QUOTE
"I have been advised that neither I nor my office have ever spoken with Mr Grant in relation to OzCar. Neither myself nor my office have ever made any representations on his behalf. I have not been aware of any representations on his behalf. I have not been aware of any representations made by anyone in Government."
END QUOTE
.
I would in particular consider the wording; “I have been advised”, I have not been aware”.
Using such kind of wording never can be deemed to be misleading the Parliament where a person relied on upon advice or isn’t aware.
.
Hence the entire ute-gate issue was an obvious nonsense unless it could have been demonstrated that Kevin Rudd actually himself say wrote the email, and that was really never alleged.
.
While a Minister can be ill advised at times by staff it cannot hold then the Minister culpable of misleading the Parliament if the Minister relies upon the advise, as he is entitled to do, and so briefs the Parliament.
.
It also must be understood that the constitution dictates in what circumstances a Minister is to vacate his seat in certain circumstances and not that the Parliament can make up its own rules undermining what the constitution provides for.
See also http://www.office-of-the-guardian.com

Turnbull has shown himself to be a petty muckraking fool who has blown his own foot off with his reliance on a fake email.
This public servant Grech has plenty of questions to answer and in light of todays revelations I am seeing his simpering appearance before the senate in a new light. No wonder he was so nervous and fearful. He knew it was fake and had knowledge of where it really came from. My money is on a certain ex treasury official who recently worked for Turnbull. The police want to talk to him and I want to know what his relationship to Grech is.

Ah a new chapter in the tragedy that is Peter Costello.

Never thought I would say this but I am now starting to fell just a little bit sorry for him. I will be better after a nights sleep.

If the close for preselections in Higgins had been just one month later ...

Ya gotta laugh.

I am amused true, some people with clearly far more education and maybe IQ much higher than mine, are talking rubbish.
Look just for a second at my constant insulting of my own party[if you can call it that] in NSW.
Understand I value honest political comment not blindness
Ask your selves do we each want our party to win no matter how?
Or are we looking for our side to govern well?
And truely look at the timing of posts here, long after it was known the whole e mail thing was based on lies, we see people blaming Labor for it.
We stand today at a very real crisis, look at todays press read it all, questions have to be answered, do most of you now know that official once worked for Joe Hocky?
Or about the inquiry into a past worker for Turbull?
Have we forgotten the bile and spite behind every word from Abbot Hockey and the dead in the water lost Turnbull.
Had Rudd lied he should have gone Turnbull is indeed not fit to stay, he must he will go.
Conservatives must find that needle in a hay stack it will not be from this front bench, not one of them should be in the house with a mop and bucket in their hands.

One forgets that the email was one of several indicators of impropriety.

1 - The dealer (in financial difficulty) "gives" Rudd a ute.
2 - The dealer gets a gov contract.
3 - An email appears from within Wayne Swann's dept indicating a deliberate preference. (the final nail in the coffin)
4 - The gov deliberately prevents a dept employee from talking on the matter.

It would be remiss of Turnbull not to pursue the matter. The fact that the email was fake still does not clear up the issue of contracts for mates, even if there is now no clear smoking gun.

The attack by Rudd on Turnbull is an effort to deflect from this.

How is this for a scenario;

The Prime Minister indicates to the treasurer that a request is coming
to the treasury for assistance under the plan and to help it on its way.
The emails and responses that are now common knowledge take place and
finally representation is made to Ford Finance together with Grant's
mobile phone number at that meeting.
The same day after the meeting Ford Finance rings Mr Grant.

Either before or after that meeting with Ford Finance someone in the
Treasury Dept is offended by the effort being made on behalf of the
PM's mate and that he sees that the PM has kept himself in the clear
so he makes up the phony email to link in the PM.
Of course these people are not aware of the normally unseen headers reveal everything.

Plausable ?