I didn't know that.

They're told what to say, knowing that if they don't they will be removed, as per Susan Monarez at CDC. How they will answer for these behaviours in the future, god only knows.

I'm not buying into this until I see it in from media company with a published street address, named journalists and fact-checkers. Then it would be a big story.

Can't see how you can run a news outlet with reporters going over the head of their editor with complaints to the board. In all my experience, that simply wouldn't be a tenable situation. If your editor takes against you, you're fucked, sooner or later, for one reason or another.

I think you might be more effective by focusing on the lies of Farage and Boris Johnson, rather than trying to relitigate Brexit. It's not going to happen in the medium term, so why not focus on the accountancy of Britain's decline and help people understand the depth of the deception?

If Starmer doesn't make the lies told by Farage and Boris Johnson a central issue, the Labour Party is fucked at the next election.

Labour would do better spending its time devising a strategy to expose the Brexit lies of Farage and Boris Johnson that have - as predicted - devastated economic growth and increased poverty. If it won't do that, it can forget winning elections.

Crises over both issues substantially worsened by the conduct of Farage, Johnson et al, in deceiving the public into supporting Brexit.

I think there's earlier data on this. Britain has been on the skids since the 1970s, and chose to dramatically accelerate this decline in 2016.

Yes, I know Harris didn't say that. But that's what Hillary genuinely believed: that people who didn't support her were trash. Her full comment spells it all out. And these are not things people forget.