The claims come from “correspondence between Cameron Slater and one of Key’s senior staffers” to quote Danyl’s post.
The claim that somehow someone in the Prime Minister’s Office managed to hack the Labour Party’s membership and donor records?
To be fair, it could be possible that the Labour Party’s data security is so slack some wannabe Neo in the PM's office hacked incredible confidential information. But it strikes me as equally plausible its not only National staffer who can leak like incontinent geriatrics given the right incentives, but Slater sexed up a good old fashioned leak to make him look more of a player than he actually is.
I think the key part that you appear to have missed is “by the Prime Minister’s office”. I’m pretty sure that if the office of the Labour leader had been implicated in the hacking of Slater or Brash, it would have been a big deal as well.
Oh, be a dear and shove off. Of course it's an incredibly serious allegation, and I don't give the proverbial rat's rectums who does it to who. But I require slightly more evidence than the burblings of someone like Slater, who I've long considered an incurable fantasist.
I’ve always been surprised that the Nats have kept Mr Ede on the payroll given the well-known allegations that he is a chronic Class B user.
Can I start another allegation that you're a fuck wit who should go make defamatory claims about third persons on your own blog, and where you're the only person liable for the contents?
But if he got more than he revealed in the post and the PM’s office was involved, it’s not a good look.
Link doesn't work -- but I guess the question someone should be asking Labour is if they've got any evidence anyone actually hacked them because, with all due disrespect, I wouldn't believe Slater if he told me water's wet and fire's hot without independent confirmation. I'm sorry, but I long ago came to the conclusion that Slater is a pathological fantasist who needs to have every word that comes out of his mouth dipped in tequila.
Danyl nominates the hacking of Labour’s computers
It's the big takeaway, and it's the one thing everyone better be hoping actually turns out to be true. Because, sorry to say, there's been an awful lot of credulity extended to hacking allegation here that wasn't extended to Don Brash and it's not as if Slater is any stranger to what can most politely be called big-noting.
OK, folks... save yourself some time and I'll do the standard reply for you. "Oh, of course you'd say that you shameless Tory hack."
Idiots and wind, every time. No need to read anything significant into it, other than hoons will be hoons.
That's a fair point, Deborah, but one reasons I'm not quite so relaxed was a remarkably unpleasant experience when I was in Wellington Central. We had a really nice elderly couple who had a hoarding well inside their property line, that would only have been accessible by climbing over a fence. They were quite understandably terrified and upset that someone was on their property in the middle of the night, quite literally slashing a hoarding to ribbons and damaging the timber framing so severely it was unusable.
At least in my book, that's beyond "hoons being hoons". And unsurprisingly, they never allowed a hoarding to be placed on their property again.
What you said was that they needed “dissociate” themselves from it, which implies that there might be a shred of evidence that they are associated with it. Which there isn’t.
And to be perfectly fair, I suspect every party leader who’s been around for more than five minutes could write a thick political memoir entitled ‘With Friends Like This, Who Needs Enemies?’ For what it’s worth, the sledged hoardings in my hood has been pretty evenly distributed – which is nothing to be proud of, but I don’t expect any candidate to disassociate themselves from something I really hope it goes without saying they consider completely unacceptable.
Jesus, what world do you live in? Reality check time: not everyone is a high falutin’ dinner party intellectual like the PA crew.
Double down reality check, Tommo – there’s nothing hoity-toity about at least knowing what the insults you pick up on Facebook actually mean. But hey, good to know you think giving a shit about Jew-baiting and plain old ignorance is a pretentious urban liberal affectation.
You are assuming he was knowingly anti-semitic, which he says he is not. On what grounds do you challenge his word?
Oh, FFS... you're just being silly now. So, Gibson ignorantly picked up a racial slur off Facebook and threw it in the Prime Minister's direction. Well, that's a relief. Accidental bigots are so much easier to tolerate than the deliberate kind.
I was also severely underwhelmed by Gibson on Morning Report doing the usual "I'm sorry people were offended" passive-aggressive voice b.s. rather than just saying "I'm sorry I was offensive. Full stop. Period. Will stop talking now."
When are political types going to understand that using your weasel words is never a good look?
I despair of my friends who don’t vote because this party or that candidate is not quite up to scratch on this policy or that aspirational value. Its a cop out, clever, safe, impressive even, but really ineffective.
To be honest, I do a bit too but can really see how that can come across as enormously patronizing and more than a little bit privileged. Remember, what's just an "aspirational value" to you, could actually have a real impact on other people's lives. It's all very nice to say "don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good", but if (say) you're a woman in the United States where both the Republican and Democratic candidates on the ballot paper are anti-choice and that's a really big fucking deal to you that has a hollow ring.