Soon after the Charles II was restored to the throne, the triumphant monarchists exhumed Cromwell’s corpse from Westminster Abbey and subjected it to a posthumous hanging, drawing and quartering. They were rank amateurs, compared to the Australian left.
No sooner has any public figure even slightly to the right of Marx shuffled off this mortal coil than the left are hooting and bellowing on the ABC, and rolling in the filth of their own orgiastic glee on social media. In the past week, we’ve seen eructations of these gross displays of leftist “kindness”. When former senator and soldier Jim Molan died, it took but minutes for Twitter to be overwhelmed with the sort of disgusting smears that even the odious little pimple at the head of the Australian Greens was previously forced to apologise for.
But nothing could hold a candle to the left’s onanistic oinking over the death of Cardinal George Pell. Naturally, the mad witches of the ABC were soiling their drawers and flinging them around the room for all they were worth.
And they weren’t about to let footling stuff like facts get in their way.
One of the nation’s leading authorities on criminal law has accused ABC journalist Louise Milligan of repeatedly ignoring facts about the prosecution of the late Cardinal George Pell that do not support her views.
Jeremy Gans, who teaches criminal law at the University of Melbourne, believes an article written by Milligan about Pell risks misleading readers about the law and aspects of the case.
An ABC journalist ignoring key facts and misleading its dwindling pool of readers? Never!
“It’s a recurrent problem with Milligan’s journalism. If there are facts that don’t help her argument, she doesn’t tell readers, she just leaves them out,” Professor Gans said.
It’s a recurrent problem across the whole ABC. After all, Four Corners is yet to even acknowledge that its multi-part series on “Russian Collusion” was a farrago of lies, let alone apologise and retract it.
His critique of her journalism was triggered by an article in The Saturday Paper of January 14, three days after the cardinal’s death, in which Milligan wrote about “The child abuse cases in which George Pell was never tried”.
Never tried, because they never happened. Even the Victorian Police, with their unremitting hate boner for Pell, were unable to pretend otherwise.
But that isn’t enough to deter a crusading anti-Catholic ABC journalist. Milligan made multiple misleading claims, such as that Pell abused two boys at a pool in the 1970s. In fact, only one even claimed that, and there was never sufficient likelihood that it was even true, for it to go to court. Similarly, Milligan claimed that Pell assaulted another boy at Melbourne’s St. Patrick Cathedral, even though that person expressly denied any abuse, before his death.
“The main point is that two of the three accounts couldn’t establish anything criminal or even improper […]” Professor Gans wrote […]
“What’s harder to understand is why Milligan wouldn’t mention this bit – which was strongly relied on by Pell.
“The same is of course true of her summary of the outcome of the trial and appeals.”
Another common line of bs from the Pell-hating left is that “he only got off on a technicality”. This is arrant nonsense. The High Court, the most senior court in the land, ruled unanimously that the original trial was fundamentally unfair. That’s as far from a “technicality” as it’s possible to get.
“Does she think the High Court misunderstood the evidence? Or that the law that requires the DPP to challenge contrary witnesses is a bad law? Or does she just not want to discuss this issue,” he wrote.
The Australian
I think we can all be the judge of that.