ydoethur said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

ydoethur said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

brendan16 said:

Benpointer said:

Scrapheap_as_was said:

Who could be the Tory MP who submitted a letter and then withdrew it ..... surely we all know who he means don't we?

https://twitter.com/SamCoatesTimes/status/1064132081649950720

Isn't the pont that it was an MP who said he or she had written a letter then withdrawn it, but who had in fact done neither of those things?

Sir Graham said one MP 'several years ago' - which implies Cameron not May could well have been PM at the time - claimed publicly to have submitted a letter but didn't. Yet that is now being taken as implying that is the case in this instance?

I do find the whole process very odd - that one person (and not even their Deputies) - knows how many letters have been submitted and where they are kept.

How are they (or can they be) submitted - by hand, email, signed for post?
Where are they kept?
Does Sir Graham acknowledge receipt by letter or email or text
What happens if there is a miscommunication if the previous point does not apply
What happens if the Chair of the 1922 Committee falls ill, is on holiday or even say has undiagnosed dementia and forgets where they are.

I sort of assumed one or more of his Deputies would be in the loop for this reason - it almost seems like the Tories have not actually moved on much from 1922 in terms of this process. All down to one person with no separate record?

It does seem like the most antiquated system. I guess the thing is a) this happens rarely and b) when it does, normally the swell of discontent is so large you aren't worrying about if it is 47, 47.5 or 48 (or equivalent required amounts), it is more concern if you will pull your back out lifting the mail sack as there are so many letters.

47.5? Has Boris sent one of no confidence and one of confidence, or just one where he can't make his mind up?

Its the equivalent of a hanging chad in Florida...

I think Boris is more into pregnant chads...

"You might very well think that; I couldn't possibly comment"

ydoethur said:

Benpointer said:

ydoethur said:

Benpointer said:

Scrapheap_as_was said:

Who could be the Tory MP who submitted a letter and then withdrew it ..... surely we all know who he means don't we?

https://twitter.com/SamCoatesTimes/status/1064132081649950720

Isn't the pont that it was an MP who said he or she had written a letter then withdrawn it, but who had in fact done neither of those things?

Who do we know who makes rash promises that they can't keep, regrets them, wobbles and then caves in in the most incompetent imaginable way?

I'm sure we can all think of some candidates for this role :🤔

Saying you have submitted a letter when you have not is not a 'rash-promise' - it's a lie, plain and simple.

True, O Cophetua. How about this:

Who do we know who makes rash promises that they can't keeptells blatant lies, regrets them, wobbles and then caves in in claims something different in the most incompetent and dishonest way imaginable?🤔

That's better - now it all makes sense!

Gardenwalker said:

Stark_Dawning said:

Hmm. I didn't really appreciate how nasty Brillo's tweet about Carole Cadwalladr was. I assumed that the 'Cat Woman' bit was a reference to the Batman character, but he was actually suggesting she was a childless old spinster who shouldn't be taken seriously. Dark.

Yes. The Brexiters have been trying to smear and malign Carole since day one. Even some of the outriders on here have gone along with it.

Brexit is nasty, among its other sins.

And she has been doing a lot of front page scoops - followed by retractions the next week on page 35 of the Observer (i.e. smears and claims she makes but can't always back up). Maybe she needs a break too from fighting the last referendum. If there is a second vote I don't know how she will cope with the excitement of another 3 years of stories.

In the end the official remain campaign spent £5 million more than the leave campaign and that excludes Cameron's £10m leaflet to every household. Remain was backed by the CBI, Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, Ryanair and big business generally, the TUC, all the main UK parties and their infrastructure bar UKIP, Obama, Merkel, the IMF, World Bank, the EU etc etc. Poor diddums!

Maybe its just time to move on - cos despite all those big backers Remain still lost. And it wasn't down to the Russians, twitter, Aaron Banks or marginal offshoots of the unofficial leave campaigns. Its for the same reason Corbyn did so well last year - because many people aren't happy with the system and the hand it is dealing them and their kids. And the referendum was the first time many Brits in safe seats had a meaningful vote to make a statement. And many did.

The 2016 referendum is done - and her endless Observer front pages are just getting a bit boring now.

ydoethur said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

ydoethur said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Benpointer said:

ydoethur said:

Benpointer said:

Scrapheap_as_was said:

Who could be the Tory MP who submitted a letter and then withdrew it ..... surely we all know who he means don't we?

https://twitter.com/SamCoatesTimes/status/1064132081649950720

Isn't the pont that it was an MP who said he or she had written a letter then withdrawn it, but who had in fact done neither of those things?

Who do we know who makes rash promises that they can't keep, regrets them, wobbles and then caves in in the most incompetent imaginable way?

I'm sure we can all think of some candidates for this role :🤔

Saying you have submitted a letter when you have not is not a 'rash-promise' - it's a lie, plain and simple.

It is virtue signalling as well.

Shameful.

In this case surely it's vice signalling?

(Although I would be wary of signalling any vices to Boris.)

In the afternoon thread the ERG will not like what I compare them to.

You wouldn't. You couldn't. Surely not...

MARK RECKLESS?!!!

No bad language is used.

TheScreamingEagles said:

ydoethur said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Benpointer said:

ydoethur said:

Benpointer said:

Scrapheap_as_was said:

Who could be the Tory MP who submitted a letter and then withdrew it ..... surely we all know who he means don't we?

https://twitter.com/SamCoatesTimes/status/1064132081649950720

Isn't the pont that it was an MP who said he or she had written a letter then withdrawn it, but who had in fact done neither of those things?

Who do we know who makes rash promises that they can't keep, regrets them, wobbles and then caves in in the most incompetent imaginable way?

I'm sure we can all think of some candidates for this role :🤔

Saying you have submitted a letter when you have not is not a 'rash-promise' - it's a lie, plain and simple.

It is virtue signalling as well.

Shameful.

In this case surely it's vice signalling?

(Although I would be wary of signalling any vices to Boris.)

In the afternoon thread the ERG will not like what I compare them to.

Had that Pineapple Pizza yet?

CarlottaVance said:

Nemtynakht said:

CarlottaVance said:

MarqueeMark said:

The news cycle being led by the former Brexit Secretary saying the PM "has not stood up to the EUs bullies" is toxic to Theresa.

The one that only just worked out we're an island?

That one?

If you look at his actual comment

“We are, and I hadn't quite understood the full extent of this, but if you look at the UK and if you look at how we trade in goods, we are particularly reliant on the Dover-Calais crossing.”

I don’t understand the problem with this - do we expect every politician to understand everything about everything - surely not. It is clear he understands we live on an island. He holds plenty of views you could legitimately criticise him for

Was he genuinely surprised that goods hauliers chose the shortest and fastest Channel crossing? Are you?

He said he hadn't appreciated the "full extent".

If someone asked we, I'd guess that Dover-Calais would account for 80% of our trade.

If the actual answer was 95% (I have no idea) then I wouldn't have appreciated "the full extent" to which we were dependent. But I would have appreciated the importance of the link.

ydoethur said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

ydoethur said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

ydoethur said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Benpointer said:

ydoethur said:

Benpointer said:

Scrapheap_as_was said:

Who could be the Tory MP who submitted a letter and then withdrew it ..... surely we all know who he means don't we?

https://twitter.com/SamCoatesTimes/status/1064132081649950720

Isn't the pont that it was an MP who said he or she had written a letter then withdrawn it, but who had in fact done neither of those things?

Who do we know who makes rash promises that they can't keep, regrets them, wobbles and then caves in in the most incompetent imaginable way?

I'm sure we can all think of some candidates for this role :🤔

Saying you have submitted a letter when you have not is not a 'rash-promise' - it's a lie, plain and simple.

It is virtue signalling as well.

Shameful.

In this case surely it's vice signalling?

(Although I would be wary of signalling any vices to Boris.)

In the afternoon thread the ERG will not like what I compare them to.

You wouldn't. You couldn't. Surely not...

MARK RECKLESS?!!!

No bad language is used.

'Mark Reckless' is technically not bad language, although many adjectives used to describe him meet that threshold.

You'll find out in around 45mins time.

ydoethur said:

'Mark Reckless' is technically not bad language ....

Pretty sure it's in the swear filter of a sizable number of PBers.

ydoethur said:

Charles said:

CarlottaVance said:

Nemtynakht said:

CarlottaVance said:

MarqueeMark said:

The news cycle being led by the former Brexit Secretary saying the PM "has not stood up to the EUs bullies" is toxic to Theresa.

The one that only just worked out we're an island?

That one?

If you look at his actual comment

“We are, and I hadn't quite understood the full extent of this, but if you look at the UK and if you look at how we trade in goods, we are particularly reliant on the Dover-Calais crossing.”

I don’t understand the problem with this - do we expect every politician to understand everything about everything - surely not. It is clear he understands we live on an island. He holds plenty of views you could legitimately criticise him for

Was he genuinely surprised that goods hauliers chose the shortest and fastest Channel crossing? Are you?

He said he hadn't appreciated the "full extent".

If someone asked we, I'd guess that Dover-Calais would account for 80% of our trade.

If the actual answer was 95% (I have no idea) then I wouldn't have appreciated "the full extent" to which we were dependent. But I would have appreciated the importance of the link.

It's actually 17% of our trade in goods, although that would be (without checking) about 40% of our trade with Europe. 2.6 million lorries or roughly 8,000 each working day.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/jan/09/record-number-of-lorries-using-dover-port-raises-fears-of-brexit-delays

He also appeared, in the same speech, to not understand JIT. He appeared to think it related to perishable goods

brendan16 said:

Gardenwalker said:

Stark_Dawning said:

Hmm. I didn't really appreciate how nasty Brillo's tweet about Carole Cadwalladr was. I assumed that the 'Cat Woman' bit was a reference to the Batman character, but he was actually suggesting she was a childless old spinster who shouldn't be taken seriously. Dark.

Yes. The Brexiters have been trying to smear and malign Carole since day one. Even some of the outriders on here have gone along with it.

Brexit is nasty, among its other sins.

And she has been doing a lot of front page scoops - followed by retractions the next week on page 35 of the Observer (i.e. smears and claims she makes but can't always back up). Maybe she needs a break too from fighting the last referendum. If there is a second vote I don't know how she will cope with the excitement of another 3 years of stories.

In the end the official remain campaign spent £5 million more than the leave campaign and that excludes Cameron's £10m leaflet to every household. Remain was backed by the CBI, Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, Ryanair and big business generally, the TUC, all the main UK parties and their infrastructure bar UKIP, Obama, Merkel, the IMF, World Bank, the EU etc etc. Poor diddums!

Maybe its just time to move on - cos despite all those big backers Remain still lost. And it wasn't down to the Russians, twitter, Aaron Banks or marginal offshoots of the unofficial leave campaigns. Its for the same reason Corbyn did so well last year - because many people aren't happy with the system and the hand it is dealing them and their kids. And the referendum was the first time many Brits in safe seats had a meaningful vote to make a statement. And many did.

The 2016 referendum is done - and her endless Observer front pages are just getting a bit boring now.

Actually, the central allegations have seen Cambridge Analytica closed, Facebook shares down, Aaron Banks under investigation by the National Crime Agency, and a lingering bad smell around Leave’s links with Bannon and the Russians.

Meanwhile, Cadwalladr has won both the Orwell Prize and the L’esprit de RSF from Reporters Without Borders this year.

Of course this is all highly inconvenient for those who paint Brexit as some kind of People’s Revolution.

FrancisUrquhart said:

Recidivist said:

Stark_Dawning said:

Hmm. I didn't really appreciate how nasty Brillo's tweet about Carole Cadwalladr was. I assumed that the 'Cat Woman' bit was a reference to the Batman character, but he was actually suggesting she was a childless old spinster who shouldn't be taken seriously. Dark.

They have really been doing a number on her. It was a few news cycles ago, but they had her on the Daily Politics or some such show. Isabelle Oakshott was on as well. They managed to completely prevent Cadwalladr making her points though she battled on pluckily. (I was drive to Google to find out what she had been proposing.) A few days later there were stories going around on social media that she had been reduced to tears by the . Having watched the programme I found that highly unlikely.

I have no way of independently checking the facts behind the story she has put into the public domain. But the way she is being personally attacked makes me inclined to believe it.

Well other than the continuous retracted / corrections to her stories by the Guardian / Observer, they have just had an independent investigation, and found a central claim was not true.

While of course you should be sceptical about things on the Guido site there are several examples here. Perhaps they are all false and all her stories and retractions are correct.

https://order-order.com/people/carole-cadwalladr/

FF43 said:

The Conservative Party soap has truly jumped the shark.

27 years in power out of the last 40 isn't a bad record.

Jordan Pickford is rubbish.

Charles said:

CarlottaVance said:

Nemtynakht said:

CarlottaVance said:

MarqueeMark said:

The news cycle being led by the former Brexit Secretary saying the PM "has not stood up to the EUs bullies" is toxic to Theresa.

The one that only just worked out we're an island?

That one?

If you look at his actual comment

“We are, and I hadn't quite understood the full extent of this, but if you look at the UK and if you look at how we trade in goods, we are particularly reliant on the Dover-Calais crossing.”

I don’t understand the problem with this - do we expect every politician to understand everything about everything - surely not. It is clear he understands we live on an island. He holds plenty of views you could legitimately criticise him for

Was he genuinely surprised that goods hauliers chose the shortest and fastest Channel crossing? Are you?

He said he hadn't appreciated the "full extent".

If someone asked we, I'd guess that Dover-Calais would account for 80% of our trade.

If the actual answer was 95% (I have no idea) then I wouldn't have appreciated "the full extent" to which we were dependent. But I would have appreciated the importance of the link.

Somebody over the past forty years should perhaps have done something to diversify some - to avoid such a potential economic threat. If, for example, we had an outbreak of Foot and Mouth centred around Dover, not sure how we would cope....

Why no buzz around Stephen Barclay for leader? He's the Brexit Secretary for heaven's sake. Certainly he looks the part with his serious yet with a hint of mischief face, his wide shoulders, his rolling confident gait, a physique which speaks of some experience of the gym but without making a fetish of it. The perfect goldilocks age too, neither wizened and old nor callow and young. Just all in all a prime piece of political specimen right there, and with a chance now in cabinet to shine for a week or so and then resign with great fuss and drama on a matter of high principle. Ought to be 10/1 max but I can't even find him quoted.

numbertwelve said:

The thing about the letters I’ve never understood is that apparently they don’t lapse. It seems to me that if, say, 6 months passes it should be deemed lapsed and you should have to resubmit if you’re still unhappy. Do they lapse at general elections or are they valid throughout a leaders tenure?

It would seem prudent for Brady to check with anyone who has not submitted one recently.

kinabalu said:

Why no buzz around Stephen Barclay for leader? He's the Brexit Secretary for heaven's sake. Certainly he looks the part with his serious yet with a hint of mischief face, his wide shoulders, his rolling confident gait, a physique which speaks of some experience of the gym but without making a fetish of it. The perfect goldilocks age too, neither wizened and old nor callow and young. Just all in all a prime piece of political specimen right there, and with a chance now in cabinet to shine for a week or so and then resign with great fuss and drama on a matter of high principle. Ought to be 10/1 max but I can't even find him quoted.

Because the current role of the Brexit Secretary is to count the paperclips?

kinabalu said:

Why no buzz around Stephen Barclay for leader? He's the Brexit Secretary for heaven's sake. Certainly he looks the part with his serious yet with a hint of mischief face, his wide shoulders, his rolling confident gait, a physique which speaks of some experience of the gym but without making a fetish of it. The perfect goldilocks age too, neither wizened and old nor callow and young. Just all in all a prime piece of political specimen right there, and with a chance now in cabinet to shine for a week or so and then resign with great fuss and drama on a matter of high principle. Ought to be 10/1 max but I can't even find him quoted.

Oh please, don't mention Stephen Barclay - Sunil will be encouraged to try his totally hilarious play on said MP's surname again.

FrancisUrquhart said:

Gardenwalker said:

brendan16 said:

Gardenwalker said:

Stark_Dawning said:

Hmm. I didn't really appreciate how nasty Brillo's tweet about Carole Cadwalladr was. I assumed that the 'Cat Woman' bit was a reference to the Batman character, but he was actually suggesting she was a childless old spinster who shouldn't be taken seriously. Dark.

Yes. The Brexiters have been trying to smear and malign Carole since day one. Even some of the outriders on here have gone along with it.

Brexit is nasty, among its other sins.

And she has been doing a lot of front page scoops - followed by retractions the next week on page 35 of the Observer (i.e. smears and claims she makes but can't always back up). Maybe she needs a break too from fighting the last referendum. If there is a second vote I don't know how she will cope with the excitement of another 3 years of stories.

In the end the official remain campaign spent £5 million more than the leave campaign and that excludes Cameron's £10m leaflet to every household. Remain was backed by the CBI, Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, Ryanair and big business generally, the TUC, all the main UK parties and their infrastructure bar UKIP, Obama, Merkel, the IMF, World Bank, the EU etc etc. Poor diddums!

Maybe its just time to move on - cos despite all those big backers Remain still lost. And it wasn't down to the Russians, twitter, Aaron Banks or marginal offshoots of the unofficial leave campaigns. Its for the same reason Corbyn did so well last year - because many people aren't happy with the system and the hand it is dealing them and their kids. And the referendum was the first time many Brits in safe seats had a meaningful vote to make a statement. And many did.

The 2016 referendum is done - and her endless Observer front pages are just getting a bit boring now.

Actually, the central allegations have seen Cambridge Analytica closed, Facebook shares down, Aaron Banks under investigation by the National Crime Agency, and a lingering bad smell around Leave’s links with Bannon and the Russians.

Meanwhile, Cadwalladr has won both the Orwell Prize and the L’esprit de RSF from Reporters Without Borders this year.

Of course this is all highly inconvenient for those who paint Brexit as some kind of People’s Revolution.

I remember when Julian Assange was being lauded by some as a fearless independent exposer of truth and given awards and uncritical praise from some quarters.

Yep. Turns out he was batting for your side all along!

D

Gardenwalker said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Gardenwalker said:

brendan16 said:

Gardenwalker said:

Stark_Dawning said:

Hmm. I didn't really appreciate how nasty Brillo's tweet about Carole Cadwalladr was. I assumed that the 'Cat Woman' bit was a reference to the Batman character, but he was actually suggesting she was a childless old spinster who shouldn't be taken seriously. Dark.

Yes. The Brexiters have been trying to smear and malign Carole since day one. Even some of the outriders on here have gone along with it.

Brexit is nasty, among its other sins.

And she has been doing a lot of front page scoops - followed by retractions the next week on page 35 of the Observer (i.e. smears and claims she makes but can't always back up). Maybe she needs a break too from fighting the last referendum. If there is a second vote I don't know how she will cope with the excitement of another 3 years of stories.

In the end the official remain campaign spent £5 million more than the leave campaign and that excludes Cameron's £10m leaflet to every household. Remain was backed by the CBI, Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, Ryanair and big business generally, the TUC, all the main UK parties and their infrastructure bar UKIP, Obama, Merkel, the IMF, World Bank, the EU etc etc. Poor diddums!

Maybe its just time to move on - cos despite all those big backers Remain still lost. And it wasn't down to the Russians, twitter, Aaron Banks or marginal offshoots of the unofficial leave campaigns. Its for the same reason Corbyn did so well last year - because many people aren't happy with the system and the hand it is dealing them and their kids. And the referendum was the first time many Brits in safe seats had a meaningful vote to make a statement. And many did.

The 2016 referendum is done - and her endless Observer front pages are just getting a bit boring now.

Actually, the central allegations have seen Cambridge Analytica closed, Facebook shares down, Aaron Banks under investigation by the National Crime Agency, and a lingering bad smell around Leave’s links with Bannon and the Russians.

Meanwhile, Cadwalladr has won both the Orwell Prize and the L’esprit de RSF from Reporters Without Borders this year.

Of course this is all highly inconvenient for those who paint Brexit as some kind of People’s Revolution.

I remember when Julian Assange was being lauded by some as a fearless independent exposer of truth and given awards and uncritical praise from some quarters.

Yep. Turns out he was batting for your side all along!

My side? What side is that?

kinabalu said:

Why no buzz around Stephen Barclay for leader? He's the Brexit Secretary for heaven's sake. Certainly he looks the part with his serious yet with a hint of mischief face, his wide shoulders, his rolling confident gait, a physique which speaks of some experience of the gym but without making a fetish of it. The perfect goldilocks age too, neither wizened and old nor callow and young. Just all in all a prime piece of political specimen right there, and with a chance now in cabinet to shine for a week or so and then resign with great fuss and drama on a matter of high principle. Ought to be 10/1 max but I can't even find him quoted.

Many people can't even find him, let alone quoted.

Benpointer said:

kinabalu said:

Why no buzz around Stephen Barclay for leader? He's the Brexit Secretary for heaven's sake. Certainly he looks the part with his serious yet with a hint of mischief face, his wide shoulders, his rolling confident gait, a physique which speaks of some experience of the gym but without making a fetish of it. The perfect goldilocks age too, neither wizened and old nor callow and young. Just all in all a prime piece of political specimen right there, and with a chance now in cabinet to shine for a week or so and then resign with great fuss and drama on a matter of high principle. Ought to be 10/1 max but I can't even find him quoted.

Oh please, don't mention Stephen Barclay - Sunil will be encouraged to try his totally hilarious play on said MP's surname again.

Stephen Lloyd will be voting for the deal too, two names May can bank on.

OldKingCole said:

kinabalu said:

Why no buzz around Stephen Barclay for leader? He's the Brexit Secretary for heaven's sake. Certainly he looks the part with his serious yet with a hint of mischief face, his wide shoulders, his rolling confident gait, a physique which speaks of some experience of the gym but without making a fetish of it. The perfect goldilocks age too, neither wizened and old nor callow and young. Just all in all a prime piece of political specimen right there, and with a chance now in cabinet to shine for a week or so and then resign with great fuss and drama on a matter of high principle. Ought to be 10/1 max but I can't even find him quoted.

Many people can't even find him, let alone quoted.

Unlike my Barclays card he isn't allowed out of the country by Mrs May - in case he tries to negotiate something on Brexit. He is purely a domestic as one might say!

Gardenwalker said:

Stark_Dawning said:

Hmm. I didn't really appreciate how nasty Brillo's tweet about Carole Cadwalladr was. I assumed that the 'Cat Woman' bit was a reference to the Batman character, but he was actually suggesting she was a childless old spinster who shouldn't be taken seriously. Dark.

Yes. The Brexiters have been trying to smear and malign Carole since day one. Even some of the outriders on here have gone along with it.

Brexit is nasty, among its other sins.

Leaving aside any personal attacks on her.

Carole seems to have started work from your premise of "Brexit is nasty" and worked from there.

How many retractions and corrections has she had to make now?

BTW - you don't think you are a bit of a hypocrite for complaining about people being smeared when you have tried to smear everyone who voted to leave in this very thread?

Y0kel said:

Lets get a few things clear on Cadwalladr.

1. There is nothing new in many of her revelations. The situation with Banks (and others) in particular was known for some time. Some of it was set out on this forum.

2. She has stopped being a journalist and started acting the zealot based on her own prejudices.

3. She is trying to change historical fact, the vote was to exit in a binary referendum. Its called democracy whether you like the result or not.

I voted in favour of getting out of the EU. I have, however, not been behind the door regarding the likes of Banks and Farage and have been as clear as I can be about my problems with them even though some people think my views on them are somewhat harsh and, ridiculously, somehow causing legal jeopardy .

On the other hand, being told that those of us who voted in favour exiting the EU that we are, at the least, dupes at the worst a sack of ignorant racist backwards by the comfy circle of the inhabitants of media and politico land is going to get a two fingered reaction.

Yes, Putin's little fellow travellers really don't like being exposed, do they?

When a journalist is so abused by politicians, we should take notice. It is what a free press is for.

FrancisUrquhart said:

D

Gardenwalker said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Gardenwalker said:

brendan16 said:

Gardenwalker said:

Stark_Dawning said:

Hmm. I didn't really appreciate how nasty Brillo's tweet about Carole Cadwalladr was. I assumed that the 'Cat Woman' bit was a reference to the Batman character, but he was actually suggesting she was a childless old spinster who shouldn't be taken seriously. Dark.

Yes. The Brexiters have been trying to smear and malign Carole since day one. Even some of the outriders on here have gone along with it.

Brexit is nasty, among its other sins.

And she has been doing a lot of front page scoops - followed by retractions the next week on page 35 of the Observer (i.e. smears and claims she makes but can't always back up). Maybe she needs a break too from fighting the last referendum. If there is a second vote I don't know how she will cope with the excitement of another 3 years of stories.

In the end the official remain campaign spent £5 million more than the leave campaign and that excludes Cameron's £10m leaflet to every household. Remain was backed by the CBI, Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, Ryanair and big business generally, the TUC, all the main UK parties and their infrastructure bar UKIP, Obama, Merkel, the IMF, World Bank, the EU etc etc. Poor diddums!

Maybe its just time to move on - cos despite all those big backers Remain still lost. And it wasn't down to the Russians, twitter, Aaron Banks or marginal offshoots of the unofficial leave campaigns. Its for the same reason Corbyn did so well last year - because many people aren't happy with the system and the hand it is dealing them and their kids. And the referendum was the first time many Brits in safe seats had a meaningful vote to make a statement. And many did.

The 2016 referendum is done - and her endless Observer front pages are just getting a bit boring now.

Actually, the central allegations have seen Cambridge Analytica closed, Facebook shares down, Aaron Banks under investigation by the National Crime Agency, and a lingering bad smell around Leave’s links with Bannon and the Russians.

Meanwhile, Cadwalladr has won both the Orwell Prize and the L’esprit de RSF from Reporters Without Borders this year.

Of course this is all highly inconvenient for those who paint Brexit as some kind of People’s Revolution.

I remember when Julian Assange was being lauded by some as a fearless independent exposer of truth and given awards and uncritical praise from some quarters.

Yep. Turns out he was batting for your side all along!

My side? What side is that?

Pro Brexit

Gardenwalker said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

D

Gardenwalker said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Gardenwalker said:

brendan16 said:

Gardenwalker said:

Stark_Dawning said:

Hmm. I didn't really appreciate how nasty Brillo's tweet about Carole Cadwalladr was. I assumed that the 'Cat Woman' bit was a reference to the Batman character, but he was actually suggesting she was a childless old spinster who shouldn't be taken seriously. Dark.

Yes. The Brexiters have been trying to smear and malign Carole since day one. Even some of the outriders on here have gone along with it.

Brexit is nasty, among its other sins.

And she has been doing a lot of front page scoops - followed by retractions the next week on page 35 of the Observer (i.e. smears and claims she makes but can't always back up). Maybe she needs a break too from fighting the last referendum. If there is a second vote I don't know how she will cope with the excitement of another 3 years of stories.

In the end the official remain campaign spent £5 million more than the leave campaign and that excludes Cameron's £10m leaflet to every household. Remain was backed by the CBI, Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, Ryanair and big business generally, the TUC, all the main UK parties and their infrastructure bar UKIP, Obama, Merkel, the IMF, World Bank, the EU etc etc. Poor diddums!

Maybe its just time to move on - cos despite all those big backers Remain still lost. And it wasn't down to the Russians, twitter, Aaron Banks or marginal offshoots of the unofficial leave campaigns. Its for the same reason Corbyn did so well last year - because many people aren't happy with the system and the hand it is dealing them and their kids. And the referendum was the first time many Brits in safe seats had a meaningful vote to make a statement. And many did.

The 2016 referendum is done - and her endless Observer front pages are just getting a bit boring now.

Actually, the central allegations have seen Cambridge Analytica closed, Facebook shares down, Aaron Banks under investigation by the National Crime Agency, and a lingering bad smell around Leave’s links with Bannon and the Russians.

Meanwhile, Cadwalladr has won both the Orwell Prize and the L’esprit de RSF from Reporters Without Borders this year.

Of course this is all highly inconvenient for those who paint Brexit as some kind of People’s Revolution.

I remember when Julian Assange was being lauded by some as a fearless independent exposer of truth and given awards and uncritical praise from some quarters.

Yep. Turns out he was batting for your side all along!

My side? What side is that?

Pro Brexit

I voted remain.....

Alistair said:

HYUFD said:

Cyclefree said:

Nigelb said:

Cyclefree said:

Nigelb said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Raab on Marr - Boris is not an ally and I support TM and will not be submitting a letter. Warfare in ERG

More like fission in the Tory party.
Are they bent on self-destruction ?

I could not care less if the Tories destroy themselves. Just so long as they don’t destroy the country with them.

Me too...
But the prospect of PM Corbyn navigating the aftermath of Brexit leaves the second bit in doubt.

The way some Tories are behaving is to make the prospect of Corbyn in power more likely. That fills me with horror. I do not think his instincts are fundamentally liberal or democratic or in favour of freedom. But those Tories behaving like extremist self-indulgent ninnies are behaving like his useful idiots and will bring about what they claim to abhor. They are a disgrace to their party. They are not patriots and they are taking the voters for fools.

Based on both polls last night Corbyn will only be in power having his policies dictated by Sturgeon and Blackford as he will need the SNP for confidence and supply.


Based on Sturgeon's comments on Marr she will demand the UK stays in the single market and the customs union as the price of her support.


So we will move from having a PM being dictated to by Arlene Foster to a PM being dictated to by Nicola Sturgeon

But isn't it already Labour's position to stay in the customs union?

Not the single market though

Foxy said:

Y0kel said:

Lets get a few things clear on Cadwalladr.

1. There is nothing new in many of her revelations. The situation with Banks (and others) in particular was known for some time. Some of it was set out on this forum.

2. She has stopped being a journalist and started acting the zealot based on her own prejudices.

3. She is trying to change historical fact, the vote was to exit in a binary referendum. Its called democracy whether you like the result or not.

I voted in favour of getting out of the EU. I have, however, not been behind the door regarding the likes of Banks and Farage and have been as clear as I can be about my problems with them even though some people think my views on them are somewhat harsh and, ridiculously, somehow causing legal jeopardy .

On the other hand, being told that those of us who voted in favour exiting the EU that we are, at the least, dupes at the worst a sack of ignorant racist backwards by the comfy circle of the inhabitants of media and politico land is going to get a two fingered reaction.

Yes, Putin's little fellow travellers really don't like being exposed, do they?

When a journalist is so abused by politicians, we should take notice. It is what a free press is for.

The security services have already provided briefs on the extent of external actor efforts to influence the vote, they know the web of contacts and cut outs who had communication with some prominent figures, the know about cybersphere efforts. They are still going on today.

Not surprisingly the public hasn't heard a peep but its possible they will.

The issue of whether one or other campaign spent a million quid here or there in excess is frankly a non story. The question of foreign attempts to steer in the democratic process is another thing altogether, whether its something overt from nominal friends of the UK (Obama and his back of the queue nonsense) or not so overt measures by outright enemies. I would consider myself a British nationalist. I do not feel in anyway bound by image that such a phrase has got tagged with. By default I'm going to have a problem with external influence/interference. I'm also 100% a liberal who believes in democratic process. I just happen to believe that the nation state is just about the largest truly feasible unifying political entity. Anything supranational is co-operation, not control.

The problem today is that to profess to have both views is apparently impossible, or so we are told because so much of the debate is being run by zealots and idealogues.

Floater said:

Gardenwalker said:

Stark_Dawning said:

Hmm. I didn't really appreciate how nasty Brillo's tweet about Carole Cadwalladr was. I assumed that the 'Cat Woman' bit was a reference to the Batman character, but he was actually suggesting she was a childless old spinster who shouldn't be taken seriously. Dark.

Yes. The Brexiters have been trying to smear and malign Carole since day one. Even some of the outriders on here have gone along with it.

Brexit is nasty, among its other sins.

Leaving aside any personal attacks on her.

Carole seems to have started work from your premise of "Brexit is nasty" and worked from there.

How many retractions and corrections has she had to make now?

BTW - you don't think you are a bit of a hypocrite for complaining about people being smeared when you have tried to smear everyone who voted to leave in this very thread?

Not really.
I have not “smeared” anyone.
Not on this thread, anyway.

Y0kel said:

I would consider myself a British nationalist. I do not feel in anyway bound by image that such a phrase has got tagged with. By default I'm going to have a problem with external influence/interference. I'm also 100% a liberal who believes in democratic process. I just happen to believe that the nation state is just about the largest truly feasible unifying political entity. Anything supranational is co-operation, not control.

The problem today is that to profess to have both views is apparently impossible, or so we are told because so much of the debate is being run by zealots and idealogues.

The UK is clearly a supranational political construct and you live amongst people who reject the idea that they are part of a British nation. Unionists of any description voting for Brexit on the basis that they wanted a return to the nation state were like turkeys voting for Christmas.