Brexit again

[Barman]

Fortuitous timing.... 

POLICE CONCLUDE LEAVE.EU CAMPAIGN DID NOT BREAK LAW DURING THE 2016 REFERENDUM

The Metropolitan Police have today announced there will be no further action against the Leave.EU campaign. The police said that there is insufficient evidence to justify any further criminal investigation. Campaign founder Arron Banks has demanded a public inquiry into Remainer MPs’ abuse of public office in respon

yes Guido would grossly distort the story

The Met didn't say that at all http://news.met.police.uk/news/update-lnvestigation-into-leave-dot-eu-381332  They say there was little chance of getting a criminal conviction for the fraudulent spending submissions.  The spending was illegal and enabled Leave.EU to campaign ~10% more that permitted, Leave.EU lost in court on that point.

Frankly it is just ridiculous to suggest that Mrs Bilney innocently forgot to include that spend on Cambridge Analytica and Goddard Gunster that she'd OKd paying their invoices for

And the National Crime Agency is still pursuing the criminal investigation for same issue plus the EC are still being taken to court for not properly investigating where the money came from

It is tedious how Remoaners denigrate any source that doesn't agree with their opinion...

Where is the distortion in the Guido quote?

For your information, the full Met statement was included in the Guido report - but here it is from your link...

On 5 August 2019 the MPS submitted a file to the CPS for Early Investigative Advice in relation to the Leave.EU investigation and this advice has now been received.

It is clear that whilst some technical breaches of electoral law were committed by Leave.EU in respect of the spending return submitted for their campaign, there is insufficient evidence to justify any further criminal investigation.

Commander Alex Murray, of Central Specialist Crime, said: “It was right to investigate the allegation, however following detailed enquiries it became apparent that the nature of potential breaches of the regulations, the criminal standard of proof required in court and the actions taken by Leave.EU to adhere to the regulations, mean that it is now appropriate to take no further action.”

Leave.EU’s responsible person has been has been told that they will face no further police action.

The full details of the technical breaches are fully detailed in the Electoral Commission report into the spending return in May 2018. This should be read in conjunction with the County Court Judgment between Leave.EU Group Ltd and the Electoral Commission of 21 March 2019.

The investigation into the spending returns of Vote Leave and BeLeave remains ongoing.

It doesn't say what you are trying to imply it says does it?

Point out the bit of the quotation that says, "there was little chance of getting a criminal conviction for the fraudulent spending submissions."

Or the bit that confirms, "The spending was illegal and enabled Leave.EU to campaign ~10% more that permitted, Leave.EU lost in court on that point."

It is bizarre that you accuse others of "deliberate massive deceit"...

[Barman]

Grimes wasn’t prosecuted


That’d be the EC that conspired to hide the illegal spending until after the Art 50 vote, the same EC that conspired to give special advice to only one side

Same EC that’s spending tax payers money fighting being held to account

The Electoral Commission had to face two Parliamentary Select Committees today after their humiliating defeat in court by Darren Grimes last Friday. Craig Mackinlay – who knows Electoral Commission incompetence only too well, took Chief Executive Bob Posner to task over their decision to relentlessly pursue Grimes while failing to fully investigate Remain campaign spending irregularities. Posner mumbles something about following those “strands” and “maybe” fining a couple of groups. They did nothing of the sort…

Instead Posner makes clear that the Electoral Commission are still considering appealing against the Darren Grimes judgement despite having already spent half a million of taxpayers’ cash on the case, although Posner points out that part of that was on the Vote Leave aspects of the case. The High Court having previously found that the Electoral Commission caused the problem in the first place by giving Vote Leave incorrect legal advice…

Clicky...

Ah more Guido 

Grimes was never prosecuted, fact.  Get over it.  What Grimes managed to show in court was he was a stupid patsy played by Michael Gove and therefore the EC shouldn't have fined him £20k as there was no mens rea for him

Vote Leave still got to have their record breaking illegal spend, nearly 10% extra for a result 'won' by a swing of a fifth of that and they very much are under investigation

Denigrate the source and make up your own interpretation of the facts - well done...

I presume, "Grimes was never prosecuted, fact." is some form of pedantry as to what exactly happened...? He won his appeal after the EC spent hundreds of thousands of Pounds nor prosecuting him...? What was it then...? Charging or something, fining...?

[Barman]

EU referendum: Brexit 'would spark year-long recession' - Treasury

Leaving the European Union would tip the UK into a year-long recession, with up to 820,000 jobs lost within two years, Chancellor George Osborne says.

Publishing Treasury analysis, he said a Leave vote would cause an "immediate and profound" economic shock, with growth between 3% and 6% lower.

David Cameron said it was the "self-destruct option" for the country.

Oh look.  UK GDP 2015-18   https://tradingeconomics.com/united-kingdom/gdp

Now compare that on a common valuing basis with the Eurozone



And the USA

And here is the 10-year chart from your own link...



And here is the 5-year -  strangely 2014 seems to have fallen off your version...



Given that we didn't even vote to leave until mid-2016 it doesn't really support the point you are trying to make does it...?

[Barman]

Okay, enough Brexit discussion I think...

These posts are becoming increasingly acrimonious and it is clear that Leavers and Remainers will never agree.

The tone of the conversation just doesn't match that of the rest of the VP or what I hoped the VP would be when I set it up.

There are plenty of places on the Interwebz where we can argue over Brexit if we wish to do so.

I've always believed in 'light' moderation (in fact almost no moderation at all) and that will continue but I will stop Brexit arguments in future.