Christian Porter Scurriously Tries To Hide ABC's Defamation Defense Evidence

Howdy dear availees...still dragging my heels in a deeply depressive rut, so here's a very quick stop-gap, cut-'n'-paste post to keep things rollin' along...I like this piece (below) 'cos it vaguely mimics what I try to do with my confected literary device 'Ed', ie, create a dialogue with some inherent humour, and vice versa...I also reckon that this summarises what most people think when it comes to Christian Porter and his status as an 'alleged Rapist'...said it before, saying it again now, I don't think there's anything "alleged" about Ms Katherine Thornton being Raped by Christian Porter...I believe that Christian's own life-long conduct defines him as a serial Sexual Predator/Offender, and that his farcical denial press conference back in March 2021, complete with fake tears, that appalling li'l performance self-defined his guilt as a Rapist...now the gutless prick, usually shreiking about "the Rule of Law" and "Free Speech", etc, is sueing the ABC for supposedly defaming him, and as part of that process, is trying to have the ABC's 'defense' thrown-out...  

(Hang on, if he's so desperate to have his name cleared and address what the ABC has done, which incidentally was only to identify "a Cabinet Minister", if Christian mate is trying to have the entire 'defense' thrown-out pre-trial, isn't that effectively getting a 'Trial' prior to the actual 'Trial'?-Ed)...exactly it is...(so he's trying to get the Justice to rule on the evidence in secret so that he can have that evidence thrown-out and then permanently suppressed?-Ed)...spot on...(and this is the same guy who wants to clear his supposedly good name, and he's gunna' achieve that by having all the evidence suppressed?-Ed)...that is apparently his strategy...and as this piece (below) covers, the ABC barely scratched the surface of the realities they 'exposed', and that reportage was lawyered to within an inch of it's life before being aired...(and that's why Chrisso mate is so keen to have the ABC's defense suppressed/banned, 'cos it's guaranteed to dump a whole lotta' manure right on his precious li'l privileged head-Ed)...couldn't happen to a nicer guy... 

So here's the one-act play by Andrew Street, and here's also the link...*** 

The Minister's New Defo Suit: A One Act Play | Andrew P Street on Patreon

Join Andrew P Street on Patreon to get access to this post and more benefits.

The Minister's New Defo Suit: A One Act Play

[Curtain rises on a garishly decked out golden stage which no normal human could afford. Pacing the room is A MINISTER, a hawkishly handsome man of early middle age, clad in an expensive suit and a flowing cape of ermine and baby teeth. Sitting awkwardly on the overstuffed couch upholstered in what looks weirdly like human skin but almost definitely isn't is a LAW TALKIN' GUY]

A MINISTER: Right, I’m suing the ABC for defamation!

A LAW TALKIN’ GUY: For the Canberra Bubble story which claimed you sexually harassed your staff? Not sure that's a great idea - they had a lot of witnesses happy to speak on camera, so I'd be curious about the stuff they didn't…

A MINISTER: No, not that. Definitely not that.

A LAW TALKIN’ GUY: Oh, OK, what?

A MINISTER: For claiming I had been accused of committing a rape 30-something years ago!

A LAW TALKIN’ GUY: Wow, did they say that?

A MINISTER: Well, no. They published a story claiming there were historical allegations regarding a cabinet minister.

A LAW TALKIN’ GUY: So… so they didn’t name you?

A MINISTER: No.

A LAW TALKIN’ GUY: And the claim, that allegations had been made and that a dossier of material had been circulated, was also factually accurate?

A MINISTER: Yes.

A LAW TALKIN’ GUY: Hmmm. Defamation, you say?

A MINISTER: Well, it was possible to infer that it was me from the context.

A LAW TALKIN’ GUY: Really?

A MINISTER: Google searches of my name jumped after the allegations were revealed!

A LAW TALKIN’ GUY: How about Google searches for, say, Alan Tudge, or Angus Taylor, or Alex Hawke, or literally all of the penis-havers in the federal frontbench?

A MINISTER: What's that got to do with anything?

A LAW TALKIN’ GUY: Well, did the number of searches similarly jump, perhaps suggesting that maybe everyone was curious about who was actually there because this government’s ministry is essentially a series of identical smug white men oozing undeserved entitlement punctuated by a handful of defensive-looking women?

A MINISTER: Listen, are you trying to help me or not?

A LAW TALKIN’ GUY: OK, sorry. So you’re suing the ABC for reporting there were allegations against an unnamed minister?

A MINISTER: Yes! It’s the only way they’ll learn!

A LAW TALKIN’ GUY: And not suing the other media outlets which also reported that there were allegations against an unnamed minister?

A MINISTER: No.

A LAW TALKIN’ GUY: And also not suing, for example, the website Kangaroo Court of Australia who actually named you as the minister under investigation?

A MINISTER: No.

A LAW TALKIN’ GUY: Huh. And you don't think this looks a bit, well, vendetta-ish?

A MINISTER: Look, the fact is that I want my day in court to finally put all these vile allegations to rest!

A LAW TALKIN’ GUY: Ah, sorry, I misunderstood - so you mean you also want to instigate a police investigation?

A MINISTER: Oh no, definitely not.

A LAW TALKIN’ GUY: Ah, I gotcha: it'll be a parliamentary inquiry, which you’ll totally be able to influence as a senior member of the government while letting the PM angrily insist that proper procedure is being followed. That's smart.

A MINISTER: No, not that either. No investigations of any sort.

A LAW TALKIN’ GUY: OK. So… a civil court case will settle this, you think?

A MINISTER: Yep. The ABC and Louise Milligan went too far with their baseless slander!

A LAW TALKIN’ GUY: The ABC, as in the national broadcaster?

A MINISTER: Yes!

A LAW TALKIN’ GUY: The notoriously cautious media organisation which legals everything within an inch of its life, and the multi-award-winning investigative journalist with decades of experience in breaking complex stories about powerful figures?

A MINISTER: Yep.

A LAW TALKIN’ GUY: So you think they recklessly threw caution to the wind when it came to a story about the nation’s chief law officer…

A MINISTER: Uh-huh.

A LAW TALKIN’ GUY: …of the government that actively invents excuses to attack them and upon which it relies on its very existence?

A MINISTER: That’s the one.

A LAW TALKIN’ GUY: [pauses, staring with incredulity at the audience for an unbroken 70 seconds] OK, so I guess this will be heard in the NSW Supreme Court, since that’s the state in which where both you and Milligan are based…

A MINISTER: Oh no no no no no, the Federal Court.

A LAW TALKIN’ GUY: The Federal Court?

A MINISTER: Yes!

A LAW TALKIN’ GUY: The court over which you, as federal attorney general, appoint the justices?

A MINISTER: I’m not AG any more, I got moved in the cabinet reshuffle.

A LAW TALKIN’ GUY: Ah. So the PM has moved you on? Ouch!

A MINISTER: No, I think it means he has even more faith in my innocence and merely reflects the boundless confidence that this government has in me!

A LAW TALKIN’ GUY: That’s how you read it?

A MINISTER: How else could it be interpreted?

A LAW TALKIN’ GUY: Never mind. But you’re not worried that there’s a perceived conflict of interest there with the justice hearing your case, even though you were effectively her boss, and she’s serving at the pleasure of your replacement and party colleague?

A MINISTER: See? What conflict?

A LAW TALKIN’ GUY: Hmmm. Look, I’m not sure you can afford me for this case.

A MINISTER: Money is not a problem.

A LAW TALKIN’ GUY: How?

A MINISTER: Not telling.

A LAW TALKIN’ GUY: How sustainable do you think it might be that a minister with a taxpayer-funded job is suing the taxpayer-funded ABC in what’s definitely a multi-million-dollar lawsuit, and then refusing to reveal to said taxpayers who’s funding it?

A MINISTER: Very sustainable, is what I think.

A LAW TALKIN’ GUY: And you don’t think there’s yet another potential conflict of interest in refusing to deny there’s some shadowy individual funding your case?

A MINISTER: People love shadows.

A LAW TALKIN’ GUY: OK: so, back to wanting to get this matter put to rest…

A MINISTER: Yes! The ABC have no case!

A LAW TALKIN’ GUY: OK, so we’ll let them reveal their defence, since it’ll obviously be full of holes…

A MINISTER: Oh no, I'll definitely want that suppressed.

A LAW TALKIN’ GUY: …sorry, what?

A MINISTER: Suppress it. Immediately get the judge to you know, put it on ice.

A LAW TALKIN’ GUY: And you think this will make you look more innocent, do you?

A MINISTER: The innocentest!

A LAW TALKIN’ GUY: OK. So, to recap:

A MINISTER: Please.

A LAW TALKIN’ GUY: You want to launch defamation procedures against one of the most well-respected journalists working within the nation’s most trusted and legally risk-averse media organisations over a story that didn’t name you…

A MINISTER: Correct so far.

A LAW TALKIN’ GUY: …using money coming from a mysterious source…

A MINISTER: Tantalising!

A LAW TALKIN’ GUY: …in a court over which you until very recently had oversight…

A MINISTER: Merely a delicious coincidence.

A LAW TALKIN’ GUY: …while actively suppressing information about the case, including the defence being used against your claim…

A MINISTER: I'm just suppressing it so they're not humiliated by how much it exonerates me.

A LAW TALKIN’ GUY: …with the intention being to settle the matter of an alleged historical rape of a woman who subsequently took her life, once and for all?

A MINISTER: Nailed it.

A LAW TALKIN’ GUY: [tallies up the billable hours in head] Look, I think we can definitely take on this yacht. I mean estate. Sorry, yacht. Case! Definitely case.

A MINISTER: Fantastic! So you think I’m going to win?

A LAW TALKIN’ GUY: [long pause] Define “win”.

 

***...so there it is...(and many a true word spoken in jest-Ed)...indeed...

 

Tomorrow: Corrupt Magistrate Ian White Appointed SA Deputy State Coroner

 

As I've discussed multiple times previous, I can refer to Ian White as being a Corrupt Magistrate 'cos I can prove it, even with the limited and partially censored/edited bits of transcripts that I already have...(well his own conduct confirms his bias and bigotry and deep personal animus toward you-Ed)...indeed his behaviour does...(and that's before you look at the definable collusion with SAPol (police) Prosecutions-Ed)...well it's all the same animal really, it's individually and collectively corrupt...(and any 'Coroner' who has previously colluded with and been complicit and/or compliant with SAPol and ICAC and the political agenda, etc, as per your "bizarre trial", that's a matter of deep concern for every citizen of this Institutionalised Pro-Paedophile Corrupt State-Ed)...indeed it is...    

 

I am Nick Fletcher and this is my blog...cheers and laters...