• 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

wombatwal said:
Well, what an end to the Parliamentary year.
The Opposition are baying for blood for the P.M. to resign. They are saying that she has commited an illegal act in 1992 and misled the WA Corporate Affairs Commission over legal advice in setting up the "Australian Workers' Union Workplace Reform Association".
A union cannot be incorporated in this way apparently.
But it seems her advice was right and it was not a Trade Union but something set up by officials of a Trade Union.
There is no evidence what so ever of Gillard acting in a criminal way. She gave legal advice for a client as she should do.
Gillard wiped the floor on Abbott and Bishop on the Parlimentary floor, they now look like desperate muck rackers.
What a poor performer Abbott is when the whips are cracking.
I don't know if Gillard has acted illegally in some way. Maybe her judgement in 1992 was not the best for giving advice for her boyfriend and not opening a file, but not a hanging offence. There is no evidence of this.
Her haters are baying for blood as they have since August 2010, what a mammoth dummy spit it has been.
Will Abbott and Bishop last as leader and deputy leader?
Click to expand...

The attack at all costs strategy is not just Abbott's, it is also Peta Credlin's. She was also the opposition leaders chief of staff when the Godwin Gretch debacle happened. If you have ever been in parliament during question time, the Liberal party acts shamefully. There is a constant chatter during question time, stupid playing with props being handed around, all designed to make the Labor Government look poor. It makes parliament look poor, including the opposition. It's a lose/lose situation, and the Liberal's are going to have to wake up to the self harm they are causing.

As for the reason for the unrelenting attacks, Abbott seriously thought he could bring a woman down if he just bullied her enough, that he would be in the Lodge hosting the end of year party for the press the year after the election. The rumours of Gillards imminent departure have never stopped. Abbott's problem, though, is that Gillard is a lot tougher than he assumed she was, just because she was a woman. Gillard is far from faultless, or innocent, I think Labor could do better. But she isn't going to go just because an idiot thinks he can bully her out of the job.
 
a_unique_person said:
The attack at all costs strategy is not just Abbott's, it is also Peta Credlin's. She was also the opposition leaders chief of staff when the Godwin Gretch debacle happened. If you have ever been in parliament during question time, the Liberal party acts shamefully. There is a constant chatter during question time, stupid playing with props being handed around, all designed to make the Labor Government look poor. It makes parliament look poor, including the opposition. It's a lose/lose situation, and the Liberal's are going to have to wake up to the self harm they are causing.

As for the reason for the unrelenting attacks, Abbott seriously thought he could bring a woman down if he just bullied her enough, that he would be in the Lodge hosting the end of year party for the press the year after the election. The rumours of Gillards imminent departure have never stopped. Abbott's problem, though, is that Gillard is a lot tougher than he assumed she was, just because she was a woman. Gillard is far from faultless, or innocent, I think Labor could do better. But she isn't going to go just because an idiot thinks he can bully her out of the job.
Click to expand...

A fantastic post. An excellent summary. This clutching at straws stuff is finally hurting the opposition. As well it should.

Abbott will be gone next year and whoever steps in will have one hell of a mess to clean up.
 
Galaxy today 46:54

But to the OP that Gillard lies, it seems that the public agrees:

31% says she has been dishonest over the AWU scandal.
31% say she has been economical with the truth.

In other words, 62% say she is a bare faced liar or a liar through omission.

"Just one in five voters believe PM has been completely honest"

As if we needed confirmation. ;)

Worst PM ever.
 
Last edited:
Am I seeing things or was that logic that just flew out the JREF window?
 
lionking said:
It did at post one of this thread.
Click to expand...

Yet some 79% of the population believe the OP to be true (certainly with regard to the AWU scandal at any rate - however her honesty has always been a problem for her).

Sadly, it is the logic of Gillard's leftard apologists and sycophants that is failing here, no one elses.
 
"Your Honour, it is the prosecution's contention that the Prime Minister is a big fat liar."

"And what is your evidence?"

"Well we have poll that shows that people think she's a big fat liar."

"......????"
 
Krikkiter said:
"Your Honour, it is the prosecution's contention that the Prime Minister is a big fat liar."

"And what is your evidence?"

"Well we have poll that shows that people think she's a big fat liar."

"......????"
Click to expand...

And everytime Kath responds to questions to the depth of her involvement and knowledge to the scam with "Mr Abbott is a big meanie because he can't prove it" instead of a denial or assertion of innocence, her support base shrinks a bit as people wonder "Why doesn't she just say she didn't do it or didn't know?"

It's always the coverup, not the crime, that get you in the end.
 
Noztradamus said:
And everytime Kath responds to questions to the depth of her involvement and knowledge to the scam with "Mr Abbott is a big meanie because he can't prove it" instead of a denial or assertion of innocence, her support base shrinks a bit as people wonder "Why doesn't she just say she didn't do it or didn't know?"

It's always the coverup, not the crime, that get you in the end.
Click to expand...

Is this a serious post? Gillard has asserted her innocence for the past 17 years, and there is still no evidence of wrong doing. Gillard haters are a thing to behold.
 
I think her reasoning is that she's already denied wrongdoing the last three (or is it four?) times already and doesn't see a need to reiterate it again.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom