Alan says:

"We shall see if this has further to go. I doubt it."

In the meantime I guess all we can do is continue talking to internet nutjobs who support the PM and her past and present no matter what.

Speaking of which Alan says:

"Just nonsense. Have you ever incorporated an association or a business, Anthony? And then opened a bank account in the organisation's name? They are not the same entity, are they?"

Alan cannot get his head around the fact that while the slush fund set up by the PM is distinct from any bank accounts subsequently set up to process the loot Wilson and Blewitt obtained, it was not the bank accounts which the PM was talking about; she was talking about the association.

Only internet nutjobs would pretend otherwise

Alan in a nutshell, let's sumarise your positions

1.

'“it is clear that registering the name of the company that is misleading with regards its purpose is an offence.”

But there is no evidence of misleading, is there?'

'Actual words: (On the AWU WRA application in Gillard's hand writing) “Development of changes to work to achieve safe workplaces”.'

'... there is no evidence of any flaw in the (AWU WRA) documentation, is there? The evidence strongly supports the accuracy of the application form.'

Yet you maintain

'The(AWU WR) association was formed to get officers elected to the union on a workplace safety platform.'

Both statements are completely different? One is misleading.

Which one is misleading Alan?

2.

'None of the funds later opened by Blewitt and Wilson had anything whatsoever to do with the lawyer who helped set up the (AWU)WRA initially'

do you realise the pure logic in this argument about bank accounts and the AWU WR association implies this AWU WR association was set up without an intent to open a bank account?

Do you really believe Gillard thinks the AWU WR association had no intention of setting up a bank account?


3.

'Ms Gillard was not referring to the association as a slush fund. She was referring to one of the bank accounts later used by the association for allegedly dodgy deeds.'

'...it seems you are still confused as to what Gillard referred to with that term.(Slush Fund) It was the bank account(s). It was NOT the association Gillard helped incorporate.

Yet you agree

'Re “She still denies any knowledge of the workings of the association.”

Correct ...'

Alan given that the accounts would constitue the workings of the AWU WRA how did Gillard both know and not know about the workings of the AWU WR association?

And you dare call others nutjobs...

Alan, like your work mate.

"Alan, like your work mate."

Yes Alan is one of the best fantasy commentators on the internet; an internet fantasist as it were.

Don't forget the nut-jobs that try and prove Juliar's innocence by redefining the English definition of fund.

In spite of all the protestations it looks as though trust in Juliar and labor has plummeted again.

I think that coming up to the elections we will see lots more of Thomson, Obeid, Williamson, Juliar, and other ALP crooks.