Arthur 🇦🇺

ONE NATION — ANOTHER SENIOR INSIDER SPILLS THE BEANS. OH DEAR, PAULINE! THE RAPIST, THE BILLIONAIRE, THE MONEY AND THE PEOPLE ALLEGEDLY PULLING THE STRINGS. On 7 November, we summarised an extraordinary investigation by The Age: "THE AGE EXPOSES THE MONEY, THE POWER, THE NEPOTISM AND THE PEOPLE PULLING THE STRINGS." Link: teapawt.net/TheNoisyTrunk/status/2… The article featured secretly recorded conversations with Sean Black, One Nation's former national campaign director and convicted rapist, who spent eight years inside Pauline Hanson's political machinery. And predictably, the usual low-follower One Nation cookers arrived in their droves, shrieking: "DISGRUNTLED EX-EMPLOYEE!" Oh, cupcakes. Seems we have a little problem with that explanation. BECAUSE NOW WE HAVE ANOTHER SENIOR ONE NATION INSIDER SPILLING THE BEANS. This time, it's CHARLES SWINDON, the former senior One Nation adviser who managed the successful campaign that delivered the party its first federal lower-house MP elected under its banner. Swindon worked inside One Nation headquarters for almost five months. And what he has now told The Age and 60 Minutes overlaps with Black's earlier allegations in some rather extraordinary ways. Once might be dismissed as a disgruntled former employee. TWICE? TWO SEPARATE INSIDERS RAISING SIMILAR ALLEGATIONS ABOUT THE SAME PEOPLE? That warrants considerably more than the usual political excuses. And this time, we have allegations involving Gina Rinehart, James Ashby, Sean Black, internal party operations, racism, financial arrangements and serious questions about the people running this organisation. HERE ARE THE MAIN REVELATIONS. 1. GINA RINEHART — WHO IS REALLY PULLING THE STRINGS? This is arguably the most significant allegation in the entire investigation. Swindon claims Gina Rinehart exercises enormous influence over both Pauline Hanson and James Ashby. His account is extraordinary. According to Swindon, Rinehart, despite holding no formal position in One Nation, was consulted on questions of party strategy and public presentation. He claims that "We'll check with Gina" was a common response inside the organisation. NOW, DOES THAT SOUND FAMILIAR? Because just ONE DAY EARLIER, The Age published covert recordings in which Sean Black ALSO alleged that Rinehart and people associated with her were influencing One Nation's political strategy. Two former senior insiders. Two accounts raising similar concerns. One billionaire who holds no formal position in the party. Rinehart has denied inappropriate involvement. But WHO MAKES ONE NATION'S DECISIONS, PAULINE? And why, according to one of your own former senior advisers, did political decisions apparently need to be checked with Gina? 2. ONE NATION — "REALLY SHADY" AND CHAOTIC Swindon's description of the party's internal operations is hardly a glowing employment reference. He describes the organisation as "weirdly incompetent, chaotic" and a "really shady place". But his most significant warning concerns what would happen if these people were entrusted with government power. Swindon predicts inconsistent policies, broken promises, administrative chaos and economic damage. Remember, this is a man who worked inside the party's national political machinery and managed one of its most significant election victories. Not some anonymous account on 𝕏. ONE NATION'S OWN FORMER SENIOR ADVISER IS WARNING ABOUT HOW THE PARTY WOULD OPERATE IN GOVERNMENT. 3. THE CONVICTED RAPIST — SACKED PUBLICLY, BUT WHAT HAPPENED PRIVATELY? Remember Sean Black? The convicted rapist Pauline Hanson publicly declared was gone, finished, removed from One Nation? Well, the earlier covert recordings revealed Black claiming that his family business continued providing fundraising services to One Nation's Victorian branch after his public removal. The alleged arrangement involved his business retaining a percentage of donations raised. Black subsequently denied continuing to provide those services. Hanson also denied the arrangement. BUT NOW THERE'S ANOTHER WITNESS. Swindon claims he raised concerns about precisely this alleged commercial arrangement. And he believes questioning the handling of the matter contributed to his dismissal. So we now have Black's recorded account AND Swindon's separate allegations about how the party handled the matter. PAULINE, WAS THERE A COMMERCIAL ARRANGEMENT OR WAS THERE NOT? And if there was, how much money was involved? 4. RACISM — WHAT SWINDON CLAIMS HE HEARD INSIDE PARTY HEADQUARTERS This allegation is particularly revolting. Swindon claims that during Hanson's June National Press Club address, a senior staff member watching proceedings inside One Nation headquarters shouted an obscene racist insult about an Indigenous journalist who had questioned Hanson. The alleged language was disgusting. And it was allegedly uttered not by some anonymous social-media troll, but by a SENIOR STAFF MEMBER INSIDE PARTY HEADQUARTERS. This remains Swindon's allegation, not an independently established finding. DID THE INCIDENT OCCUR, PAULINE? AND IF SO, WHAT ACTION WAS TAKEN? 5. THE PARTY THAT CAMPAIGNS AGAINST IMMIGRATION — EXCEPT WHEN IT SUITS? Swindon also alleges that David Farley, One Nation's first federal lower-house MP elected under its banner, privately expressed concerns about the party's immigration policies. According to Swindon, Farley indicated that a wealthy agricultural donor could rely on continued access to overseas migrant workers. Farley has dismissed Swindon's claims as nonsense and speculation. BUT HERE'S THE INTERESTING BIT. The article separately reports that Victorian One Nation candidate Garner Smith publicly supported ensuring regional employers continued to have access to migrant workers. So we have a party campaigning on major immigration reductions while some of its own candidates are defending migrant labour for particular industries. WHAT EXACTLY IS ONE NATION'S IMMIGRATION POLICY WHEN AGRICULTURAL DONORS AND EMPLOYERS ARE INVOLVED? 6. THE UNDERWORLD CONCERNS — AND THE SACKING OF THE MAN WHO RAISED THEM Swindon claims he raised concerns about Bianca Colecchia, One Nation's Victorian state secretary, and her former employment managing a strip club. The venue had dealings with a promoter previously accused by police of involvement in serious criminal activity and links to the Comanchero bikie gang. Importantly, the promoter was never convicted, charges were dropped and a subsequent civil proceeding was settled without admission. The allegation is NOT that Colecchia committed a crime. The concern is how the party handled questions about these associations. And here is where the reporting becomes particularly significant. THE AGE REPORTS THAT TEXT MESSAGES CONFIRM senior One Nation official Kelvin Morton dismissed Swindon's concerns as rumours before sacking him "because of Bianca Colecchia". Swindon claims his dismissal was unlawful. One Nation disputes that allegation. SO WHAT INVESTIGATION DID ONE NATION UNDERTAKE BEFORE DISMISSING THE PERSON WHO RAISED THE CONCERNS? 7. THE MAN VETTING ONE NATION CANDIDATES — WHO EXAGGERATED HIS OWN CREDENTIALS And finally, Kelvin Morton. The senior One Nation official involved in vetting candidates and personnel. The same man has admitted exaggerating his background. The investigation reports that Morton falsely claimed to have been an army officer and overstated his involvement in an American political campaign. THE MAN RESPONSIBLE FOR HELPING VET ONE NATION PERSONNEL COULDN'T ACCURATELY REPRESENT HIS OWN CREDENTIALS. Quite the personnel department, Pauline. TWO INSIDERS. TWO INVESTIGATIONS. THE SAME TROUBLING QUESTIONS. Let's be absolutely clear. Not every allegation made by Black or Swindon has been independently proven. Both are former employees, and Swindon is contemplating legal proceedings over his dismissal. Their claims must be tested, and denials must be reported. BUT THAT DOES NOT MAKE THE OVERLAP DISAPPEAR. On 7 November, Sean Black's covert recordings raised questions about Gina Rinehart's influence, James Ashby, financial arrangements and One Nation's internal operations. On 8 November, Charles Swindon publicly raised overlapping concerns about Rinehart's influence, the alleged continuing financial relationship with Black's business and the party's governance. And the second investigation adds serious allegations about racism, internal personnel vetting, candidate management and the treatment of staff who raise concerns. ONCE IS AN ALLEGATION THAT DEMANDS SCRUTINY. TWICE, FROM TWO PEOPLE WHO WORKED INSIDE THE SAME ORGANISATION, IS A PATTERN OF ALLEGATIONS THAT DEMANDS ANSWERS. And please, spare us the chorus of "disgruntled ex-employees". That is not an answer to the substance of what either man has said. PAULINE HANSON AND JAMES ASHBY: Who makes your party's strategic decisions? What influence does Gina Rinehart exercise? What were the financial arrangements involving Sean Black's family business? What investigations were undertaken into Swindon's complaints? And why should the public have confidence in your internal governance when one of your own senior officials admits to exaggerating his credentials? THOSE ARE THE QUESTIONS. And Australians deserve proper, evidenced answers. ⛐ ▓ ▓ ▓ ▓ ▓ ▓ ▓ Not another political tantrum. ONE NATION — WHOSE NATION? FOLLOW THE MONEY. FOLLOW THE INFLUENCE. AND FOLLOW THE EVIDENCE. Source: The Age, 8 November 2026 — Nick McKenzie, Garry McNab and Toni Ambrogetti. ‘Really shady place’: Top adviser claims One Nation sacked him when he raised rapist, underworld concerns. Full article link in replies.

Tim Blair, a cooker from the Daily Telegraph, not a journalist but a "commentator & Blogger" like Fred Scratchedem from Upper Outback, is so far right-wing he's in danger of falling off the flat earth he lives on. The Telegraph headlines with his propaganda piece, "Tim Blair: Here’s to Hanson’s ever-helpful hater mates" Well, that's a reason not to read right there, "Tim Blair". But it's our job, and thank fuck we get paid well to do it, for this was sphincter-shrinking shite. Let's burn this rot. Tim Blair’s “Elect Pauline Project”: A Masterclass in Delusional Spin Tim Blair, the Daily Telegraph’s resident contrarian and professional troll, has once again graced us with a column so detached from reality it might as well have been written on a flat earth. In his latest, “Here’s to Hanson’s ever-helpful hater mates,” Blair attempts to argue that the left, yes, the left, is single-handedly responsible for One Nation’s surging popularity. Because, in Blair’s world, if you criticise a far-right party, you’re actually their secret PR team. It’s the kind of logic that would make a goldfish blush. Let’s break this down, shall we? 1. The “Leftist Elect Pauline Project” Myth: A Conspiracy So Stupid It’s Almost Impressive Blair’s central thesis is that One Nation’s rise is fueled by left-wing outrage, as if every tweet from a progressive or every critical ABC segment is somehow a backdoor endorsement. This is, of course, complete nonsense. One Nation’s popularity isn’t a grassroots movement sparked by leftist rage, it’s the result of a well-funded, media-amplified campaign backed by billionaire interests. Fact: One Nation has spent millions on targeted online advertising, social media manipulation, and astroturfing. They didn’t get to 30% in the polls by relying on Quentin Dempster’s X rants. Fact: The mainstream media, especially News Corp outlets like the Daily Telegraph, have given Hanson and her cronies endless free airtime, platforming her every controversial soundbite while framing her as the “voice of the forgotten Australian.” Fact: Blair conveniently ignores that One Nation’s messaging is amplified by right-wing echo chambers, not left-wing critics. The more the Telegraph, Sky News, and shock jocks parrot her talking points, the more normalised her extremism becomes. But sure, Tim, it’s the left’s fault. Because nothing says “organic growth” like a party propped up by Gina's chequebook and Murdoch’s propaganda machine. 2. The “We’re Just Misunderstood” Gaslighting Blair takes Quentin Dempster’s satirical (and admittedly over-the-top) summary of One Nation’s platform and pretends it’s a serious argument. Dempster’s list, “Frack, drill, open cut coal; deport/ban #Muslims; restore landlords’ neg-gear/#CGT slush; open slather gambling; paywall for ABC; axe Family Court; ‘work choices’ 2.0, burn Aboriginal flag”, is obviously a caricature, but Blair treats it as if it’s the left’s actual manifesto. Then, in a move so shameless it deserves an Oscar, Blair pivots to agree with half of it: “Put aside Dempster’s misrepresentations, exaggerations and fearmongering… and you’ve got a pretty workable nation-rebuilding strategy there.” Ah yes, the classic “ignore the #racism, the bigotry, and the economic illiteracy, just focus on the parts I like” defence. Because if you squint hard enough, open-cut coal mines and gutting worker protections do sound like a “nation-rebuilding strategy”, if your idea of “rebuilding” involves turning Australia into a 19th-century company town. 3. The Minimum Wage Lie: Hanson’s “Pro-Worker” Fantasy Blair unironically praises Pauline Hanson for opposing minimum wage increases, framing her as the real champion of workers because wait for it, “employers might not hire as many people if wages go up.” This is trickle-down economics at its most laughable: Reality: The minimum wage is not the reason businesses fail. If a company can’t afford to pay its workers a living wage, it’s not a viable business. Reality: Hanson’s “pro-worker” stance is a joke. She’s the same woman who voted against superannuation increases, opposed penalty rates, and wants to dismantle the Fair Work Commission. But sure, Tim, she’s totally looking out for the little guy. Reality: Amanda Rishworth is right. If you oppose wage growth for the lowest-paid workers, you’re not on the side of workers. You’re on the side of exploitative employers. But Blair doesn’t care about facts. He’d rather pretend that opposing basic labor rights is “common sense” while ignoring that real wages have stagnated for a decade under the very policies Hanson and her allies push. 4. The “Middle Australia” Myth: Hanson’s Base Isn’t Who Blair Thinks It Is Blair laughably claims that One Nation’s appeal is broadening to “young, educated, multicultural” voters, as if Barrie Cassidy’s outdated take is the only thing standing in the way of Hanson’s universal appeal. Reality: One Nation’s base is overwhelmingly older, white, and regional, the same demographic that News Corp and Sky News have spent years radicalising with fearmongering about immigrants, “woke elites,” and “leftist conspiracies.” Reality: The idea that inner-city progressives are secretly flocking to One Nation is delusional. If anything, Hanson’s rise is a backlash against the very media ecosystem Blair is part of, one that has normalised far-right rhetoric while pretending it’s “just common sense.” But Blair needs this myth to be true because if One Nation’s support is actually driven by right-wing media and billionaire backers, then his entire narrative collapses. 5. The Arts Funding Red Herring: Because Nothing Says “Populism” Like Pissing Off Artists Blair ends with a bizarre fantasy about One Nation abolishing arts funding, as if this is the key to winning over “Middle Australia.” Reality: Most Australians don’t give a damn about arts funding, but they do care about healthcare, wages, and cost of living. Hanson’s actual policies (slashing immigration, gutting environmental protections, attacking unions) are what drive her base, not some culture war crusade against painters and poets. Reality: This is pure trolling. Blair knows that no one votes based on arts funding, but he loves the idea of triggering “elite” artists because it feeds his persecution complex. The NOISY Verdict: Blair’s Column Is a Dumpster Fire of Bad Faith Arguments Tim Blair’s piece isn’t just wrong, it’s dishonest. He: ✅ Ignores One Nation’s billionaire backers and pretends their rise is organic. ✅ Blames the left for platforming Hanson, while his own employer (News Corp) does the heavy lifting. ✅ Twists criticism into endorsement, as if calling out extremism is the same as promoting it. ✅ Cherry-picks economic talking points while ignoring the real-world harm of Hanson’s policies. ✅ Mocks progressives for being “elitist” while his entire career is built on elitist sneering. This isn’t analysis. It’s propaganda. And it’s exactly why people are sick of the mainstream media’s complicity in normalising far-right nonsense. Final Thought: If One Nation’s Rise Is the Left’s Fault… Then What’s Your Excuse, Tim? If Blair truly believes that criticism = promotion, then by his own logic: →Every time the Telegraph attacks Labor, they’re actually helping Albanese. →Every time Sky News platform Hanson, they’re actually undermining her. →Every time Blair writes a column, he’s actually discrediting himself. But we know that’s not how it works. One Nation’s rise is on you, Tim. It’s on News Corp’s relentless amplification of far-right talking points. It’s on the Telegraph’s decision to treat Hanson as a serious political figure instead of the conspiracy-peddling, worker-exploiting grifter she is. So here’s a NOISY challenge for Blair: If you really think the left is electing Pauline Hanson… then stop platforming her. But we all know you won’t. Because you need her more than she needs you. Your move, Tim. Or are you too busy “owning the libs” to notice the house you’re burning down? We are not providing a link to the article because we have too much respect for our readers, and it is unmitigated shite. Thank us later. NB: Tim has given up on 𝕏 and probably did so when he created the handle @RobotTimBlair in 2016, because when you choose a handle like that, experience incredibly low view and participation rates, why wouldn't you give up? Tim finally gave up around May 2023 (Evidence in replies) after nearly ten years of 'giving up'. He is now giving up regularly at The Daily Telegraph.

Jacinta Numpty Jumper Price has been quiet for a while. That was until the Liberal Party handed her ANGUS TAYLOR'S talking points on DAVID JONES. But she, like all the others, didn't do her research. Angus blamed Albo. Numpty Jumper blamed ALBO. Yet here's the odd thing none of them talk about. David Jones was profitable when sold to ANCHORAGE (The same group that owned DICK SMITH before its demise). Anchorage bought DJ's for around $100 million, almost a TWENTIETH of what Woolworths paid for it. Woolworths sold a profitable David Jones to Anchorage for a fraction of what it had paid. In its first two full financial years under Anchorage, David Jones suddenly posted net losses of A$74.4 million and A$62.3 million. OOPS. Let's also not forget that David Jones received over A$102.99 million in reported wage subsidies, including Australian JobKeeper. We replied to Jacinta's ANGUS-worded post here: teapawt.net/TheNoisyTrunk/status/2…

Hi Vivian @BlackerVivian, we understand your frustration. But polls are often wrong, as we will demonstrate. However, our question to Angus Taylor has nothing to do with what 1241 people apparenlty think in a poll paid for by the RIGHT WING MEDIA. "Majority now say Government spending is too high!" Those sentiments come from two polls, one of them contracted by Murdoch, sampling 1241 people, and the very same poll that got the 2025 election totally wrong. In fact, nearly every major poll leading up to the 2025 election was totally and utterly incorrect. However, our post was not about what some people may think, majority or minority or otherwise. It was a direct question to Angus Taylor, who, as we quoted, over 100 times recently, stated that government spending is too high. Our post asks a direct question of ANGUS: WHAT WILL YOU CUT? Will it be Medicare, aged care, the pension, GP or PBS? What the fuck will you cut government spending by and where? Furthermore, just for fun, in the very same two polls that suggested "voters" (55% of all of the MASSIVE [joke] SAMPLE of 1241 of them) also preferred Anthony Albanese as Prime Minister. Go figure. The RW media is hell-bent on removing Labor. The majority of PEOPLE are not.

Dear Angus Taylor (or Andrew Hastie, depending on when this reaches you), “Because of Labor’s out-of-control spending.” You’ve trotted out the same line on 𝕏, in TV pressers and anywhere else someone’s left a microphone unattended. So here’s your chance, Angus. TELL US, IN WRITING, EXACTLY WHAT YOU’LL CUT. MEDICARE? HOSPITAL FUNDING? AGED CARE? THE AGE PENSION? Or will you dust off the Morrison playbook and talk tough about public service headcounts while paying outsiders to do the work? The Department of Finance audit put the bill for external labour across 112 federal agencies at $20.8 billion in 2021–22. WHICH PROGRAMS, ANGUS? HOW MUCH FROM EACH? WHEN? “We’ll put out our costings before the election” won’t cut it. You’ve got plenty to say about spending today. You can tell Australians today what you’d take off the table. PUT IT IN WRITING. We know you won’t.

Angus Taylor, yet again, posted about "Labor's out-of-control spending" - See below. We have counted at least 100 times that he has posted on social media the very same statement, stated this in TV pressers, or in other media. We stopped counting at 100 because we were fucking bored. However, we didn't find ONE EXAMPLE, and trust us we have searched thoroughly, anywhere where he has stated how he would CUT SPENDING. So we fucking asked him: And we gave him two short video clips to remind him. Please see our reply to Angus, we will be keeping a record of any response he gives. Yawn. teapawt.net/TheNoisyTrunk/status/2… PS: Pensioners, be very scared. Sick people, forget it; take a pain pill (under doctor's supervision, assuming he doesn't cut MEDICARE).

Now, you will need a coffee break for this. It's 6 minutes of the best of ANGUS TAYLOR boring the Beef Bourguignon out of journalists at the Nation Press Club. Before the 2025 election. We promise you it is time well spent. Seriously, this is seasoned journo's reactions to old Watergate at his most comical. At this time the Liberals were ahead in every poll and Peter Dutton was widely reported to be the next PM. HAHAHAH

Dumb Furries. They sulk and then lie. Fucking weak-assed jelly babies. They always get the opportunity to respond. If they respond by avoiding their responsibility to back up their claims, they will get fucking blocked. And when we do, they cry like little fucking babies. And that's why we keep records.

Dear Paulsy, You need a new advisor. Lesson 1. Never, ever, mention the word 'RORTS'. This could cause people to go back over the records and look at all the rules you've been involved in and publish them. I don't know who those people would be; maybe it will be us?

How inconvenient for ANGUS TAYLOR. #Noisy has researchers: MAJOR BUSINESS CLOSURES UNDER THE LNP: OOPS teapawt.net/TheNoisyTrunk/status/2…