• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Julia Gillard - liar

uvar said:
It would be more accurate to say that it was set up solely to ensure Pauline Hanson went to and remained in jail. It wasn't meant to be a direct analog to the current situation, more just an amusing fact that about a decade ago Abbott himself was in trouble because of a secret slush fund (which really is about all the two events have in common).


Presumably you are referring to the information in Ian Cambridge's NI96 affadavit? (A pdf of which I found from the details you mentioned, and yes, I'm aware this is the case that Robert McClelland mentioned by name.) It is interesting reading, in the most honest sense of the phrase. Particularly relevant are sections 18.1/18.2 which are too lengthy to quote when I can't copy-and-paste but discuss a cheque of $67,722.30 to Slater & Gordon (as part of the cost for the house that Wilson purchased on behalf of Blewitt), as well as 18.15 (discussing Account F). There's not much about Account I - how did you learn that "Bill the Greek" refers to Vassilis Telikostoglou, or was it just because it was the most likely name of those listed? It's unfortunate that the documents referred to throughout aren't included.

I've stated before that I wouldn't be surprised if Wilson was guilty of theft/whatever the offence would technically be - especially after I learned the police investigation failed mostly because Thiess Contractors refused to take part and not because of lack of evidence - and the affadavit provides a lot of evidence for this, and suggests the number of people 'in the know' is larger than I expected. On the other hand, although I haven't read every part of it closely I don't think it includes any evidence that Gillard knew the apparent 'true' purposes of the account(s) she was involved with or evidence toward her more general involvement in the matter (in fact I don't think it mentions her at all, but it is only one man's affadavit and he doesn't seem to have investigated the account creations at the time).

An aside: Given the large number of accounts mentioned - as well as the supplementary list of further accounts he considered worth investigating just from the Commonwealth Bank - and that even Pickering has only accused Gillard of one or two, I wonder what the process was for the rest (i.e. whether there were many persons/entities like Gillard responsible for a few each, a single entity helped create most, or only a few required people like her at all).


Yes, but only the ones that exist, since I'm not willing to draw more just to get the picture I want. The affadavit adds dots to one picture - I suppose it would be more accurate to say that it shows dots that have always existed but were previously obscured, but that's taking the metaphor too far - but I don't know that it makes the case against Gillard any stronger (or, admittedly, weaker).
Click to expand...

I don't think there will ever be an actionable case against Gillard - unless someone talks and since the only people who could talk are probably implicated in some way, thats not likely.

The identity of Bill the Greek is given in the 1995 transcript
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/features/what-julia-told-her-firm/story-e6frg6z6-1226455281078

According to the Cambridge affidavit the money paid by Thiess was originally from the West Australian State government for the purposes of training - so the reason they may not have cooperated was
a. they had suffered no financial loss
b. they may have shared culpability.

I take your point about the cheque from the AWRA account being deposited in the Slater and Gordon trust account for the purchase of property. The lawyer is responsible is not named, but if it was Gillard who handled that transaction it blows her defense out of the water.

How can she on the one hand advise on setting up the AWRA for the purposes of union officials campaigning for reelection on the platform of workplace safety and then process large cheques from the same association for settling property transactions?
 
Her Grey Eminence said:
The identity of Bill the Greek is given in the 1995 transcript
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/features/what-julia-told-her-firm/story-e6frg6z6-1226455281078

According to the Cambridge affidavit the money paid by Thiess was originally from the West Australian State government for the purposes of training - so the reason they may not have cooperated was
a. they had suffered no financial loss
b. they may have shared culpability.

I take your point about the cheque from the AWRA account being deposited in the Slater and Gordon trust account for the purchase of property. The lawyer is responsible is not named, but if it was Gillard who handled that transaction it blows her defense out of the water.

How can she on the one hand advise on setting up the AWRA for the purposes of union officials campaigning for reelection on the platform of workplace safety and then process large cheques from the same association for settling property transactions?
Click to expand...
Ah, of course. I'm embarrassed to have brought Bill's name up now. And while I wouldn't claim that all the companies who paid into or recieved money from it were part of the scheme, one of the first things in (Pickering's version of) the story was that the WA manager of Thiess was Bruce Wilson's brother-in-law so I'd bet of the two options you suggested the latter seems far more likely.

I mentioned the purpose of the cheque just to avoid any unnecessary assumptions; it might still have been illegal and laundering but I didn't want to give the impression it was going straight to Gillard's bank account. Still, I don't disagree - she talks about the purchase of the house in the interview transcript, and was certainly involved at some level, but if it was that simple and obvious even to us I'd have expected to hear more about it from actual journalists.

With all the new, actual, information out I think I've re-evaluated my position a little. It seems like there was a pretty big case of corruption. I still don't think Gillard was part of it (whether she was fooled, or willing to overlook clues because of the relationship, or whatever), though it seems like there was some level of poor judgement on her part. (And I agree that even if she was nobody would be willing to sacrifice themselves to reveal it, though wasn't Styant-Browne talking about spilling the beans for immunity?) On the other hand, which isn't a new thought but I suppose should be mentioned since it's been part of my reasoning... as long as she's not covering up a crime does it really matter? In the seventeen years since, and particularly the past two, Gillard's performance has been pretty decent. No huge scandals (personal ones anyway), a working minority government, a few long-term projects, Australia is doing pretty well... we don't need to make guesses about her character from an old mysterious event when we have several years of up-to-date examples.

Also a somewhat terse apology to you, HGE, since on re-reading some posts recently I realised I had added a few assumptions into most of your posts which painted you in a unnecessarily negative light. I still can't say I agree with a lot of them, but it will probably help in future if I actually respond to what you're saying and not what I assume you meant.
 
Last edited:
Speaking of boats. It's interesting how originally Gillard screamed for so long and so loudly about how offshore processing would not work (lie), that it was inhumane (compared to what one asks), then it would work but Nauru would not and could not work in any way (lie), that Nauru was massively expensive and she quoted figures some three or four times larger than what her committee said (another lie). Not to mention her claim around East Timor discussions (possibly the most blatant and pre meditated lie she has uttered).

And what about after she dismantled the PS - when a boat was lost - she claimed that Liberal party MPs were making things up when she was questioned about it (lie).

She really has to be the biggest liar we have ever seen at the head of government. Unfit to hold the position. The sooner she is gone the better off this country will be.

History will judge her poorly.
 
With Gillard's approval rate in the newest Neilsen data up two points (if only to 39), and preferred PM rate up 3 to 46 (1 point above Abbott, who's down 3 to 45!) this looks to have been a non-issue for the average voter. (ALP is also up.) Too early to call it a trend?

ETA: On the other hand, this data is probably from before the most recent developments and I can't make any claims about it... yet.
 
Last edited:
Indeed, it looks a lot like she is moving from absolute annihilation to utter annihilation.

Yet in the NT, Labor has been handed its backside. The Labor leader did not even want Gillard to visit there ahead of the election so toxic is she. Says it all really.
 
Sounds like it'll be covered (or at least The Australian's participation) on Media Watch tonight. No prizes for guessing what Jonathan Holmes' position will be, I'd expect.
 
A.A. Alfie said:
Indeed, it looks a lot like she is moving from absolute annihilation to utter annihilation.

Yet in the NT, Labor has been handed its backside. The Labor leader did not even want Gillard to visit there ahead of the election so toxic is she. Says it all really.
Click to expand...

Don't know much about the NT do you? To think that any national issue at all would exercise the minds of Territorians is pure fantasy.
 
uvar said:
Sounds like it'll be covered (or at least The Australian's participation) on Media Watch tonight. No prizes for guessing what Jonathan Holmes' position will be, I'd expect.
Click to expand...

He will be firmly pro-embezzlement.

I agree with your previous comment that it is unlikely she would have handled the cheque (even Andrew Bolt concedes it is improbable), nonetheless I am pretty sure that she was well aware what was going on. She had been in a relationship with him for 4 years and attended the auction, not to mention having AWU officials organising her renovations.

Kon the Builder states firmly in his recent media interview that he didn't do the aluminium windows but confirms that he received the two cheques from Gillard in september as per her interview for fencing work. I would say that Account I originally paid Kon the Builder and another unknown contractor for the windows.

It may be that Account F or another account perhaps Accounts A, B or G paid for the work in September 1994. It would be interesting to know what "Town Mode" of October 1994 actually refers to. Everyone googles it and thinks it is a fashion shop. But two amounts of $8500 two weeks apart seems an odd sum to spend in an obscure clothing store. Perhaps it was the name of a building contractor?

It is interesting how everyone touched by this seems to do rather well out of it.
Bernard Murphy, Gillard's supervisor, appointed to the Federal Court.
Ian Cambridge - appointed to Fair Work Australia
David Feeney, who was in some fashion involved in discovery of the Kon the Builder's account at the AWU, Parliamentary secretary, angling for a safe Victorian seat and simultaneously protecting his friend Kathy Jackson.

It makes me more convinced that Craig Thomson is, relatively at least, innocent and carrying the rorts of others.

If he was guilty everyone would be rallying around covering things up.

I expect The Australian will back off now, even though the transcript has come so very close to blowing Gillard's involvement open. And I don't think the Coalition will touch it either.
 
Last edited:
Derrin Hinch sacked by 3AW (Fairfax) today.
Tell me it had nothing to do with his Pickering interview last week. :(
 
lionking said:
Good riddance to the toxic jerk. I don't really care why he was sacked. An idiot.
Click to expand...


icon14.gif
3,374,825 people like this.
 
I can't say I liked him much either. Clearly some have trouble playing join the dots. The penny might drop at some stage. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom