The other is quoted in Court as saying that he will hit below the belt those who get in his way or criticise him.

Muscat was right to say that they share the same values. What a proud boast.

The barrel, Rumplestiltskin, has long turned into a cesspit.

As it happens, the timing coincided with the government’s new found concern for LGBT rights and the recent civil unions / adoption issue. Luckily for the government it involves a gay couple and in light of the upcoming election, instead of getting rid of a gay member of the party, they have made him a martyr.

Of course they do not mention the victim anywhere because that would mean opening up a discussion on the actual facts of the case and that there was a person who suffered because of the martyr’s actions.

He tells us that there is no difference between “il-Laburisti l-antiki u l-Laburisti ġodda.” Well, we can’t help but agree. All are as corrupt as each other.

It’s only the medium which has changed. From Lorry Sant wielding a brown envelope full of compromising photographs to Cyrus Engerer wielding a memory stick full of the same.

Both get protected, embraced and hailed as heroes by their respective leaders.

Muscat follows in Mintoff’s footsteps to a fault. Post-new Labour is still very much like old Labour after all.

The switchers must be really proud.

When I saw and heard the video of the meeting I am more convinced that Muscat not only condone what Cyrus did, but he feels that he (Cyrus) had a right to do what he did to his ex-lover.

Even worse Muscat gave the impression that there was collusion between the Court’s judgement and the P.N.

It seems that Dr. Muscat forgot that he had taken naction against Dr. Anglu Farrugia for mentioning a magistrate during a meeting. In Dr. Muscat’s case it is even worse since he is sowing doubt on the integrity of a judge.