Why isn't Dear Old George on OLO, just on page 4 of this topic there was an ad for 'Adorable Singles Await'..."These Flirty Babes Know How To Cheer You Up" What's George waiting for? Where is the peanut gallery of anti immigration bods as George tries to slip one in the back door from the Philippines.

The Labor Party doesn't need to tip dirt on George, not that they wouldn't given half a chance. There are plenty of Turnbull's supporters still in Parliament who have a long hit list of "mates", and a long memory to go with it, who are ready, willing and able to do the job for Labor. Dear Old George would be high on the list.

George is a member of the National Party, and in good company, a party almost entirely made up of old men, a couple who are well known for their sexcapades with women half their age, now George makes three. Will there be more?

This thread is typical of the fact free innuendo that the left whingers on this site rely on.

What are the facts?

It has been reported from an unnamed source that GC has got a travel advisory about wandering through the less salubrious parts of Thailand. Please let me know if I am missing anything?

There is a far more substantial case against Bill Shorten for rape.

Shadow Minister,

Total rubbish.

The facts have been presented in the case of George
Christensen. No innuendo there. The man's behaviour
speaks for itself.

As for Mr Shorten?

A thorough and detailed investigation by the
Victorian police made it unequivocally clear that
there was no case to answer. The allegations were
not true.

The same can't be said about Mr Christensen.
At best - all that can be said is the man did not
apparently break any Australian laws. This does
not equate to having "no case to answer."

Foxy - Are you aware how much of a hypocrite you are being.

Read and comprehend.

Quote.
"As for Mr Shorten?

A thorough and detailed investigation by the Victorian police made it unequivocally clear that there was no case to answer. The allegations were not true."

Quote from AFP
"• “The AFP completed a thorough assessment in relation to this matter and found there was no evidence or other information to support the allegation or establish criminal conduct on the part of Mr Christensen."

_________________________________________________________
Then you say.
Quote "The man's behaviour speaks for itself."

** Please enlighten us as to what behavior is of a criminal nature **
** Please be specific here this is what I will come back at you for proof of **
_________________________________________________________
As for Shorten investigated by Victoria police, in a Labor held state by Labor appointed Police commissioner, that's what I call Justice.

I would like to remind you about the Judge Kavanaugh investigation.

1st I will demolish any credibility with this statement by you

You stated Quote "According to reputable sources like CNN, NBC News,
Washington Post, Huffington Post, and others."
** No one could believe anyone who thinks they are reliable sources of truth **

You blindly believed Judge Kavanaugh was guilty on the word of the female but when it comes to Shorten the female must be a liar.

The US Senate have just released the report about their investigation of Kavanaugh and his accusers. To summarise the 414 page report...

“After an extensive investigation that included the thorough review of all potentially credible evidence submitted and interviews of more than 40 individuals with information relating to the allegations, including classmates and friends of all those involved, Committee investigators found no witness who could provide any verifiable evidence to support any of the allegations brought against Justice Kavanaugh. In other words, following the separate and extensive investigations by both the Committee and the FBI, there was no evidence to substantiate any of the claims of sexual assault made against Justice Kavanaugh,”

Philip S.,

The case involving Mr Shorten has already been amply
explained. As has the case concerning Mr Christensen.
There's no comparisons between the two. One was found
to be innocent, the other (Christensen) was found to
have not broken Australian laws.

As for Kavanaugh? He was never on trial and no verdict
was delivered except for those given by Mr Trump in
support. The FBI took about a week on the matter.
They never followed up with potential interviewees
and their investigation was too narrow in time and
scope. The results of that investigation, delivered in
a report to the White House and Senate lawmakers, led
the White House and Republicans on the Judiciary
Committee to say there was no evidence to corroborate
the claims.

Kavanaugh was confirmed in a 50-48 vote. The lowest in
history. He was never on trial - no verdict was delivered
and Trump got what he wanted - as he tends to do - for now
at least.

Dear Shadow Minister,

You wrote;

“It has been reported from an unnamed source that GC has got a travel advisory about wandering through the less salubrious parts of Thailand. Please let me know if I am missing anything?”

Yup, as usual you are missing the facts which is typical as they always seem to elude you.

The advisory was for General Santos City in Mindanao, an island of the southern Philippines.

This was confirmed by a 'named source', bloody well Chirstensen himself.

However if you have evidence of him visiting the less salubrious parts of Thailand as well then I'm willing to look at it, if not perhaps before you come into the thread with your partisan crap you could at least make an effort to get some of this right.

And why is it that when right whingers like you and Philip S get caught defending the indefensible you feel the need to try and switch the focus to someone else. This is about GC, not Shorten or a Trump pick.