US presidential election, final poll

[tinfoilhat]

Yes it was. FOI request leaked to the Telegraph who then broke the story and tediously reported more and more each day dragging it out in a seemingly never ending shopping list of sometimes ludicrously expensive tax payer funded tat. I was bored by the end. I sort of got the idea of the story from day one!

 

I digress. Anna B is talking rubbish.

 

But, and I'm contradicting myself completely here, most newspapers lie - if not outright, by omission. Current daily mail target Gary linekar is subject to a tawdry report in their rag/website regarding some schmoozing on a plane with his missus. Only it happened in 2009 and they forgot to mention that. Whoopsie daisy.

[999tigger]

how can anyone

 

Then dont make false claims. How hard is that?

[Anna B]

Completely untrue.

 

The orginal information came to light following a freedom of Information request by campaigners and was granted by an Information Tribunal and then upheld in the High Court in May 2008 despite resistance from MP's.

 

That is it came to light because we have laws that allow you to ask questions and tribunals that can make such decisions. the people seeking those answeres were FOI campaigners and hournalists journalists Heather Brooke, Ben Leapman and Jonathan Ungoed-Thomas. There was no need to check other sources as you claim. They had nothing to do with the expenses scandal. Your claim is completely wrong.

 

There is no evidence the mainstream media tries to supress it. As Tinfoil pointed out the media took up the baton to make the expenses details widely known.

 

If you have evidence to back up your claim then please link it.

 

FOI is not all it's cracked up to be.

 

A recent documentary on TV showed how easy it is to block these requests altogether, or cloud the answers with total obfuscation, or make the process so difficult and tied in red tape that people give up. There's also the problem of files being sealed for 30+ years etc. If they don't want you to know something there are plenty of ways for them to achieve it, the most popular being an unjustified invoking of 'national security.'

 

And when I was watching a recent government enquiry by MPs (sorry can't remember what it was about, but that's not the point,) I was surprised to see how often those being questioned simply refused to answer and were allowed to get away with it. And that's with MPs asking the questions so what chance do we have?

 

Then there's the fact that some MPs have been trying to repeal the FOI law altogether.

[Santo]

FOI is not all it's cracked up to be.

 

A recent documentary on TV showed how easy it is to block these requests altogether, or cloud the answers with total obfuscation, or make the process so difficult and tied in red tape that people give up. There's also the problem of files being sealed for 30+ years etc. If they don't want you to know something there are plenty of ways for them to achieve it, the most popular being an unjustified invoking of 'national security.'

 

And when I was watching a recent government enquiry by MPs (sorry can't remember what it was about, but that's not the point,) I was surprised to see how often those being questioned simply refused to answer and were allowed to get away with it. And that's with MPs asking the questions so what chance do we have?

 

Then there's the fact that some MPs have been trying to repeal the FOI law altogether.

 

Anna B, why not just admit you were wrong?

 

Have you ever submitted a FOI request? I have. It isn't in the least bit hard. I received a prompt and courteous answer.

[RootsBooster]

you really what a third world war.

 

What are you talking about?

[blake]

Ridiculous that this thread has become a silly discussion about British politics when a realigning American presidential election will take place in about 60 hours.

Edited November 6, 2016 by blake

[tinfoilhat]

Ridiculous that this thread has become a silly discussion about British politics when a realigning American presidential election will take place in about 60 hours.

 

I disagree. If Clinton wins the senate and House of Representatives will end up with a such huge republican majority at the first available election she won't get enough support to allow her to do anything more than change the colour scheme at camp David.

 

If trump gets in though, that's a different matter. What says and what he does will be very very different.

[Anna B]

Anna B, why not just admit you were wrong?

 

Have you ever submitted a FOI request? I have. It isn't in the least bit hard. I received a prompt and courteous answer.

 

That depends on the question don't you think..?

[999tigger]

FOI is not all it's cracked up to be.

 

A recent documentary on TV showed how easy it is to block these requests altogether, or cloud the answers with total obfuscation, or make the process so difficult and tied in red tape that people give up. There's also the problem of files being sealed for 30+ years etc. If they don't want you to know something there are plenty of ways for them to achieve it, the most popular being an unjustified invoking of 'national security.'

 

And when I was watching a recent government enquiry by MPs (sorry can't remember what it was about, but that's not the point,) I was surprised to see how often those being questioned simply refused to answer and were allowed to get away with it. And that's with MPs asking the questions so what chance do we have?

 

Then there's the fact that some MPs have been trying to repeal the FOI law altogether.

 

Anna can you just stop posting stuff that is wrong.

You made a number of claims.

It was pointed out you were fundamentally wrong and posting falsehoods.

You arent big enough to admit it.

 

As for the election I cant say at the way which way its going to go. Polls are too close now following the FBI intervention. Going to be ironic if she loses and the e-mails do not come to anything.

Edited November 6, 2016 by 999tigger

[Robin-H]

Anna can you just stop posting stuff that is wrong.

You made a number of claims.

It was pointed out you were fundamentally wrong and posting falsehoods.

You arent big enough to admit it.

 

As for the election I cant say at the way which way its going to go. Polls are too close now following the FBI intervention. Going to be ironic if she loses and the e-mails do not come to anything.

 

I wouldn't hold my breath. Anna posted the absolutely ludicrous claim that the entire world's media was controlled by just 6 corporations or something, and despite it being pointed out that this was categorically and demonstrably false, refused to accept that she was wrong.

 

This article is claiming that voter analysis has revealed that Clinton has a 99% chance of winning the US election.

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/sam-wang-princeton-election-consortium-poll-hillary-clinton-donald-trump-victory-a7399671.html

 

However, I am pretty sure the Independent were running headlines the day before the Brexit vote that the result would be a large win for the remain side...