Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Emrys
Emrys's Journal
Emrys's Journal
October 26, 2019
The other headings in the article:
Johnson's election message could fail
The 'remain' vote is now much more efficiently distributed
Johnson will have to gain lots of ground just to stand still
The Labour voters Johnson needs could prove too difficult to budge
Johnson's campaign could be wrecked by scandal
A tentatively cheery, if not uncontroversial, counterpoint to doom for a Saturday afternoon. I'm not sure I buy in to the prospect of a Corbyn premiership. Another hung parliament of some complexion is probably more likely.
Boris Johnson's snap-election bid could backfire and make Jeremy Corbyn prime minister
...
Johnson is in a weaker position than Theresa May was in 2017
When Prime Minister Theresa May called a general election in 2017, she already held a small majority over Corbyn's Labour Party, and polls put her as much as 25 points ahead.
However, by the end of that election campaign, Corbyn's party was neck and neck with May's Conservatives, meaning she lost her majority in Parliament.
Johnson, by contrast, would enter this campaign with no majority and with much smaller leads, of as little as 4 points, some recent polls have found. Some other polls have found significantly bigger leads for Johnson, of up to 15 points.
However, there remain significant doubts about whether Johnson's polling leads are large enough to withstand a general-election campaign, in which his party's almost 10 years in power would again be under the spotlight.
https://www.businessinsider.com/boris-johnson-brexit-election-bid-could-make-jeremy-corbyn-pm-2019-10
Johnson is in a weaker position than Theresa May was in 2017
When Prime Minister Theresa May called a general election in 2017, she already held a small majority over Corbyn's Labour Party, and polls put her as much as 25 points ahead.
However, by the end of that election campaign, Corbyn's party was neck and neck with May's Conservatives, meaning she lost her majority in Parliament.
Johnson, by contrast, would enter this campaign with no majority and with much smaller leads, of as little as 4 points, some recent polls have found. Some other polls have found significantly bigger leads for Johnson, of up to 15 points.
However, there remain significant doubts about whether Johnson's polling leads are large enough to withstand a general-election campaign, in which his party's almost 10 years in power would again be under the spotlight.
https://www.businessinsider.com/boris-johnson-brexit-election-bid-could-make-jeremy-corbyn-pm-2019-10
The other headings in the article:
Johnson's election message could fail
The 'remain' vote is now much more efficiently distributed
Johnson will have to gain lots of ground just to stand still
The Labour voters Johnson needs could prove too difficult to budge
Johnson's campaign could be wrecked by scandal
A tentatively cheery, if not uncontroversial, counterpoint to doom for a Saturday afternoon. I'm not sure I buy in to the prospect of a Corbyn premiership. Another hung parliament of some complexion is probably more likely.
October 22, 2019
The actual exchange in the House yesterday:
The only sane response short of darting across the floor of the House and ramming Rees-Mogg's order book up his over-entitled arse:
I'm not sure what's worse: Rees-Mogg's arrogant non-answer, or the fact that business in the House moved briskly on.
New game: Where's the Brexit Economic Impact Assessment?
https://twitter.com/davidschneider/status/1186554357476724737David Schneider ✔
@davidschneider
Brexit in a nutshell:
MP: “Can we make an informed decision about how Brexit will affect people and the economy?”
Rees-Mogg: “Go take a flying dump!”
[Twitter video]
@davidschneider
Brexit in a nutshell:
MP: “Can we make an informed decision about how Brexit will affect people and the economy?”
Rees-Mogg: “Go take a flying dump!”
[Twitter video]
The actual exchange in the House yesterday:
Kirsty Blackman (SNP, Aberdeen North): Can the Leader of the House let us know if an economic impact assessment on the deal has been carried out yet, and if it has, will it be published tomorrow in time for us to look at it before the second reading?
Jacob Rees-Mogg (Tory, the 19th century): If you ask an economist anything, you get the answer you want. [Sits down]
Jacob Rees-Mogg (Tory, the 19th century): If you ask an economist anything, you get the answer you want. [Sits down]
The only sane response short of darting across the floor of the House and ramming Rees-Mogg's order book up his over-entitled arse:
I'm not sure what's worse: Rees-Mogg's arrogant non-answer, or the fact that business in the House moved briskly on.
October 20, 2019
How the media (and we, if we're not careful) get played.
I posted this in the thread "Boris Johnson sends unsigned request to Brussels for Brexit delay" on Latest Breaking News, but it might be of some interest.
Here are some interesting observations from Mike Hind about framing and PR in politics and how the headline in the OP plays into Johnson et al.'s hands.
It has some relevance to the situation with Trump in the USA, too.
(Note to moderators: it's a Thread Reader transcript of a Twitter thread, so I don't believe it's subject to the usual four-paragraph limit on quotes.)
Downing St wants you to kick off about him not signing the letter.
This is a perfect example of Lakoffian framing.
The fact is that an unelected Prime Minister has again been humiliated by an elected Parliament.
A short explainer...
To win the PR air war you need to be first, with a fresh message, no matter the setback you just suffered. That's how you manipulate the media. By giving them a new story, to distract from the bad story.
Vote Leave (which is basically now the government) has been very adept at this.
Remember when the Electoral Commission ruled that Vote Leave had broken electoral law? They instantly declared the EC as "politically biased".
The story then? VL accuses EC of political bias?
See?
That is what we call framing.
Today's story is now about Johnson's 'defiance', rather than his humiliating political failure.
In the age of social media, those adept at framing have millions of people to manipulate. Most of us aren't aware of much comms theory, so we are easily manipulated into amplifying these talking points.
I too have been momentarily tempted to post some snarky 'hot takes' on Johnson not signing the extension request & sending a contradictory note. But reality bites when you spot the framing.
Today's story, behind the framing flannel, is that Johnson preferred to die in a ditch than do the thing he has been forced to do.
As ever, well-meaning people will argue the toss on this. Because often the last people to spot skilled manipulation are the skillfully manipulated.
Anyway, this is how to react
If you're inspired to better understand framing, a good follow to consider is @dirktherabbit who consistently shines a light on these tactics
Framing is what the best journalists cut through, to bring you the real story. Which is why @BethRigby is one of my go-to sources for insight, rather than gossip
I should also recommend @jennirsl, who is calling out the same problem
What actually happened
If you'd like to journey into the deeper subtleties of framing this, by @zephoria, is a brilliant introduction.
“Media Manipulation, Strategic Amplification, and Responsible Journalism” by danah boyd link.medium.com/Y5OvWhqZV0
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1185797486708961280.html
This is a perfect example of Lakoffian framing.
The fact is that an unelected Prime Minister has again been humiliated by an elected Parliament.
A short explainer...
To win the PR air war you need to be first, with a fresh message, no matter the setback you just suffered. That's how you manipulate the media. By giving them a new story, to distract from the bad story.
Vote Leave (which is basically now the government) has been very adept at this.
Remember when the Electoral Commission ruled that Vote Leave had broken electoral law? They instantly declared the EC as "politically biased".
The story then? VL accuses EC of political bias?
See?
That is what we call framing.
Today's story is now about Johnson's 'defiance', rather than his humiliating political failure.
In the age of social media, those adept at framing have millions of people to manipulate. Most of us aren't aware of much comms theory, so we are easily manipulated into amplifying these talking points.
I too have been momentarily tempted to post some snarky 'hot takes' on Johnson not signing the extension request & sending a contradictory note. But reality bites when you spot the framing.
Today's story, behind the framing flannel, is that Johnson preferred to die in a ditch than do the thing he has been forced to do.
As ever, well-meaning people will argue the toss on this. Because often the last people to spot skilled manipulation are the skillfully manipulated.
Anyway, this is how to react
David Allen Green
@davidallengreen
Nothing in the latest tactical idiocy to cause alarm
The Benn Act letter is sent, these other reported letters legally inconsequential
Seems clever, and will impress the easily impressed, but nothing to worry about
If you're inspired to better understand framing, a good follow to consider is @dirktherabbit who consistently shines a light on these tactics
Framing is what the best journalists cut through, to bring you the real story. Which is why @BethRigby is one of my go-to sources for insight, rather than gossip
Jenni Russell ✔
@jennirsl
Journalists refusing to be spun by access to the No 10 machine are the ones to read in this latest Brexit crisis - the fearless @BethRigby here. https://twitter.com/bethrigby/status/1185668023635628042 …
Beth Rigby ✔ @BethRigby
Unspun version
1) Govt asks for a Brexit extension as legally required by Benn Act
2) PM writes an additional letter saying why he believes a delay is a mistake and he will not negotiate one https://twitter.com/allisterheath/status/1185663405191024643 …
I should also recommend @jennirsl, who is calling out the same problem
Jenni Russell ✔
@jennirsl
This is just a stunt by Johnson aimed at his base - but @peston is acting as his megaphone by sending the message Johnson wants out there; that he’s defiant. The truth is: he isn’t. He complied with the law. Peston’s doing No 10’s job here rather than his own. https://twitter.com/peston/status/1185662067090571264 …
Robert Peston ✔ @Peston
.@BorisJohnson will tonight stick two fingers up at the Benn Act by sending the letter to @eucopresident it stipulates asking for a three-month Brexit delay but refusing to sign it. He expects to see MPs in court.
What actually happened
https://twitter.com/RobDotHutton/status/1185644857311846401
Robert Hutton ✔
@RobDotHutton
Narrator: He asked for a Brexit extension.
If you'd like to journey into the deeper subtleties of framing this, by @zephoria, is a brilliant introduction.
“Media Manipulation, Strategic Amplification, and Responsible Journalism” by danah boyd link.medium.com/Y5OvWhqZV0
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1185797486708961280.html
October 20, 2019
Here are some interesting observations from Mike Hind about framing and PR in politics
and how the headline in the OP plays into Johnson et al.'s hands.
It has some relevance to the situation with Trump in the USA, too.
(Note to moderators: it's a Thread Reader transcript of a Twitter thread, so I don't believe it's subject to the usual four-paragraph limit on quotes.)
Downing St wants you to kick off about him not signing the letter.
This is a perfect example of Lakoffian framing.
The fact is that an unelected Prime Minister has again been humiliated by an elected Parliament.
A short explainer...
To win the PR air war you need to be first, with a fresh message, no matter the setback you just suffered. That's how you manipulate the media. By giving them a new story, to distract from the bad story.
Vote Leave (which is basically now the government) has been very adept at this.
Remember when the Electoral Commission ruled that Vote Leave had broken electoral law? They instantly declared the EC as "politically biased".
The story then? VL accuses EC of political bias?
See?
That is what we call framing.
Today's story is now about Johnson's 'defiance', rather than his humiliating political failure.
In the age of social media, those adept at framing have millions of people to manipulate. Most of us aren't aware of much comms theory, so we are easily manipulated into amplifying these talking points.
I too have been momentarily tempted to post some snarky 'hot takes' on Johnson not signing the extension request & sending a contradictory note. But reality bites when you spot the framing.
Today's story, behind the framing flannel, is that Johnson preferred to die in a ditch than do the thing he has been forced to do.
As ever, well-meaning people will argue the toss on this. Because often the last people to spot skilled manipulation are the skillfully manipulated.
Anyway, this is how to react
If you're inspired to better understand framing, a good follow to consider is @dirktherabbit who consistently shines a light on these tactics
Framing is what the best journalists cut through, to bring you the real story. Which is why @BethRigby is one of my go-to sources for insight, rather than gossip
I should also recommend @jennirsl, who is calling out the same problem
What actually happened
If you'd like to journey into the deeper subtleties of framing this, by @zephoria, is a brilliant introduction.
“Media Manipulation, Strategic Amplification, and Responsible Journalism” by danah boyd link.medium.com/Y5OvWhqZV0
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1185797486708961280.html
This is a perfect example of Lakoffian framing.
The fact is that an unelected Prime Minister has again been humiliated by an elected Parliament.
A short explainer...
To win the PR air war you need to be first, with a fresh message, no matter the setback you just suffered. That's how you manipulate the media. By giving them a new story, to distract from the bad story.
Vote Leave (which is basically now the government) has been very adept at this.
Remember when the Electoral Commission ruled that Vote Leave had broken electoral law? They instantly declared the EC as "politically biased".
The story then? VL accuses EC of political bias?
See?
That is what we call framing.
Today's story is now about Johnson's 'defiance', rather than his humiliating political failure.
In the age of social media, those adept at framing have millions of people to manipulate. Most of us aren't aware of much comms theory, so we are easily manipulated into amplifying these talking points.
I too have been momentarily tempted to post some snarky 'hot takes' on Johnson not signing the extension request & sending a contradictory note. But reality bites when you spot the framing.
Today's story, behind the framing flannel, is that Johnson preferred to die in a ditch than do the thing he has been forced to do.
As ever, well-meaning people will argue the toss on this. Because often the last people to spot skilled manipulation are the skillfully manipulated.
Anyway, this is how to react
David Allen Green
@davidallengreen
Nothing in the latest tactical idiocy to cause alarm
The Benn Act letter is sent, these other reported letters legally inconsequential
Seems clever, and will impress the easily impressed, but nothing to worry about
If you're inspired to better understand framing, a good follow to consider is @dirktherabbit who consistently shines a light on these tactics
Framing is what the best journalists cut through, to bring you the real story. Which is why @BethRigby is one of my go-to sources for insight, rather than gossip
Jenni Russell ✔
@jennirsl
Journalists refusing to be spun by access to the No 10 machine are the ones to read in this latest Brexit crisis - the fearless @BethRigby here. https://twitter.com/bethrigby/status/1185668023635628042 …
Beth Rigby ✔ @BethRigby
Unspun version
1) Govt asks for a Brexit extension as legally required by Benn Act
2) PM writes an additional letter saying why he believes a delay is a mistake and he will not negotiate one https://twitter.com/allisterheath/status/1185663405191024643 …
I should also recommend @jennirsl, who is calling out the same problem
Jenni Russell ✔
@jennirsl
This is just a stunt by Johnson aimed at his base - but @peston is acting as his megaphone by sending the message Johnson wants out there; that he’s defiant. The truth is: he isn’t. He complied with the law. Peston’s doing No 10’s job here rather than his own. https://twitter.com/peston/status/1185662067090571264 …
Robert Peston ✔ @Peston
.@BorisJohnson will tonight stick two fingers up at the Benn Act by sending the letter to @eucopresident it stipulates asking for a three-month Brexit delay but refusing to sign it. He expects to see MPs in court.
What actually happened
https://twitter.com/RobDotHutton/status/1185644857311846401
Robert Hutton ✔
@RobDotHutton
Narrator: He asked for a Brexit extension.
If you'd like to journey into the deeper subtleties of framing this, by @zephoria, is a brilliant introduction.
“Media Manipulation, Strategic Amplification, and Responsible Journalism” by danah boyd link.medium.com/Y5OvWhqZV0
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1185797486708961280.html
October 19, 2019
Letwin amendment passes
322 for the amendment
306 against it
Johnson now has to write to the EU requesting an extension to the Brexit deadline.
A major factor in tipping the vote by such a margin was the DUP voting for it.
October 17, 2019
Soundings among various EU office holders indicate that a decision on any extension if this deal isn't passed is by no means done and dusted, despite interpretations of Juncker's statement earlier today.
Barnier's been talking about the prospects of an extension into 2020.
The media, including the BBC, jumped the gun earlier today in reporting Juncker vetoing any chances of an extension - indeed, the BBC's Laura Kuenssberg has been serving her usual role of craven stenographer to the Johnson regime and putting her gloss on matters that serves it best. It's a shame that Katya Adler, a much better analyst with no identifiable ulterior motives, isn't in her role - see what she tweeted in Muriel's reply to Sophie's post in Latest Breaking News.
Has the EU really ruled out another Article 50 extension?
No. But Boris Johnson needs Labour MPs to believe it has.
Deal or no-deal: that’s the stark choice MPs will face when the Commons sits on Saturday if reports from Brussels are to be believed. Asked to rule out a further extension to Article 50 beyond 31 October, EU Commission president Jean-Claude Juncker said: “We have concluded a deal and so there is not an argument for the delay. It has to be done now...[Boris Johnson] and myself don’t think it’s possible to give another prolongation. There will be no other.”
Emmanuel Macron, meanwhile, has struck a similar note. “France said very clearly in the spring that we mustn’t pursue these discussions after the end of October,” the French president has said.
In appearing to rule out another extension, Juncker and Macron have created the cliff-edge scenario that the prime minister believes is necessary to deliver a majority - and particularly the Labour switchers that he will need in the absence of the DUP's 10 votes. It has been dutifully reported to that effect, most notably by the BBC's breaking news app.
The problem for Johnson, however, is that the proposition is not as binary as he might like. As much as Juncker sounds like he is opposed to a further extension, it is not within the Commission’s gift to offer or reject one (and nor did he expressly rule it out). Rather it is the individual member states who will decide whether to accept or reject a request for an extension the government has committed to table under the terms of the Benn Act, or, for that matter, offer one themselves - as was the case in March.
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2019/10/has-eu-really-ruled-out-another-article-50-extension
Deal or no-deal: that’s the stark choice MPs will face when the Commons sits on Saturday if reports from Brussels are to be believed. Asked to rule out a further extension to Article 50 beyond 31 October, EU Commission president Jean-Claude Juncker said: “We have concluded a deal and so there is not an argument for the delay. It has to be done now...[Boris Johnson] and myself don’t think it’s possible to give another prolongation. There will be no other.”
Emmanuel Macron, meanwhile, has struck a similar note. “France said very clearly in the spring that we mustn’t pursue these discussions after the end of October,” the French president has said.
In appearing to rule out another extension, Juncker and Macron have created the cliff-edge scenario that the prime minister believes is necessary to deliver a majority - and particularly the Labour switchers that he will need in the absence of the DUP's 10 votes. It has been dutifully reported to that effect, most notably by the BBC's breaking news app.
The problem for Johnson, however, is that the proposition is not as binary as he might like. As much as Juncker sounds like he is opposed to a further extension, it is not within the Commission’s gift to offer or reject one (and nor did he expressly rule it out). Rather it is the individual member states who will decide whether to accept or reject a request for an extension the government has committed to table under the terms of the Benn Act, or, for that matter, offer one themselves - as was the case in March.
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2019/10/has-eu-really-ruled-out-another-article-50-extension
Soundings among various EU office holders indicate that a decision on any extension if this deal isn't passed is by no means done and dusted, despite interpretations of Juncker's statement earlier today.
Barnier's been talking about the prospects of an extension into 2020.
The media, including the BBC, jumped the gun earlier today in reporting Juncker vetoing any chances of an extension - indeed, the BBC's Laura Kuenssberg has been serving her usual role of craven stenographer to the Johnson regime and putting her gloss on matters that serves it best. It's a shame that Katya Adler, a much better analyst with no identifiable ulterior motives, isn't in her role - see what she tweeted in Muriel's reply to Sophie's post in Latest Breaking News.
October 15, 2019
One question that arises is whether this is just the Tories planning for a "worst case" (though possibly not the worst case for them electorally) and whether there are also unleaked drafts of leaflets dealing with a situation where the UK has left the EU at the time of an election.
Conservative Party election leaflets suggest Brexit delay
...
The leaked leaflets, made available to agents and activists last week, also reveal some of the arguments the party may use against their opponents in a general election.
...
But more intriguingly, the language in the leaflets clearly suggests the party is expecting the UK not to have left the EU by the time of a general election, saying: "Without a strong majority government, we can't deliver Brexit," and "Nigel Farage can't deliver Brexit but he could yet block it."
...
Another leaflet is aimed at people who voted Leave in 2016 who are now tempted to vote for the Liberal Democrats.
This leaflet says "without a strong majority government Brexit won't get delivered", again suggesting the party intends on sending this leaflet out after the UK's departure has been delayed.
...
People who voted Leave and are now deciding between the Conservatives and Labour will be targeted with the following leaflet.
It says "Labour's Brexit policy is more delay", once more suggesting that the UK will not have left the EU at the time of a general election.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-50029635
The leaked leaflets, made available to agents and activists last week, also reveal some of the arguments the party may use against their opponents in a general election.
...
But more intriguingly, the language in the leaflets clearly suggests the party is expecting the UK not to have left the EU by the time of a general election, saying: "Without a strong majority government, we can't deliver Brexit," and "Nigel Farage can't deliver Brexit but he could yet block it."
...
Another leaflet is aimed at people who voted Leave in 2016 who are now tempted to vote for the Liberal Democrats.
This leaflet says "without a strong majority government Brexit won't get delivered", again suggesting the party intends on sending this leaflet out after the UK's departure has been delayed.
...
People who voted Leave and are now deciding between the Conservatives and Labour will be targeted with the following leaflet.
It says "Labour's Brexit policy is more delay", once more suggesting that the UK will not have left the EU at the time of a general election.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-50029635
One question that arises is whether this is just the Tories planning for a "worst case" (though possibly not the worst case for them electorally) and whether there are also unleaked drafts of leaflets dealing with a situation where the UK has left the EU at the time of an election.
October 5, 2019
I'm not sure how long this story's legs will be yet, and so far only the Telegraph (where you need to register or subscribe to read beyond what I've quoted above) and Mail are covering it.
FWIW, here's some of the Mail's version:
The journalistic formula "X happened as Y ..." can sometimes be misleadingly used to link two events that may be unrelated except in occurring around the same time. But the last sentence quoted from the Telegraph piece - "Multiple Home Office spokesmen and aides declined to rule out on-the-record that Ms Patel and Mr Barr discussed the investigation." - is bound to fuel speculation, especially given Patel's disastrous past record as a loose cannon in foreign affairs.
Revealed: Trump's attorney general met Priti Patel as he sought UK help to investigate Russia probe
Donald Trump's attorney general met Priti Patel this summer as he sought British help in an investigation casting doubt over the Russian 2016 election meddling probe, The Daily Telegraph can disclose.
William Barr met Ms Patel, the Home Secretary, in London shortly after she got the role while both attended a conference for the Five Eyes intelligence-sharing alliance.
They met on July 29 - just days after Mr Trump had reportedly urged Boris Johnson to help with the investigation, which is looking at how the probe into Mr Trump's Kremlin links had begun.
Multiple Home Office spokesmen and aides declined to rule out on-the-record that Ms Patel and Mr Barr discussed the investigation.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/10/04/revealed-trumps-attorney-general-met-priti-patel-sought-uk-help
William Barr met Ms Patel, the Home Secretary, in London shortly after she got the role while both attended a conference for the Five Eyes intelligence-sharing alliance.
They met on July 29 - just days after Mr Trump had reportedly urged Boris Johnson to help with the investigation, which is looking at how the probe into Mr Trump's Kremlin links had begun.
Multiple Home Office spokesmen and aides declined to rule out on-the-record that Ms Patel and Mr Barr discussed the investigation.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/10/04/revealed-trumps-attorney-general-met-priti-patel-sought-uk-help
I'm not sure how long this story's legs will be yet, and so far only the Telegraph (where you need to register or subscribe to read beyond what I've quoted above) and Mail are covering it.
FWIW, here's some of the Mail's version:
Donald Trump's Attorney General 'met Priti Patel as he sought British help investigating inquiry into Russian meddling in 2016 US election five days after she became Home Secretary'
...
Their meeting came days after Mr Trump reportedly asked Prime Minister Boris Johnson to assist him as he tried to discredit the Mueller investigation into possible connections between Russia and his election campaign.
Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab told the Commons on Wednesday that no British government member, including the prime minister, would collude with Trump to discredit intelligence agencies looking into Russian interference of the 2016 election campaign.
...
Mr Johnson's Attorney General Geoffrey Cox also met Mr Barr at the Five Eyes conference and said had the investigation been raised he would have declined to talk about it.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7540735/Trumps-Attorney-General-met-Priti-Patel-sought-British-help-investigating-Russian-inquiry.html
...
Their meeting came days after Mr Trump reportedly asked Prime Minister Boris Johnson to assist him as he tried to discredit the Mueller investigation into possible connections between Russia and his election campaign.
Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab told the Commons on Wednesday that no British government member, including the prime minister, would collude with Trump to discredit intelligence agencies looking into Russian interference of the 2016 election campaign.
...
Mr Johnson's Attorney General Geoffrey Cox also met Mr Barr at the Five Eyes conference and said had the investigation been raised he would have declined to talk about it.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7540735/Trumps-Attorney-General-met-Priti-Patel-sought-British-help-investigating-Russian-inquiry.html
The journalistic formula "X happened as Y ..." can sometimes be misleadingly used to link two events that may be unrelated except in occurring around the same time. But the last sentence quoted from the Telegraph piece - "Multiple Home Office spokesmen and aides declined to rule out on-the-record that Ms Patel and Mr Barr discussed the investigation." - is bound to fuel speculation, especially given Patel's disastrous past record as a loose cannon in foreign affairs.
Profile Information
Gender: Do not displayCurrent location: Scotland
Member since: Sun Sep 6, 2009, 11:57 PM
Number of posts: 7,863