Managed to watch some of that press conference that Gillard gave today in a desperate attempt to make the AWU scandal go away. Lots of non-answers and evasions, of course.
One of the most revealing parts of it was when she was asked if she actually witnessed the signing
of the Power of Attorney. It required a very simple answer, yes or no.
She couldn't give one. Even some tragic Labor luvvies in the meeja are starting to realize this is a serious issue, and that her constant claim that she "did nothing wrong" just doesn't cut it.
The way she went on the attack against Ralph Blewitt showed how angry and desperate she was. She used her well honed sliming techniques on the former union official:
"Mr Blewitt is a man who has publicly said he was involved in fraud. Mr Blewitt is a man who has sought immunity from prosecution," Ms Gillard said.
"Mr Blewitt is a man who has fled Indonesia to avoid a police interview in relation to land fraud, although he denies wrongdoing in the case. Mr Blewitt says he owes money on another Asian land deal.
"Mr Blewitt admits to using the services of prostitutes in Asia. Mr Blewitt has published lewd and degrading comments - and accompanying photographs - of young women on his Facebook page.
"Mr Blewitt, according to people who know him, has been described as a complete imbecile, an idiot, a stooge, a sexist pig, a liar, and his sister has said he's a crook and rotten to the core.
What has any of that got to do with the facts of the matter? Hell, he could be a serial killing, cannibalistic pedophile for all I care ... Did she witness him signing the document or didn't she?
"His word against mine? Make your mind up."
I think an awful lot of people have made up their minds -- even many within her own party. And not in the way she'd expect ...
Knowing how easily and often this woman lies her word is worth very little indeed. Sure, Blewitt's not the most credible person in the world but he strikes me as being a lot more trustworthy than she is. And people can, and do redeem themselves, after all. Which is exactly what he genuinely seems to be attempting to do in this case. He's been clear, consistent and unequivocal in his claims, while Gillard has been evasive, changing her story repeatedly.
Hell, the Prime Minister of the country comes across as way dodgier than a self-confessed bagman. How sad is that?
Then there's the fact that back in the day Gillard herself was great mates with this "sexist pig". Surely he was the same guy in the nineties? Why did she have anything to do with him then, I wonder ...
UPDATE: Blewitt responds to the smear.