BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 28 May 19 - 09:18 AM

Didn't quite finish
ONE OF THE MOST POSITIVE OF THE RESULTS
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: DMcG
Date: 28 May 19 - 11:38 AM

So Cleverley and Malthouse have decided they could be PM now. Let me know when 5% of all Tory MPs are in the ring …

I am not sure how many backers you need to stand for PM, or whether there is a formal minimum, but is getting to be a bit silly now. If we aren't careful we will run out of time to get the choice whittled down to the two to ask party members to vote on.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 28 May 19 - 11:50 AM

Maybe they still haven't got enough to change a light bulb.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 28 May 19 - 12:06 PM

They can't change light bulbs. It takes one to book a man to do It and the rest to make money out of the transaction...

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: DMcG
Date: 28 May 19 - 12:22 PM

From a Guardian live feed:

=====
John Bercow, the Speaker of the House of Commons, has warned
Conservative leadership candidates that they will not be able to force through a no deal Brexit without parliament’s approval.
Speaking in New York, he gave a clear sign that the speaker would make sure parliament has an opportunity to stop the UK leaving without a deal if MPs believe it should be halted.
"The idea that parliament is going to be evacuated for the centre stage of debate on Brexit is simply unimaginable...The idea the House won’t have its say is for the birds," he said.
He highlighted the fact that while leaving the EU without a deal is
the legal default: "There is a difference between a legal default position and what the interplay of different political forces in parliament will facilitate."
=====

So much for the idea by Rabb (or perhaps just his supporters) that Parliament could be prorogued can be quietly forgotten.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Iains
Date: 28 May 19 - 01:18 PM

They are a one-policy party who will have no reason to continue to exist when (an if) Britain leaves Europe

Dream on squire! They are the largest party in the EU and will be around until we finally leave the EU and will fight the next General Election.

The idea that parliament is going to be evacuated for the centre stage of debate on Brexit is simply unimaginable...The idea the House won’t have its say is for the birds," he said.(Bercow)

Not quite what he said several months ago

"Labour MP Stephen Doughty asked Bercow in the Commons if a prorogation such as the one in 1948 could happen. The Speaker replied this would be “an unusual step”, but it was possible, although he had no idea whether the government had such plans" March 18th 2019
There would be a reluctance to do this as a Queen's speech would be required and there would thereby involve the monarchy. This is contrary to accepted procedures,where there is a presumption for parliamentary business to be carried out without involvement of the Queen.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: DMcG
Date: 28 May 19 - 01:46 PM

I am not sure that is what Bercow said on Marxh 18th. Here is the extract from Hansard:

Stephen Doughty (Cardiff South and Penarth) (Lab/Co-op)

On a point of order, Mr Speaker. Thank you for your statement today. The Government have gained an infamous historical reputation for trickery and abuse of Parliament during this whole process, and already rumours are going around that they might seek to use prorogation as a method of getting out of this. Can you confirm that that would not only provoke a greater constitutional crisis, but also result in us losing every single piece of legislation currently before both Houses, including many of the pieces of legislation needed to implement any Brexit?

Mr Speaker

If particular legislation was subject to carry-over, that would not apply, but in the expectation, let us say—or, to use a more neutral term, in the circumstance—that it was not subject to the carry-over procedure, manifestly and incontrovertibly it would fall. As for whether the Government are contemplating that, I have no way of knowing. No Minister has indicated that to me. I have no idea what is in their mind. It would be an unusual step, but look: I have been in this place a little over 20 years, and some quite unusual things have happened. I have no way of knowing whether this is being contemplated.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Iains
Date: 28 May 19 - 02:04 PM

It was a procedure last invoked in 1948 to quell rebellious Lords. If the government were to pursue such an unlikely step I would surmise there is precious little the speaker could do to thwart it.

https://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2019/01/the-prime-minister-could-prorogue-parliament-but-almost-certainly-wont.htm

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: DMcG
Date: 28 May 19 - 02:35 PM

I will get told off if I stay on this, so this is the last post on the prorogatiin matter unless it becomes centre stage later.

In 1948 Parliament was preroged on 25 Octber until 26th Octiber. I.e. There was a 'reset' but apart from a nominal few hours both houses were sitting on the day before and the day after.

Most recently, prerogation was talked about as a mechanism to bring May's deal back again.

In both cases, the intention was to continue the work of the house with no significant gap in the times the houses were sitting.

In the idea being floated is that Parliament was preroged for the precise purpose of stopping it being able to work for some time around the 31 October. It would be days or weeks beforehand, because otherwise the house could attempt to introduce some form of action to amend the decision to leave without a deal. So it is completely opposite to the earlier examples: it is about thwarting the ability of Parliament to act, not enabling it.

Hence Bercow's informal comment that the idea is "for the birds."

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Stanron
Date: 28 May 19 - 02:36 PM

I had to search what prorogation meant. For any others wondering try this

https://www.parliament.uk/about/how/occasions/prorogation/

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Stanron
Date: 28 May 19 - 02:41 PM

However prerogation is a differnt fish.

https://www.lawteacher.net/free-law-essays/judicial-law/prerogative-powers-remain-an-important.php

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 28 May 19 - 05:04 PM

Message from Magid Magid


A ray of hope in the darkness.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 29 May 19 - 02:24 AM

Magid Magid on BBC Breakfast right now.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 29 May 19 - 02:35 AM

Interesting article about Ol' Haddock-Face in the NYT yesterday, exposing him as 'the most dangerous man in Britain'.

Sounds right to me.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: DMcG
Date: 29 May 19 - 03:20 AM

Bercow plans to stay on as speaker until after October. What he will do if there is an extension beyond that is unclear, but based on the rationale for staying on, I expect he would stay on through a further extension as well if there was one.

Meanwhile the EU remains clear that the agreement will not be reopened, so anyone hoping to stand for PM based on renegotiating it is either just hoping the EU is bluffing or is asserting they will do something they know they can't.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 29 May 19 - 05:00 AM

I think at this stage a renegotiation is out. A second referendum is now required with the options...

Do you vote for

A) Keeping things as they are in Europe and fixing our own broken government or

B) Leaving the EU with no deal thereby fucking the UK economy for decades to come, screwing the peace in Ireland and breaking up the Union.

I am happy with that wording :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 29 May 19 - 06:36 AM

Johnson to face charges

Interesting to see how this one pans out for both the leave campaign and for his PM bid.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: DMcG
Date: 29 May 19 - 07:05 AM

It will also be interesting if, should the court eventually rule he knowingly lied whether our defenders of the bus quote will agree it was misleading.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 29 May 19 - 07:28 AM

Had to smile a few minutes ago when, in a piece about the court case, the presenter on BBC News said that, "Mr Johnson's spokesman wasn't available for comment".

Why a 'spokesman'? Bozo didn't have any problem shooting his big, blabbering gob off at every possible opportunity during the BrexShit Referendum campaign, why can't he speak for himself now?

Presumably it's the effect of the big yellow stripe down his back - the same one that make him soil his boxers and run for the hills on the morning after the Referendum, when the horrible truth dawned on him that his slogans, soundbites, and barefaced lies, had actually won it for the Leavers?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Stanron
Date: 29 May 19 - 08:39 AM

Obviously it's a 'nobble' job. That part of the establishment who fear the results of Boris in power are using this to disqualify him from being leader. Out with the popcorn. Let's see how this develops.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Stanron
Date: 29 May 19 - 09:11 AM

What I didn't mention in my last post is the possibility that Boris might have 'nobbled' himself. Whoever wins the leadership competition faces two possible outcomes.

1. We leave the EU and nearly 50% of the UK hates the result and the person who got the result.

or

2. We don't leave the EU and nearly 50% of the UK hates the result and the person who got the result.

If a court procedure prevents him from standing for the leadership he cannot be accused of chickening out. The downside is that the window of opportunity for leadership can be very narrow. If he misses this one he may never get another. Remember Michael Portillo? He blinked once and now makes TV programs.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 29 May 19 - 10:41 AM

Obviously it's a 'nobble' job

Why so, Stanron? The process began well before May even mentioned when she might resign.

As to TV programs. Portillo's are OK. I don't think I'd trust Johnson on a train... :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Stanron
Date: 29 May 19 - 11:03 AM

Of course you wouldn't, you're a lefty. Boris has a history of being elected. Twice as mayor of London. He would be the best bet to oppose Jeremy Corbyn in a General Election. However he has significant opposition in the Tory party and he also has a history of presenting himself with widely different options. Remember the two different articles he wrote on Brexit? He published the one in favour of leaving but he also had written one in favour of remain. Exactly why he made the choice he made is not known but he examined both cases and then decided. Maybe he has given himself an out in case he decides his future is brightest outside of Parliament.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: DMcG
Date: 29 May 19 - 12:10 PM

Off topic, and purely my view which anyone is entitled to disagree with as they wish.

Most of you will remember a moment that entered folklore as 'Were you up for Portillo?', referring to the live broadcast of the election night results and the way it was clearly a huge shock to Michael Portillo when he lost his seat. It seems to me that it was an even bigger shock to him to find himself as the figurehead of derision and anger that encapsulated the rejection of the whole party. And that he was unusually self aware and thoughtful enough to take that away and reflect on whether was he actually as awful as the population seemed to think, and if so what could he do about it. I think he did genuinely accept that just being self confident was not enough and was determined to work to be 'a better person' (however that may be interpreted.)

In short, I have a lot more respect for him now than I had before. So, no, it is not 'a lefty thing' - it is a thinking person thing.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Iains
Date: 29 May 19 - 04:36 PM

In view of the attempted prosecution of Boris I bring to your attention:
Wheeler v Labour Prime Minister (2008) the Divisional Court held that manifesto promises were NOT justiciable

" "Even if we had accepted that the relevant ministerial statements had the effect of a promise ... such a promise would not in our view give rise to a legitimate expectation enforceable in public law, such that the courts could intervene... The subject-matter, nature and context of a promise of this kind place it in the realm of politics, not of the courts."

I find it surprising that action against Boris was not taken at the time in 2016. This late in the day it is a deliberate attempt to marginalise a contestant, the same as the attempted smear of Farage by an electoral commission enquiry inmmediately before voting commenced.
Compare and contrast this with the delay until after the EU elections for the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) announcing the launch of a full statutory investigation to determine whether The Labour Party has unlawfully discriminated against, harassed or victimised people because they are Jewish.

The only other political party to ever face a formal investigation by the EHRC is the BNP.

Politics is a dirty business!

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: peteglasgow
Date: 29 May 19 - 04:46 PM

whatever... boris johnson is a total arsehole. surely it's obvious to anyone with half a brain

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 29 May 19 - 05:08 PM

I wondered how long it would take for Labour antisemitism to rear its head. You would have thought the media barons, Tory dirty tricks brigade and spin doctors would have realised that you can only flog a dead horse so far.

The economy is broke. Look, Labour antsemitism!

Brexit negotiations are a shambles. Look, Labour antsemitism!

The government is in disarray. Look, Labour antsemitism!

I wish they would play another record.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Iains
Date: 29 May 19 - 05:20 PM

Kind of hard to ridicule the Equality and Human Rights Commission announcing the launch of a full statutory investigation into the Labour party.

and while Labour is expelling people for breaking rules:
Fresh from yesterday’s conveniently timed explusion of Alastair Campbell from the Labour Party, today it emerged that famously loyal Labour MP Jeremy Corbyn was a star speaker at a 1998 rally for the Communist Party of Britain. Corbyn’s name literally appears on the Communist Party recruitment form, the rally will have helped to drum up cash for the party’s coffers, breaking a swathe of Labour Party rules.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: bobad
Date: 29 May 19 - 05:33 PM

The only other political party to ever face a formal investigation by the EHRC is the BNP.

Thus nicely exemplifying the The Horseshoe Theory

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 29 May 19 - 05:58 PM

its all a bit reminiscent of when everyone was predicting the SDP was going to be the biggest party in parliament. Thatcher was a bastard and Foot/Kinnock unelectable. So people were going to vote SDP.

Then there was the Falklands and . And everyone went back to voting Tory/Labour.

it was personality led that time too. And to be honest ... i didn't like the personalities then either.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 29 May 19 - 06:05 PM

Don't worry about Boris. The establishment will look after him. The big guns are already out. As for Portillo, well his railway programmes are very nice. But his true colours all too frequently show through on the Thursday night Andrew Neil programme. Deep down, he's a dyed-in-the-wool unreconstructed right-wing Tory. A leopard who can't change his spots. A wolf in sheep's clothing. The iron behind the velvet. Choose your own metaphor. Know thine enemy. Thine enemy is any Tory, and he's one of the unthinking worst.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Iains
Date: 29 May 19 - 06:34 PM

Potentially even more damaging events are coming to the fore in the Euro wonderland. Italy is threatening to play hardball !


https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2019/05/29/epic-clash-building-italys-triumphant-salvini-brussels/

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: DMcG
Date: 30 May 19 - 02:29 AM

The idea of a parallel currency that Italy is raising is remarkably similar in some ways to Brexit. Yes, you can run a campaign to convince people it is a good idea, and they can vote for it and perhaps win it. Or, as a government you can introduce it with the persuasion but without having a vote (at a somewhat greater risk to your personal future if it all goes bad.) But if you do introduce it, you get the whole package. You don't get to choose the bits you like and reject the bits you don't.

I visited Madagascar a few years ago and it uses a curreny called the 'ariary'. At the moment, 1 arity = 0.00022 pounds sterling. When I left, I came home with around £25 worth of currency. It is a wad of notes about 3cm thick. It is a perfectly useful currency for internal trading - paying for a hotel room, for example - but try to buy any foreign goods - a can of coke, rather than the local version for example - and it has very little value at all. Try and buy arity before you go to the country and it is unheard of - the banks don't even recognise it. (While India won't allow the banks to buy and sell their currency, at least the banks know it exists.)

So Italy can introduce a parallel currency if it likes, and hope to get some advantages out of it. But, whether they like it or not they would also get any disadvantages that come with it. And primarily they would probably turn out to be huge difficulties of trading with other countries, in or out of the EU, because it is those countries that decide on the value to attach to the parallel currency. And it could turn out to be virtually none.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Iains
Date: 30 May 19 - 02:56 AM

An interesting bit on the chappie crowdfunding the court case accusing Boris of lying:

The man behind the case to prosecute Boris Johnson has been saying his case is not about stopping Brexit, just about stopping 'lying in politics'. That will come as news to the original backers of Marcus J. Ball's first (now deleted) crowdfunder which was set up from "within a Facebook group called The 48%" in order to reverse the result of the referendum.

"Once these prosecutions have established that politicians did indeed lie to voters our next step will be to take other action to prevent Brexit. This may be in the form of a judicial review… We will also work to reverse Brexit and ensure our membership of the European Union is not lost"

Ball deleted his original blogs, seemingly to hide his original intentions and then launched a new site claiming that he was "motivated by a desire to challenge the national problem of lying in UK politics." In late 2018 a new 'Brexit Justice Prosecution' page was launched, a new financial target established, and new Twitter and Facebook profiles were set up as old ones are deleted. The old 'Brexit Justice' Page now reroutes to the new page, with all references to Ball's political views removed. (what a sneaky fellow he is!)

What started as an attempt to prosecute the Leave campaign turned into a campaign against the man who led it, which if successful would have hugely destructive consequences over our democracy, enforcing government regulation of political speech.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: DMcG
Date: 30 May 19 - 03:27 AM

My wife was subjected to a tedious lecture by me yesterday on the differences between truth value, lying and rhetoric. The third is the natural ground of politicians and is about persuasion, rather than about whether things are true or not, or whether they are misrepresentations of the truth intended to deceive. She is long-suffering, I am afraid.

I think making politicians challengeable on whether they are deliberately misrepresenting something in order to deceive is no bad thing and falls a long short of destroying democracy. Without is we are really in the world of 'who shouts louder', which is a far greater threat to democracy in my view.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Iains
Date: 30 May 19 - 04:59 AM

You realise that all MPs that signed up for article 50 and stood for election on a leave ticket would be open for challenge, as would May's inveterate lies about brexit, not to mention dodgy dossiers and possible war criminal charges. We could of course add all the remainer false claims about instant interest rate rises, the economy tanking etc stc.
All deliberate misrepresentations.
Could be some rather nasty unintended consequences from such actions.
Be careful what you wish for!

From your perspective it could be argued brexit has occurred by default because of endless lies enabling postponement.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Iains
Date: 30 May 19 - 12:14 PM

Brexit Betrayal from their own words

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iPcmebRH904

If Boris is convicted we might need to refurbish the Tower for multiple long term residency.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: DMcG
Date: 30 May 19 - 12:45 PM

I am afraid, Iains, you are just demonstrating that you and whoever made that video do not understand the difference between being incorrect and lying. But relax: I am not about to repeat the monologue my wife had to sit through.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Mossback
Date: 30 May 19 - 01:15 PM

He, and they, understand perfectly well.

They just don't give a shit.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Iains
Date: 30 May 19 - 01:28 PM

Should the politically motivated court case against BORIS have merit, I have no doubt absolute clarity will be given to both interpretations.
The Crown Prosecution Service could throw it out right now. I suspect had a remainer been accused the result would be no case to answer and produced faster than you could say timmy robinson.
It is a dangerous path when the judiciary show political leanings, as it is when the speaker is no longer impartial, as it is when a convicted criminal is given a ridiculously abbreviated sentence and thereby allowed a casting vote on crucial legislation.
The EU, I notice, has no qualms in banning the duly elected Catalan MEP from taking his seat.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: David Carter (UK)
Date: 30 May 19 - 02:14 PM

There is a difference between a promise which is not kept, and a downright lie on matters of fact. Boris is bang to rights. The maximum sentence for misconduct in public office is life imprisonment. And may I recommend Walton Gaol, Liverpool. And when he goes in, every single prisoner should be given a copy of this article. Pick up the soap, Boris.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 30 May 19 - 03:09 PM

The remain campaign undoubtedly made misleading and unrealistic PREDICTIONS about the post-Brexit world. Political campaigning is predicated on predictions and it's up to an educated electorate (or should be) to distinguish between realistic projections and far-fetched extrapolations based on ideological bullshit. That's the name of the game and 'twas ever thus. What Johnson did was to tell a deliberate lie, which he painted on the side of a bus. It was a lie and he knew it was a lie. That was no prediction. It was a stated false fact, writ large. Defenders of Boris appear not to be able to tell the difference.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: David Carter (UK)
Date: 30 May 19 - 03:16 PM

Why to you think that those predictions were unrealistic Steve? We don't know yet, if we ever will. I would suggest that George Osborne's predictions of the hit that the average family would/will take might have been a touch short of reality.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Iains
Date: 30 May 19 - 03:21 PM

Good to see remainiacs applying the same sleight of hand that emanates from the abbaccus school of mathermagic. Was Hogwarts their alma mater?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 30 May 19 - 03:28 PM

I'm no defender of boris, but the difference saying something misleading and unrealistic and outright lying seems abit academic. Is the bus the difference?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: DMcG
Date: 30 May 19 - 04:02 PM


I'm no defender of boris, but the difference saying something misleading and unrealistic and outright lying seems a bit academic

Not at all. It is all about whether statements and predictions were made in good faith and believed at the time they were made, or were made knowing full well they were not. Whether a prediction turned out to be accurate in the end is different from whether it was made in good faith at the time.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: DMcG
Date: 30 May 19 - 04:17 PM

Let me illustrate that with an example which does not involve Brexit. Two salesmen go along to a company and try to sell them a product. The potential purchaser is reluctant: he is not at all confident he can get the funds, or that it will really that beneficial to his company, and anyway they have found something maybe as good but a little cheaper from elsewhere.

Each salesman reports back. The former says they seemed quite reluctant and not at all promising and estimates 10% chance of getting the sale. The second salesman reports back that they were wildly enthusiastic, and were begging to get the product ASAP. He estimates 90% or better chance of the sale coming off.

Surely it is obvious the first is speaking in good faith and the second is lying? And that that is what is taking place, irrespective of whether the company does buy the product or not in the end?

Nothing academic about it, in my opinion.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 30 May 19 - 05:13 PM

Yes, the previous post was from me. I'll state it again just in case it gets deleted as a 'Guest' post in BS: I was signed in when I started typing. [It got deleted. Thanks for re-posting it. -Mod]

As I pointed out back in 2017, when this matter was last raised, the figure of £350m was an official figure (Although a gross rather than net figure) provided by the UK Statistics Authority. They wrote to Boris, complaining that he was misusing official figures. The wording makes clear that it was an official figure.
In his letter, Sir David once again repeated the explanation that the £350m statistic relates only to what the UK currently pays to the EU, and does not include the money that Britain receives in return.
(the above)From: The Independent
The side of the "Boris Bus" said "We send the EU £350 million a week"
Apart from the comment differentiating between net & gross, David Norgrove's comment is the same as the bus.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: DMcG
Date: 30 May 19 - 05:38 PM

I am happy for the court to examine the matter. We have, in my opinion, covered all the relevant points about the bus many times so I don't see this advancing until we can react to whatever the court gives its view.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit #3: A futile gesture?
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 30 May 19 - 07:01 PM

I think it would be a mistake ro attribute honesty to anyone in this fight.