The Standard and Rachinger

From time to time The Standard goes in to bat for people involved in disputes with Cameron Slater. Lynn Prentice and Slater have been feuding for years, so siding with people attacking Slater isn’t surprising.

So it isn’t surprising to see The Standard getting involved in the Ben Rachinger story, especially as The Standard is the target of Slater in his apparent attempt to pay Rachinger to hack The Standard.

Here’s posts at The Standard on it, first after Rachinger’s Twitter releases in February:

  • Interesting story coming up in The Herald – 20 February 2015
    There will probably be a story soonish in The Herald that will be of particular interest to The Standard community.

    We have had nothing to do with the coverage. We’ve just been watching events unfold on Twitter, and we’re happy to see it come out via The Herald.

“Just been watching events unfold on Twitter” – but they happen to have advance notice of NZH coverage.

Then it went quiet until Rachinger expanding on his claims via blogs (and more Twitter) in May.

Arguably.

  • Sphinx and Rachinger – 4 May 2015
    The search engine on this site is run by Sphinx search. This is an open source general purpose package that runs a scan on the databases amended posts or comments. However it appeared to have caused Cameron Slater to cum all over his brain and shut down even the minimal amounts of animal cunning that he usually possesses.
  • Rachinger on dirty politics 4 – Ben asks for help  – 11 May 2015
    Ben Rachinger was a dirty politics insider, he is telling his story. Ben has asked for help

This was plea for financial help (donations) from Rachinger.

… I am completely broke. Homeless. Living moment to moment. Being threatened by the State and by ‘unknown’ assailants. I fear for my very existence. I have nothing left to give but multiple angles for getting to story out.

I’m working with big names in MSM to bring this story to light. They have been able to check the facts that I was an informant and that I attempted to lay a complaint against Mr Slater for Conspiracy to Hack.

Bank details were posted, along with an odd disclaimer:

Authors at The Standard have had no contact with Ben (though we have had independent confirmation of some details). We have no idea what to expect. Over to individuals what to make of Ben’s request.

After recent revelations this became controversial, prompting an Update:

[Update: About a month after this post was published, shortly after The Nation covered Rachinger’s account of being offered money to hack this blog, allegations were made about Rachinger’s past behaviour. We’re not going to give the sordid story any oxygen here, but if true Rachinger’s behaviour was appalling and inexcusable. This new context should be kept in mind if you are reading this old post.]

No links to what to keep in mind though – this was to appease some of the Standard troops who were torn between loving Rachinger v. Slater but hating Rachinger v. Williams.

  • Update on dirty politics developments – 7 June 2015
    A brief roundup of coverage and developments in the latest dirty politics revelations.
  • Cameron Slater’s statement on Ben Rachinger – 8 June 2015
    Cameron Slater has posted one statement in response to Ben Rachinger’s allegations.  It was by way of a jpg and was not searchable.  As a public service broadcast I thought that New Zealand should have the benefit of the text of his response.
  • Little weighs in on dirty politics – 8 June 2015
    Andrew Little on the latest round of dirty politics.
    “It beggars belief any politician – like John Key and Judith Collins – wants to have anything to do with him [Cameron Slater].”

One could also wonder why The Standard wanted to have anything to do with Ben Rachinger.

Perhaps they didn’t choose Rachinger. Perhaps Slater chose to target The Standard using Rachinger. Perhaps we don’t know the full story yet.

What we do know is that there has been contact between Rachinger and members of the Standard collective prior to the hack attempt. See Disappearing tweets – not. Of course that could just be coincidental crossing of paths in social media.

Leave a comment

13 Comments

  1. BUCK WIT

     /  15th June 2015

    or perhpas Rachinger is double dealng little twat who was already well involved with The Standard and it was a set up / sting to see if Slater would take the bait. All that aside there still seems to be a big issues with the porn pics Rachiner circulated and what is really going on with Media Works, Williams and the media blanket placed on this whole mess

    Reply
    • GregM

       /  15th June 2015

      Correct. Rachinger was talking to Prentice way back in October.And again in December.

      Reply
      • BUCK WIT

         /  15th June 2015

        @GregM well there you go then, my suspicions confirmed. so far Rachinger has harmed himself the most, Williams a bloody close second, and the rest are well down the list

        Reply
      • Shagger

         /  15th June 2015

        And still haunting Slater for money in Feb.

        Reply
  2. RAMBONE of RAMBONIA

     /  15th June 2015

    I’m surprised to see that as of yet Blomfield has not sent you his stock standard letter saying that if all comments relating to him are not deleted by the time he has his morning coffee he will sue you for defamation lol. I remember when he he wrote to the guys at Lauda Finem telling them that and they just posted away harder and harder.

    Reply
    • I’ve got to be more careful than LF.

      And I’ve always tried to ensure that any comments here are not potentially actionable, so ask that no claims or accusations are made unless backed by facts.

      Reply
  3. Pete Kane

     /  15th June 2015

    Buck Wit I would have thought the really ‘big time’ damage to Williams remains in the potential stage at this point, depending on what if anything emerges in the MSM. I don’t want to belittle the embarrassment and I guess reputational damage she must be feeling within the media/beltway fraternity but for as long as this remains ‘in the political blog family’ the wider public may never be any the wiser. Now obviously if things emerge (and reading PG and various comments here there are several people who are many times better informed than myself) that all may or will change. As an aside it would be ironic to observe Media Works (and perhaps eve Whale Oil) arguing for name suppression in our fine Courts of Law.

    Reply
    • BUCK WIT

       /  15th June 2015

      agree @Peter Kane – my view is currently Rachinger is the only one whos popped his head up and been doing is usual rubbish via twitter. Williams cant go silent for ever if she hopes to return to the media, and that will be a MOST interesting day.

      Reply
  4. Pete Kane

     /  15th June 2015

    Buck Wit it will be interesting to catch up with question time in the House tomorrow to see what subtle (or not so subtle) comments are made – particularly if they find their way into Hansard. Apart from Little’s immediate comments there appears to be either nothing said by the opposition or if there has, nothing reported. If the former is the case then I guess it’s fair to assume that the Opposition have agreed to stay quiet for the time being. Apart from the brief Hearald and ODT piece the closest Iv’e seen to media comment was from The Nation’s producer on the Pundit site which he edits.by Tim Watkin on June 10, 2015

    Tim Watkin

    “Deep Red, I’ve deleted your link because it goes to a place (both literally and metaphorically) that I’m not prepared to go. In short, an attempt to intimidate journalists has been seen off by (ultimately) the collective decency of the (often-maligned) mainstream media and most of those online. End of.

    Thanks for everyone’s comments on the track. And thanks for watching it. I hope you encourage others to watch it too. Given our research prior I was confident when the story went to air that it was accurate; the reaction since has only served to reinforce that.”

    You would think given the accusation Watkin speaks of and its link to website arguably linked to the governing Party (or any Party) is “dangerously” close to public interest material (regardless of truth – but that the allegations are being made at least some linkage seems present). I would love to have been a fly on the wall at various editorial meetings throughout the last week.

    Pete Kane

    Reply
  5. gregpresland

     /  15th June 2015

    Or maybe Rachinger is lprent’s love child and in a chilling double cross was paid to entice Slater to pay him money and then pretending to hack TS while planning all along to publicise the story.

    Or maybe he is a fiendish treble cross planted by Crosby Textor to ingrain himself with TS and then sucker in Slater and then undermine TS all under the control of Matthew Hooten.

    Or maybe …

    I mean really PG?

    As for the disappearing tweet it looks like the only tweet I have ever sent that links to Rachinger. I can still see it. My memory is that at the time all I knew about him that he popped up occasionally on Slater’s site.

    As for the story how could we ignore it? Note however posts were only put up when the story was going to be reported by the MSM.

    Reply
    • You could hardly ignore the story Greg, it was about The Standard. I have pointed out that the way the story was introduced and handled was interesting. That’s all.

      Are you talking on behalf of yourself as an individual who happens to be a part of a loose collective? Or on behalf of everyone?

      Reply
    • but you have to be able to find your prick, not just be a prick to make a baby @gregpresland

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s