Westminstenders: Exit 2020 Vision

[RedToothBrush]

Yet it is a great mistake to suppose that the only writers who matter are those whom the educated in their saner moments can take seriously. There exists a subterranean world where pathological fantasies disguised as ideas are churned out by crooks and half-educated fanatics for the benefit of the ignorant and the superstitious. There are times when this underworld emerges from the depths and suddenly fascinates, capturers and dominates multitudes of usually sane and responsible people, who thereupon take leave of sanity and responsibility. And it occasionally happens that this underworld becomes a political power and changes the course of history.
Norm Cohn ‘Warrant for Genocide’ 1970

(As referenced by Nick Cohen).

We have a deal (or bits of a deal). Bino til Dec 2020. Then the cliff?

Still a long way to go. It sounds better than it could be. But worse than it initially seems.

I think sadly this will go the same way the Russian interference did, not scrutinised, no spotlight, brushed aside, no investigation.

I was wondering what would happen if there was a court case about this that found significant illegal interference, enough to sway the vote (brexit/trump) what would happen then? Result annulled?

What about public sentiment?

Jane Bradley @jane__bradley
Huge new revelations in The Times: #CambridgeAnalytics offered a £1m bribe to turn election AND its CEO Alexander Nix referred to two black clients as n*ers in an internal email.

Story relates to an entrapment of Lindsay Grant, the leader of the opposition in St Kitts and Nevus in 2010.

SCL has received hundreds of thousands of pounds from the british gov to carry out behavioural analysis in conflict zones over the past decade.

Elsewhere Alexander Nix was suspended from Cambridge Analytics earlier today. Carole Cadwalladr pointed out it doesn't exist in reality. Its a shell company. And Nix isn't suspended from the parent SCL. Meanwhile a new company with all the old board members has appeared called Emerdata.

No Warrant Yet???!

So who is moving the boxes? And why?

Source www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5524263/Cambridge-Analytica-chief-executive-Alexander-Nix-suspended.html

Ciaran Jenkins @C4Ciaran (1min ago)
ICO is still waiting for warrant to search #CambridgeAnalytica
They also investigated
When we secretly filmed Tories’ election call centre
ICO said Tories ‘crossed the line’ into ‘unlawful’ territory
But took no action

This time
The world is watching

How long does it take to get a flipping warrant?? All the judges on holiday or something?

I don't want to distract from the CA developments but there's an FT article from Monday that I don’t think was mentioned?

The key points are about supply chains and some myths about reduced tariffs:

•	One in seven EU companies with UK suppliers have moved part or all of their business out of Britain already. (See Chartered Institute of Procurement and Supply.)

•Food-processing companies contribute 50 % more to the UK economy than the automotive sector.
•70 % of food exports went to the EU.
• Prices have risen since the Brexit vote, this will continue.

•A third of UK suppliers have raised prices already because of the weakened pound.

•Another 41 per cent of suppliers plan future price rises to offset Brexit-related costs.

•Alex Waugh, director-general of the National Association of British and Irish Flour Millers, warned that food producers will be shut out of preferential trade between the EU and the UK unless We stay inside the customs union.

•the Institute for Fiscal Studies said low tarries on leaving the customs union may lead to gains but they would be very small. The common EU tariff is low anyway, averaging 4.8% before the EU’s trade agreements are taken into account. The IFS said ven a zero-tariff assumption would see prices fall a maximum of 1.2% because only a quarter of spending is on imports.

•Peter Levell IFS economist said any potential gain “is not large compared with the 2% increase in prices due to the sterling depreciation following the referendum.

https://www.ft.com/content/a7acd37a-2b84-11e8-9b4b-bc4b9f08f381

George Peretz QC @GeorgePeretzQC
The Withdrawal Agreement and Article 3 of Protocol 1 to the ECHR: a question.

As we know, the WA provides that the U.K. remains subject to EU law in the transition period, including new law made by the EU Parliament and Council.
^However, there will be no U.K. representation in the EU Parliament.
A3 Protocol 1 ECHR (part of the Human Rights Act 1998) says that “The High Contracting Parties shall hold free elections at reasonable intervals by secret ballot, under conditions which will ensure the free expression of the opinion of the people in the choice of the legislature”^

In Matthews v U.K., in 1999, the European Court of Human Rights looked at the position of a Gibraltar voter. At that time, Gibraltar had no vote in EP elections.
<a class="break-all" href="https://www.webcitation.org/5lWx37qMR?url=cmiskp.echr.coe.int/tkp197/view.asp?action=html&documentId=696787&portal=hbkm&source=externalbydocnumber&table=F69A27FD8FB86142BF01C1166DEA398649" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">www.webcitation.org/5lWx37qMR?url=cmiskp.echr.coe.int/tkp197/view.asp?action=html&documentId=696787&portal=hbkm&source=externalbydocnumber&table=F69A27FD8FB86142BF01C1166DEA398649

The ECtHR found that the the U.K. was in breach of A3P1. That was because the EP was a real legislature for Gibraltar, making law that was supreme over law. And Mrs Matthews had no vote for it.
It was no answer, said the ECtHR, that EC law, agreed by the U.K., omitted to provide for votes for those living in . The U.K. agreed to sign up to those rules and agreed to have EC law applied to . The U.K. was answerable for having so agreed.

That raises an interesting question: by signing the WA including the agreed transition arrangements, wouldn’t the U.K. be in breach of A3P1? In essence, every U.K. voter is deprived of a vote in the legislature which will (still) be making supreme law in the U.K.?

Nor (probably) is there any EU remedy: the EU charter protects the right to vote in the EP for all EU citizens. But we won’t be EU citizens.

I throw the thought open to legal Twitter: but at first blush there seems to be an argument that the U.K. would be in breach of its ECHR obligations if if it signed up to the WA, and that any Act implementing the WA would be incompatible with the ECHR.

And there could be some MPs, or ordinary voters, ready to try to get an appropriate declaration from the courts on that.

Jon Worth @jonworth
Oh I do like this thread.

That’d be so amusing - use ECHR to ensure Brits have representation in the EP during transition…

… and better still based on a case about Gibraltar! FTW!

#Brexit

Rory Cellan-Jones @ruskin147
““Mark, Sheryl and their teams are working around the clock to get all the facts and take the appropriate action moving forward, because they understand the seriousness of this issue. The entire company is outraged we were deceived” Latest from Facebook

Helen Lewis @helenlewis
This is the worst crisis statement since that mad Harvey Weinstein one about how he was going to bring down the NRA.

It was only in November that Facebook finally stopped letting advertisers exclude users based on “ethnic affinities”. And that was only because ProPublica went back after its initial investigation & found you could still target that way.

taps wineglass Other things I want to say: it’s never going to stop being piquant that Cambridge Analytica being comedy panto villains has FINALLY cracked open a story about data protection which journalists have been struggling to nail for years. We salute you, boys.

ALSO: the only organisation with enough clout/political will to stand up to giant tech firms is the EU. It’s bringing in BIG legislation in May (the GDPR), and BIG fines for breaking it. Again a big well done to us for going it alone & opting out of shaping future legislation.

PS. I’m still sceptical about the efficacy of Facebook ad targeting. I used the ProPublica plug in - here:www.propublica.org/article/breaking-the-black-box-what-facebook-knows-about-you - and Facebook thinks I am wildly interested in fishing? I barely know one end of a haddock from the other.

Nonetheless, targeting doesn’t have to be mystically sensitive to be alarming. Here’s something the Trump campaign boasted about: trying to suppress the vote in black majority areas with negative Facebook ads.

We only know about it because they were PROUD of doing this. In the London mayoral election, attempts to portray Sadiq Khan as a terrorist sympathiser backfired because they were done in newspaper columns etc. On Facebook, though, no one can hear you dogwhistle.

Phew. Now it’s time for some GAME THEORY. (Not really.) But if I were Mark Zuckerberg, there’s only one thing I’d be thinking tonight…

"Never Gonna Be President Now"

And there is Zuckerberg's motive for keeping quiet. He knew he could do the same himself.

Also DH "Do you know how strict Germany's data protection law is? Like instant prison" I think he exaggerates a bit here but yeah

Also, another great motive for Brexit along with money laundering.

Home affairs committee @commonshomeaffs
We have published our report on UK-EU security cooperation after Brexit. Read the report and more here:
www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/home-affairs-committee/news-parliament-2017/uk-eu-security-cooperation-brexit-report-published-17-19/

Steve Peers @ stevepeers
1 Some thoughts on this new @CommonsHomeAffs report on EU/UK security cooperation after Brexit.

First of all, it's separate from the @LordsEUCom inquiry into a future UK/EU security treaty, which is ongoing (and which I am a special adviser for).

2 As it happens I gave evidence to the @CommonsHomeAffs inquiry, as did my @EssexLawSchool colleague Professor Lorna Woods.

On the substance, the committee wants to continue lots of EU/UK cooperation in this area, but argues that both sides have to drop "red lines".

3 The committee is very keen to continue the UK role in Europol but is well aware that the participation of non-EU countries is limited compared to EU Member States. It wants the government to clarify its plans here.

4 The committee is equally keen to continue with the European Arrest Warrant and access to police data, and equally uncertain about what the government's exact intentions are here.

5 The committee doesn't like the constraints on cooperation in this area during the transition period. Awkwardly the government has now agreed to these.

Note that like @CommonsEUexit this committee is favourable to an extension to the transition period if needed.

6 The committee thinks that losing the European Arrest Warrant and going back to earlier extradition treaties would be "catastrophic".

It's concerned about some Member States refusing to extradite their citizens (but note that the withdrawal agreement already provides for this)

7 Some of us warned that this was likely to happen during the referendum campaign, but we were called scaremongers. Happy days!

8 The committee is worried about the risk that the UK won't get an adequacy decision to facilitate data flows in this area. It even thinks that the UK security services may be subject to extra scrutiny as a non-EU country. "Taking back control" is so exhilarating!

^9 The committee thinks that the UK should retain the data protection clause in the EU Charter of Rights in UK law.

Also it's concerned about government plans to curtail the data protection rights of @The3Million - which could jeopardise an adequacy decision.^

10 The committee recognises that the ECJ has a record of critical scrutiny over personal data transfers to non-EU countries (and, one might add, also Google and...Facebook 😀).

So no strong red line is viable here - as the PM recently accepted.

Are we witnessing the death of Brexshit?
So much negativity right now.

Is this a turning point?

Ive thought from early on that NI and NHS were two things that could break brexit. When trump was elected, I added that to the list. When the CA started I thought it would go nowhere but if it did, it would be huge.

All four are still unresolved and pressure is building behind them.

Id say we were going in the right direction but this isn't accounting for the May factor.

May likes to see.things through and not back down.

So no, we still arent even close to this. Yet.

Unfortunately, that Rachel Maddow transcript reads a bit like a Rush Limbaugh monologue. While I applaud Maddow's anti-Trump approach in general, I really can't do anything but cringe at the style and tone and lack of substance of that 'report'.

If you take it apart there are very few facts there.

You think he`d be too busy to take on other clients, right?
This is a silly assertion. Kasowitz is a founding partner of a 350 lawyer firm with branches in several states besides NY, and many clients both individual and corporate.
But, you know, looking at it from another angle, if there were Russian interests who are particularly concerned to know what was going on in the Trump-Russia investigation...It may be handy to have conversations undercover of attorney-client privilege with the lead lawyer for the president on the Trump-Russia investigations so who knows? Maybe that was just a coincidence too.

I may be wrong, but I believe a lawyer could be disbarred for what she is suggesting - and I think she is sailing as close to an accusation as she can without getting into legal hot water herself.

This is not really journalism. It's closer to salacious gossip, and it cheapens the subject matter (i.e. Trump's possible crime/s).

I am hugely cheered by the “yet”.

Bill Browder
@Billbrowder
BREAKING: This afternoon the parliament of Jersey began debates on whether to pass a Magnitsky Act in Jersey, which would mirror the U.K. Magnitsky Act. See 1:46:45 on video for the debate

statesassembly.public-i.tv/core/portal/webcast_interactive/344422/start_time/6405000

If Jersey goes through with this and enacts a Magnitsky Act, this would be a tectonic negative shift in the fortunes of Russian human rights violators because they hold significant assets in Jersey.

Even on these threads, the significance of CA took a while to build up.

As long as govt policy remains Brexit and keeping the ERG on side, they will try to ignore CA Brexitgate
They - and Leave voters - will not willingly admit that the narrow Leave victory was probably swung by CA Brexitgate

However, it provides a genuine reason - not an excuse - for a late change of UKpolicy to full BINO when the economic / trade consequences finally sink in at the 11th hour

It might possibly spur on Parliament to threaten the govt into BINO, but Corbyn is a real roadblock for the Tory Remain

We need to force this into the open quickly, for any chance of public outrage to build up in time - March 2019 - to revoke A50

It also gives the E27 a reason to accept this revocation even at the 11th hour

• the referendum was swung by CA, working for sinister forces

Mightybanhammer - The first time I watched BBC News on TV here in the US after not seeing it for many years I was stunned. Bad and all as BBC news had been wrt NI (hinting that coverage of other places might not be as neutral or thorough as the BBC's image promised) I still hoped that the BBC would be better than the commercial news broadcasts in the US. Instead I was left wondering what the world was coming to after seeing a sob story masquerading as a news report by Orla Guerin that could have been composed and performed (yes, performed) by a talented 12 year old.

The lawyer representing Sberbank and trump has a history of not always behaving in accordance with what one might expect from a lawyer:

www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jul/13/donald-trump-lawyer-marc-kasowitz-emails-apology

And

Ivanka and Donald Trump Jr. Were Close to Being Charged With Felony Fraud

New York prosecutors were preparing a case. Then the D.A. overruled his staff after a visit from a top donor: Trump attorney Marc Kasowitz.

www.propublica.org/article/ivanka-donald-trump-jr-close-to-being-charged-felony-fraud

And

Role of Trump’s Personal Lawyer Blurs Public and Private Lines

mobile.nytimes.com/2017/06/11/us/politics/trump-lawyer-marc-kasowitz.html

It's an old article but clearly there has been contradictory comment on the extent of CA's connection to the LeVe campaign.

What we need to know, of course, is who made a payment to CA prior to the referendum and how much money changed hands.

uk.businessinsider.com/cambridge-analytica-has-contradicted-itself-on-its-work-for-leaveeu-2018-3

Invitation letter by President Donald Tusk to the members of the European Council ahead of their meetings on 22 and 23 March 2018

< notice how the EU openly publish everything possible about their business,
whereas UK govt has traditionally been secretive even about mundane matters.
Knowledge is Power and no UK govt wants the public to be genuinely knowledgeable about govt >

Agenda is basically

1. USA trade sanctions
2. Brexit (only #2)
3. Russia

http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2018/03/20/invitation-letter-by-president-donald-tusk-to-the-members-of-the-european-council-ahead-of-their-meetings-on-22-and-23-march-2018/
…
[2] "I will ask you to adopt a first set of guidelines on the future relationship with the UK.
Additionally, yesterday our negotiators reached a solution on parts of the withdrawal agreement

Whether all 27 Member States can welcome this at the European Council remains open.

I still need a couple more hours to consult with some of the most concerned Member States.

To me, one thing is clear.
We have achieved success when it comes to citizens' rights and the financial settlement.

As I have stated from the very beginning of these negotiations, defending the rights of our citizens will be the number one priority for the EU.
And we have made it.

European citizens will be fully protected from the consequences of Brexit.

This also means that our citizens crossing the Channel in this period will not get worse treatment than those who did so before.
This is good news for all Europeans.

As regards the most contentious issue, namely Ireland, Prime Minister May has reassured me that she accepts all options agreed in December to be on the negotiating table.

Including the option of full regulatory alignment between Ireland and Northern Ireland if there is no other possibility to avoid a hard border.
This bodes well for the rest of the negotiations.
…
[3] Following the Salisbury attack, we should not only express our full solidarity with the UK
but also draw operational conclusions, as this incident poses a challenge to our shared security."

@mrjamesob
Going out on a limb here but the people who’ve been brainwashed by their own Facebook feeds aren’t very likely to believe they’ve been brainwashed.

They haven't really been brainwashed. Their inner demons have been summoned forth after being identified and examined by CA, according to the whistleblower. They have seen in meme form confirmation of their deepest, darkest convictions.

There is a difference between behaviour that is different from what one would expect from a lawyer and conduct that would result in being disbarred.

www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/may/07/the-great-british-brexit-robbery-hijacked-democracy

The fact remains that Kasowitz represents trump as well as representing Sberbank, the largest Russian state-owned bank that also happens to be under sanctions, and Oleg Deripaska, a oligarch who is closely connected to putin and who has been reported to have used Manafort’s financial debts against him around the time that he became trump’s campaign manager. I think that’s noteworthy and think JRM’s connections to Sberbank are also noteworthy.

Of course, Nigel Farage will have known exactly what was going on with Cambridge Analytica. But how could Boris and Gove not have known? And are now Foreign Sec and Environment Sec?
I will ask my MP in an email today.

Matt Thomas
@Trickyjabs
Roger Gabb, board member on at least four firms linked to Cambridge Analytica, SCL and Alexander Nix, has donated £717,950 to the ... Conservative Party.

And

Liam O'Hare
Liam O'Hare
@LiamOHare
The President of SCL is Sir Geoffrey Pattie. He is a former vice chairman of the Tory party, and served in Thatcher's cabinet, including as defence minister.
Another of SCL's directors is the millionare and former British special forces officer in Borneo and Kenya, Roger Gabb. In 2006 he donated £500,000 to the Conservative party.
Gabb was fined by the Electoral Commission for failing to declare his funding for adverts campaigning for a Leave vote in the Brexit referendum.
SLC’s links to the Conservative party go even deeper. The company’s chairman is venture capitalist Julian Wheatland. He also happens to be chairman of Oxfordshire Conservatives Association.
The organisation has also been funded by Jonathan Marland, a former Conservative Party Treasurer, a trade envoy under David Cameron, and a close friend of Tory election strategist Lynton Crosby.
Meanwhile, property tycoon and Conservative party donor Vincent Tchenguiz was also the single largest SCL shareholder for a decade.

[i haven’t cipirdvthe whole thread across but it ends with this;

Liam O'Hare
@LiamOHare
Finally, it's worth mentioning that SLC received $1 million to support NATO operations in Eastern Europe targeting Russia. Britain is quick to accuse Russia of interfering but it seems this is exactly what the private arm of its military establishment has been doing. ]