If Malcolm Turnbull expects

a wave of sympathy following the publication of "A bigger picture" then he will have, once again, misread the public mood.
Politicians should not write books, particularly not write "tell all" books when they have been dumped. It makes them look bitter and revengeful. 
Turnbull is both those things. 
I will admit here that I have never liked Turnbull. Before he became Prime Minister I  heard stories about him. He was a leader of the "republic" push. Some of those in it thought he was there because he saw himself as one day being President. It did not make him popular.  I don't support the idea of Downunder being a "republic". We are already a completely independent country with our own head of state. Those who claim otherwise in order to try and gain support are simply being dishonest.  What they are really seeking is a change to the way we are governed - a change in a way they believe will (often financially) benefit them.
That was a start but I also have a nephew who, more than once, has personally witnessed Turnbull's behaviour in what I suppose would be described as public but social settings. My nephew was not impressed by drunken, abusive behaviour and disrespect towards women.  He was not impressed by the arrogance and boorish manner of the man.
Politicians on both sides of the fence - and those who sit on it - have told me Turnbull was not a leader and that he could not work with people.  He expected people to work for him.
Turnbull's predecessor was many things, some of which he was rightly criticised for, but he knew he was the leader of the team and that he needed the team and their cooperation if he was to do the job. When history reviews their respective contribution his will be the greater. (I know, not a popular viewpoint, but one which is shared by many who know about such things.)
Now Turnbull is complaining that copies of his book have been illegally distributed. It would seem they have been distributed to people who have a very direct interest in what he has had to say.
I disapprove strongly of breaches of copyright but, in this instance, I am not at all surprised there has been such a blatant breach of it.  Why? Perhaps because the purpose, perhaps the sole purpose, in writing the book was - as he sees it - revenge. In it Turnbull claims that the party he was supposed to once lead should have lost the election. He cannot accept that the present Prime Minister, who also has his faults, managed to turn what looked like certain defeat into a victory.
A real leader would have been glad of that. Turnbull is not a leader. He is a traitor. He would have been wiser not to have written the book at all.