That wouldn't surprise me in the least given past examples.

Seems to me that author's conclusion is "if Labour did what it sees to have done then it certainly broke the law but there's nothing that can be done about it now because there's a time limit for prosecutions for electoral fraud, and it's now too late."

Well gee, that's a ringing endorsement.

Leftie commentator Chris Trotter opines that yes, a trap was laid for Cunliffe and he walked straight into it, and it was most likely done by someone within the Labour Party.

http://bowalleyroad.blogspot.com.au/...ot-resign.html

Edit update - just saw the dateline was Thursday, so written before most of the recent muppetry was revealed.

I think his first point is that it's not yet established whether the law was breached as Lui could be the undisclosed donor.

Or even established that there was even a six figure donation in the first place.
http://m.nzherald.co.nz/politics/new...ectid=11279402

Some potentials:

1. Liu donated a ton of money to Labour through the "auction" method and Labour head office received this money and hid it. Those involved ensured that they retired before any shit hit any fans, so Cunliffe et al are in the dark.

2. Liu donated a ton of money to Labour through the "auction" method and Labour head office received this money and hid it. Cunliffe et al are aware of what went on and are trying to divert attention away from it, because if there was one donor like this there were ten.

3. Liu donated a ton of money to Labour through the "auction" method and Labour head office never received the money. Somewhere between Liu and Labour HQ someone or someones inside Labour helped themselves to the money. Cunliffe et al are in the dark.

4. Liu did not donate any money and is lying. He's been embarrassed and has lost face through his interactions with NZ Labour and now he's got it in for them. In many ways this is the worst of all possible alternatives.


Any others come to mind?

5. They used the Liu donation to pay off the pledge card

It might be because I'm full of bami goreng and my brain is going to sleep, but can you elaborate on why #4 might be the worst?

Liu is a millionaire construction and property developer from mainland China. Not a pretend western country like Hong Kong or Taiwan. Real Chinese China. People who make it to the top of the heap in that society tend to be the sort of people you do not want bearing a grudge against you.

That's funny, because I think similar of National. Neither of us are biased of course.

Whatever went on I'm not convinced that at this stage the Herald should have run the story based on a signed statement (ie not an affidavit). But I suppose they're the same folk who lead with suggesting Cunliffe should resign over "a pro forma note written by his staffers"!

http://dimpost.wordpress.com/2014/06...the-liu-story/

Has Labour denied getting the money? Now that I'm actually looking all I can see is Labour disputing the stories about HOW they got the money.

My read is "We've not been able to find any donations or payments from Liu that match the alleged amounts. We're not commenting on any other payments we may or may not have had from Liu"

I basically have no idea if there was a payment or not at this point, but that just muddies the waters further - yet another screw-up.

Lab needs to come out with one of the two statements:
"We believe Liu's statement is incorrect and here's why [...]or
"We do not know if Liu's statement has validity, we are seeking to prove this either way, here's how [...]"

Honest, blunt, open.

Only then can they start throwing National's broken promises and lies back in their teeth with any chance of traction, but that's not going to happen as long as they're percieved as being either dishonest or utter muppets... or both.

Yeah I think that they're being a bit cautious after what happened to Cunliffe haha.

Another interesting thing is that apparently the fundraiser was alleged to have happened on a Sunday during queens birthday weekend. ??

Can we call bullshit on the 'pro forma note' - how many million dollar immigrants do you really think go through the New Lynn electorate office.

The guy was a non-resident, he was not eligible to vote, he was not living in the electorate and has never lived in that electorate. There's more to this than 'brain fade'.

http://www.listener.co.nz/current-af...ne-fundraiser/

Edit update - posted on Twitter by Rob Salmond, "I am familiar with the event. The wine you refer to sold for $1,600, and I have seen the record proving it was not to Mr Liu."

Sounds like a night of access to the Labour Cabinet Club.

Rule #4: "If Labour accuses national of something, they are guaranteed to be guilty of it themselves".

More to this? What's your theory? Liu's immigration agent contacted Cunliffe's electorate staff and they talked Cunliffe into asking for a time-frame in return for donations?

Conspiracy theory: this whole media storm is National flexing its muscle in response to Labour's digs at National over their connection with Liu and their fundraising practices.

But probably just frothing. Look at this Listener guy ready to grab at the first bit of evidence that fits what he's looking for.

Still, gotta wonder the The Herald's game is. Probably just bumbling in National's favour.

Personally I expect the NZ media to run increasingly critical hit pieces on both Labour AND National as we get closer to the election. We've had "CUNLIFFE KNEW LIU!" and I expect that any second/day/week now we'll get "KEY KNEW ABOUT THE DOTCOM RAID!" or some shit like that.

Labour in particular likes to cry like a bitch that Big Media has it in for them, but the reality is that Big Media likes to sell newspapers and ad impressions.. that's it. Thrashings are not interesting; down-to-the-wire contests are. Thus Big Media (insofar as NZ actually has any) has a vested interest in dragging each side down to more of a level playing field as we go into election mode. No-one gives a shit about the All Blacks playing the Rongotai Golden Oldies because you know it's gonna be a smashing, but you can sell ads around the ABs vs the Springboks.

I've been thinking this exact same thing for a while now. All of the blogs are the same on both sides. The right blogs moan about an impartial "MSM". The left blogs moan about tory journos writing biased opinion pieces. There's no long term perception. Read an article, have a moan because journos are supposed to be balanced, or commend the author for 'finally coming to their senses', depending on what your bias is.

The comments on the Herald are especially hilarious in this respect.

Strap yourself in and feel the lols

http://thestandard.org.nz/why-the-le...-stream-media/

Yes, that would explain why the Herald had Lucy Lawless as a guest editor last week...

In other lols, Labour released its 2014 list rankings yesterday. Under immense pressure to reinvigorate its list of candidates with fresh faces unencumbered by the baggage of past Labour administrations, Labour has responded by giving high list positions to candidates like Phil Goff, Annette King, and Clayton Cosgrove.

On current polling the only new face that Labour would bring to parliament is a policy analyst in the Ministry of Women's Affairs whose greatest life achievement to date appears to be gaining an MA in gender studies.

Edit update - actually she only gets in if Labour gets 29% on election day.

If it ain't broke, don't fix i.... oh, wait. n/m.

Imagine the exam she had to sit in order to get that degree.

"How many genders are there?"
A) 1
B) 2
C) All of the above

These days? C).

A spot of visual commentary:
http://neetflux.tumblr.com/

Now now, I'm sure her post-colonialist feminist analysis of forced marriage in Aotearoa New Zealand will enable Labour to reconnect with undecided voters. After all, her thesis emphasises self-reflexivity and is influenced by various epistemologies including postcolonial feminism, subaltern studies and participatory action research.

Nothing gets aspirational middle-class Mums and Dads to the polls like a Women's Affairs policy analyst who can talk subaltern studies and participatory action research.

Cunliffe is discovering that it's awfully hard to oppose National and differentiate Labour from the Greens at the same time.

http://www.3news.co.nz/Labour-U-turn...0/Default.aspx

10.30am: Labour opposes oil exploration in the Maui dolphins' habitat
5.00pm: Labour supports oil exploration in the Maui dolphins' habitat

lolz. The worst part about this it's not just the Greens who will be picking up the votes.

Still, I suppose I have to have some sympathy with the nonsense they've had to fade recently.

Fade?

Wow a trifecta of dumb all in one post :-)

Get around, avoid.

Labour sucks at communications, episode 34687637: Labour candidate organises protest march against Labour policy

http://dimpost.wordpress.com/2014/06/25/wtf/

Every second that this drags on, every article that contains the words "Liu" and "Labour" in the same sentence, is a blow to Labour. The only good outcome for Labour is for this shit to never ever get mentioned again. Fat chance of that happening.

Labour sucks at communication, episode 34978563

Labour MP on brutal school stabbing which has left boy in critical condition in intensive care:

"Boys will be boys"

http://www.3news.co.nz/Boys-will-be-...#ixzz35bGlYWZt