Mailwatch(ed) Forum

Bones McCoy wrote: ↑Mon Aug 28, 2023 11:14 am The majority commentators on ConservativeHome regard it as a "well written and righteous" critique of Sunak.

Sunak tries his best to be one of them (vacuous right wing bigot) but there’s just something about him they don’t like.

Phil Moorhouse’s take is worth a listen, as usual.

At 03:48 though - will Labour do this?They're playing far too nicely, in a "we're not like the Tories" way.

BTW Abers, did you mean to start the video at 10:14 in?

Boiler wrote: ↑Mon Aug 28, 2023 3:26 pm At 03:48 though - will Labour do this?They're playing far too nicely, in a "we're not like the Tories" way.

BTW Abers, did you mean to start the video at 10:14 in?

No. Did not know that had happened. Or how. Presume you just played it from the start?

I did, but somehow I think you may have accidentally clicked on the option to "copy video URL at current time": when I looked at your post as a quote it said
- the &t=614s at the end of the URL tells us who click on the video to start it at 614 seconds in. If you want to fix it, edit the URL in your post by deleting the &t=614s bit.

Boiler wrote: ↑Mon Aug 28, 2023 12:16 pm Much as I like the idea of this woman being a pain in the neck to Sunak, it's clear she has her supporters. You just know she'll never shut up.

They are so made for one another.

From the Guardian.

The Treasury, meanwhile, has confirmed chancellor Jeremy Hunt has appointed Dorries to be Steward and Bailiff of the Three Hundreds of Chiltern, the archaic mechanism for quitting the Commons.

Good. Now:

James O'Brien clearly enjoying Dorries getting handed her arse by John Nicolson here

Nadine Dorries’ book on Boris Johnson’s downfall delayed due to legal issues

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... gal-issues

The publisher said a “small delay is necessary to allow for the huge volume of material the author has consulted, the number of high-level sources spoken to and the required legal process needed to share her story”.

Or as I read it "the huge volume of material the author has consumed."

Rather useful having it out of sight, and even then potentially gutted, until after the by-election though.

"The publisher" is HarperCollins, and who owns HarperCollins?

Step forward, creepy Uncle Rupert.

I hope that when it finally gets published bookshops place it in the 'Fan Fiction' section.

satnav wrote: ↑Fri Sep 01, 2023 8:17 am I hope that when it finally gets published bookshops place it in the 'Fanny Fiction' section.

FTFY

My take is that Harper Collins are now having to acquaint Nad with the law of libel

I'm thinking the first draft is so fucking incontinently deranged that it might never see the light of day. Apparently, Dorries received an advance of £20,500 for this wankery.

soulboy wrote: ↑Fri Sep 01, 2023 7:12 am Nadine Dorries’ book on Boris Johnson’s downfall delayed due to legal issues

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... gal-issues

The publisher said a “small delay is necessary to allow for the huge volume of material the author has consulted, the number of high-level sources spoken to and the required legal process needed to share her story”.

Or as I read it "the huge volume of material the author has consumed."

Rather useful having it out of sight, and even then potentially gutted, until after the by-election though.

Eaten the crayons she was supplied to write with - more like!

Nadine Dorries was tonight accused of being “offensive” to voters by failing to declare any cash she pocketed from her second job as a TV presenter.

The ex-Tory MP didn’t declare a single penny in earnings from nearly a year of presenting a high profile TV show - while largely absent from her day job as an MP...

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.mirror ... 849689.amp

Totally unsurprised by this

Extremely relative use of "high profile" there

Anyone else enjoying I Claudius at the moment?

soulboy wrote: ↑Fri Sep 01, 2023 7:12 am Nadine Dorries’ book on Boris Johnson’s downfall delayed due to legal issues

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... gal-issues

The publisher said a “small delay is necessary to allow for the huge volume of material the author has consulted, the number of high-level sources spoken to and the required legal process needed to share her story”.

Or as I read it "the huge volume of material the author has consumed."

Rather useful having it out of sight, and even then potentially gutted, until after the by-election though.

I read this as ‘long-suffering editor exasperated that feedback on utterly abysmal manuscript is consistently ignored, so deadline pushed back’.

The delay could be down to Nad being too busy drinking the advance th publisher gave her to actually have had the time to put finger to keyboard.