bill shorten being investigated for rape...

Dunno if it's Shorten, press reports were about a senior Labor figure, rumours have it as Shorten.

 

Perhaps it is, perhaps it is not. Fact is this does not change the clear demonstration of hypocrisy seen here today.

 

Does hypocrisy within ALP fanatics really surprise you?

The red queen has not answered about her involvement in the slush fund she set up for her Union boyfriend, whilst being a senior partner in a solicitor firm.

Fanatics are just that -brain washed morons.

 

No it doesn't. Allegations of sexual assault and other serious crimes should always be taken seriously and investigated. That doesn't mean that there is necessarily any truth to them. Look at that Australian woman that the Irish thought was a child sex slave.

Whether or not someone is a "misogynist" is really just a matter of opinion.

However, whether or not someone is a "rapist" is a matter for the courts.

 

As stated and highlighted by you, "I don’t know if the claim is wrong or right, but it is being investigated" This in no way suggests that there is truth. What you seem to consider is that "This gives some credit that some sort of impropriety has occurred". This still does not mean anything is true or false, what it does say is that if there was absolutely no credence to the claim, there would not be any investigation. The fact there is means that some sort of impropriety has occurred, the question is by whom? Also the other fact is that the investigation continuing beyond the point of actually finding out if it was at all possible that anything could have occurred suggesting impropriety on both sides if not only one. So, before you jump to the conclusion that I am discussing the truth of claims, you should consider that fact that regardless of fact or fiction IMPROPRIETY HAS OCCURRED.

Of course it is matter of opinion but when one wants to cartwheel around labelling people (obviously on party preference) they should remain true to form when the door swings back. This type of thing (politically speaking) has happened before unfortunately and I dare say, since lowing the expectations of values of politicians will probably happen again. We ALL should condemn the actions of these people equally not play party politics with them.

 

You're still saying that because the claims are being investigated that there must be some truth to them, which I don't think is accurate, hence the investigation by the Irish police about the Australian woman. It's not easy to establish something that is alleged to have happened about 30 years, they can't just dismiss it without investigating, still doesn't mean there is any truth to the allegation, that's for the courts to decide.

Okay, but this is not one of those times. Whether someones a rapist isn't a matter of opinion that people should speculate about based on rumours.

 

I am saying that there is some impropriety occurring here. That speaks nothing to the truth of the claims but to the fact that

A) obviously there is something that means there is a reason to investigate... This could mean that the claim is true, meaning the person has been guilty of something OR that the claim is false which is an act of impropriety in itself, due to the fact it was used to tarnish the name of an elected official. Either way there is impropriety...

AND B) That the official is in position to be considered to be able to be complicit in such actions (regardless of if he was or not) meaning his impropriety was simply by time and place, by either accident or on purpose.
I could go on but simple to say, ONCE the investigation gets past the first question of "Is this POSSIBLE" then there is impropriety of some description.

They need to first establish if the claims are possible to occur, if not investigation ends. Simple as that.

Fair enough, except for one thing, as stated they could have not commented on such but chose to do so. And chose to minimise the point to simple off handed throw away comments that deserve the mark of hypocrisy... I stated this in the very beginning. I do not hold you to that because you are reflecting on my comments and not the premise of the thread.

I must say since the election, you have been far more reasonable than I have ever seen you. This is extremely agreeable, even though we do not often agree.

 

Okay, sounded like you were inferring Shorten must have done something wrong if there were allegations.

And don't worry, I'm sure something you say will annoy the crap out of me sooner or later and I will rant at you again, just like old times.