Westminstenders: Why didn't you whistle whilst you worked?

[RedToothBrush]

After over a year in the public dominion, SUDDENLY the mainstream media have picked up the story on breeches by the Leave campaigns over election rules. This comes off the back of the Cambridge Analytic scandal with Facebook data having been stolen and their offices (finally) being raided.

This has now led to the involvement of solicitors Bindmans (who were involved with the Gina Miller case and are associated with prominent Remain Jolyon Maugam) and have released a 53 page document they say is evidence of collaboration between Vote Leave and BeLeave campaigns. They state effectively that there is no 'smoking gun' rather a 'drip drip drip' effect of cumulative information (as Sam Coates succinctly sums up).

What difference does this make?

Both the Electoral Commission and the ICO have very little power and in law there doesn't appear to technically be any recourse. This needs to be addressed now as an extreme priority.

The prospect of another referendum being run in such circumstances, is alarming. Without an inquiry into what went wrong, how could you prevent any of this from happening again? There would also be feelings of some kind of establishment stitch-up to reverse the referendum, which could have major implications for trust in democracy in its own right.

There seems to be no easy answer here. And Brexit increasingly looks to be the turkey that was feared, though not exactly in the way the deeply flawed remain campaign made out.

Noises from the disgruntled Vote Leave director Dominic Cummings read like almost a threat to go after the EHCR which is just as poorly understood as the EU. And there is every reason to believe that Lexiter types would also be supportive if that meant they could take property from private ownership and put into state ownership without having to properly compensate.

Worth noting is that Cummings originally deleted his twitter account when this first started to surface. A least one of the whistleblowers was and still is a committed Leaver. Cummings seems rattled, but Cummings was previously on record as saying he wanted to destroy our existing establishment. He's not rattled about the damage to democracy nor I suspect even leaving the EU; he's rattled at prospect of being 'caught'. Make of that what you will.

With that in mind, shouldn't we be the mildest bit cautious about the intentions of Chris Wylie when he says we should have another referendum? Should we be cynical, rather than just accepting this as being great news and getting excited about an opportunity to reverse Brexit? Worst still our failure to be able to trust anything, in itself, is a sign of just how weak our democracy has become.

Are the efforts to dig up a story which should have been dealt with twelve months ago, going to help? Could they cause more damage and further risk our now seemingly ever fragile democracy?

I don't know. Impossible to tell. As Westministenders has said from very early on, the referendum wasn't just about leaving the EU but also a turning of backs on the concepts and principles of democracy. Only now is this really beginning to show its true ugliness to the masses. Even now, few see the real dangers here. Many are so blinded by the hatred of their political 'enemies' they turn a blind eye to their own side's zealotry and dogma.

The danger from the far right was always much more clear to see, but the danger from the far left as it grows bolder is also starting to be alarming.

If you think this is merely about leaving the EU, you are wrong. Even if we do stay in the EU after everything, we may still lose what it is to be a real functioning democracy.

Unless we promote these principles and involve all in society and give them a stake in the future; either inside or outside the EU we will be in a whole world more trouble.

And if that wasn't bad enough. Russian spies and murders plus the appointment of warmonger Bolton at the Whitehouse.

This in the New Statesman is another depressing read: Labour is eating itself

Will any losses be recompensed by the government ?

www.theregister.co.uk/2018/03/29/eu_dumps_300000_ukowned_domains_into_brexit_bin/

In an official statement Thursday, the European Commission announced it will cancel all 300,000 domains under the .eu top-level domain that have a UK registrant, following Britain's eventual departure from the European Union.

"As of the withdrawal date, undertakings and organizations that are established in the United Kingdom but not in the EU and natural persons who reside in the United Kingdom will no longer be eligible to register .eu domain names," the document states, adding, "or if they are .eu registrants, to renew .eu domain names registered before the withdrawal date."

Going even further, the EC suggested that existing .eu domains might be cancelled the moment Brexit happens – expected to be 366 days from now – with no right of appeal.

(contd)

It's frustrating when you can't really trust any source, they're all biased.

www.hertfordshiremercury.co.uk/news/hertfordshire-news/welwyn-garden-city-man-who-1395159.amp?__twitter_impression=true
Welwyn Garden City man who bought chemicals and guide on how to make a bomb convicted for terror offences

Why is no one interested it would be white terrorists? Not seen this story elsewhere.

It sounds a strange thing to find hopeful but when we were at the Aberdeen Uni Offer Holders Day last week, there were was a mini-lecture for the prospective Politics & International Relations students (and their parents) and I was strangely reassured by some of the comments of the young people.

Terrorism came up as one of the 5 biggest issues facing the world (we sub-divided into small groups: parents on one side if the lecture theatre and students on the other) that we were asked to define.

The positive thing was when the group who suggested that were asked to elaborate, they said right wing terrorism (ds was in that group - but he wasn't the one that answered that question his contribution was pointing out the risk of increasing inequality, aided and abetted by government(s) policies . I was strangely reassured that they hadn't bought into the dog-whistle fear of Islamic terrorism.

The young people also pointed out that being a democracy didn't reduce the risk of use of nuclear weapons, given that the only country ever to have used nuclear weapons "in anger" (twice) is in theory at least a democracy.

Brexit also came up as a challenge (NB: not an "opportunity" )

Young people do give cause for hope Pretty. It's the older ones who seem to have spectacularly cocked up our politics and society.

For those people still trying to absorb the facts around the Cambridge Analytica and it's founders I found this good synopsis about the influence of Robert Mercer and his family in the Trump campaign and the Trump administration.

www.npr.org/2017/03/22/521083950/inside-the-wealthy-family-that-has-been-funding-steve-bannon-s-plan-for-years

It's really interesting. I remembered a conversation I had when I read Dark Money in 2016. I then lent it to a very switched on friend (who is Aussie by birth). Her first question to me after reading the book was ' Do you think it could happen here too?' .

My reply at the time before all this news broke was " No I don't think so, because it needs big money and we don't have multi billionaire campaign funders in the same way as they do in the US."
How wrong I was.

ALittleAubergine Thu 29-Mar-18 09:06:35
A sad but true post. (Choice is between bad and worse).

Is there a glimmer of hope on the horizon in the US?
Trump sacked his current Veterans Affairs Secretary and wants to appoint his own personal doctor to oversee the privatising of VA services. Veterans groups are not impressed. Maybe vets will turn out and vote in November therefore?

I used to think/hope that maybe Corbyn and Starmer were playing a clever waiting game and timing their move for the right moment when public opinion was changing and the government was disunited and in chaos.
No. It now seems unbelievably that they themselves are disunited and in chaos, and that if Labour MPs make a rebellious move against the party whip (say on the final deal vote), it will be far too late to have any effect.
They will be powerless just at the moment when the government are pushing through the most enormously important legislation I can remember in my lifetime.
Useless opposition.

Also the Prime Minister's bloody road to Brexit video concludes with talk of " seizing opportunities".

What f.ing opportunities? After near two years since the referendum we are still waiting to hear what the opportunities are.

The best opportunity Gove could come up with was exporting pigs' ears to China which we can do anyway.

What about seizing the chance to be a leading member of one the world's largest economies generating $19.9 trillion each year? That would be an opportunity.

What about having a significant international group supporting you internationally culturally, socially, politically, militarily and academically. That would be an opportunity to seize.

I used to think/hope that maybe Corbyn and Starmer were playing a clever waiting game and timing their move for the right moment when public opinion was changing

Hester I do understand from a Mum friend who works with the Labour Party that generally the overall general strategy is to carefully monitor statistics from public opinion and sort of just stay 1 millimetre ahead of it.
Hence the eventual apparent support for the Customs Union I guess.

However Smith's sacking over a second ref, the anti semitism, sexism, and self id skirmishes do all cast doubt on any possible bigger picture.

If public opinion demonstrably changes en masse, then both Labour and Tory stances will surely change too (except the Pfeffel and Grease Mogg contingent ).

But how can that shift happen when the MSM is so biased? It's all a bit chicken and egg.

TM is about to holiday (Or currently is on it as I'm lost as to where I am) in Wales with a walking element. Labour look like they're imploding again. Another GE where TM hopes to annihilate them?

Large tin foil hat territory here would be to suggest things like Smith's sacking may be a play to get that to happen. I use the sacking and not the anti semitism thing purposely - that's clearly not a play.

Managing expectations downwards

DD 2016: "Brexit will lead us to sunlit uplands."
…
DD 2018: "Brexit will not result in a Mad-Max-style dystopia."
TMay March 2018: “I said the sky won’t fall in”
?
Govt 2020: "Brexit has not resulted in an increase in cannibalism."

Fionna O'Leary @ fascinatorfun
1/ A thread to give an idea what is in the documents submitted by @chrisinsilico to @CommonsCMS this week in relation to SCL Elections, Cambridge Analytica, AggregateiQ, Global Science Research (Kogan’s Company), Kanto Ltd (The “Hon” Thomas Borwick & Vote Leave’s Ch Tech Officer

2/. There are also some rather interesting emails referring to the wishes of “Ambassador Bolton”, Trumps new National Security Advisor.

A Condifential advice to Rebekah Mercer, Bannon and Nix and some docs re SCL Social re training U.K. Intelligence Community in PsyOps.

3/. Try and hold off commenting for a short while as I anticipate it will need at least 12 tweets. I shall signal “End”.

So. To start you off a link to the docs released by the DCMS Committee.

t.co/656paJQm7O

4/. The bundles contains a series of contracts between SCL Elections Ltd and Aggregate iQ covering a period between November 2013 to well into 2014.

They describe development work being done by AiQ for SCL Elections Ltd together with Intellectual Property licensing.

5/. This is not to suggest that therehave not been a whole series of subsequent contracts between the two organisations (or affiliates, subsidiaries or assignees) .

In fact it is clear that the relationship was intending to be ongoing.

6/. However the docs in this first release clearly cover the first full year of the relationship.

SCL Elections Ltd is the dominant organisation buying services and intellectual property. AiQ is the developer and supplier.

Payment for the first tranche of work was c $US 200k

7/. There was an agreement to pay a further total of over CAD 500k for continuing work done by AiQ for SCL Elections Ltd in 2014.

8/. In that second agreement clause 3.1 says

“In the event either party enters into third party arrangements utilizing the Product to generate revenue, the revenue shall be shared between AIQ and SCL.”

10/. That being the case, if AiQ received several £millions from Vote Leave, DUP, BeLeave and Veterans for Leave, did half(or indeed any) of the revenue go to SCL Elections (or any of the associated or affiliated companies?

11/. It certainly blows a hole in the suggestion that CA/SCL and AiQ had nothing to do with one another.

12/ In fact a series of emails exchanged between AiQ and Nix and Tayler (the acting CEO of CA U.K. Ltd whilst Nix suspended) shows they were working very closely together well before the USA elections and the EU Ref.

Those emails make several references to “Ambassador Bolton”

13/. The agreements ALSO make clear that the IP developed by AiQ was transferred to SCL Elections Ltd

To be clear:
CA LLC (American company: Bannon, Mercer, Nix)) was formed BEFORE CA U.K. Ltd (U.K. Company, Nix).
SCL Elections was initially a minority shareholder in CA LLC.

14/. CA U.K. Ltd was originally called SCL US Ltd when inc in the U.K. in Jan 15. name change April 2016 CA U.K.

It is a shell company. They money mainly flows through SCL Elections Ltd and CA LLC (the Mercer Bannon Company).

14. SCL Elections Ltd entered into a contract with Global Science Research Ltd, (GSR) that had Dr Kogan (Cambridge University U.K. & St Petersburg university Russia who had developed a Psydata Analysis application using Facebook data.

Ooops. 2 x no 14s!

15/. That contract covered data collected from 11 USA States and seems connected to the Bolton emails some attached previously.

Schedule 2 is particularly interesting as it describes the sort of data it collects and a limitation via changing FBook T&Cs.

16/. Schedule 2 describes what the GSR technology and specifies FB likes. It specifies further that it does NOT rely much n surveys as that would create an altruism bias.

17/. It also specifies that it relies on a pre existing applications and acquisition terms based on FB’s OLD terms of service. New acquisitions do not permit access to friend networks. Sothe application was installed before Facebook changed its rules?

18/. There is also a handy Condifential Advice relating to the proprieties of U.K. or Canadian personnel, not US citizens or Green Card holders, working on US election related projects.

19/. Whatever to public record, the advice specifies both Mercer daughters, Rebekah and Jennifer were “preferred managers” along with Bannon and COULD legitimately work on US election projects.

20/. Nix is described as a “common” manager and limited legally substantially as to the scope of his involvement due to his British Citizenship.

21/. That advice was dated June 2014.

However in February 2014 SCL Elections Ltd entered into a contract of services with Kanto Ltd, a company owned by Thomas Borwick, Vote Leave’s Chief Technical Officer.

Apps/develop & focus group work were to be undertaken I think in the USA

22/. What exactly was done where?

Was there a breach of US electoral law or not?

I have not had enough time to go through that agreement in detail, or the timelines.

FINALLY

23/. It seems that an associated SCL Company, SCL Social Ltd, provided training in PsyOps to the U.K. Intelligence community in 2012.

More about that another time.
Doesn’t look to “social” to me.
^There was I thinking they were getting involved in the online dating business!
END/^

24/. Appendix.1.

A while back, when I was looking at SCL Elections Ltd abbreviated filed accounts I noticed that the ones to the end of Dec 16 indicated that over £4 million went through its accounts.

How much, if any, came from AiQ for Brexit related work?

@MsMottram has just alerted me to the fact that a Breach of ethics complaint has just been filed with the FBI re Bannon, Nix, Cambridge Analytica, SCL Elections, Trump Campaign and John Bolton .
These people/companies are all over the docs from @chrisinsilico and DCMS committee

What does the above actually mean? And what is likely to be the political fall out from it.

This is my reading of it:

1. The Mercers tried to influence the referendum though dark money.
2. This isn't illegal in the UK. This will make a case for foreign money to be illegal in British elections. Look out for calls along those lines. (Notably, not from Tories).
3. A couple of Americans with strong links to Bannon and seemingly still Trump is not a good look. That hand holding incident with Trump, now starts to look particularly bad.
4. As this story progresses, it is hard to see the UK being politically able to make a very close trade deal with the US over and above the EU. Why? a) cos the EU won't like the look of it one bit b) it will look like the US bought the UK. So much for taking back control.
5. Again as this story progresses, its hard to see how any serious politician is going to be able to shake off close associations with Trump, Bannon, etc. Those politicians will be tarred with the image. This is why that hand holding image for May holds special significance.
6. Due to hand holding, if May wants to look serious about being independent and not having just been bought by the US, politically she is going to have to put clear water between herself and the US. Strong advocates of US trade deal like Fox are going to be told to STFU. May is going to have to lean more towards the EU. She has little choice, as the party will be punished for selling out to the US.
7. The EU are likely to be more inclined to insist on certain things, like data protection and money laundering cooperation as a basis requirement for a deal. This is necessary for their own defence. There is little room for compromise on this. Security issues play into this, but the UK needs EU cooperation whether we like it or not, because of where our borders are. The EU might, however, be willing to make slight concessions elsewhere to keep the UK close.
8. Money is important in this. So the city isn't just a prize its a security issue.
9. Trump's appointment of Bolton, suggests that perhaps the net really is closing in on him. With everything coming out, putting someone so close to the investigation looks a risky move thats either brazen and because Trump doesn't fear anything or because he's got that few options left.
10. It is increasingly difficult to argue anything other than Nix lied to parliament. This could have legal fall out.
11. Moderate Tories will be concerned. It might not be public, and they might fear Corbyn in government, but they are going to be extremely unwilling to allow us to align with America above the EU. Pressure on May will be very firmly to deal with the EU, no matter how bad the deal is. I think it weakens the ERG in political terms, though the numbers won't change.
12. How much did May know about all this? And when? You would have thought the security services would know a fair amount of this already, especially given the Steele Dossier. Has May's approach been to play for time, over and above do a deal in recent months and to try and get a BINO because of this, not simply because of the election?
13. How much do the EU know about all of this too.
14. The Salisbury attack is significant even if not connected. It showed a need for close security with the EU. Plus there was SOMETHING not public, that convinced them to expel Russian diplomats. Whatever that something was, it also rattled the US to make a significant gesture too. Trump couldn't ignore it.
15. Russian influence isn't direct, but the close association with the Mercers is crucial.
16. If Trump goes down, its inescapable that the UK isn't going to now also going to suffer a major political crisis. This was always the case to a certain extent, but the direct linking of the ref to Trump is now virtually impossible to sidestep.

Those US Elections in November could be a tipping point if Trump doesn't manage to gerrymander it, start a war or simply cling on.

Yes lonelyplanet I can see that could be a good strategy for Labour. But. They probably had two or three years to build themselves up into a strong opposition after the referendum and the collapse of that summer. However, as we can see and as the opinion polls tell us, the reality is far from it.
The bad news is all about them when it should be about the useless Tories and CA shenanigans.
Disappointment doesn't cover what I feel. (Sorry if it sounds like I'm having a go at Labour supporters; I'm really not.)

I think the problem with politics - and maybe 'twas ever thus - is that it's now driven in exactly the same way all consumer goods are.

By brand.

Parties are simply a "brand" and are marketed to appeal to certain demographics. Just like craft beer, poncy coffee shops and wanky cereal bars.

And - just like craft beer, poncy coffee shops and wanky cereal bars the people buying into the brand really have no idea what's under the hood.

Brexit is a brand now. Tailored to attract the people that are attracted to what it represents - and who simply don't understand or care what's in the tin.

By the same token Labour, Tory are brands too. Persil and Bold. Macleans and Oral-B. Tetley and Typhoo.

Do I get to go on Question Time now ?

(Incidentally, I am well aware that Mumsnet is a brand too ...)

The inevitable classical allusion (fuck it, I spent a long time learning, WTF should I try and hide it ?) is the Nika riots ... if that sounds familiar, it was used as the plot for a series of "The Tomorrow People" in the 70s (as noted in the article). Who used to 'jaunt'

Bannon also in cahoots with Rees mogg.

Hopefully farage is implicated too

FBI questions Ted Malloch, Trump campaign figure and Farage ally
American once touted as possible ambassador to EU tells of being detained at Boston airport and subpoenaed by Robert Mueller’s Trump-Russia inquiry

www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/mar/30/fbi-questions-ted-malloch-trump-campaign-figure-and-farage-ally

Even people who aren't much bothered about politics and current affairs seem happy to conflate "Trump and Brexit", because even if you don't go into detail the big picture shows striking similarities. The gestalt view perhaps.
How far they will be convinced that both are really linked and that something seriously needs to be done will involve other factors, such as their propensity to hope for the best, cognitive dissonance, and the attitude on the Today vox pop yesterday "well you can't do anything about it can you, they will do what they want", versus finding a voice and forcing some action, but that is really not an easy thing to do, even for those of us who are highly invested and reasonably well informed and articulate.

www.buzzfeed.com/ryanmac/growth-at-any-cost-top-facebook-executive-defended-data?utm_term=.poVnB0E2QM#.qrV2eJ5DYj
Growth At Any Cost: Top Facebook Executive Defended Data Collection In 2016 Memo — And Warned That Facebook Could Get People Killed
Facebook Vice President Andrew “Boz” Bosworth said that “questionable contact importing practices,” “subtle language that helps people stay searchable,” and other growth techniques are justified by the company’s connecting of people.

Uhoh. Pants around ankles.

Alexander Clarkson @ APHClarkson
The most depressing thing about Brexit debate is that two years since the start of the Brexit referendum the same arguments are just being repeated over and over again. Brexiters have no viable plan to make Hard Brexit work, Remainers have no viable plan to make Return possible.
Brexit UK resembles nothing more than an overturned car with its wheels spinning in the air whose drivers and passengers still haven't noticed that all forward motion has become impossible
The absurdity of the millions of words, the tons of newsprint, the infinite amount of online time spent in the UK debating desirable Brexit outcomes when in reality the UK's economic and political future will be determined by the EU27.
A UK that remains fully integrated economically yet is no longer able to block EU decisionmaking at a crucial moment for European integration is ideal for the EU. In opting for a transition model that will have to be extended several times over the UK has chosen exactly that fate
When Theresa May declared in September 2017 that Britain required a transition in a timeframe that will require repeated extensions she put the UK on an inevitable path to endless transition where it loses what control it has left to avoid disrupting the everyday life of voters
We will spend the next year, probably the next decade, debating ideal Brexit outcomes while ignoring a more mundane reality in which the UK cannot move towards the supposed utopia of Hard Brexit and cannot move back to full EU status. Brexit means paralysis.
But hey, it's more fun debating dystopias and utopias than facing up to how pointless the Brexit process has become.

Just to go back to this buzzfeed article:
www.buzzfeed.com/ryanmac/growth-at-any-cost-top-facebook-executive-defended-data?utm_term=.otNrvAYqn7#.myQ1lpDoa8
Growth At Any Cost: Top Facebook Executive Defended Data Collection In 2016 Memo — And Warned That Facebook Could Get People Killed
Facebook Vice President Andrew “Boz” Bosworth said that “questionable contact importing practices,” “subtle language that helps people stay searchable,” and other growth techniques are justified by the company’s connecting of people.

That memo from the executive is dated 18th June 2016.

That date bothers me. I don't think its insignificant.

Completely agree Red.
Paralysis will happen, partly because we have to make a choice now between two extremes: hard Left and hard Right. Eventually most ordinary folk won't like the look of these two choices and maybe won't choose anything. We desperately need a viable centrist party in order to move forward.