By Tom Miller
I don't seek to play down what has come to light over the past couple of days, not that I was involved in it myself. Nor ideed did I have any knowledge of it. I've made my comments elsewhere.
People are, understandably in my view, very angry. But in reading our comments at LabourList, you'd get the impression that Labour was alone in having people with dubious jounalistic/blogging ethics among its ranks.
If you think this, you should read the Stirrer. Iain has (rather crudely, I think) tried to turn what was clearly a big mistake on his part into an attack.
I'm not sure if that will work either.
Now I'm not saying that anyone is guilty or innocent of anything; Tom Watson (and possibly, we're hearing, his legal team) can establish the facts quite well enough. What I do wonder is if anyone, Labour or Tory, has learned anything.
If there is one thing that people should have taken in over the weekend, it is that it's probably a bad idea to make completely unqualified and unsubstantiated accusations and allegations aoubt people.
Our editor here, Derek Draper, has (correctly) taken a lot of flak, despite the fact thathe decided not to publish the things that were sent to him (indeed, a whole load of attacks sans facts are now in the public domain which, if Derek had remained in charge of them, would not have been).
Iain, in contrast, sent his to a national newspaper (not that staines didn't try), which, we're now told, has published them.
It looks likely that a senior Labour MP has been slandered. Cue days of tabloid outrage? I doubt it.
Update: Bob Piper also has something to say about this, and other matters.
Update: Some stuff from the comments: Firstly, this. Why didn't Osborne report his friend/associate/other libel free desingated woman?
Secondly, seeing as it's so in vogue to demand apologies from party leaders for the completely unauthorised activities of their staff, how about one for this? It's been nearly a year.
No? Well I never.
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
StumbleUpon
Let's hope she can start to stop feeling sorry for herself.
Fawkes, Dale and Dorries all smeared Tom Watson live on TV. And I found it rather amusing that when Fawkes challenged the BBc to name a story where he'd got anything wrong he so smeared Peter Hain in illustrating his point that the BBC felt bound to make a humbling correction within minutes.
There's a lot of it about this smearing stuff.
Tom's point about Derek deciding not to publish these ideas - that he had commissioned - is quite important. Do we think the idea that is being presented of immediate revulsion and shelving Red Rag is really going to pass muster? Or will another Dale "fact" (or smear) that plans were still extant a couple of weeks ago going to prove correct after all?
Is Derek saving up his exit for when the next instalment of this malarkey hits the fan? Has he not gone yet?? And will the Tories be showing this new broom by getting rid of Coulson who was hired and is paid between three and four times what McBride was on to control the lobby for Dave?
This person does not work for an MP from our party. There will chapter and verse before too long. But in the mean time they are smearing, harassing, bullying and bileing away.
More than four years of it now. Most of that paid for by the taxpayer. Although like McBride presumably they claim that whether it's 10 am on a work day or 3 am on a weekend that it's "out of work time".
That reminds me. I have an interest in Japanese caligraphy. I'm going to have to pick up a brush sometime.
Draper has a fairly poor grip on editing and triangulates too much. If he sticks to what he's good at and lets someone else who's better at building sites like Labour List do what they're good at things should take off.
If Labour step up a gear it will leave the Tories wishing they'd never tried it on. The Tories have thrown their biggest punch and if Labour seize the opportunity it will leave the Tories feeling impotent and scared.
In that case Hitler should have been rehabilitated sometime in mid 1955.
The point is the Tories DO smear, and always have done. So have Labour.
It's 5 days now and people are STILL wittering on about it. Such prolonged outbursts of outrage look artifical and even orchestrated.
What is the point of repeating it all day after day?
The real tragedy here is that things hat SHOULD be being debated - like the extravagent second homes and expenses claims of MPs is going unremarked.
Wow. They should TOTALLY show Labour supporters like you mercy, you're such a gentle soul.
The Tories are so obsessed that people believe their version of the "truth" they try to crowd out a more mature understanding. This is an arrogant and uncaring attitude. It doesn't surprise me that the party of power and greed would pull that stunt. It is, after all, what they are. It's also another sign they haven't got a clue and are unreformed.
Bullies and other false heroes like Cameron tend to rely on ignorance and peer pressure to get their way. The Tao warns that barons arise during times of trouble. It's no wonder this over-promoted cha wallah tries to dumb everyone else down and whip up their fears. If people took a moment of calm reflection they'd never give him the time of day.
As often as the 'Labour' front bench?
I've lost count of the number of times front bench Tories have told whoppers or called people names. The rot starts at the top, and the Tory leadership is kneck deep in filth. Tell me, when was the last time those animals showed a shred of mercy to anyone else?
As for your second update, the line in the story you linked to "[Osborne] flatly denied that a white powder visible in front of them was cocaine" answers your question. And even if you don't believe him (and I don't) what relevance does this have to the discussion? I don't think the prostitute works for the Conservative party (though that would be a story).
As for the last point - surely you can see the distinction between Cameron's responsibility for the actions of an insane parliamentary candidate, who it is likely he never met, and the PM's responsibility for one of his closest advisors, who he personally hired to worked with him in Downing Street and who he relied on to do down his rivals.
Incidentally, it's interesting isn't it that Derek won't answer the question about whether he discussed the "Red Rag" site with the PM at Chequers. Can you think of any reason he would refer journalists asking that question to Downing Street if the answer is "no"?
I sense a Blairite plot coming on here. What do you think?
Whatever you say, I don't think the Tories are making a big issue of whose time the emails were sent on. Do you never send personal emails in your lunch break, or sometimes on your bosses time when things are quiet? No mate- the issue was the vicious content of the emails.
David Cameron said that the culture in a party comes from the top. So the link Tom posted of the Tory smear against his Lib Dem collegue does raise an important question - what sort of culture is coming from the Tory leadership.
They are fast becoming the "have your cake and eat it party".
The job isn't care in the community FFS.
(Who writes official letters of 'apology' in felt tip, Jees)
Apart from the fact that Ian Oakley, the Conservative involved, would appear to be certifiably insane, I gleaned from your helpful link the fact that he had been investigated by the police, charged, prosecuted, and convicted for his behaviour.
What do you think is the likelihood of any of that happening to McBride, for, let's say, 'malfeasance in public office'?
Let's all have a guess. My guess is: No likelihood whatsoever.
The job isn't care in the community FFS.
(Who writes official letters of 'apology' in felt tip, Jees)
To be permanently enraged for days on wend seems downright unhealthy to me. When I first read them I found them disgusting, but to keep hearing the Tories relishing them, while pretending to be so outraged is as hypocritical on their part as it is when the News of the World publishes a lurid sex story on it's front page in it's moralistic tones, then at the back of the paper publishes sex contact ads. Anyone with any sense, knowing these satories to be untrue, would after the initial shock and anger just laugh it off and forget about it.
Let us indeed not forget this public statement which, however ill-judged, was made in public and for which Osborne could be and was held accountable.
You guys really don't do 'analogy' at all well do you? Mind you, if I supported a party of borderline fascists and thugs that was about to be consigned to oblivion for decades I guess I would be flailing around a little too.
And of course you are well placed to know with 100% certainty that these emails wouldn't have been used. No you're not, you are alos making an assumption.
By the way, you need to stop eating all those burgers ;)
But I'm beginning to suspect it will continue as long as Derek is editor.
There is no comparison.
Now stop being a dick and trying to justify the unjustifiable, you unspeakable little snot.
And you throw that into the mix because?
Not that the e-mails would have appeared anywhere as the reality is they would not have.
There is nothing wrong with a website that points out a few home truths about Tory policy, that's if the Tories ever find a backbone to create any.
After all the Tories have the Daily Mail don't they?
In reading your comment do you work for a newspaper?
For you seem well qualified as you take names and imply a different meaning and in doing so see conspiracy where there are none. Frankly you come across as believing what you want to believe and damn the truth.
Yes you would do well in today's press, its just the style of reporting they like...
No facts, no proof but plenty of assumptions and negativity...
Ha.. and the press say they support democracy? yer and I'm Elvis back from the dead.
I'm saying there's a very clear parallel between Tom's - very weak - justification and counter-attack and what my kids try on when caught in the biscuit barrel.
If this is the best defence ("Tories are just as bad") then, really, there's no leg to stand on is there?
Remember when New Labour were voted in how they promised to be (in Blair's words) "whiter than white"? Now you have to have a thick skin and not take yourself too seriously when civil servants paid for by the taxpayer conspire with ostensibly independant media commentators to anonymously publish scurrilous rumours about your private life.
I honestly can't see how anyone can vote for either Labor, Conservatives or as a matter of fact, any other party. Specially concerned about how disconnected they are from reality.
It sadly bring to my memories the hugely popular "Yes, Minister and Yes, Prime Minister" TV series... nothing has changed hasn't it?
Sorry Tommy Boy but there are very few people that don't believe Draper wasn't plotting to release them nearer election time. If you can't see that I suggest you are even more blinkered and sheep like than I thought. And by sheep like I don't mean fluffy and useful either.
Just curious, but is your Whiter-Than-White Watson using the same lawyer / solicitor that Draper does? Reason I ask is that time and time again Draper has squealed he's seeing them and so far they've done bu**er all.
Meanwhile Sniper Staines seems to be taking aim at Not-Me-Guv Watson. His last shot was McBride. For all your sakes, you had better hope he misses and can't prove anything about Watson...or the next one could be Big Boy Brown himself!
"If there is one thing that people should have taken in over the weekend, it is that it's probably a bad idea to make completely unqualified and unsubstantiated accusations and allegations aoubt people."
It's "probably".
Your moral compass is as bust as mcBride's and Draper's if it has only the vaguest sense of direction as to what's right -- and what, beyond the bounds of any and all 'probability', is wrong.
With editorialising of the calibre of yours, this particular 'list' might just as well be published by Tory Central office.
No of course she didn't
And Blair never apologised for Campbells excess - his abuse towards people like the late Mo Mowlem.
They don't do things like that - not even the beloved Maggie
We all know what you are your little chums are up to Tom:
http://www.torybear.com/2009/04/he-who-whields-knife-might-just-wear.html
'Tis a common proof,
That lowliness is young ambition's ladder,
Whereto the climber-upward turns his face;
But when he once attains the upmost round,
He then unto the ladder turns his back,
Looks in the clouds, scorning the base degrees
By which he did ascend.
Julius Caeser(2.1.22)
Secondly he should apologise for his first, lame apology wherein he described the smears and lies concocted by Draper/McBride as 'unsubstantiated claims'.
The man has the emotional intelligence of a hyena.
I see little point in continuing to express outrage - I think that is taken as read.
I also tried to point out that these dirty trick campaigns have been waged by both parties and that the ascerbic spin-doctor goes back even before Alistair Campbell to Bernard Ingham - a very different sort of character to Joe Haines who was harold Wilson's press secretary.
I also made the point yesterday that McBride, though plainly an unpleasant character, nlot musch liked by Labour itself, swrote this stuff - which - yes - let me say again was puerile and unpleasant, but that Campbell, Blair's own McBride arranged and helped write dodgy dossiers to encourage a war which we are still fighting, in which people are still being killed, and we know that these dossiers were a mixture of alarmist fantasy and a tissue of lies.
At least McBride never did anything that caused such lasting damage. As the emails were never published, I have to ask the question, what harm has the man done? Well, apart from embarrassing senior politicians anmd an obscure backbencher, nobody has been killed.
Just to go back to your first message, Mrs Dorries admits she received the letter from Brown expressing regret. Well, I should say that WAS an apology. The wording of the letter seems quite plain to me and I should think to any fair-minded person. That is why I said that if she had any generosity of spirit she would accept it in the spirit in whih it was written - so would the others: at a time of recession and great difficulties for so many people it seems rather immature for the Conservatives to keep going on about this. have they run out of policies, or will they offer a few more peerages to "Labour" supporters like Freud to go over to their side? Sir Frank Field and Sir Stephen Byers has quite a ring to it, don't you think?.
I think in politics you need to have a thick skin and the ability never to take yourself too seriously.
Guess he's just one helluva guy.
I'm not offended, I just think your responses are irrational and getting worse. That's a sure sign that someone is talking nonsense. Like old legal saying "If the evidence is on your side, show the evidence. If the law is on your side, cite the law. If neither the evidence nor the law is on your side, bang on the table."
You, sir, and fellow Dolly apologists are banging on the table, and everyone knows it.
However, the fact remains Mrs Dorries does seem to be enjoying the limelight - her 15 minutes of fame. I have no doubt she was angry and I can understand her inital appearance on BBC Radio on Saturday's PM just after the story broke. But you can say "No" to requests to do interviews. She doesn't have to do every one of them, spreading herself so thin. The fact that she does, rather suggests she is enjoying the experience. After all, few people would be aware of her had it not been for this unfortunate episode.
I'm sorry I don't buy the Joan of Arc theory: it seems to me the Tories have kept this going because they have no answers or suggestions to the very REAL problems we face at the moment. To self-obsess to this degree shows a very selfish streak.
Still it is nice you are giving me a kicking instead of Derek Draper, who appears to have become overnight a mixture of Adolf hitler and Saddam Hussein in the eyes of some of the people here.
If you are offended by my reply and wish to hit back - please do - I have broad shoulders, as should Osborne, Dorries and co.
Nadine Dorries at the center of the biggest political story going at the moment so every journo in the business is calling her up and asking her for a quote. Of course she has been on the radio and TV a lot.
That fact that something would not offend or anger you personally is no evidence that it would not be offensive or hurtful to someone else. Any attempt to diminish this offense by attacking her is truly contemptible.
Furthermore she may well accept an apology if one was offered. This is a purely hypothetical scenario because instead of apologising, our gutless PM has written to her expressing "regret that politics has stooped to this level" or something similar. That's not actually an apology. He doesn't accept responsibility. He doesn't promise to change his own behaviour and that of his underlings and (most importantly of all) he doesn't actually say sorry.
I've read again and again comments that suggest how Guido is some kind of non-partisan (or only mildly centre-right leaning) politician-hater, some kind of lone crusader ready to skewer corruption wherever it rears it's head. It's a good bit of branding, I'll give him that - but it's nothing more.
As for examples of Tories engaging in the same tricks, lets not forget Osborne's public suggestion that Brown was autistic - I'm not sure why he thought that was appropriate to say in public.
15. Mudslingers: The Twenty-five Dirtiest Political Campaigns of All Time, Kerwin Swint
Plenty of things anger me - somebody pretending I had entertained somebody who was not my spouse and left evidence of it in a hotel room, is onme thing that I would laugh off. At my age I might even regard it as a compliment. I am sure Mrs Dorries is so obsessed by herself and her career (God knows she mentions it often enough) that she wouldn't have time to even consider doing such a thing. She doesn't need to keep repeating her denials.
Regarding your children; I am sure when Johnny took the biscuits and said Suzy spilled the milk last week (I hope that isn't their names or you will think I am one of those internet spies!), I am sure you didn't tell Johnny that it didn't matter that Suzy spilt the milk (though there is little point in crying over spilt milk, as I wish all these "disgusted, Tunbridge Wells" posters would remember when they post their umpteenth "comment" on this blog). Just because it happened last week doesn't mean it didn't happen.
I am glad actually you use the analogy of children: Do you and others here think that the first thing people out there are worried about, when they might face losing their job this week, or their home, or are suffering from a terminal illness, is some jejune smutty emails (which wouldn't have been published had not Mr Staines tried to SELL them to the Daily Telegraph - so much for his finer feelings), or the temporary embarrassment of a few senior politicians and an obscure backbencher who is making a second career out of telling anyone who might be listening on the radio, how upset and outraged she is?, several times a day?
People have real worries and the fact that this affair is dragging on shows how little concerned the Conservative Party are witrh real problems of real people and how self-obsessed they are.
LIKE THAT LIKE THAT SHOWN TOWARDS HER AND THE OTHERS WHO WERE THE INTENDED VICTIMS OF THIS DIRTY LITTLE SMEAR OPERATION?
I don't think its good to let children get away with that kind of thinking...
"Power without principle is barren, but principle without power is futile."
So that will be barren Labour now, soon to be both barren and futile Labour.
One denial, one press conference, one threat of legal action wopuld have been adequate - but, no: she keeps coming back repeating the same complaints. If I were her, I'd either put up or shut up: sue and have the "allegations" spread over every newspaper in the country, or have the generosity of spirit to accept the apologies offered and think about more important things.
The Buck stops with Gordon McRuin!! If he truly is/was the "Honorable Member for...!" then he would do the decent thing and resign, and call an early General Election. As far as these 'alleged' scurilous, lieing and slanderous Emails, then shame on all of New ZaNuLab-Pf Partie!
This definately won't be the last of the ZaNuLab 'Slease Departments' attempts to slander opposition MPs. It will probably surface again the nearer we are to May 2010, assuming that Pa Broone or someone else does not decide that a little 'National Emergency' needs to be instigated so Parliament, democracy and Civil Liberties are all shut down. (Oops, I should not have given them that idea now!!!!!!!)
But I don't think that Gordo McRuin and Pals are that stupid - or are they?
So - do the party faithful still have 'full confidence' in Pa Broone and his advisors now?
Oh how the Neues Liebore Turkeys are all coming home to roost now - Whoopee Do!!
Of course both sides go in for tricks that are nothing to be proud of, but judging by the outrage that has been expressed on this site for 4 DAYS now (God help us!) you would think the Tories had never uttered a bad word or dirty trick against Labour in their history.
Many people come back more than once to express their "outrage and anger" (how long can a normal person remain permanently angry and outraged?). I have to confess Derek Draper is not my favourite person, that said, it is sickening to read some of the insults and vile abuse that has been poured on him: the posters iobvioiusly believe they have the moral high ground, but these emails against the Tories were never meant to be published (the fact that after 4 months they hadn't been published rather suggest they wouldn't be) these bullying remarks against DD are certainly meant to be published, and to it's credit, LabourList has not attempted to withold them.
I think these people have had their fun now, and it's time they realised that there are real and pressing issues far more important than Mrs Dorries who made yet another radio appearance today to tell us how upset she was etc etc.
Reading the bullying remarks against DD, some of which posters have come back for a second or even third kick, reminds me of a remark once made by the great conductor Sir Thomas Beecham: "The only thing to do when you have sung a folk song is to sing it again -LOUDER"
You seem like a nice guy, but you are very young and even more inexperienced.
Supporting the sleaze and corruption that is embodied by the likes of Draper and McBride will ruin your career prospects (not to mention - in the longer run - your integrity).
Why do you think that Draper has surrounded himself with very young, idealistic eager-beavers like you? Anyone who wasn't prepubescent just a decade ago could have told you that Draper was toxic and any enterprise involving him was likely to end up in a squalid pile of scandal and corruption. That's why any grown ups with any decency kept away.
(Do I seem patronising? As someone who could be your father, of course I am!)
Tom Watson next, then Guido has a clear head shot at Snotty McDribble himself.
Start looking for a new job mate. McDonalds are hiring.
One more fat slug soon to hit the dust?
Harold Wilson.
Brown has behaved abominably about this. He is in charge. He appointed this scum. He has hurt two perfectly uninvolved and innocent ladies and then has not apologised. And yet the leader of this country, heir to Attlee, Nye Bevan and the Tolpuddle Martyrs, cannot even admit that he has done anything wrong!
Sorry but I cannot vote for that. Neither can a lot of other Labour people who care about decency and looking after the vulnerable.
They can be useful when beginning sentences.
Grown-ups use them all the time.
Just sack Draper and move on to something more useful.
LabourList is impotent till Draper goes.
what we are seeing is the (beginning of the) end of tribalism. "Heir to Blair" and Staines are not far behind.
Why don't we just hang a sign up in front of 39 Victoria Street saying we don't think we can win the argument.
1. Is Iain Dale the right hand man of the Tory party leader?
2. Is he on a six figure salary paid by the tax payer to do what he does?
3. Is he supposed to be an impartial civil servant?
4. Does he believe what he wrote to be true rather than it being a complete work of fiction?
5. Does alledging someone was CC'd into an email when they were not come close to alledging someone is mentally ill/racist/ a cross dresser/ has an STD etc, etc
The first step to rehabilitation is to accept what you have done, the Laboutr party cannot do this while you write this sort of justificational tripe and Derek Draper remains in the post of editor for the party's main internet site.
It's pathetic, put your hands up, fire everyone responsible, apologise unreservedly and move on. Otherwise it just prolonges the pain and looks worse and worse and worse. Had Brown unreservedly apologised it would have drawn a line, instead it's still the main news story on the BBC.
My guess is that they were being saved for a rainy day, it looks like Kevin Maguire may have had prior knowledge so who knows who else knew.
Edit to say this.
Further more both Dale and Guido have FOI requests in to see McBrides emails so dont get to excited yet in your attempts at deflection.
He has zero integrity and no credibility as a political voice.
As for Labour being singled out, its not the fault of the reporters that Labour is rotten. The "dark arts" will no doubt continue but that doesn't mean those practising them shouldn't be punished harshly. McBride and Draper have been proven to be vacous morons that shouldn't be anywhere near the public eye. The sooner they disappear the better.