Thursday, May 17, 2012

More "Gotcha" journalism

3News played "gotcha" with John Banks last night; once again, with the assistance of Kim Dotcom, who seems to have it in for the Epsom MP.

Banks last night released this statement:

Statement from John Banks on gift basket

On a personal trip to Hong Kong I received a gift basket at my hotel from Mr Kim Dotcom.  I did not accept the gift and gave it to hotel staff.  I did not give the matter any further thought. 
I have learned through the media today that the gift was supposedly worth more than $500, an amount which requires disclosure under the Register of Pecuniary and Other Specified Interests. 
Subsequently my office sought clarification from the Registrar on the appropriate course of action.   As we are unable to confirm the actual value, their advice was to make an addition to my return as set out in Standing Orders Appendix B 20(1) which I have now done.

On this occasion, Banks seems to have played with a very straight bat. Getting advice from the Registrar of Pecuniary Interests  before going public was a sound strategy, and it's unlikely that this matter will go any further.

But we're sure that John Key is thinking the same question that most people with any interest in this matter will be; does Dotcom have anything else on Banks in this death by a thousand leaks? Key may have even posed that question of Banks; like previous Prime Ministers, he operates on a "no surprises" basis.

But John Key's comments about the media are further borne out by this story. And we reckon that some questions should be asked of 3News as to just what their motivation is with regard to Jon Banks and Kim Dotcom.


Judge Holden said...

Goodness me. What chums these two were! Helicopter rides, birthday parties, fireworks displays, hotel recommendations (and discounts), little presents, huge donations and little thank yous. And Banks said he hardly knew the guy. For someone with nothing to hide and nothing to fear, Banks sure is hiding a lot and running scared. What else is there to come out of the woodwork I wonder...

Lesley said...

Wonder how many others Dotcom has tried to romance - can't just be John Banks! What are TV3 getting out of this? Dotcom seems to be the type who wants something in return for what he gives. Watch out - when you point a finger - 3 are pointing back to you.

Anonymous said...

Oh God! The '3-fingers pointing back at you' argument, so favoured by the righteous.
Why hasn't John Key spoken to John Banks about all this grubby dealing?
The Prime Minister, completely removed from the scandal - yeah right!
Key is playing all innocent but the whole country can see he's got it all over his face and chin. His credibility is shot. Banks is neck-deep in privileged deals and Key's
pretending he's relaxed. That's bull with a large serving of shit on top.
Nice little 'smooth over' post though. Keeping Stock. You're doing all you can to protect your boys, we can see that.

Anonymous said...

"Statement from John Banks on gift basket"

Btw - explaining is losing - Whale Oil.

Keeping Stock said...

I agree Anon (7.51); but in this case, a question has been asked, and Banks has responded. Sometimes you have to lose a battle to win the war.

BTW: ever bought one of those gift baskets? There's a helluva difference between what they cost and what they're worth!

Judge Holden said...

"Sometimes you have to lose a battle to win the war."

Why are you so dead set on defending Banks? If this was one of the people you classify as the enemy you'd be baying for blood. This is worse than Peters/Glenn in terms of the sheer volume of lies told and odd behaviour. Unless you're a hack who's view is worth nothing, what's the reason for your inconsistency?

Anonymous said...

It really disturbs me when I read this sort of thing, Keeping Stock:
"This certainly ups the stakes for Banks and for Key. Like the Murdochs in Britain, they have resorted to “wilful blindness” regarding Banks’ description of DotCom’s donation of $50,000 to his mayoral campaign as “anonymous”. Key has refused to ask Banks any direct questions, continued to accept Banks’s assurance that he acted legally as question piles on question, and said Ministerial ethics wasn’t an issue as Banks was not a Member of Parliament at the time of the mayoral donation.

But he was a Member of Parliament when he made the offer of service to DotCom in the context of seeking financial assistance from him. This makes Philip Field look like a Good Samaritan. Banks has to go.

I agree with the Judge. It's out of order for you to be defending Banks so freely and by doing so, Key for his 'willfil blindness'. If Clark was doing this, you'd be baying long and loud. This is a very low point for you.

Keeping Stock said...

Defending Banks? No; check this out:

Anonymous said...

Banks exposed again today, with a $1000 undeclared gift from Kim Dotcom. Will Banks' venal greed and arrogance and Key's vain efforts to dodge responsibility for his minister never cease?
And you support these corrupt clowns, KS?

May 16, 2012 7:22 PM

Blogger Keeping Stock said...

I'm not aware of the allegation against Banks Anon, but if he has been "exposed" as you say, then he is a fool, and Key would be better off without him.

"If" Banks had been exposed last night, he would indeed have been a fool, and I stand by my comment. But he wasn't; it was a pathetic beat-up by the 3News/Dotcom cheer squad.

James Stephenson said...

I think the motivations here are pretty transparent actually.

3News are obviously out for revenge after they were made to look like idiots over the teacup thing, Dotcom obviously feels like Banks owed him something which he didn't deliver during his recent problems.

In this case there doesn't appear to be a direct cash payment for a specific favour, like a Consulship or a NZ passport, just one very very rich bloke trying to get pally with another merely very rich bloke with political connections.

Dotcom doesn't appear to be afraid to splash his money around, so I'm wondering who else has been a recipient of his buttering up...Winston probably doesn't have the influence to be worth it these days.

Judge Holden said...

Yep, KS, you've really gone into bat for Banks. Every damning revelation gets the "gotcha" treatment from you, and then you attempt to dissemble, deflect and distract. I'm simply asking the question about why that is, given you're rabidly opposed to the perception of dodgy conduct when you think you see the other side of the fence doing it. No credibility.

Anonymous said...

KS comments conditionally on hearsay - see his comment @8.19 -and then produces this post when facts become available.

Averse to facts are you, Judge Holden?

Graeme Edgeler said...

"I didn't know it was worth $1000" isn't a good reply. Did Banks know it was worth less than $500? Erring on the side of non-disclosure is foolish.

Alex said...

If he was playing with a straight bat, wouldn't he have come out with this at the correct and appropriate time? Once again, Banks is (to use his own wonderful word) obfuscating. He has displayed the ethical standards displayed by Philip Field, and should be punished accordingly.

Anonymous said...

And Key, who is behaving similarly evasive and 'not having spoken to the Minister (obfuscation of the decade), should go too. It's embarassing to watch a blogger defending the two shifty bullshitters, Banks and Key.

Anonymous said...

"What are TV3 getting out of this? "

Well, using Occams Razor, I'd say ratings - surely that's what they're meant to do, no?