Comments on: Tell us more about your Panama company and New Zealand trust, Minister

By: Antoine Vella

Antoine Vella — Fri, 07 Oct 2016 16:11:00 +0000

Konrad Mizzi could have simply refused to give the name of the audit company and stopped there. Why did he mention the Prime Minister?

We already know that Muscat is up to his neck in it but I can’t understand why Mizzi mentioned him in court. It’s as if he wants to implicate the Prime Minister and remind us that the “full independent audit” was Muscat’s idea.

By: FP@DISQUS

FP@DISQUS — Fri, 07 Oct 2016 11:53:00 +0000

So Konrad Mizzi blatantly lied on the witness stand while under oath.

Does this amount to anything nowadays?

By: Dizzy

Dizzy — Fri, 07 Oct 2016 11:53:00 +0000

So let’s summarise. Konrad Mizzi under oath insinuates that he has no personal knowledge about the audit when he says “ask the Prime Minister”.

Therefore, accordingly, it appears that the faceless auditors who have been engaged to audit Konrad Mizzi have not in the past eight months even bothered to contact him, not even once. Give us a break, Joey.

By: Rumplestiltskin

Rumplestiltskin — Fri, 07 Oct 2016 11:36:00 +0000

Konrad Mizzi seems to take us all for fools. I don’t think that he even fools much of the Labour crowd either, but the latter probably admire his ability to pull a fast one. They probably form part of that demographic, described by Jon P. Mitchell in his book ‘Ambivalent Europeans …’ who consider the word ‘haxxej’ when applied to a politician to be an honorific rather than an insult.

By: observer

observer — Fri, 07 Oct 2016 11:32:00 +0000

In a few words: the Con-Rat is lying once again. To hell with oaths and perjury.