SM,

The 2011-12 cabchrge allegations were investigated by the AFP and found to be baseless.

Rares J:

"Even though Mr Ashby has now abandoned the 2003 and all the Cabcharge allegations, the features that I have criticised did the harm to Mr Slipper that Mr Ashby and Mr Harmer intended when those allegations were included in the originating application. A party cannot be allowed to misuse the Court’s process by including scandalous, irrelevant or damaging allegations knowing that they would receive very significant media coverage and then seek to regularise his, her or its pleading by subsequently abandoning those claims."

...........

"Secondly, I still don't see Brough being mentioned.....Where was Brough other than on the periphery?"

Oh really?

Conclusion:

" 199 Even though I have not found that the combination was as wide as Mr Slipper alleged in his points of claim, the evidence established that there was a combination involving Mr Ashby, Ms Doane and Mr Brough of that kind. Mr Ashby acted in combination with Ms Doane and Mr Brough when commencing the proceedings in order to advance the interests of the LNP and Mr Brough....."

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/07/tony-abbott-race-of-life
The link is a view of the man Tony Abbott see,s in his mirror each morning.
It however is, in truth, not the man we will see if he becomes Prime Minister.
More and more the front bench, puppet like, repeat Abbott,s script word for word, unable to deviate from it.
More like a traveling sides show than a party.
Mumblings more suited to the fiction section in a library than any place we see, not a view of what they will do, but what they want us to believe they will do.

Hi Poirot,

While you're getting so much mileage out of Ashby and the Pervert, when you take a breather, perhaps you could get back to us and rank those activities - Obeid/McDonald's, Thomson's and Ashby/Brough's - and let's throw Gillard and her slush fund in the mix - on a scale of perfidy and nefarity and wickedness.

Oh, and Abbott looking at his watch - let's include that too. B@stard !

1 to 10. Not such a difficult task. Although diversion seems to be easier and more fun :)

No rush.

Cheers,

Joe

P,

Again I ask, "So what!"

"Even though I have not found that the combination was as wide as Mr Slipper alleged in his points of claim....Ashby acted in combination with Ms Doane and Mr Brough when commencing the proceedings"

The phrase "acting in combination" has a wide meaning, anything from encouragement to direct involvement.

As per the first line, "I have not found that the combination was as wide as Mr Slipper alleged" combined with Brough not being directly involved in the court case supports my assertion that while Brough was actively encouraging Ashby, his involvement was peripheral.

Brough did nothing illegal, and given Slipper's selling out his principles for money to Juliar he has no claim to the moral high ground.

Okay, SM,

We've probably gone as far as we can in this round.

I suppose Brough was "encouraging" Ashby for no reason?

I wonder why someone would encourage another person to steal information and then to pass that information on to the person who was doing the encouraging?

Beats me.....

.......................

Gotta run...just counting up a certain troll's latest tally.

: )

Hi Poirot,

My understanding of the meaning of 'troll' is someone who tries to divert discussion from a thread, usually by insulting participants.

This thread is supposed to be about Obeid/Mcdonald and political corruption generally.

But if you want to drag "Mussels" and Ashby into the mix, then let's play:

* how do you rank the behavior of Abbott (watch), Ashby/Brough (diary), Gillard (slush fund), Thomson (misuse of union members' funds), Obeid/Mcdonald (coal leases) ?

A troll would try, by any means, to divert discussion away from a legitimate thread topic. So what's your response, Poirot ? You are putting your bit in, after all, so it's only proper to assume that you might, just this once, stick to topic.

So how would I rank those above?

Abbott would off the scale, below the 1, nothing wrong with looking at your watch.

Ashby/Brough might, I'm not sure, be at no. 1.

Gillard and Thomson might hit a 6 or 7. What's half a million in kick-backs and stand-over money, after all ? Or half a million on prostitutes - that works out at barely 500 high-class prostitutes, or 1000 middle-range prostitutes. Might have kept Thomson going for a couple of years, and then what, poor bugger ?

Obeid and McDonald - if the allegations are substantiated, be up close to 9.

If you think I'm not going in to bat for criminals hard enough, just say so: how would you rank these various behaviors ?

No rush.

Cheers :)

Joe