Monday, November 19, 2012

Key calls Dotcom's bluff

John Key is not mincing words over allegations by Kim Dotcom that Key has been untruthful; Stuff reports:

Prime Minister John Key is standing by his assertion that he knew nothing of tech millionaire Kim Dotcom until the day before his arrest.
Dotcom, who is battling extradition to the US on internet piracy charges, yesterday accused Key of lying - and said he will prove it in court.
Key has maintained his first he learned of the German entrepreneur was on January 19, when he was briefed about a joint FBI-New Zealand Police raid on his Coatesville mansion.
Speaking on his way to the East Asia Summit in Cambodia, Key said Dotcom is "just plain wrong".
"I've always said, to the best of my recollection, the first I ever heard of the guy was January 19.
"My office have extensively looked at the meetings I've held, the correspondence I've had both in my electorate office and my parliamentary office and I've seen nothing to conflict that view.
"I have no doubt that he'll try and draw one and one together and he'll get three, as he has in the past - this is a guy who has publicly made quite a few statements that have been proven to be incorrect.'' 

The onus in now on Dotcom to put up or shut up. Let's not forget that Mr Dotcom has a very shady past including convictions in Germany and Hong Kong, and that despite the media in New Zealand fawning over him (until last week's Sunday programme, which was the first to bust the myth) is still under threat of extradition to the USA to face charges of:
  • Conspiracy to commit racketeering;
  • Conspiracy to commit copyright infringement;
  • Conspiracy to commit money laundering;
  • Criminal copyright infringement by distributing copyrighted work being prepared for commercial distribution on a computer network and aiding and abetting criminal copyright infringement;
  • Criminal copyright infringement by electronic means and aiding and abetting criminal copyright infringement.

If Dotcom has evidence that John Key has lied about him, he should front up with it rather than continuing the innuendo. But we won't hold our breath.

10 comments:

Freddie Fleetstreet said...

TVNZ played after Truth exposed him the Thursday before

alwyn said...

I suspect Kim Dotcom's "evidence" is probably a letter from John Key sent before the last election telling him all the things that National has been doing and asking for his vote. The fact that Key would never have seen it and one would go to everyone in the electorate is of course irrelevant.
I got such missives from Grant Robertson last year and I am quite sure he doesn't know me.

Keeping Stock said...

Of course Alwyn; that explains it. Don't tell Edward the Confessor though; it'll send him into a state of apoplexy!

Joint the dots,Commie said...

Dotcom's sharp-as and has excellent lawyers.
He has, he will, Key's screwed.
Happy days.

Edward the Confessor said...

Before the media starting fawning over Dotcom, the government was doing it. Remember his close friendship with John Banks and all those "anonymous" donations, helicopter rides, parties and lies? Whatever happened to that guy? Oh that's right, he's a Minister in Key's government.

Anyway, if Key's assertion is proved false he'll just run with his trusty fallback; his remarkably and conveniently faulty memory. To the best of his recollection indeed.

Jonny 2Face said...

Kim Dotcom is not mincing words over allegations that Key has been untruthful; Stuff reports:

Kermit said...

Dotcom is not using innuendo. He's saying Key lied. He's also not failing to 'front up'. He says the evidence will be presented in court, and not before then. The man's a machine and Key is heading for a big fall and the hands of the Large German.

Ciaron said...

The next question is: if Dotcom can topple this government, is Labour in a functional state to govern?

Keeping Stock said...

@ Kermit - given your eminently sensible comment on this morning's post, I'm surprised that you have been taken in by the Large German Gentleman's bluff and bluster.

I think that Deborah Coddington's FB comment is a far more credible explanation:

Deborah Coddington - As I understood the interview with Holmes, Dotcom was vaguely trying his hand at blackmail - make these extradition hearings go away or I'll reveal that the PM is naked. Whoop de do, we'd all love to see the PM naked. Not.

Given Dotcom's criminal past, that is a far more likely scenario.

Kermit said...

"Dotcom was vaguely trying his hand at blackmail"

hardly. Not his style at all. Dotcom is backed by expensive and efficient lawyers. He'd not have said it lightly, nor would he have said it without proof in hand. Seeing Shearer fall at the final hurdle would have alerted Dotcom to the perils of claims without substance. He's got it. He'll use it.
Key's buggered.