EDITORIAL: It wasn't "an employment matter" that Todd Barclay didn'tAt least he didn't sign a painting he didn't paint!
want to discuss with police.
It was a police matter. Not the same thing at all.
Police didn't want to go over the niceties of employment law with the >Clutha-Southland MP. They were investigating whether he had illegally
taped the private conversations of a longserving electorate staff
member, Glenys Dickson, prior to her departure.
Having assured the public that he had done no such thing, he made a
second assurance that he would co-operate fully with any police >investigation. Then he didn't.
As he tells it, after taking legal advice he declined "an invitation"
to make a statement.
"As is my right," he adds.
So it is. We might add, however, that police were confronted by
special rules for seeking a warrant to search a politician's property
and were unable to obtain one.
Their own documents hardly suggest they were issuing Barclay some >out-of-politeness RSVP invitation to top up an investigation already >proceeding to their satisfaction. They had fruitlessly tried to speak
with him.
So a 10-month investigation resulted in no prosecution, Barclay has
been re-selected as the party's candidate for the upcoming election
and Prime Minister Bill English disappointingly repeats the by-now
fatuous line that this was essentially only ever an employment matter,
now resolved, and we should all move on.
Let's not.
____________________________________________
It is hard to see why he is able to hide behind "special rules" in a
matter unrelated to his being a politician - we should know more about
the apparent ability to hide from a crime in this way - was he
protected by English - who is now seen to have lied about it being an >employment matter . . .
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote: >http://www.stuff.co.nz/southland-times/opinion/90728035/unhelpful-barclay-faces-fresh-reproach
EDITORIAL: It wasn't "an employment matter" that Todd Barclay didn't
want to discuss with police.
It was a police matter. Not the same thing at all.
Police didn't want to go over the niceties of employment law with the >Clutha-Southland MP. They were investigating whether he had illegally
taped the private conversations of a longserving electorate staff
member, Glenys Dickson, prior to her departure.
Having assured the public that he had done no such thing, he made a
second assurance that he would co-operate fully with any police >investigation. Then he didn't.
As he tells it, after taking legal advice he declined "an invitation"
to make a statement.
"As is my right," he adds.
So it is. We might add, however, that police were confronted by
special rules for seeking a warrant to search a politician's property
and were unable to obtain one.
Their own documents hardly suggest they were issuing Barclay some >out-of-politeness RSVP invitation to top up an investigation already >proceeding to their satisfaction. They had fruitlessly tried to speak
with him.
So a 10-month investigation resulted in no prosecution, Barclay has
been re-selected as the party's candidate for the upcoming election
and Prime Minister Bill English disappointingly repeats the by-now
fatuous line that this was essentially only ever an employment matter,
now resolved, and we should all move on.
Let's not.
____________________________________________
It is hard to see why he is able to hide behind "special rules" in aAt least he didn't sign a painting he didn't paint!
matter unrelated to his being a politician - we should know more about
the apparent ability to hide from a crime in this way - was he
protected by English - who is now seen to have lied about it being an >employment matter . . .
Tony
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/southland-times/opinion/90728035/unhelpful-barclay-faces-fresh-reproachAt least he didn't sign a painting he didn't paint!
EDITORIAL: It wasn't "an employment matter" that Todd Barclay didn't
want to discuss with police.
It was a police matter. Not the same thing at all.
Police didn't want to go over the niceties of employment law with the
Clutha-Southland MP. They were investigating whether he had illegally
taped the private conversations of a longserving electorate staff
member, Glenys Dickson, prior to her departure.
Having assured the public that he had done no such thing, he made a
second assurance that he would co-operate fully with any police
investigation. Then he didn't.
As he tells it, after taking legal advice he declined "an invitation"
to make a statement.
"As is my right," he adds.
So it is. We might add, however, that police were confronted by
special rules for seeking a warrant to search a politician's property
and were unable to obtain one.
Their own documents hardly suggest they were issuing Barclay some
out-of-politeness RSVP invitation to top up an investigation already
proceeding to their satisfaction. They had fruitlessly tried to speak
with him.
So a 10-month investigation resulted in no prosecution, Barclay has
been re-selected as the party's candidate for the upcoming election
and Prime Minister Bill English disappointingly repeats the by-now
fatuous line that this was essentially only ever an employment matter,
now resolved, and we should all move on.
Let's not.
____________________________________________
It is hard to see why he is able to hide behind "special rules" in a
matter unrelated to his being a politician - we should know more about
the apparent ability to hide from a crime in this way - was he
protected by English - who is now seen to have lied about it being an
employment matter . . .
Tony
On Friday, 24 March 2017 10:04:17 UTC+13, nor...@googlegroups.com wrote:a cabinet minister's house.
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/southland-times/opinion/90728035/unhelpful-barclay-faces-fresh-reproachAt least he didn't sign a painting he didn't paint!
EDITORIAL: It wasn't "an employment matter" that Todd Barclay didn't
want to discuss with police.
It was a police matter. Not the same thing at all.
Police didn't want to go over the niceties of employment law with the
Clutha-Southland MP. They were investigating whether he had illegally
taped the private conversations of a longserving electorate staff
member, Glenys Dickson, prior to her departure.
Having assured the public that he had done no such thing, he made a
second assurance that he would co-operate fully with any police
investigation. Then he didn't.
As he tells it, after taking legal advice he declined "an invitation"
to make a statement.
"As is my right," he adds.
So it is. We might add, however, that police were confronted by
special rules for seeking a warrant to search a politician's property
and were unable to obtain one.
Their own documents hardly suggest they were issuing Barclay some
out-of-politeness RSVP invitation to top up an investigation already
proceeding to their satisfaction. They had fruitlessly tried to speak
with him.
So a 10-month investigation resulted in no prosecution, Barclay has
been re-selected as the party's candidate for the upcoming election
and Prime Minister Bill English disappointingly repeats the by-now
fatuous line that this was essentially only ever an employment matter,
now resolved, and we should all move on.
Let's not.
____________________________________________
It is hard to see why he is able to hide behind "special rules" in a
matter unrelated to his being a politician - we should know more about
the apparent ability to hide from a crime in this way - was he
protected by English - who is now seen to have lied about it being an
employment matter . . .
Tony
Or be the subject of a complaint of sexual assault involving a swiss ball and
But hey, it's OK when the left do it. Apparently.
On Friday, 24 March 2017 10:04:17 UTC+13, nor...@googlegroups.com wrote:
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/southland-times/opinion/90728035/unhelpful-barclay-faces-fresh-reproachAt least he didn't sign a painting he didn't paint!
EDITORIAL: It wasn't "an employment matter" that Todd Barclay didn't
want to discuss with police.
It was a police matter. Not the same thing at all.
Police didn't want to go over the niceties of employment law with the
Clutha-Southland MP. They were investigating whether he had illegally
taped the private conversations of a longserving electorate staff
member, Glenys Dickson, prior to her departure.
Having assured the public that he had done no such thing, he made a
second assurance that he would co-operate fully with any police
investigation. Then he didn't.
As he tells it, after taking legal advice he declined "an invitation"
to make a statement.
"As is my right," he adds.
So it is. We might add, however, that police were confronted by
special rules for seeking a warrant to search a politician's property
and were unable to obtain one.
Their own documents hardly suggest they were issuing Barclay some
out-of-politeness RSVP invitation to top up an investigation already
proceeding to their satisfaction. They had fruitlessly tried to speak
with him.
So a 10-month investigation resulted in no prosecution, Barclay has
been re-selected as the party's candidate for the upcoming election
and Prime Minister Bill English disappointingly repeats the by-now
fatuous line that this was essentially only ever an employment matter,
now resolved, and we should all move on.
Let's not.
____________________________________________
It is hard to see why he is able to hide behind "special rules" in a
matter unrelated to his being a politician - we should know more about
the apparent ability to hide from a crime in this way - was he
protected by English - who is now seen to have lied about it being an
employment matter . . .
Tony
Or be the subject of a complaint of sexual assault involving a swiss ball and a cabinet minister's house.
But hey, it's OK when the left do it. Apparently.
On Thu, 23 Mar 2017 15:01:17 -0700 (PDT), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com>What lies - you still provide no evidence!
wrote:
On Friday, 24 March 2017 10:04:17 UTC+13, nor...@googlegroups.com wrote:
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
At least he didn't sign a painting he didn't paint!http://www.stuff.co.nz/southland-times/opinion/90728035/unhelpful-barclay-faces-fresh-reproach
EDITORIAL: It wasn't "an employment matter" that Todd Barclay didn't
want to discuss with police.
It was a police matter. Not the same thing at all.
Police didn't want to go over the niceties of employment law with the
Clutha-Southland MP. They were investigating whether he had illegally
taped the private conversations of a longserving electorate staff
member, Glenys Dickson, prior to her departure.
Having assured the public that he had done no such thing, he made a
second assurance that he would co-operate fully with any police
investigation. Then he didn't.
As he tells it, after taking legal advice he declined "an invitation"
to make a statement.
"As is my right," he adds.
So it is. We might add, however, that police were confronted by
special rules for seeking a warrant to search a politician's property
and were unable to obtain one.
Their own documents hardly suggest they were issuing Barclay some
out-of-politeness RSVP invitation to top up an investigation already
proceeding to their satisfaction. They had fruitlessly tried to speak
with him.
So a 10-month investigation resulted in no prosecution, Barclay has
been re-selected as the party's candidate for the upcoming election
and Prime Minister Bill English disappointingly repeats the by-now
fatuous line that this was essentially only ever an employment matter,
now resolved, and we should all move on.
Let's not.
____________________________________________
It is hard to see why he is able to hide behind "special rules" in a
matter unrelated to his being a politician - we should know more about
the apparent ability to hide from a crime in this way - was he
protected by English - who is now seen to have lied about it being an
employment matter . . .
Tony
Or be the subject of a complaint of sexual assault involving a swiss ball and >>a cabinet minister's house.
But hey, it's OK when the left do it. Apparently.
Yet again the nat-bots try to deflect from a Nat-lie by claimings its
all OK because someone else did something they didn't like a long time
ago . . .
Whatever those incidents were JohnO, are you and Tony claiming that
they somehow excuse Bill English from lying now? His lies are
certainly not as bad as our soldiers killing civilians - but tdoes
that make lying acceptable to you? If so, why?
http://www.stuff.co.nz/southland-times/opinion/90728035/unhelpful-barclay-faces-fresh-reproach
EDITORIAL: It wasn't "an employment matter" that Todd Barclay didn't
want to discuss with police.
It was a police matter. Not the same thing at all.
Police didn't want to go over the niceties of employment law with the >Clutha-Southland MP. They were investigating whether he had illegally
taped the private conversations of a longserving electorate staff
member, Glenys Dickson, prior to her departure.
On Fri, 24 Mar 2017 09:52:14 +1300, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/southland-times/opinion/90728035/unhelpful-barclay-faces-fresh-reproach
EDITORIAL: It wasn't "an employment matter" that Todd Barclay didn't
want to discuss with police.
It was a police matter. Not the same thing at all.
Police didn't want to go over the niceties of employment law with the >>Clutha-Southland MP. They were investigating whether he had illegally
taped the private conversations of a longserving electorate staff
member, Glenys Dickson, prior to her departure.
Has anyone asked journalist Bradley Ambrose for a comment?The Nats were quick enough to talk about provacy then, but now
Bill.
On Thu, 23 Mar 2017 15:01:17 -0700 (PDT), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Friday, 24 March 2017 10:04:17 UTC+13, nor...@googlegroups.com wrote: >>> Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/southland-times/opinion/90728035/unhelpful-barclay-faces-fresh-reproachAt least he didn't sign a painting he didn't paint!
EDITORIAL: It wasn't "an employment matter" that Todd Barclay didn't
want to discuss with police.
It was a police matter. Not the same thing at all.
Police didn't want to go over the niceties of employment law with the
Clutha-Southland MP. They were investigating whether he had illegally
taped the private conversations of a longserving electorate staff
member, Glenys Dickson, prior to her departure.
Having assured the public that he had done no such thing, he made a
second assurance that he would co-operate fully with any police
investigation. Then he didn't.
As he tells it, after taking legal advice he declined "an invitation"
to make a statement.
"As is my right," he adds.
So it is. We might add, however, that police were confronted by
special rules for seeking a warrant to search a politician's property
and were unable to obtain one.
Their own documents hardly suggest they were issuing Barclay some
out-of-politeness RSVP invitation to top up an investigation already
proceeding to their satisfaction. They had fruitlessly tried to speak
with him.
So a 10-month investigation resulted in no prosecution, Barclay has
been re-selected as the party's candidate for the upcoming election
and Prime Minister Bill English disappointingly repeats the by-now
fatuous line that this was essentially only ever an employment matter, >>>> now resolved, and we should all move on.
Let's not.
____________________________________________
It is hard to see why he is able to hide behind "special rules" in a
matter unrelated to his being a politician - we should know more about >>>> the apparent ability to hide from a crime in this way - was he
protected by English - who is now seen to have lied about it being an
employment matter . . .
Tony
Or be the subject of a complaint of sexual assault involving a swiss ball and a cabinet minister's house.
But hey, it's OK when the left do it. Apparently.
Yet again the nat-bots try to deflect from a Nat-lie by claimings its
all OK because someone else did something they didn't like a long time
ago . . .
Whatever those incidents were JohnO, are you and Tony claiming that
they somehow excuse Bill English from lying now? His lies are
certainly not as bad as our soldiers killing civilians - but tdoes
that make lying acceptable to you? If so, why?
| Sysop: | sneaky |
|---|---|
| Location: | Ashburton,NZ |
| Users: | 31 |
| Nodes: | 8 (0 / 8) |
| Uptime: | 230:33:18 |
| Calls: | 2,088 |
| Calls today: | 2 |
| Files: | 11,140 |
| Messages: | 948,557 |