Abbott/Liberal Govt Watch

[DOC]

Is it an "egging" if it does not break?

Nothing detracts from your cause like this stupidity. And FFS, at the CWA? An old lady then gets knocked over.

[cracka]

Hmmm. The tolerant left. And they claim the right are the bigots

[Armchair expert]

She could not of stuffed that up anymore if she tried.

[tipper]

Hmmm. The tolerant left. And they claim the right are the bigots

also claim that the right are the violent ones too...

[Mr Beefy]

She could not of stuffed that up anymore if she tried.

She was left with egg on her face. At least she had a crack.

[Q.]

AFR for one

That quotes Mr Chisolm in 2013

Comment confounded: April 29 2019: https://www.afr.com/news/politics/natio ... 429-p51i4e

And considering politicians propensity to sue for defamation, surely Shorten couldn’t give this a pass!

That article doesn't confirm anything

[DOC]

Certainly not behind the pay wall

[Q.]

Scomo just got egged
https://www.9news.com.au/national/scott ... ial-9NewsA

I said there would be a copycat situation if the Anning egger got a pass

I believe they are copycats of the Gillard egg thrower.

Or maybe that was a copycat of all the other ones. It's Eggception.

[DOC]

All eggsellent points.

I am genuinely surprised that the Mayo poll results show only about a 1% change since the bye election. Would have thought it would be closer.

[Jimmy_041]

AFR for one

That quotes Mr Chisolm in 2013

Comment confounded: April 29 2019: https://www.afr.com/news/politics/natio ... 429-p51i4e

And considering politicians propensity to sue for defamation, surely Shorten couldn’t give this a pass!

That article doesn't confirm anything

You do know the difference between 2013 and 2019 don’t you?
Like it’s 6 years difference???

[Q.]

[quote="Jimmy_041"]

AFR for one

That quotes Mr Chisolm in 2013

Comment confounded: April 29 2019: https://www.afr.com/news/politics/natio ... 429-p51i4e

And considering politicians propensity to sue for defamation, surely Shorten couldn’t give this a pass!

That article doesn't confirm anything

You do know the difference between 2013 and 2019 don’t you?
Like it’s 6 years difference???[/quote]Still no evidence there that Shorten has met with Palmer to discuss a preference deal.

[Jimmy_041]

You do know the difference between 2013 and 2019 don’t you?
Still no evidence there that Shorten has met with Palmer to discuss a preference deal.

Nice try but I never said they met. In fact, I said:

And sending someone else to do your dirty work so you have plausible deniability is just classic Shorten work.

YOU said: “That quotes Mr Chisolm in 2013” I proved you wrong so you now try to say this is about them meeting. Chisholm admits he has spoken to Palmer twice this year and in previous years.
Palmer also says he met Chisholm not Shorten.
Palmer says Chisholm approached him with a deal. But Palmer is a liar because he shafted some workers.
Bill is not a liar and we must trust his word even though he shafted some workers.
In fact, because Bill was in a position of trust, his dog act is far worse than Palmer’s.
Finally, Palmer calls Bill a two faced liar over preferences.
I doubt there is a politician on earth that wouldn’t sue a rich man for defamation. Then again, Bill is pure and a wonderful man so I’m probably wrong there.
Two people have several conversations. One says one thing and the other something else. One calls the other a liar. Let’s wait for the defamation case to see who can prove their version.

But Chisholm certainly admits he’s spoken to Palmer more than once this year which proves your statement that it only happened 6 years ago: wrong

[Q.]

Nice tin foil hat conspiracy theory jimmy. A good bit of fake news from you.

Shorten never met with palmer to discuss preferences. Chisholm didn't even discuss preferences.

[Q.]

And your only 'source' is a crooked Palmer who just signed a preference deal with the Coalition and would have everything to gain by smearing Labor.

You reek of desperation as we head into the final throes of festering pustule of a government led by another crook who uses bullying and bluster to mask a total lack of vision and substance.

[Jimmy_041]

And your only 'source' is a crooked Palmer who just signed a preference deal with the Coalition and would have everything to gain by smearing Labor.

You reek of desperation as we head into the final throes of festering pustule of a government led by another crook who uses bullying and bluster to mask a total lack of vision and substance.

actually the source is Chisholm who confirmed that he has spoken to Palmer twice this year which proved you wrong that they hadn't spoken since 2013.

<And your only 'source' is a crooked Shorten who just didn't sign a preference deal with Palmer and would have everything to gain by smearing the Coalition> edited for hypocrisy.

As for reek of desperation: I'm not the one getting caught making $hit up

[Q.]

We know you struggle with comprehension (see Franking Credits) but reference to 2013 is in regards to discussion of preferences.

[Jimmy_041]

We know you struggle with comprehension (see Franking Credits) but reference to 2013 is in regards to discussion of preferences.

Really! My information on franking credits comes from an Institute of Chartered Accountants seminar, fund managers and financial planners. I've posted articles from people who know more than me and certainly way more than you. But all those people are biased (and you talk about tin foil hat conspiracy theories! Yours comes from Labor Party trash and proven to be a complete lie.

My comprehension is fine. Maybe its just too fine for you hence why you make $hit up.

As for: "but reference to 2013 is in regards to discussion of preferences" You reckon I struggle with comprehension Chisholm said he's never discussed preferences with Palmer so that';s just fabricated BS again. Keep digging the hole!

Anyway, I have to get back to work

[Q.]

We know you struggle with comprehension (see Franking Credits) but reference to 2013 is in regards to discussion of preferences.

Really! My information on franking credits comes from an Institute of Chartered Accountants seminar, fund managers and financial planners. I've posted articles from people who know more than me and certainly way more than you. But all those people are biased (and you talk about tin foil hat conspiracy theories! Yours comes from Labor Party trash and proven to be a complete lie.

My comprehension is fine. Maybe its just too fine for you hence why you make $hit up.

As for: "but reference to 2013 is in regards to discussion of preferences" You reckon I struggle with comprehension Chisholm said he's never discussed preferences with Palmer so that';s just fabricated BS again. Keep digging the hole!

Anyway, I have to get back to work

Oh Jimmy. Feel free to point out where I used "Labor Party trash" - you and I know I quoted the Treasury estimates and tax discussion papers.

But do keep quoting Coorey from the now rabid AFR.

[Booney]

So, you two spending election night together on the couch watching the coverage?

[mighty_tiger_79]

I will be, all by myself cos they won't invite me.

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk