Tommunist posted:

I hope that Dan mines the border

kirbysuperstar posted:

[citation needed]

Cartoon posted:

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/jan/27/antisemitism-and-holocaust-denial-on-the-rise-in-australia-josh-frydenberg-warns

froglet posted:

Holy poo poo.

kirbysuperstar posted:

oh my god

Breakfast Burrito posted:

Who do we want instead? Albo was my "instead" for a long time and look how that's worked out

freebooter posted:

The WA mining company in question is GME and I wouldn't call going from 5c a stock to 8c a stock "soaring" in the context of the broader story

go_banana posted:

Has there been any discussion as to why the government is still insistent with the Astra Zeneca vaccine? I understand it’s the best we can get in a short amount of time, but 70% effectiveness compared to 94% is quite a large gap and we are extremely wealthy nation. Has there been any further discussion to what may happen in the future, when we actually want to open back up internationally? Will the government consider getting more Pfizer/ whoever vaccines that are shown to be more effective?

quote:

to think that the average feral cat kills 1,100 animals per year — that is just amazing

bowmore posted:

someone on facebook wrote this up

Sierra Madre posted:

What is teardrop twitter?

hooman posted:

If you do not wish to buy yourself a different better avatar, I will buy one for you.

quote:

MinterEllison chief executive Annette Kimmitt has left the the law firm after its board decided her position was no longer tenable in the wake of an email she sent to staff about the firm acting for Attorney-General Christian Porter.

The firm’s chairman, David O’Brien, wrote to partners just before 10pm on Wednesday advising them that Ms Kimmitt had worked her last day after they had “mutually agreed” on her departure.

He said partner Virginia Briggs –the firm’s managing partner, infrastructure, construction and property – would take over as the firm’s CEO and managing partner “while the board considers who will become our new CEO”.

“We have thanked Annette for her years of service and wished her well for the future,” wrote Mr O’Brien.

“During her time at MinterEllison, among her many achievements, Annette led our firm successfully through the pandemic for which we are most grateful.”

The development followed a report in The Australian Financial Review that after a board meeting on Tuesday, Mr O’Brien told Ms Kimmitt her services were no longer required.

Ms Kimmitt had been told that she should work from home and not come into the office while she and the firm work on a negotiated settlement and public statement.

It had been thought that there would be no announcement for about two months so that the firm is not seen to be making a knee-jerk reaction.

“They want to focus on getting back to work, getting their name out of the paper and focusing on clients,” said a source.

It is not clear whether the firm - the largest in Australia with 257 partners and around 2000 staff - brought forward its announcement after seeing the media reports.

The firm did not return calls continuing the public silence they have adopted since Ms Kimmitt’s email was revealed in the Rear Window column of the Financial Review on March 5.

Ms Kimmitt, who had not been seen in the firm’s Melbourne office this week, also declined to comment – as did Peter Bartlett, the partner advising Mr Porter.

Ms Kimmitt was only halfway through a five-year term as chief executive which began in September 2018 after she was hired from big four consulting firm EY.
Under siege

However, since she sent the email on March 3, she has been under siege from partners who had already been expressing misgiving about her leadership and the direction of the firm.

Ms Kimmitt told staff she was “hurt” by the fact it had taken on Attorney-General Christian Porter as a client.

“The acceptance of this matter,” Ms Kimmitt wrote, “did not go through the firm’s due consultation or approval processes. Had it done so, we would have considered the matter through the lens of our Purposes and Values.

The criticism since then has focused on the fact that Ms Kimmitt is not a lawyer, had appeared to suggest the firm would pick and choose clients and had not spoken to Mr Bartlett before sending the email.

Mr Bartlett hit back with his own email to partners pointing that out.

“I have advised many federal and state ministers, premiers and prime ministers from both parties. This week I received a call from the PM’s office thanking me for trying to assist the A-G.

“With the claims against the A-G, I would have thought that a majority of our partners would believe that everyone is entitled to a presumption of innocence and legal representation.”

When the email burst into the public realm last Friday, there was immediate pressure from inside and outside the firm for Ms Kimmitt to resign.

While the board told partners on Wednesday that they were looking into the matter, some started working on an ouster proposal to be taken to the board.

quote:

...

Kate says her Princeton Diary was “created circa 1989” and that photos of four pages were taken on February 19, 2020, and transcribed November 25-26, 2019. Each page of the “scratched entries” is covered over in thick blue highlighter pen, making it hard to decipher. The reference to “James” is James Hooke, her former teenage boyfriend.

“How can I tell this tale? Who to? James – maybe [?] him – if we ever get back together, I’ll have to tell him [.] Before then or After–1 way or the other??? But we won’t [??? ..] together. I’m too damaged [?] might [?] [final line] F..K IT WHY

“What did I do? Porter will say I led him on — did I? I said NO — I said NO. To the blow job. He never asked about the rest. Just did it & took what he wanted. Me. My virginity & my voice. What a Prick.”

https://cdn.newsapi.com.au/image/v1/1ed2196fae64d27f8cb0761b1af24003?width=650

What follows is what Kate calls the “F..k It” note that she says was written in January 1991 and included in her dossier for police after she found it in mid-2019. The description of the note says: “transcribed by me in July 2020”. Kate took her own life prior to that, in June of 2020. Hence the below transcriptions were either done by someone else, or, if done by Kate, the date is incorrect. It notes that some of the original pencilled words were traced over in black pen before then being rubbed out.

Below are the horizontal words in the middle of the page transcribed from the original 1991 ­document:

“I don’t know & I can’t explain it to you even if I did know. It’s ­either as simple & facile an explanation as ‘I was drunk’ or I can go into my psyche up to the elbows & drag out some reason but either way & [?] I’ll never explain it to you properly. You’ll have to do that for yourself.”

Below are the words that formed concentric circles transcribed from the 1991 document:

“HE LOVED ME? IN AUG 88. IN JAN 89. HE MUST HAVE. HE SAID SO. HE MEANT IT. I FELT IT. I KNOW HIM. HE KNEW ME. I CAN TRUST HIM. HE’D HELP ME. HE WOULD — I JUST NEED 2 LET GO. S/1 ELSE NEEDS TO KNOW. IT CAN BE HIM. SO WHAT IF HE RECOILS? THEN, @ L, I’D KNO. IT WILL B A 1St STEP ON THE NEC PATH. NECESSE EST. MAYBE WRITE TO HIM IN LATIN? MAKE IT A GAME, A PUZZLE. HE MIGHT EVEN ­APPRECIATE THE CHANCE TO USE HIS BRAIN ON SOMETHING OTHER THAN SKIRT CHASING. HE’S SMARTER THAN HE GIVES H’SELF CREDIT 4. NOT QUITE AS CLEVER AS YOU BUT THAT’S GOOD. HE WON’T CUT H’SELF ON HIS MIND’S RAZOR SHARP EDGES à THE WAY YOU DO ON YRS. F..K IT WOMAN. JUST TELL HIM. HE WAS GOOD 2 U. SO WHAT ABOUT the kid? THERE’S STILL TIME 4 THAT – 1 DAY – THAT’S WAT HE PROMISED U @ ANU. GET THRO’ UNI, GROW UP – THEN SEE IF IT STILL BURNS. IT NOT, HE’LL B A GOOD FRIEND & THAT’S BETTER THAN A LOVER & LONGER-LASTING. “1 of the GIRLS”. HE MIGHT EVEN LIKE THAT! J YOU GAVE HIM HEAD OFTEN ENOUGH (DID HE EVER REPAY that fave? Don’t think so ... Little poo poo...ASK 4 his help or you’ll end up in a ditch s/where. He hates Xtn already – no? MORE REASON 2 REACH 4 HIM. J. HELP ME Honey.”

Kate says she took photos on February 19, 2020, of 11 pages from what she called her Food Journal that she kept in 1990-1991 or “possibly in 1992”. There is one single word on each page:

“I [o?] [n?] don’t want to

Xtian [Christian] [.]

Pl[ea]se do not take me [.]

88 [1988] I [January, the first month indicated by my using a lower case Roman-numeral].”

Kate’s claims are as follows:

“Given the surreal quality to my memories of his raping me, and the dissociative states that I have (and still) experience, I suspect that CP put some sort of date-rape style drug into my drink” when they were at the Hard Rock Cafe in Kings Cross.

“CP walked me back to my room in Women’s College … CP propositioned me, asking ‘How about a pearl necklace?’, I agreed to do this.

“He then forced me to perform oral sex on him ... he had his hands around my throat, I thought that he would choke me to death ... I remember that I vomited ...”

Kate then describes a ritualised form of behaviour by the 17-year-old Porter: “CP then took me from my bedroom to a bathroom … and made me have a bath or a shower.”

Porter “undressed me”, “brushed my teeth”, wrote ‘Christian Porter was ’ere Jan 88’ in the steam on the mirror”, “soaped and washed me with a flannel”, “washed and conditioned my hair”, “shaved my legs and under my arms” and “spent a lot of time washing my anus”…“he was a bit impatient but still shampooed my hair twice”.

“CP took me back to my room and dressed me in my nightie and a clean pair of underpants”… “we got into my bed together and I fell asleep”. “I woke up to CP anally raping me” noting “he did not use a lubricant or a condom” and it was “extremely painful”.

The next day, Kate writes, “All I could cope with, as I remembered parts of the night before, gingerly, was the idea that things had gone ‘a bit too far’ with CP, the previous evening. But it was ok, I reassured myself, because we were going to get married — one day. CP had implied this to me on the previous afternoon, when I was ironing his shirt.”

After the alleged rape, Kate writes about “the last time I saw CP”. She had dinner with Porter, in Perth, almost six years later where, she says, Porter propositioned her, but nothing happened.

freebooter posted:

Is there some editorialising in that article doubting the victim that you haven't posted? I've only kept half an eye on Twitter today but a lot of people seem furious at the Australian. Unless that's just for publishing her private account in the first place?

meteor9 posted:

Boy what an awkward day to get citizenship! I'm just grateful Dutton's name isn't on the certificate. Or that I can read whose name it even is.

Megillah Gorilla posted:

Porter's doing the "Of course I''m innocent, I wouldn't be suing the ABS if I wasn't"

drunkill posted:

quote:

The Liberal Party’s federal vice-president, Teena McQueen, said “I would kill to be sexually harassed at the moment” according to three senior Liberal women who joined her at a meeting to discuss the NSW branch’s new code of conduct.

And Ms McQueen, who says she did not make this exact comment, has apologised for an attempt at humour about herself.

Ms McQueen said she “made a throwaway line, that ‘when women reach my age, we don’t have to worry about being sexually assaulted’,” during the meeting.

“It was an attempt at humour about myself. I regret making that off the cuff remark and apologise.”

But when told of Ms McQueen’s version, the three women were adamant she said “I would kill to be sexually harassed at the moment”.

Two of the attendees at the meeting also told The Sydney Morning Herald and The Age they heard Ms McQueen say “let’s talk about women not getting drunk at work” in comments that left other party officials stunned and outraged.

But Ms McQueen said “I don’t drink, never have” and commented, “I don’t understand excessive drinking in any work environment, let alone Parliament House”.

She added this was “absolutely no reference to anyone” though other people at the meeting understood it to be a reference to former Liberal staffer Brittany Higgins, who had recently come forward alleging she had been raped in Parliament House.

The revelation of Ms McQueen’s comments come as the Morrison government has been left reeling by Ms Higgins’ allegations, a historical rape claim against Attorney-General Christian Porter that he has vehemently denied, a video of emerging of a male staffer performing a solo sex act on a female MP’s desk and as backbench MP Andrew Laming announced he will quit at the next election because he took a photo of a woman’s bottom while her underwear was visible.

The meeting of senior female NSW Liberal Party officials was held on the afternoon of Friday, February 26, just hours before the NSW division’s state executive convened.

The executive voted later that evening to adopt a new code of conduct that makes clear the party has zero tolerance for bullying, sexual harassment, vilification, physical violence and discrimination.

Nine people attended the meeting — Ms McQueen, NSW state director Chris Stone, party official Dorina Ilievska, country representative Michelle Bishop, urban vice president Penny George, women’s council president Mary-Lou Jarvis, country representative Jemma Tribe, urban representative Michelle Byrnes and country vice president Aileen MacDonald, who organised the meeting.

Several formal complaints about Ms McQueen’s comments were made after the meeting to Mr Stone and these have been discussed with Liberal Party federal director Andrew Hirst.

When Ms McQueen’s specific comments were put to Mr Stone he did not deny she had made the comments.

Instead, a spokesman speaking on behalf of the federal and NSW Liberal parties said “the matters you’ve raised are internal matters for the party and we are unable to comment”.

Ms MacDonald had requested the meeting of women in the NSW branch’s executive in the days after Ms Higgins came forward to “come up with the beginnings of a cultural shift action plan”, according to an email sent by Ms MacDonald to the group on February 20 and seen by the Herald and The Age.

But according to several people who attended the meeting, Ms McQueen seemed determined to shut down the discussion about the proposed code of conduct.

“We were all left in shock, it was terrible, deplorable,” one of those participants, who asked not to be named, said.

“When we were talking about another aspect of the code she said ‘can’t we move on?’ and then she said ‘let’s talk about women not getting drunk at work’. A few of us have made complaints.”

A second participant said other people in the meeting were “absolutely shocked, horrified, there aren’t enough words to describe how we felt”.

“I had gone in hoping it would be constructive but it was rail-roaded by those comments. Her views didn’t represent those of the other people in the room”.

The Sun-Herald and The Age reported the Liberal Party had issued a gag order on officials speaking publicly about party affairs, with only federal president John Olsen and federal director Andrew Hirst authorised to make statements about federal party matters in the lead up to the next federal election.

The order is widely understood to have Ms McQueen, an outspoken conservative member of the party, as its target.

But Ms McQueen is refusing to stay silent, continuing to appear on television and saying: “Do you think anyone could gag me?”

Less than two months before the 2019 election, Ms McQueen delivered what was widely regarded as a “trainwreck” performance on the ABC’s high-profile Q&A program.