not-disput...

Back to top

IP Logged

Dnarever

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 59448
Here
Gender: male

Re: Why would anyone support Thommo?
Reply #63 - Jul 27^th, 2013 at 5:24pm

Aussie wrote on Jul 27^th, 2013 at 4:17pm:

Quote:

I am criticising the idiotic claims in a prior post.

The only idiotic claims in prior posts are (a) Thomson is pleading guilty, (b) 'he's more or less admitted that he did do it,' (c) and that Thomson is not contesting the charges.

Do you agree those are false claims?

Yes I do they are a obviously dishonest representation of the facts.

Back to top

IP Logged

Aussie

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 38876
Gender: male

Re: Why would anyone support Thommo?
Reply #64 - Jul 27^th, 2013 at 5:31pm

Dnarever wrote on Jul 27^th, 2013 at 5:24pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 27^th, 2013 at 4:17pm:

Quote:

I am criticising the idiotic claims in a prior post.

The only idiotic claims in prior posts are (a) Thomson is pleading guilty, (b) 'he's more or less admitted that he did do it,' (c) and that Thomson is not contesting the charges.

Do you agree those are false claims?

Yes I do they are a obviously dishonest representation of the facts.

I'm waiting for melielongtime to answer. That'll be enlightening.

Back to top

IP Logged

cods

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 88048

Re: Why would anyone support Thommo?
Reply #65 - Jul 27^th, 2013 at 5:55pm

Aussie wrote on Jul 27^th, 2013 at 5:31pm:

Dnarever wrote on Jul 27^th, 2013 at 5:24pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 27^th, 2013 at 4:17pm:

Quote:

I am criticising the idiotic claims in a prior post.

The only idiotic claims in prior posts are (a) Thomson is pleading guilty, (b) 'he's more or less admitted that he did do it,' (c) and that Thomson is not contesting the charges.

Do you agree those are false claims?

Yes I do they are a obviously dishonest representation of the facts.

I'm waiting for melielongtime to answer. That'll be enlightening.

Thomson unlikely to dispute facts of case
Date
July 19, 2013
Read later
Joel Cresswell
submit to redditEmail articlePrint

Ads by Google

Federal independent MP Craig Thomson is unlikely to dispute many of the facts of the fraud case against him, a court has heard.

Thomson is accused of misusing credit cards on items including X-rated movies and female escorts, while he was national secretary of the Health Services Union (HSU) and a Labor MP.

His lawyer Greg James QC said there was likely to be "very little" debate of the factual matters of the case.

"There's not much by way of factual dispute at the moment," he told the Melbourne Magistrates Court on Friday.

Advertisement
But Mr James said questions would be raised over his authority to use the cards.

Thomson said he was not admitting to the charges.

"I am not making any admissions. But there is a threshold issue of who had authority to use the credit card, which must be heard first," he said in a statement after the court hearing.

"If the Crown cannot prove its case on this issue, all other charges become null and void."

Back to top

IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: Why would anyone support Thommo?
Reply #66 - Jul 27^th, 2013 at 6:16pm

Aussie wrote on Jul 27^th, 2013 at 4:17pm:

Quote:

I am criticising the idiotic claims in a prior post.

The only idiotic claims in prior posts are (a) Thomson is pleading guilty, (b) 'he's more or less admitted that he did do it,' (c) and that Thomson is not contesting the charges.

Do you agree those are false claims?

I read them in an article. Their truth or not is not something any of us can really know until he actually makes his pleas. But the substance of the article was that he was going to stipulate to the facts and the charges but say that he was legally entitled to do what he did. Im not sure what is more reprehensible: that he stole the money or that it might possible be legal for him to do so under union rules.

either way, stipulating to the facts does essentially mean that he admits what he is charged with is true.

Back to top

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: Why would anyone support Thommo?
Reply #67 - Jul 27^th, 2013 at 6:18pm

Lobo wrote on Jul 27^th, 2013 at 4:22pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 27^th, 2013 at 4:12pm:

Lobo wrote on Jul 27^th, 2013 at 4:00pm:

Innocent until PROVEN guilty!!!

As opposed to....

Guilty 'because I say he is'; for political purposes...

when I hear you say that about a Liberal charged with a serious crime, I will believe you. For now, you are merely trotting out a principle that supports your bias and therefor is not a principle at all.

Whatever floats your boat.

I believe, contrary to what you would try to push as to my principles, that justice should be allowed to run its course WITHOUT any outside interference.

As for YOU believing ME???

Do you really think I give a rat's ar$e??

Cheesy

I would not be using the Thomson case to make you point on that. The years and investigations that took place without criminal or civil actions do not make justice look good.

Back to top

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged

Aussie Gold Member Offline OzPolitic Posts: 38876 Gender:	Re: Why would anyone support Thommo? Reply #68 - Jul 27^th, 2013 at 6:20pm We do know his plea to the charges. 'Not Guilty.' Quote: The only idiotic claims in prior posts are (a) Thomson is pleading guilty, (b) 'he's more or less admitted that he did do it,' (c) and that Thomson is not contesting the charges. Do you agree those are false claims? Simple question ~~ answer it.
Back to top	IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: Why would anyone support Thommo?
Reply #69 - Jul 27^th, 2013 at 6:20pm

cods wrote on Jul 27^th, 2013 at 5:55pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 27^th, 2013 at 5:31pm:

Dnarever wrote on Jul 27^th, 2013 at 5:24pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 27^th, 2013 at 4:17pm:

Quote:

I am criticising the idiotic claims in a prior post.

The only idiotic claims in prior posts are (a) Thomson is pleading guilty, (b) 'he's more or less admitted that he did do it,' (c) and that Thomson is not contesting the charges.

Do you agree those are false claims?

Yes I do they are a obviously dishonest representation of the facts.

I'm waiting for melielongtime to answer. That'll be enlightening.

Thomson unlikely to dispute facts of case
Date
July 19, 2013
Read later
Joel Cresswell
submit to redditEmail articlePrint

Ads by Google

Federal independent MP Craig Thomson is unlikely to dispute many of the facts of the fraud case against him, a court has heard.

Thomson is accused of misusing credit cards on items including X-rated movies and female escorts, while he was national secretary of the Health Services Union (HSU) and a Labor MP.

His lawyer Greg James QC said there was likely to be "very little" debate of the factual matters of the case.

"There's not much by way of factual dispute at the moment," he told the Melbourne Magistrates Court on Friday.

Advertisement
But Mr James said questions would be raised over his authority to use the cards.

Thomson said he was not admitting to the charges.

"I am not making any admissions. But there is a threshold issue of who had authority to use the credit card, which must be heard first," he said in a statement after the court hearing.

"If the Crown cannot prove its case on this issue, all other charges become null and void."

interesting highlighted bit. Even his lawyer said that the facts are not really in dispute. So the claims about the hookers are... TRUE. after all the years of denying them.

Back to top

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged

Aussie

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 38876
Gender: male

Re: Why would anyone support Thommo?
Reply #70 - Jul 27^th, 2013 at 6:25pm

Quote:

interesting highlighted bit. Even his lawyer said that the facts are not really in dispute. So the claims about the hookers are... TRUE. after all the years of denying them.

None of us know what facts the QC was referring to. You have stupidly leapt to the conclusion that every thing adverse to Thomson which you've read in an 'article' has been agreed to, when in fact, you have no idea what has been (to use your TV Americanism) 'stipulated.'

Back to top

IP Logged

cods

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 88048

Re: Why would anyone support Thommo?
Reply #71 - Jul 27^th, 2013 at 6:34pm

Aussie wrote on Jul 27^th, 2013 at 6:25pm:

Quote:

interesting highlighted bit. Even his lawyer said that the facts are not really in dispute. So the claims about the hookers are... TRUE. after all the years of denying them.

None of us know what facts the QC was referring to. You have stupidly leapt to the conclusion that every thing adverse to Thomson which you've read in an 'article' has been agreed to, when in fact, you have no idea what has been (to use your TV Americanism) 'stipulated.'

but you do of course.. Roll Eyes

THOMO says he is still going to run as an independent he is still convinced he has done nothing wrong... hasnt he spent quite a bit of time trying to blame others????..yeah I think he even did that in Parliament.

now they are not even going near some of the charges..so if he had a $5 coffee he will admit that.... on top of that he is begging for money.... can anyone do that?? or only pollies?

I am a bit over this guy he should do the decent thing and plead guilty.. and stop this act.. I get the feeling he thinks he is entitled to preferential treatment.

if he doesnt go to court before the election can he still run as a candidate?

Back to top

IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: Why would anyone support Thommo?
Reply #72 - Jul 27^th, 2013 at 6:47pm

Aussie wrote on Jul 27^th, 2013 at 6:25pm:

Quote:

interesting highlighted bit. Even his lawyer said that the facts are not really in dispute. So the claims about the hookers are... TRUE. after all the years of denying them.

None of us know what facts the QC was referring to. You have stupidly leapt to the conclusion that every thing adverse to Thomson which you've read in an 'article' has been agreed to, when in fact, you have no idea what has been (to use your TV Americanism) 'stipulated.'

nor do you. lawyer or not, you have no more knowledge of the facts than I do. All any of us have is these reports from which it is more than fair to conclude that Thomson does not plan in denying many if any of the facts but rather constructing a defence against them. And I don't care if 'stipulate' is a legal term here or not. In this non-legal forum it still means precisely what he is saying (or reported as saying).

Back to top

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged

Alinta

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 1470
Melbourne
Gender: female

Re: Why would anyone support Thommo?
Reply #73 - Jul 27^th, 2013 at 6:47pm

Aussie wrote on Jul 27^th, 2013 at 6:25pm:

Quote:

interesting highlighted bit. Even his lawyer said that the facts are not really in dispute. So the claims about the hookers are... TRUE. after all the years of denying them.

None of us know what facts the QC was referring to. You have stupidly leapt to the conclusion that every thing adverse to Thomson which you've read in an 'article' has been agreed to, when in fact, you have no idea what has been (to use your TV Americanism) 'stipulated.'

Exactly........though I'd be inclined to think the reference would be the fact of the credit card expenditure subject of the allegations per se would not be in dispute.

Back to top

IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: Why would anyone support Thommo?
Reply #74 - Jul 27^th, 2013 at 6:49pm

cods wrote on Jul 27^th, 2013 at 6:34pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 27^th, 2013 at 6:25pm:

Quote:

interesting highlighted bit. Even his lawyer said that the facts are not really in dispute. So the claims about the hookers are... TRUE. after all the years of denying them.

None of us know what facts the QC was referring to. You have stupidly leapt to the conclusion that every thing adverse to Thomson which you've read in an 'article' has been agreed to, when in fact, you have no idea what has been (to use your TV Americanism) 'stipulated.'

but you do of course.. Roll Eyes

THOMO says he is still going to run as an independent he is still convinced he has done nothing wrong... hasnt he spent quite a bit of time trying to blame others????..yeah I think he even did that in Parliament.

now they are not even going near some of the charges..so if he had a $5 coffee he will admit that.... on top of that he is begging for money.... can anyone do that?? or only pollies?

I am a bit over this guy he should do the decent thing and plead guilty.. and stop this act.. I get the feeling he thinks he is entitled to preferential treatment.

if he doesnt go to court before the election can he still run as a candidate?

Im unsure about the constitutional argument re criminal convictions. I do know that if you are convicted while in office you are kicked out. but I am not sure if a person can be and MP with a criminal record from the past.

Does anyone know this for sure other than opinion?

Back to top

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged