Mark Hotchin

Labour’s Dirty Politics by cowardly David Parker continues

unnamed-1

Labour’s Dirty Politics tactics continue today with coward David Parker now trying to pressure the Police into picking up allegations he’s too scared to repeat outside of Parliament.

Here’s his latest attempt at politicising the New Zealand Police force for political means. Question 11 today reads:

Hon DAVID PARKER to the Minister of Police: Does he know whether or not the allegations in Matt Nippert’s 31 August 2014 article in the Sunday Star-Times that Cameron Slater and Carrick Graham were paid to undermine the Serious Fraud Office are correct?

Read more »

NBR Poll shows all PR people are professional liars

A recent online survey by NBR shows that people can’t be fooled by prissy press releases and smooth talking tosspots…we seem to know they are professional liars.

And the association of professional liars is all upset about it too.

New Zealand’s public relations body, PRINZ, is sour about the result of a recent NBR subscriber poll.

In a press release, PRINZ president Bruce Fraser took a potshot at the messenger, an NBR reporter.

‚ÄúPresident Bruce Fraser has taken issue with an¬†NBR reporter‚Äôs view that¬†subscribers don‚Äôt believe public relations professionals are simply balancing out media and public commentary on contentious issues,‚ÄĚ it says. ¬† Read more »

Labour’s Dirty Politics – Coward Parker defames and smears with no evidence

We have now seen Labour’s Dirty Politics tactics in actions with the brazen coward David Parker standing in the General Debate yesterday and outrageously smearing and defaming Mark Hotchin, Carrick Graham, Cathy Odgers and myself.

I have had two people make worrying allegations to me. One is a former staff member of the Serious Fraud Office who told me at the time the Serious Fraud Office commenced their investigation, a former advisor to Hotchins contacted this person and said, “Hotchins plays a rough game. You watch out. He will use underhand tactics to undermine the Serious Fraud Office and their staff”

The second allegation I have had made to me was that Mr Hotchins used underhand tactics to take out some of the potential witnesses against him in respect of his conduct by Hanover.

Now I can’t name either of those sources and I can’t prove those allegations to be true and they are both hearsay allegations to me, but these allegations must be investigated.

He can’t name them, he has no evidence, it is hearsay at best and yet he demands an investigation? Is this man really a lawyer?

Not a shred of evidence. Even Winston Peters produces evidence.

It is obvious that he has spent too much time running one up his crippled mate’s missus instead reading the Chisholm report.

After days in the house with Andrew Little claiming that National runs a smear machine it was David Parker who displayed the most outrageous smear seen in the parliament in a long, long time. ¬†¬† Read more »

Say It Outside The House David Parker

David Parker is running his mouth in places he shouldn’t with an outrageous name check and then smear in the House against Cactus Kate, Carrick Graham, Mark Hotchin and myself. ¬†This has to be a joke¬†from a man who has integrity so low he ran off with his sick mates missus.

Parker needs to¬†replace¬†the Chisholm Report¬†as his door stop with the best of Chris Knox’s¬†back catalogue then¬†put it on his desk and actually read it. ¬†

He will find that respected Judge Lester Chisholm completely exonerated Mark Hotchin from paying anyone to attack the SFO. ¬†Parker’s dreaming when he makes baseless allegations from imaginary friends he may have at the SFO.

Screen Shot 2014-12-03 at 3.50.47 pm

The¬†only people Justice Chisholm found were paid to undermine the SFO were Mr Feeley’s current¬†and former staff and those who work for the New Zealand Herald. ¬†The Herald being involved in two attempts at undermining to the bloggers’ one.

Parker needs to actually read Whaleoil for some factual information.

The non-issue regarding Tony Gapes was covered off there last week.¬† All this despite it not being a part of the Inquiry. ¬†Mr Hotchin was not even paying for anyone’s¬†services at the time of the post in question that Mr Parker ran off and laid a politically based complaint about. ¬† Read more »

Chaos & Mayhem is never going to stop

Carrick Graham, "gunning for" his opponents

Carrick Graham, “gunning for” his opponents

My mate Carrick Graham has broken his silence and spoken to the Herald on Sunday about Chaos & Mayhem.

You might note that Chaos And Mayhem spells CAM. I’ll even break my policy of not linking to the Herald.

The PR supremo whose employment of attack bloggers was exposed in Dirty Politics says his unconventional media strategies are here to stay.

A defiant Carrick Graham broke his silence over Dirty Politics, which led to the resignation, and exoneration this week, of Judith Collins over allegations she had undermined former SFO boss Adam Feeley.

An inquiry found Graham played third fiddle in the attacks on Feeley, behind his “out-of-control” cohorts Cameron Slater and Cathy Odgers.

But Graham told the Herald on Sunday this week he was simply trying to turn the tide of overwhelmingly negative coverage against his client Mark Hotchin, former Hanover boss.

And he dismissed concerns raised by the Public Relations Institute of New Zealand about the questionable ethics of his radical tactics.

“I don’t think it surprises anyone that when they read the paper in the morning or watch the news, there is someone pushing an agenda somewhere.

Whether it’s PR people, MPs, officials, or even the media themselves.

“I don’t want to burst anyone’s bubbles by pretending that the world is black and white. Some people don’t communicate very well, and the tide turns against them, and that’s where I come in.”

Read more »

Chisholm Report: The Lies and Smears of Fran O’Sullivan Part II

Following on from Part I is examination of Fran O’Sullivan’s now infamously silly second column about witnesses yet to even be interviewed¬†titled “We need to know who tried to fit up SFO Boss”¬†where she writes:

I believe he could start by requiring Odgers, Graham and Slater to say just who paid them for apparently trying to fit up Feeley.

And why they obliged.

Here is what Justice Chisholm said – Mark Hotchin did not pay for anyone to “fit up Feeley”:

Screen Shot 2014-11-26 at 12.02.03 am Read more »

Chisholm Report: The Lies And Smears of Fran O’Sullivan Part I

The Chisholm Report is very ugly for Fran O’Sullivan.

Lets take some of the allegations she has chucked around, often in a defamatory fashion in the past months:

First she said “Key Must Widen Probe

Was there a conspiracy to defeat the course of justice after the collapse of the Hanover Group of companies?

That’s the question the Government must address after the disquieting claims in relation to the attempts by the trio allegedly working for Hanover Finance to discredit the SFO and FMA and prime potential witnesses in any resulting court cases.

Ergh no…the Chisholm Report completely exonerated both Mark Hotchin and Judith Collins from discrediting anyone. ¬†Mr Hotchin in particular was found not to have funded or had anything to do with any of the above.

A cache of emails appears to reveal that three people – Carrick Graham, who was former Hanover Finance director Mark Hotchin’s PR man, tax lawyer and blogger Cathy Odgers (aka Cactus Kate) and blogger Cameron (Whale Oil) Slater – were running campaigns apparently on behalf of Hotchin to try to discredit the SFO and the Financial Markets Authority as they investigated the failed finance company.

No. ¬†Justice Chisholm found that no one was running campaigns “apparently on behalf of Hotchin to try to discredit” anyone.

Screen Shot 2014-11-26 at 12.02.03 am Read more »

Chisholm Inquiry – Four Answered Questions For Matt Nippert

Matt Nippert is keen to keep flogging the dead horse that is the Chisholm Inquiry. ¬†He asks four questions that he thinks are unanswered. No one outside the small selection on the Beltway could possibly care about this heading into the second 24 hours but…

Here at Whaleoil we are particularly keen to help the infirm, bewildered and lazy so will answer them for Matty.

1. Who didn’t the Inquiry hear from?

Hong Kong-based blogger Cathy Odgers, ruled by Chisholm to have been part of a campaign to undermine Adam Feeley, was allowed to provide a “very detailed” written declaration in lieu of interview.

And former Hanover boss Mark Hotchin, despite his offer to talk from overseas via video link, was also not interviewed. At the time of the email the SFO was investigating Hanover, and the investigation was eventually dropped with no charges laid.

Cactus¬†provided a voluntary highly detailed 7,500 word statement to the Inquiry. ¬†She never at law even had to do that because she was never forced to appear at the Inquiry. ¬†Justice Chisholm accepted all of her¬†statement as evidence. ¬†The fact that Fran O’Sullivan called Justice Chisholm in her slag column¬†a “respected” High Court Judge should mean that his accepting of Cactus’ evidence should be the end of it. ¬†Cactus wasn’t called to the Inquiry formally for an interview most likely because O’Sullivan had already tainted the Inquiry with her vile attacks on three witnesses to it¬†as soon as she could reach a keyboard. ¬†Mark Hotchin wasn’t called to the Inquiry because Justice Chisholm already had all the information he needed to draw a conclusion. ¬†Along with Judith Collins he was completely exonerated in the Inquiry.

2. What information wasn’t considered?

“The absence of telephone records for Mr Slater’s calls is surprising given that both Ms Collins and Mr Slater confirmed that they phoned each other often,” Justice Chisholm said.

So here we have a journalist questioning a “respected” High Court Judge after the Judge has gone to the effort of conducting a very extensive Inquiry, breached ¬†privacy to gain evidence and Nippert¬†thinks that this isn’t good enough after 99 pages? ¬†If Justice Chisholm was unhappy with the evidence he obtained then he damn well would have asked for more. He wasn’t the sort of man who would have held back and the painful length of his interviews proved that. ¬†The¬†Inquiry was already intrusive enough anyone staying awake long enough to read the report should see that. ¬†¬† Read more »

Chisholm Inquiry – New Zealand Herald Undermine Themselves

Screenshot 2014-11-25 16.47.40

 

There has been some conjecture among the so called elite of the media regarding the “alleged Gapes smear”. ¬†The report covered off this and a footnote at 42.

Screenshot 2014-11-25 16.50.09

What Fran O’Sullivan and Matt Nippert do not realise is that Cactus Kate has already answered this in the Inquiry even though it is beyond the terms of reference of the inquiry. ¬†They would like to think that Mark Hotchin (completely exonerated in the Chisholm report) paid to “stitch up” not only Adam Feeley but a serious charge of influencing a witness. He did no such thing. ¬† Read more »

Brian Gaynor Made To Eat His Own Humble Pie

Brian Gaynor threw the cloak of sanctimony around his shoulders and rode his high horse during Dirty Politics crying about being sued for defamation and invoking an argument that being sued for defamation suppressed his freedom of speech.

Well, well, well what a difference a few weeks makes.

Yesterday in The Herald both Gaynor and the Herald have had to apologise to Mark Hotchin and Hanover for their Hotchin derangement syndrome on page B12, buried sufficiently back in the rag so as to not be noticed.

I wonder why it wasn’t online? No matter I borrowed someone’s paper so I didn’t have to buy one.

gaynor-defamation Read more »