The SA Politics Thread

[crawf]

Is there anything to suggest he was high while in parliament or otherwise carrying out his duties as an MP?
If there isn't, people need to move on.

addicts don't need to be high to be unhinged, it affects their everyday life decisions

we're not talking about cannabis here

Oh seriously ghs put the pitchfolk down. He wasn't in parliament, he was in his own private residence.

I don't buy the deepfake AI thing, it's obviously him unless that is some crazy AI technology. I do though feel sorry for him considering how damaging this is to his career and his own mental health. The biggest question is who has he seriously pissed off to dog him to the Advertiser, who love trashing peoples reputation.

I'm not the biggest fan of Speirs but he is right on his recent commentary regarding the SA liberal party. They are a complete shambles and should be taken over by the Feds. Ashton Hurn is the only decent person there.

[abc]

Is there anything to suggest he was high while in parliament or otherwise carrying out his duties as an MP?
If there isn't, people need to move on.

addicts don't need to be high to be unhinged, it affects their everyday life decisions

we're not talking about cannabis here

Oh seriously ghs put the pitchfolk down. He wasn't in parliament, he was in his own private residence.

I don't buy the deepfake AI thing, it's obviously him unless that is some crazy AI technology. I do though feel sorry for him considering how damaging this is to his career and his own mental health. The biggest question is who has he seriously pissed off to dog him to the Advertiser, who love trashing peoples reputation.

I'm not the biggest fan of Speirs but he is right on his recent commentary regarding the SA liberal party. They are a complete shambles and should be taken over by the Feds. Ashton Hurn is the only decent person there.

ghs? tf you on about?

[rev]

Is there anything to suggest he was high while in parliament or otherwise carrying out his duties as an MP?
If there isn't, people need to move on.

addicts don't need to be high to be unhinged, it affects their everyday life decisions

we're not talking about cannabis here

Oh seriously ghs put the pitchfolk down. He wasn't in parliament, he was in his own private residence.

I don't buy the deepfake AI thing, it's obviously him unless that is some crazy AI technology. I do though feel sorry for him considering how damaging this is to his career and his own mental health. The biggest question is who has he seriously pissed off to dog him to the Advertiser, who love trashing peoples reputation.

I'm not the biggest fan of Speirs but he is right on his recent commentary regarding the SA liberal party. They are a complete shambles and should be taken over by the Feds. Ashton Hurn is the only decent person there.

I love how he's suddenly deemed an addict too lol.
We don't even know if the video is actually real or fake, although appears to be real according to a forensic expert the advertiser dug up.
If it's real, we don't know the extent of him using cocaine. Maybe it was the first time he did it, maybe it's because of what transpired with himself and the party.. Does that make him an addict?
Are politicians who drink alcoholics? Or is that different because there's a different stigma with that..

I didn't like the guy, found him quite annoying, but far out to label him an addict over one video where we don't even know if it's real let alone what the substance is, is absurd.

For someone like abc who is all anti-establishment, anti-mainstream, all his talk about open mindedness and critical thinking, his rush to judgement without all the facts is hilarious.

[abc]

addicts don't need to be high to be unhinged, it affects their everyday life decisions

we're not talking about cannabis here

Oh seriously ghs put the pitchfolk down. He wasn't in parliament, he was in his own private residence.

I don't buy the deepfake AI thing, it's obviously him unless that is some crazy AI technology. I do though feel sorry for him considering how damaging this is to his career and his own mental health. The biggest question is who has he seriously pissed off to dog him to the Advertiser, who love trashing peoples reputation.

I'm not the biggest fan of Speirs but he is right on his recent commentary regarding the SA liberal party. They are a complete shambles and should be taken over by the Feds. Ashton Hurn is the only decent person there.

I love how he's suddenly deemed an addict too lol.
We don't even know if the video is actually real or fake, although appears to be real according to a forensic expert the advertiser dug up.
If it's real, we don't know the extent of him using cocaine. Maybe it was the first time he did it, maybe it's because of what transpired with himself and the party.. Does that make him an addict?
Are politicians who drink alcoholics? Or is that different because there's a different stigma with that..

I didn't like the guy, found him quite annoying, but far out to label him an addict over one video where we don't even know if it's real let alone what the substance is, is absurd.

For someone like abc who is all anti-establishment, anti-mainstream, all his talk about open mindedness and critical thinking, his rush to judgement without all the facts is hilarious.

drug addiction is one of the foibles of mainstream society in the current era...

I would put money on there is at least a handful of members of this forum on ADHD medication

regardless, this is a politics thread, and by its very nature is opinion oriented, Karen

[rubberman]

An interesting question about this is whether or not the video was being used to influence Speirs before he resigned as Leader, or at the time he talked about Federal intervention.

The reason this could be interesting is that there was a case, not so long ago, of alleged blackmail (later withdrawn by the DPP) where an ALP luminary was involved...

Given that the video has been released, Speirs is likely evaluating the possibility of a formal complaint and referral to the police. Obviously, he'd be talking to his lawyers to see if there's any chance he'd be convicted on the basis of what was in the video, and the lawyer may advise him to STFU. However, if the lawyer thinks a prosecution of Speirs unlikely, and there's evidence of someone blackmailing him, Speirs could drop a bomb onto the State Branch...or even have someone do time.

Interesting.

[SBD]

The issue to me is not just whether he might have been high while in parliament, making press conferences or writing speeches. It's (if true) that a law maker was not committed to following the law. Bernard Finnigan wasn't doing his crimes while in the House as far as I know either.

The fact that the video could have been used to bribe/influence him demonstrates that the electorate at large is also likely to care.

He hasn't tried to defend the behaviour, he has asserted it is fake and was never recorded.

I think I heard that The Advertiser had a camera in his house a few months ago; the video was released to and then by The Advertiser; and The Advertiser had an expert review the recording and assert it is unaltered. I don't see a lot of independence in that chain either.

This story has much more to give yet, including who was behind the camera and what their political position is, how it got to The Advertiser if it didn't start there, and whether Speirs knew the video existed (true, misinterpreted or completely fake) before it made the Front Page.

[abc]

An interesting question about this is whether or not the video was being used to influence Speirs before he resigned as Leader, or at the time he talked about Federal intervention.

The reason this could be interesting is that there was a case, not so long ago, of alleged blackmail (later withdrawn by the DPP) where an ALP luminary was involved...

Given that the video has been released, Speirs is likely evaluating the possibility of a formal complaint and referral to the police. Obviously, he'd be talking to his lawyers to see if there's any chance he'd be convicted on the basis of what was in the video, and the lawyer may advise him to STFU. However, if the lawyer thinks a prosecution of Speirs unlikely, and there's evidence of someone blackmailing him, Speirs could drop a bomb onto the State Branch...or even have someone do time.

Interesting.

you're delving deep into a conspiracy theory rabbit hole there

[SBD]

An interesting question about this is whether or not the video was being used to influence Speirs before he resigned as Leader, or at the time he talked about Federal intervention.

The reason this could be interesting is that there was a case, not so long ago, of alleged blackmail (later withdrawn by the DPP) where an ALP luminary was involved...

Given that the video has been released, Speirs is likely evaluating the possibility of a formal complaint and referral to the police. Obviously, he'd be talking to his lawyers to see if there's any chance he'd be convicted on the basis of what was in the video, and the lawyer may advise him to STFU. However, if the lawyer thinks a prosecution of Speirs unlikely, and there's evidence of someone blackmailing him, Speirs could drop a bomb onto the State Branch...or even have someone do time.

Interesting.

you're delving deep into a conspiracy theory rabbit hole there

Do you have any simpler theories for how and why the video was made, and who and why it was released?

[rubberman]

An interesting question about this is whether or not the video was being used to influence Speirs before he resigned as Leader, or at the time he talked about Federal intervention.

The reason this could be interesting is that there was a case, not so long ago, of alleged blackmail (later withdrawn by the DPP) where an ALP luminary was involved...

Given that the video has been released, Speirs is likely evaluating the possibility of a formal complaint and referral to the police. Obviously, he'd be talking to his lawyers to see if there's any chance he'd be convicted on the basis of what was in the video, and the lawyer may advise him to STFU. However, if the lawyer thinks a prosecution of Speirs unlikely, and there's evidence of someone blackmailing him, Speirs could drop a bomb onto the State Branch...or even have someone do time.

Interesting.

you're delving deep into a conspiracy theory rabbit hole there

Well, if you don't think anyone is going to be interested in who released that, and why, fair enough.

On the other hand, some people are interested. As I said, it will depend on what Speirs wishes to add. That will be critical. Obviously if you have inside information as to whether he will or will not drop a bomb or two, let us know.

[abc]

An interesting question about this is whether or not the video was being used to influence Speirs before he resigned as Leader, or at the time he talked about Federal intervention.

The reason this could be interesting is that there was a case, not so long ago, of alleged blackmail (later withdrawn by the DPP) where an ALP luminary was involved...

Given that the video has been released, Speirs is likely evaluating the possibility of a formal complaint and referral to the police. Obviously, he'd be talking to his lawyers to see if there's any chance he'd be convicted on the basis of what was in the video, and the lawyer may advise him to STFU. However, if the lawyer thinks a prosecution of Speirs unlikely, and there's evidence of someone blackmailing him, Speirs could drop a bomb onto the State Branch...or even have someone do time.

Interesting.

you're delving deep into a conspiracy theory rabbit hole there

Well, if you don't think anyone is going to be interested in who released that, and why, fair enough.

On the other hand, some people are interested. As I said, it will depend on what Speirs wishes to add. That will be critical. Obviously if you have inside information as to whether he will or will not drop a bomb or two, let us know.

Occam's razor someone knew about his habit and he was encouraged to step down. The media already had this in their possession before that happened.

[SRW]

As with most scandals, it's rarely the 'crime' but the cover up that becomes the undoing. There are more skeletons in the closet for the players here.

[rubberman]

you're delving deep into a conspiracy theory rabbit hole there

Well, if you don't think anyone is going to be interested in who released that, and why, fair enough.

On the other hand, some people are interested. As I said, it will depend on what Speirs wishes to add. That will be critical. Obviously if you have inside information as to whether he will or will not drop a bomb or two, let us know.

Occam's razor someone knew about his habit and he was encouraged to step down. The media already had this in their possession before that happened.

If the person that 'encouraged him was the person who handed the video to the media, it may well be blackmail, and a police matter. It is a matter of who did what that's of interest. If Tarzia was connected in any way, it will be even more interesting.

[abc]

Well, if you don't think anyone is going to be interested in who released that, and why, fair enough.

On the other hand, some people are interested. As I said, it will depend on what Speirs wishes to add. That will be critical. Obviously if you have inside information as to whether he will or will not drop a bomb or two, let us know.

Occam's razor someone knew about his habit and he was encouraged to step down. The media already had this in their possession before that happened.

If the person that 'encouraged him was the person who handed the video to the media, it may well be blackmail, and a police matter. It is a matter of who did what that's of interest. If Tarzia was connected in any way, it will be even more interesting.

There's no blackmail here. He stepped down and the video was released anyway.

[rubberman]

Occam's razor someone knew about his habit and he was encouraged to step down. The media already had this in their possession before that happened.

If the person that 'encouraged him was the person who handed the video to the media, it may well be blackmail, and a police matter. It is a matter of who did what that's of interest. If Tarzia was connected in any way, it will be even more interesting.

There's no blackmail here. He stepped down and the video was released anyway.

Or, they threatened him that they would release the video if he asked for Federal intervention, and when he did, they released the video. That's blackmail. Unless you were involved, how would you know? Were you involved? If not, then you are guessing as much as I am. If you were involved, then let's hear the details. It'd be worth hearing the inside story, if you have it.

[abc]

If the person that 'encouraged him was the person who handed the video to the media, it may well be blackmail, and a police matter. It is a matter of who did what that's of interest. If Tarzia was connected in any way, it will be even more interesting.

There's no blackmail here. He stepped down and the video was released anyway.

Or, they threatened him that they would release the video if he asked for Federal intervention, and when he did, they released the video. That's blackmail. Unless you were involved, how would you know? Were you involved? If not, then you are guessing as much as I am. If you were involved, then let's hear the details. It'd be worth hearing the inside story, if you have it.

you're formulating a conspiracy theory and have convinced yourself that is the most likely outcome without any evidence