And that is all Trump had to say. The fact that he refused to say this, to the extent that he cast doubt on his own country's intelligence in favor of a foreign nation is why he is justifiably taking **** from all sources today.
Your argument was about fairness, not legality. If you want to argue about the legalities then the Supreme Court has already decided there’s no legal reason to re-run the referendum.
An unfair advantage DESPITE total spending being £13m compared to Remain's £19m (not including the £9m leaflet) * Some advantage that. And it is very telling that the Electoral commission dismiss remain doing the same............despite David Cameron's Aide and Remain strategist clearly detailing that they did do the same in his book!! *Source at the bottom. Same people as deciding that Leave doing it is illegal but remain doing it isn't: please log in to view this image
I would assume it includes all the free Metro newspapers with VOTE LEAVE on the cover and all the free Metro newspapers with VOTE REMAIN TOMORROW on the cover.
You are getting a bit silly now. You know full well if we ended up adding up everything including heads of state "giving their opinion" and all other "independent intra-national bodies, business groups, businesses, celebrities we would end up in the 10:1 region in favour of remain.............and they still didn't win. If vote leave have broken the rules then fair enough. Prosecute them. Make sure remain are prosecuted for doing the same though. And stop pretending that this "extra" spending had any effect when remain still spent 1.5x what leave did.
The remain camp doing the same has been in the hands of the Electoral commission for ages.............or should I say in their bin!!!! (Sir) Craig Oliver (knighted by Cameron in his "resignation" honours list) was David Cameron's aide and strategist of Cameron's remain campaign. In his book he detailed: “I join a 7.30 a.m. cross-party call chaired by Will Straw. It’s designed to catch up with what the In campaigns for the various political parties are doing that day. I want to get across a blunt message: this matters. We failed on immigration yesterday, hardly anyone stuck to our line that we accept it’s a problem, but Leave’s solution of trashing the economy is no way to deal with it”. That is working together. He is co-ordinating all the seperate remain groups to be on the same page, same message etc. Setting up seperate groups yet collaborating and thus staying within the spending limits. https://order-order.com/2017/12/28/remain-campaign-flouted-rules-to-spend-double-legal-limit/
The editor of Metro at the time says otherwise. https://www.pressgazette.co.uk/who-...itor-ted-young-on-the-rise-and-rise-of-metro/ Near the bottom: In the run-up to the EU referendum, Young says the Leave campaign wanted to take out a cover-wrap advert (worth £250,000). He says he said the only way the paper could do it was if Remain took out an advert as well. As it turned out, they did, meaning Metro made £500,000.
oh, it was an advert? ok thats my mistake. most papers side for free so when i saw them all strewn across the train i just assumed. my point was that newspapers heavily sided with leave and didn't cost anything.
This is interesting. If you see that twitter is only used by 17% of eligible users and facebook only used by 57%, total newspaper readers must be about the same as twitter these days yet virtually every eligible voter is "exposed" to TV news whether it be BBC, ITV, CH4 or any other. So in reality TV/facebook are the dominant forces these days in terms of "forming opinion."
The Metro is a free newspaper and proclaims not to take any side in politics. Apparently the DUP paid for that leave advert!!!
"Jewish Labour MP calls Jeremy Corbyn a 'f*****g anti-Semite' in furious Commons tirade" https://www.politicshome.com/news/u...ws/96941/jewish-labour-mp-calls-jeremy-corbyn
