Page 10 of 10 FirstFirst ... 8910
Results 136 to 139 of 139

Thread: Cambridge Analytica + Psyops + The Beast

  1. #136
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    The Fear - Dublin
    Posts
    7,425

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by droid View Post
    This hit right at the end of the first Q, lets see what happens at the end of June.
    Ahem.

    Facebook investors reeling after 20% share price tumble

    ...But Facebook’s executives then shocked investors by revealing disappointing second-quarter earnings and forecasts. Its shares tumbled as much as 24 per cent, wiping up to $140bn off the company’s value, in one of the largest after-market drops ever.

    https://www.ft.com/content/84a9e6c8-...9-7680cedcc421

  2. #137
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    15,874

    Default

    Zucky must be devastated. Maybe he'll buy another island to cheer himself up.
    Doin' the Lambeth Warp New: DISSENSUS - THE NOVEL - PM me your email address and I'll add you

  3. #138
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    1,023

    Default

    After watching a documentary on Mercer and his connections to Cambridge Analytica on French TV (!) I am rather convinced they actually DID score the presidency for Trump. They showed very plausibly how they operated - picked the few "battle gound" states where they were able to influence enough voters to get Trump the small lead. The true crux of the american presidential eletion seems to be the outdated mode of the electoral college. Popular vote is the way to go.

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to firefinga For This Useful Post:


  5. #139
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    385

    Default

    This should be a bigger story. The consensus seems to be that they're worried about being forced to disclose the source of their funding so they're copping to everything in order to avoid the case going to court - https://www.theguardian.com/politics...aunched-smears

    TaxPayers’ Alliance concedes it launched smears against Brexit whistleblower

    The rightwing pressure group the TaxPayers’ Alliance has conceded that it illegally sacked the whistleblower Shahmir Sanni for revealing unlawful overspending in the Brexit referendum campaign, in a case that could have a major impact on how lobbyists are described in the media.

    In a development that lawyers have described as “almost unprecedented”, the group has also conceded that it illegally vilified Sanni on the BBC in coordination with a network of other “linked” organisations.

    The alliance has accepted all the allegations Sanni made during his action claiming unfair dismissal, wrongful dismissal, direct discrimination and “dismissal by reason of a philosophical belief in the sanctity of British democracy”. Significantly, it has also conceded that it is liable for what Sanni’s lawyer, Peter Daly of Bindmans, describes as “extreme public vilification”. Sanni had claimed that it was responsible for a smear attack published by the website Brexit Central, and that it coordinated “derogatory statements” made by the head of Vote Leave, Matthew Elliott, to the BBC – calling Sanni a “Walter Mitty fantasist” and “so-called whistleblower” and claiming that he was guilty of “completely lying” – before an official finding by the Electoral Commission into the conduct of the Brexit referendum.

    The disclosure is likely to have far-reaching consequences for the way that broadcasters describe lobby groups. The uncontested claim has stated that the TaxPayers’ Alliance is responsible for Elliott’s Brexit Central website as part of nine “linked” high-profile rightwing “thinktanks” that operate in and around offices at 55 Tufton Street in Westminster and coordinate media and other strategy.

    In Sanni’s case, they also coordinated with Downing Street.


    The network includes the Adam Smith Institute, the Centre for Policy Studies, the Institute of Economic Affairs and Leave Means Leave. The shadow chancellor, John McDonnell, is calling for a full inquiry into the groups’ funding and said that in the interests of “openness and accountability” the BBC must make clear they are lobbyists, not thinktanks” as they are sometimes referred to.

    In March, Sanni revealed to the Observer massive overspending by the official Vote Leave campaign, which has now been found to be in breach of the law by the Electoral Commission. The day before this was published, Downing Street released a statement that revealed Sanni was gay, and the TaxPayers’ Alliance subsequently sacked him from his job running its social media. It has now conceded in full Sanni’s claims and is liable to pay substantial damages. Details of the alliance’s relationship with Downing Street and the role of Stephen Parkinson, Theresa May’s political secretary, will now not be heard in court. A separate claim by Sanni against Downing Street is still ongoing. Sanni, who received an award from Gay Times last week, said: “It has proved that the TaxPayers’ Alliance sacked me for speaking the truth. And that there has been a coordinated effort by the Conservative establishment, including the government, to shut me down.

    “The TPA claimed to have lost a donor because of my actions. If they had fought the case in court as we wanted, they would have had to reveal who their donors are. That they were prepared to admit their illegal behaviour on all counts shows how far they are willing to go to protect this information. “Serious questions must be asked about who is funding them, what their exact relationship is with the government and why are they allowed a platform on national television.”

    Chris Milsom, a barrister who specialises in whistleblowing cases, said: “It is incredibly unusual for a respondent to make a complete concession on liability as the respondent has here. To wave a white flag to avoid disclosing documents and giving evidence in court is really unusual. They conceded everything. How does an ostensibly private company come to be working with Downing Street? What is their relationship? Who are their funders? “If this had been fully ventilated in a public trial we could have found these things out. The effect of these admissions, however, is that Mr Sanni was dismissed both because he blew the whistle on electoral crimes and because of his philosophical belief in the sanctity of democracy. We must now ask: is that an entity that is fit to be on the BBC ostensibly speaking on behalf of all ‘taxpayers’?”

    McDonnell said: “We need full transparency in who is operating in our political system and therefore seeking to influence both our elections but also our governmental policymaking. These organisations – even by their names – seek to portray themselves as independent, authoritative research bodies.” In reality, he said, they were “virtual lobbyists” but never presented as such by the BBC and others.

    At the time of publication, the TaxPayers’ Alliance had not responded to the Observer’s request for comment.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •