Yesterday saw a remarkable series of allegations from the Prime Minister, which I am going to go through in detail. There are two explanations for them:
- She is a desperate paranoid leader who really thinks her own law enforcement agencies are colluding with the Opposition.
- She deliberately accused the SFO of leaking, knowing the “media meerkats” would forget all about asking her questions about how she knew “No” meant “Yes” in reference to Owen Glenn’s donation, and instead focus on the SFO instead.
I suspect No 2, as the media did all fall for it. Very little coverage on the Owen Glenn issue. But whether her allegations are desperate or calculating, they are extraordinary to tolerate from the country’s Prime Minister. It almost brings Nixon to mind, railing against the FBI.
Let’s start with her performance on Breakfast yesterday.
I find the National Party statement and timing interesting. Because I would say it is almost certain they got a tip from the Serious Fraud Office that it was about to move.
So Helen Clark can not work out if Winston is telling the truth, but she is “almost certain” that the SFO tipped off the National Party. Does she has a shred of evidence for her claim? No.
And I challenge them directly to come clean on that, because it is a very serious thing if an agency like the Serious Fraud Office is leaking to the Opposition.
It is a very serious thing. Almost as serious as inventing allegations against the Serious Fraud Office. Note that Clark has gone from inventing the allegation to now demanding that the guilty parties come clean on it.
I’m saying they acted on a tip. There was news around Wellington on Tuesday night last week they were about to move. The next day the National Party moved.
This is a classic 2 + 2 = 7. First of all National moved the day Owen Glenn directly contradicted Winston Peters’ version of events, shattering what remained of his credibility. Helen Clark seems to be the only person left in NZ who believes Peters knew nothing of the donation until July. In fact not even she can beleive it because at a minimum she told Peters about it in February.
And as for the PM’s Sherlock Holmes like conclusion that there was gossip in Wellington, so the SFO must be leaking to National, it is more like Inspector Clouseau.
First of all it had been reported in the media that the SFO had been interviewing key parties. Hence it was not surprising that people would speculate that they may launch a formal investigation at some stage. I’d been hearing such gossip for one to two weeks.
Second, Clark overlooks the obvious. That some of those who were interviewed by the SFO, formed a conclusion that they thought a formal investigation was likely, and were saying so – hence the source of the gossip.
Then the SFO responds:
“We do not believe that there has been any leak from the SFO and have received assurances to that end from all SFO personnel involved with the donations matter, and we do not intend to make further comment.”
So is that the end of the matter?
Miss Clark said she had “no option” but to take the SFO’s word.
Good God. She invents a wild accusation with no proof. The SFO talk to every staff member and respond, and her response is to say she has “no option” but to believe them. That is code for saying she doesn’t beleive them, but can’t prove it. And of course she can’t prove it, as she invented the allegation.
Late in the day, Clark widened her claims to include two other agencies.
“I have no doubt whatsoever that word seeped out that the SFO was about to make a move,” she said at her post-Cabinet press conference. “Whether it seeped from there or from others in the loop remains to be seen.”
Now remember, Clark still has not produced a shred of evidence, apart from the fact there was gossip in Wellington (something that happens every day of the year), yet now she claims Crown Law or the Police may be leaking to National.
She said she was not dealing in rumour.
Not dealing in rumour??? She is creating the rumours!!!
The Herald reports
A Crown Law spokeswoman, who confirmed Mr Collins was involved, said he “absolutely did not leak to the National Party, or anyone else for that matter”.
Next Clark will claim it must have been the Cabinet Office, or DPMC or Heather Simpson or anyone at all she can fit up, because Helen is “almost certain” someone leaked to National.
I am trying to think of a parallel where a Prime Minister has just invented allegations against three senior law enforcement agencies, like Clark has. I honestly don’t think even Muldoon acted in such a way.
Finally we do know there was one definite tip-off:
But Helen Clark was also tipped off on Wednesday by Deputy Prime Minister Michael Cullen – who had learned of the impending investigation in his capacity as Attorney-General.
She said she was told late on Wednesday, after Mr Key held a press conference saying a National government he formed was highly unlikely to work with Mr Peters.
Maybe she will accuse Dr Cullen of tipping off National?
The sad thing is the media all played along with her bizarre claims, and let her off the hook on her knowledge of the Owen Glenn donation.