IF AT first you don’t succeed, as the saying goes…
Feminist Louise Milligan, the ABC’s attack-dog, came up short in the end with her anti-Pell campaign.
And now a fresh campaign is upon us – and some of the strategies and tactics of the ABC’s fembot attack machine are coming into sharp focus.
- The hateful #MeToo ABC is becoming anti-Australia central.
- It poisons the reputation of anyone who is two-minutes late renouncing liberal conservatism.
- The "she said/she said" doctrine now dominates and all men must learn their place.
As more is revealed of Christian Porter’s rape complainant known as “Kate”, the more it becomes apparent that the purpose of the push against Porter has been, well, precisely to “have all these things come out”.
ABC is becoming the #MeTooist law central. There is no high-profile ideological enemy that it won’t seek to bring down, given the right opportunity to inflict maximum pain and a perfectly positioned “victim”.
JUDICIAL
Its methodology is as follows – find a credible complainant, then use the media and/or the publishing industry to publicly defame the target, whatever the ultimate judicial outcome, where there are opportunities for career, wealth, reputation and life destruction.
In a sense, whatever redress might be achieved for the “victim” – inevitably called a victim whether the allegations are proven or not – through the law enforcement/judicial system is almost incidental to the main game.
Jail time is merely a bonus for the #MeTooists. Guilt-by-accusation in the public domain is a blunt instrument to achieve vengeance for the accuser, with or without a legal victory.
The critical element of the strategy is to get the sordid details of the allegations, or some other element of the alleged events, out into the public domain where possible.
ABC is becoming The #MeTooist law central. In the case of Cardinal Pell, it was Milligan’s strategically published book.
It was carefully timed to coincide with the complainant’s approach to the police, the details of whose investigation of Pell were also leaked to the media to gain maximum hit power.
A double whammy. In Cardinal Pell’s case, as many details of alleged crimes as possible made it into the Milligan book, but the killer blow was the sheer number of complainants and would-be complainants she unearthed.
This was the ace in the hole. Make Cardinal Pell out to be a serial abuser. In the case of Mr Porter, it was one particular detail of the alleged assault in particular that would be dynamite if and when revealed.
A detail gross enough that, when seen or heard, cannot be unseen or unheard. The plan? Game over for Christian Porter’s career and reputation.
How did the details of the allegations come to be in the public domain?
DEFAMATION
This happened as a consequence of the removal of Mr Porter’s star barrister, Sue Chrysanthou SC, from his defamation action against the ABC, which was, in turn, the result of a separate case brought in the Federal Court.
One outcome of this case was the publication of previously unrevealed content of the diary of Porter’s accuser, which contained all the lurid details of the alleged incident all those decades ago.
A brilliant result for Mr Porter’s antagonists.
Mr Porter’s risk in suing the ABC for defamation was always that all the hideous details of the alleged incident and of the subsequent sad events in Kate’s life would come out, and not to his advantage.
This presumably influenced his decision not to proceed with the defamation case after mediation, the loss of his key barrister at a critical time and the discovery by Team Porter of the details of the ABC’s defense of the defamation.
Ever more damaging information that would skewer Mr Porter politically, maybe permanently.
Consideration of the critically important action against Ms Chrysanthou brings us to Jo Dyer. So, who is Jo Dyer?
Ms Dyer will largely be remembered as the woman who managed, through the Federal Court, to get Porter’s star barrister thrown off the case.
Ms Dyer was known to the woman who sat on allegations against Christian Porter for three decades then aired them privately with a select group of people, before, sadly, she took her own life.
VENGEANCE
But not before setting out a detailed game plan to get Christian Porter. Jo Dyer was not a great friend of Kate’s, and not in any contact with her since they parted ways post-school.
Ms Dyer is the #MeTooist from central casting, and hence superbly suited to her present role of flag-bearer for Team Kate in its quest for vengeance against the “entitled arseholedom of CP”, as the also-now-released text messages between Dyer and fellow Porter-pursuer, the ABC’s Annabel Crabb, attest.
Even more Milligan than Milligan, if that is possible. A failed candidate for pre-selection for the ALP.
An avid greenie – one of her heroes is Greta Thunberg – a progressive activist who worked for, then left, the Human Right Commission because it was “too bureaucratic” and not political enough.
A high bar, there. Another of Jo’s heroes is the awful Nicola Sturgeon, Scotland’s First Minister and scourge of sensible centrists and conservatives north and south of the original River Tweed.
Jo fantasised about working on Democrat Elizabeth Warren’s presidential campaign. She wants to leave coal in the ground. And get tech companies to stamp out “fake news”.
Ms Dyer is a self-described “frustrated political junkie” and “social media lurker”. One of her first acts upon arriving back in Adelaide was to start bagging the Liberal Government on Facebook, which led to calls for her to be sacked.
Ms Dyer is, these days, the Director of the Adelaide Writers’ Week, a known haven for “wokedom” and a hangout of the perennially Left-of-centre.
BURNING
When previously director of the Sydney Writers’ Festival, Ms Dyer promoted events such as the following:
The Zeitgeist Series, puts writers and thinkers together to discuss the burning meta-issues of the day. Wednesday March 6 will see Rage, Rape and Revolution discussed by Sohaila Abdulali, Soraya Chemaly, Lucia Osborne-Crowley and Clare Wright.
She also sees refugee “journeys” and Aboriginal massacres as essential elements of her festival curation philosophy.
You just couldn’t make Jo up.
Kate chose wisely.
On Dyer’s own say-so, she started to recruit (perhaps) carefully selected old school acquaintances to form an “army” to ensure Porter never became prime minister.
Ms Dyer, and the aforementioned Crabb are smart, credentialed and former school acquaintances who shared a feminist-politico desire to get Porter and were reflexively inclined to believe Kate-as-victim. “We believe you”.
ABC’s Louise Milligan, of course, is always a reliable antagonist of accused sex offenders and a trusted and pro-active friend of victims’ groups.
Another daughter of the revolution, Sarah Hanson-Young, acts as the legislative arm. The Team was in place.
As Katina Curtis of The Sydney Morning Herald put it:
[Dyer] believes Kate chose people she had been closest with, partly in a strategic move about who she thought would step up for her but partly based on the powerful emotions they shared.
… The comment about thwarting political ambitions came because Kate was “clear-eyed about the [unlikely] prospects of a conviction” with very few allegations of sexual assault proceeding to trial and even fewer ending with guilty verdicts.
This perception, by the way, is by no means true.
CUNNEEN
As Margaret Cunneen SC has pointed out, around thirty per cent of cases of sexual assault that go to trial obtain guilty verdicts, an astonishingly high percentage given the problems of “she said-she said” evidence.
All too often the claims are historical, and typically without confessions, witnesses or physical evidence.
Ironically, the tsunami of #MeTooism sweeping through the law enforcement and judicial systems State-by-State has had the perverse effect of reducing the conviction rate that inevitably follows when “filters” within Offices of the Directors of Public Prosecutions are removed.
In the past, in the days before the feminist legal revolution in Victoria and elsewhere, weak cases were not allowed to go forward. Cases involving outlandish accusations, like those against Cardinal Pell, made it to court only as a result of the feminist, “we believe you” revolution.
There can be no doubt that the pursuit of Mr Porter is a political act, and was seen as such by the complainant before she died.
It is certainly considered political – in both a Party political and in a broader ideological sense – by Jo Dyer.
There is little public demand for an independent inquiry into the allegations. Porter’s Western Australian electorate is Pearce, held presently by a comfortable margin.
One newspaper characterised local interest in the Porter case as “don’t know, don’t care”.
On the other hand, there is a re-distribution on the way, so Pearce may well be in play, especially if more pressure were applied to Porter. And the Government’s margin is wafer thin.
Whatever it takes, as someone (sort of) from the Left of politics has said.
The question is raised – did Ms Dyer set up Mr Porter’s lawyer in the legal equivalent of a honey trap?
Did she use her Federal Court action as a deliberate means of getting further details released about the allegations against Mr Porter, to blacken his name yet more?
It’s a plausible hypothesis, to say the least. Porter’s legal team has also upped the ante in a recent description of Kate, as Samantha Maiden has noted:
Christian Porter’s lawyer says the woman who accused him of rape was severely mentally ill and suffering from “hypermania”.
Cardinal Pell had, astonishingly, nothing but sympathy for the also troubled complainant whose actions all but ruined his life and reputation.
“He was used,” the Cardinal said.
There was also a deceased “victim” in the Cardinal Pell case, of course, who, equally sadly, died of a drug overdose.
The latest revelations about the real mental state of Mr Porter’s accuser, the circumstances of a deceased accuser no longer around and the methodology of the “Get Porter” team, then, are eerily familiar.
And against the powerful zeitgeist, Bill Shorten must, all the while, be counting his lucky stars.PC
I remain incredulous that ABC persons who violate journalistic norms, deliberately target political figures whose belief system differs from theirs, and engage in massive, dark PR campaigns that result in equally massive court action upon court actions against their personal political enemies – using the taxpayer dollar – are not billed individually by the taxpayer. Or indeed accountable at ANY level!
I don’t care who it is or what their personal cause may be. We obviously need to establish a line over which ABC and other journalists are no longer protected by freedom of the press for personal vendettas, especially by that mad, targeting and manipulative process. Call it the hearsay line. Like company directors now be held personally accountable for financial malfeasance.
Destroying entire reputations and careers as an art form, especially in order to scratch a personal, political itch and not be held individually accountable, especially at our financial expense is plain wrong, no matter what political beliefs we hold.
After all, a commercial media organisation has to take a hit for expenses when cases are heard that reflects on proprietors – who probably recoup income for extra sales anyway. They gamble their own dollars in this regard and their investors accept that because they have like ideals.
The ABC is totally taxpayer funded, representing all views and is basically chartered to be apolitical. We poor idiots who disagree with its actions and suffer because of it have no choice in the matter. And then up go the taxes that the looney left-wing, anti-everything, placard-writing, disaffected, dole-bludging, pot-smoking, professionally demonstrating, “thinkers” probably have never paid.
While ever the journalists involved have no financial skin on the table, their ability to use a national broadcaster to propagate their own personal political vendettas will only continue.
Potentially bringing an entire country to its knees, deliberately creating serious internal divisions and making it vulnerable to economic or military attack as a consequence just isn’t funny.
For those of us who love their country, who are the indulgent silent majority, whose parents and we slaved, toiled, went without, fought – and many of our loved ones who died – to preserve our wonderful way of life, and who actually understand what this means because we have seen what happens when this is taken away, this is all going wrong.
We have given such puzzlingly discontented, ungrateful and spoiled wretches freedom to express those very views that they take for granted and that their extreme left-wing mates will rapidly take away from them if ever they were to seize power.
So, it’s time for change.
It’s time for us to become active again ourselves, become vocal and teach the indulged generation respect for the democratic paradigm. Have we spared the rod too much?
The pen is still mightier than the sword, as our Northern Neighbours currently attest so well.
So let’s start using it!
Where do I go to find out basic details of Bill’s case and why it was dropped. I would simply like to point Louise Milligan in the right direction in commencing her newest investigation. Oh… and I might need some more information re Gillard’s involvement in union corruption before she became PM.
These female ‘haters’ are the modern day witches, dancing around their cauldron, stirring their brews of malice, cackling and plotting their victims’ downfall.
I wonder how an insightful psychiatrist would analyse this huge facility to hate, their driving force. I’m pretty sure their malicious strikes leave the great majority of normal females feeling ashamed and not a little bilious!
I’m hoping that once Christian Porter recovers from this shocking abuse, he will recover his Portfolio of Attorney General. He deserves that at the very least.
Shortens accuser is alive and kicking – and willing to talk – but the ABC just yawns and gives her a wide berth.
What’s more, she was a participant in Young Labor so you’d think Milligan and her gang of thugs would have at least a sympathetic ear.
But no – Bill Shorten and the ALP hierarchy are untouchable it seems, even though they fall into the privileged white male category.
It appears these particular males are considered to be useful idiots for the ABC’s dark ideological pursuit.
As a Sydney based Media Analyst I have observed the behaviour of the journalism industry and its participants revealing gradual extreme change over the last 25 years, to the left. Not only have these creatures been trained at the ABC they have spread their left language over to 7, 9 and 10 e.g. Waleed Aly and Hugh Riminton. Re ABC, the government should be able to do something about it, but, successive Coalition governments have not had the strength of intelligent fortitude to act in taking back control to insist it adheres to its charter of impartiality. I know they think they have with placing certain conservative thinkers on the board but as Janet Albrechtson from The Australian has written her experience showed it was impossible to make a difference.
The poison and mischief that is created by a large cabal of the staff at the ABC would make Genghis Khan tremble on the battle field. We are in a war that needs to be recognized as taking place, and the Coalition governments needs to understand who the enemy is and what is taking place in the war and what ammunition that is being used. The biggest weapon across this planet is the media in all its shapes. The determination of the left is to silence the conservative thought and its individual. It is winning – the left that is. They are ruining the western world as we have known it. Conservatives have always been part of the progression of mankind’s walk.
Who is going to tackle the poison production at the ABC where the truth is never part of language that the journalists use. Successive communication ministers have been of no use in this area whatsoever.
I joined Foxtel just so I could get a balance of journalism from Sky news. By now I can hardly bear to watch the output from the rest. Make a start Scott, admit you made a mistake and get rid of Ita, buy a suit of armour for a middle aged media or corporate warrior and send them onto the battle field. I reckon John Anderson could sweet talk some change there.
George Pell was never guilty on what was presented as “evidence” to the courts. It’s amazing the level of corruption that must be rife in the Victorian Police Force starting right at the very top.
The clown who was police commissioner at the time, and still is strangely enough, should have been sacked for gross incompetence. He is obviously a pathetic human being.
As for Christian Porter, there isn’t a court in Australia (except Victoria) that would find him guilty of anything untoward. He is just being persecuted by the left wing media because he is on the wrong side of politics.
City based ABC has become a partisan political media department for the far-left of politics.
The treatment Christian Porter has been subjected to is disgraceful.