Monday, August 18, 2014

Maybe 'Crusher' should be renamed 'Ratfucker?'

Finally got round to downloading a copy of "Dirty Politics" and reading it.  This is interesting stuff - it's unlikely to get widespread traction among those not interested in politics but, as Danyl points out in this post, "some of the reporters listening to the PM have read the book. And when Key insists that the real dirty politics comes from the left, I think, or hope, that they’ll reflect..."

And it looks like they are.  Andrea Vance has come to the same 'implausible deniability' conclusion that I did.  And, astonishingly, even long-term Key sycophant John Armstrong isn't backing him on this.

So, it may not make a difference to National's percentage of the vote, but it certainly does make the prospect of National's dealings with the media if it gets a third term look decidedly unpleasant.

As to the book itself, those who haven't read it are writing it off.  They shouldn't.  Here's one example, the allegation that Judith Collins was the source of the leaked email about Bronwyn Pullar's ACC claim:

"Boag sent an email to Collins about the Pullar case in March 2012.  It was leaked to the Herald on Sunday about a week later, revealing for the first time Pullar's name as the claimant, Boag's role in her case and, embarrassing for them both, an alleged attempt to do a deal over Pullar's ACC payment before returning the client list."

Before the leak, an ex-prostitute friend of Slater's worries that her ACC file is now in the hands of some guy who might find details of her activities in it.

"Slater said, 'I'll tell you what I'll do, I will call Collins and get the real story.'  After talking to Collins, he rang his friend the next day to say, 'The file was an excel spreadsheet ... there is fuck all in it except names and numbers.'  He reassured her that 'your file wasn't leaked or anyone elses'.  And Collins had told him more. 'The person who got it was a woman,' he said, 'she then tried to blackmail ACC into giving her something or she would release the file ... she is now going to be prosecuted for extortion.'"

Claims that Slater is a fantasist fond of big-noting about imagined contacts with senior politicians don't really stack up in this instance. Collins is a personal friend of his, and after claiming to have talked to her he had information about the case that only Collins and a few other people knew.  That's strong evidence that, at the very least, Collins gave out confidential information about her department's business and its clients.

More circumstantial evidence:

"On the Friday evening, two days before the Sunday newspaper came out, he boasted to his friend that he had known it was only a spreadsheet and now 'I know who it is too': he had had another conversation, presumably with Collins again, and learnt of Pullar's identity.  More important, he had heard what was going to happen to Pullar: 'She is going to get ratfucked hard.'"

Which she then was, by someone who had passed on Boag's email to David Fisher of the Sunday Herald. Potential suspects for the leak were Boag, Collins or senior ACC officials.  Boag had no motive for wanting the alleged extortion attempt splashed all over the Herald; nothing suggests any ACC officials leaked the email; but we do know that Slater had a strong motive to embarrass his enemy Boag, and that Collins was his close friend and had almost certainly given him information about the case already, and that if Slater passed the email to Fisher, Collins could swear with complete honesty that she hadn't leaked the email to Fisher.

So, yes - "no proof" that Collins leaked the email, only circumstantial evidence.  But personal opinion isn't a court of law - it deals in what you personally find more likely or less likely.  Having read this chapter, my personal opinion is that Collins most likely did quite deliberately leak that email to Slater for the purpose of 'ratfucking' Pullar.

14 comments:

Ghost Of Greenwood said...

. . . Such lovely people.

Paranormal said...

"After talking to Collins, he rang his friend the next day to say,.. "

I get that emails and possibly texts were hacked and available to Hager. But how the hell does Hager know what was said in a phone conversation?

Jim Peters said...

All politicians are "rat fuckers." Some are better at it than others.

Trevor Mallard, for example, would be the Crown Prince of Rat Fuckers, Heather Simpson the Arch Duchess, and Helen the Irrefrangible, XXXVII Divine Ruler of Godzone, as the Empress Immemorial of Rat Fucking.

Compared to those pillars of the community above, the stupid Tory's are significant under achievers.

But since the left have an arse-about-face perspective of failure and piss-poor performance, I can see why they are agog at Hagar's divine scriptures.

Surely if the bumbling Tories were one-tenth-as-competent as Hagar implies, the left would be in complete disarray and eating their own at this point.

Psycho Milt said...

Er, the left are in complete dissaray and Labour in particular has been absolutely hammered by these six years' worth of black ops efforts. That seems reasonably competent to me.

Jim Peters said...

That's because the left have fragmented into ego driven parties chasing the same prize from a fairly static pool.

The fragmentation is not the result of a successful coordinated Tory dirty tricks campaign, despite what many on the left claim or believe.

It is more symptomatic of the I-know-Best and My-Version-Of-Socialism-Has-The-Right-Answers-This-Time-I-Promise mentality that infests the left, plus their inability to work together cohesively because of that division.

Jim Peters said...

To accept that the Tories have been extraordinarily successful with their multifaceted, well planned, coordinated and executed political black ops campaign (with many diverse players, strategies and possible outcomes involved) implies they are capable of successfully managing other complex tasks, like the economy for example.

The left is in a shambles thanks to various self-inflicted wounds, in-fighting and general bitchiness that turns a lot of people off.

In Labour's case, the root cause of their malaise can be firmly laid at the feet of Saint Helen and her Robespierre-esque reign of terror on the party for more than a decade.

Edward the Confessor said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Jim Peters said...

Edward my friend. Still lacking the warm embrace from someone who loves you I see.

I am no Tory. I have never voted for the National Party, nor do I intend doing so any time soon.

I personally believe the National party has done poorly at many levels. My sarcasm in that particular comment obviously went whoosh over your head. Next time I will put and tags to help.

I am somewhat surprised at such a simple mistake by you because, well, you seem to be a real know-it-all and smarter than the average bear.

macdoctor said...

But personal opinion isn't a court of law - it deals in what you personally find more likely or less likely.

True. But a reasonable person would hear both sides of an argument before forming an opinion. And Hagar's book is most certainly only one-side of the story.

Edward the Confessor said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Psycho Milt said...

True. But a reasonable person would hear both sides of an argument before forming an opinion. And Hagar's book is most certainly only one-side of the story.

I for one would love to read an excursive and encompassing version of Ms Collins' side of this particular story, but suspect I won't unless hell unexpectedly freezes over...

Edward the Confessor said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Tom Hunter said...

Oh come on guys. Let Sludgy speak. Why are you right-wingers so hard on the mentally disabled?

Psycho Milt said...

Didn't see the comments, but I think Edward the Confessor blotted his copybook with Barnsley Bill in an earlier thread, sufficient to get him deleted on sight.