At last someone has picked up on the important issues arising from the affair. Thank you, Jo.

Three other issues are worthy of comment: The conduct of David Martine who pointedly refused to let Mr Grech answer a direct question that only Mr Grech could have had knowledge of, and instead provided an answer to a question that wasn't asked, was amazing.

The clear inference (to me) was that Mr Martine was well aware of the existence of the email. Is this not misleading the committee by omission? The stonewalling by Mr Martine was clearly pre-arranged.

Secondly, the conduct of the Committee Chair needs explanation. If she did genuinely did not appreciate that the two questions were quite different, she should not be the Chair. My interpretation is that she well realised that they were different questions, but like Mr Matrine, did not want the answer from Mr Grech.

On the night when I watched the proceedings, I was left with the distinct impression that there had been a fair bit of conniving going on in the background, and nothing I seen since has caused me to change my mind.

Thirdly, if Mr Grech was suspected of being a coalition "mole" (as has been claimed) then was he set up in a stunt that got out of hand?

Finally, if Mr Grech was not the author, a serious criminal offence may have been perpetrated.

Is it just me, or does anyone else consider somewhat distasteful the earmarking of taxpayer dollars in the cause of keeping car dealers afloat?

It is such a pernicious piece of favouritism, in the context of what all small businesses (declaration of interest: that includes me) are going through at the moment.

Unfortunately there is nothing in my corner of industry that could possibly advantage a politician seeking re-election.

Which clearly explains the conspicuous absence of a queue of pollies outside my door, offering me money.

Because of this rather jaundiced view, I am extremely cynical about the whole exercise, and came to the conclusion very early on that it was simply a piece of Parliamentary theatre, engineered by K-Rudd, to distract attention from the utter iniquity of "Car Dealership Financing Guarantee Appropriation Bill 2009".

Bah. Humbug. And a pox on all their houses.

I'm more interested in the contrived performance of Senator Abetz, who feigned ignorance depite his apparent background knowledge of the alleged email.

This isn't the first time fake documents have been used.

Three days out from the initial Howard election in 1996, there was that fake memo from Kennett to Howard that suckered Ralph Willis. A serious matter yet there was never any post-election investigation of its origin.

Then we had the fake ComCar logbook, with Heffernan trying to implicate a Judge. No investigation or charges laid.

The worst one I can recall is a letter bomb sent to Joh Bjelke-Petersen's office - believed to have been a pre-election sympathy stunt that went wrong and caused serious injury to an office worker.
Again, no investigation after the event.

This time may be different.

Pericles and WD, you seem to be smelling the same rat as I am.

What amazes me is how adept Mr Rudd is in sending the Press in the wrong direction. Suddenly, Turnbull is under fire simply for demanding Rudd's head, which, given the evidence of Mr Grech was a reasonable,if premature call. Meanwhile, Swan, who admits to purchasing cars from Mr Grant himself in the past and has been proven to have made personal calls to him, gets out of gaol free and untarnished!.

Apparently its OK for Rudd to demand Turnbull goes and make extremely personal and vindictive attacks against him but its a crime to suggest Rudd has something to answer for. Its all about the Australian community's belief about the Left being ultimately good while the Conservatives are essentially evil. The Press, most of whom lack of objectivity and are essentially Labor sympathisers are easily distracted from the truth.

The problem is, Atman, that we tend to indulge in wishful thinking when it comes to politicians.

Blair did the same thing to the UK, waving his youthful charisma at the electorate like some heartthrob matador, but ultimately proving himself to be just another expedient, deceitful, self-serving amoral politician.

Chavez pulled the same trick in Venezuela, one day a forthright "man of the people", the next - what a surprise - an expedient, deceitful, self-serving amoral politician.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123482581445795001.html

We tend to see what we want to see, and as a result become ripe material to swallow any spin that is on offer.

K-Rudd will be found out at some point. At which time we will attach ourselves to some other image, like a bunch of besotted schoolgirls to their pop-idol-of-the-day.

Of course, if this country possessed any half-intelligent investigative reporters, and newspaper editors with a modicum of spine (huh!), we'd actually have half a chance to objectively assess the entire farce for ourselves.

Fat chance.

Pericles.

If you were "half-intelligent" enough to be able to "objectively assess" circumstances and actions, you wouldn't find it necessary to descend into pathetic invective like referring to Rudd as "K-Rudd".

Rudd combines intelligence, political savvy and underlying positive values. An unusual combination.

Is it the positive values that so turn you off?

We are talking about the same person, aren't we Glorfindel?

>>If you were "half-intelligent" enough to be able to "objectively assess" circumstances and actions, you wouldn't find it necessary to descend into pathetic invective like referring to Rudd as "K-Rudd".<<

The one who went to the electorate as "Kevin'07"?

T-shirt politics. Doncha love it.

After watching the approach of the Chair and the behaviour of Grech's Superiour I think "KRudd" will do nicely.
Grech was Crucified and Gulagged that day , poor begger , he is now finished as a PS his determination to tell his story the truth as he saw it . How could anyone figure out that the Email was a fake everyone knows not to trust anything on a Computer .

What's positive about making promises you don't keep.

There's a whole list starting with proscuting Japan for it's whale slaughter.

Clearly there have been levels of information sharing, even collusion, between various parties, but Jo's comments are no less speculatory than any of the other commentators. Maybe Grech is not technogically bright and just never thought a deleted email could be traced to him. Maybe he is a quiet subversive and thought he'd found a behind the scenes way to help the opposition out. Maybe he's a victim of an opposition that are hell bent on finding any way to bring the government down rather than constructive democracy. Maybe we should just wait for the facts to come out.