Forum menu
Tbh whatever the explanation 10 years sounds totally over the top to me
It's treason, Lord Haw Haw was hanged for broadcasting foreign propaganda. 10 seems reasonably to me though 20 wouldn't have shocked in a country where a stop oil protestor got 5 before appeal.
I hope Farage is absolutely shitting himself.
Off with his head 🙂
It's treason, Lord Haw Haw was hanged for broadcasting foreign propaganda.
No, Nathan Gill was not convicted for treason. I guess you think that the whole Tory Party (and therefore previous UK government) is guilty of treason because they accepted Russian money?
Btw Lord Haw Haw did not broadcast foreign propaganda. The United States born German national was broadcasting his own country's propaganda.
If he had done it with a strong German accent he probably wouldn't have been hung.
No, Nathan Gill was not convicted for treason
He was convicted of taking bribes. I haven't read the full trial transcript but he admitted accepting money for promoting Russian interests. The sentence will have been within the relevant guidelines.
I agree that there's a fine line between donations and bribes. I'd like to think it makes all politicians very nervous about past actions, and rethink any future plans.
there's a fine line between donations and bribes.
Yup, as I said Putin's oligarch haven't bankrolled the Tory Party because of philanthropic concerns about UK politics, it is because they believed that it would serve theirs and Russia's interests, if that isn't a bribe I don't know what is.
I reckon that Nathan Gill probably has good reason to feel hard done by. Especially when you compare the custodial sentences dished out to Jonathan Aitken and Jeffrey Archer. Ten years is a long time.
there's a fine line between donations and bribes.
In this instance - it wasn't a case of being influenced by or unduly favourable to a cause as the result of a donation - the money was for delivering speeches in parliament, verbatim, that had been written an prepared by Voloshyn. His correspondence with Voloshyn made it clear that they both knew that was what he was doing - delivering Voloshns scripts, word for word, but passing these speeches off as his own. Basically he agreed and conspired to act as a shill for a foreign government in another parliament. 8 times.
So the sentence will represent the repeat pattern of offending. A single offence of bribery can carry a 10 year sentence so he's got off comparatively lightly for 8 offences. In fact the 10 years is a reduced sentence, the judge reduced it from 14 years due to mitigating factors.
Especially when you compare the custodial sentences dished out to Jonathan Aitken and Jeffrey Archer. Ten years is a long time.
those offences were trivial by comparison (both perjury convictions as cover up for fairly minor offences). Gill has at least fessed up, eventually, he didn't cooperated with police but ultimately pled guilty pre trial and its pretty much his own evidence, from turning over his phone, that he has been convicted on
His correspondence with Voloshyn made it clear that they both knew that was what he was doing - delivering Voloshns scripts, word for word, but passing these speeches off as his own.
Okay that at least helps to explain the severity of the allegations, but firstly even prime ministers don't write their own speeches and secondly had it all been written in his own words but with the same sentiments (I don't know what the speeches were about) would he really not have got 10 years?
And how does that compare with the case of Jonathan Aitken who got just 18 months not for taking dodgy Saudi money, which he did, but because of lying about it under oath.
My link above suggests that right-wing UK politics is awash with Russian money it seems strange that one person gets over 10 years for greedily accepting a piddling £40k
When Nigel Farage becomes Prime Minister will he be able to grant Nathan Gill a Royal pardon Trump style?
Edit : I hadn't seen your edited post with the last paragraph. Anyway I'm not going to lose any sleep over the issue but I can't say that I am comfortable with the sentence, plus I worry that it will be used to claim a witch hunt against Reform politicians not least because of all the Russian money that's gone into the Tory Party.
as always you can read the judgement
the amount of money is sort of irrelevant - £40k doesn't sound a lot, but it was actually £5k for each offence. He was very, very easily and very, very cheaply bought. Saying exactly what he was being paid to say was the deal.
There are quite likely more lucrative and more sophisticated ways this could have been done, but that would have required someone smarter, and someone smarter probably wouldn't have got caught.
someone smarter probably wouldn't have got caught.
Someone smarter on an MEP salary would might have concluded that even with a cunning plan it just wasn't worth it for peanuts.
I wonder if it is connected to the excitement of risk taking and being very naughty? Sometimes in cases of bent coppers I do wonder if that plays a part.
Someone smarter on an MEP salary would might have concluded that even with a cunning plan it just wasn't worth it for peanuts.
Someone smarter in any situation would have realised them getting caught was probably part of the overall scheme.
Putin doesn't fund people and organisations because he's a fan of them. He funds both sides of opposing factions, he funds his own opponents. His general aim is to sew confusion and distrust. Conspiring with people like Gill to feed Russian propaganda into other nations' parliaments would be one part of a plan, having it be revealed that they had done that would be another. Putin meddles with stuff in order to achieve one end, reveals the interference to achieve another, then implausibly denies it as another win.
Conspiring with people like Gill to feed Russian propaganda into other nations' parliaments would be one part of a plan, having it be revealed that they had done that would be another.
Erm, wasn't it in connection with the European Parliament? I am sure that there many far-right politicians in the European Parliament who are prepared to do favours for Putin, probably even without financial reward, I not sure that getting them in the shit helps Putin much.
I think that the Nathan Gill conviction is possibly likely to result in more scrutiny and likely put Putin at a disadvantage
I very much agree with the suggestion that the Kremlin likely funds opposition parties to themselves though, for example that was originally the case with Rodina, but I have no idea what the present situation is.
This is who’s funding Farage, who ‘forgot’ to declare the money…
The man earned 1.2 million from second jobs in the last year. It's not surprising that he could forget small sums like 25k here and there for a speaking arrangement or two.
Is Reform still a limited company instead of a proper parliamentry party?
Its not just reform that have dodgy funding though. The whole funding of politics needs addressing, the money pumped into political parties and lobbying makes a mockery of democracy. It's a far bigger issue than FPTP because no matter what the voting system we only get to vote on the policies the political doners allow the parties to offer.
IMO the oligarchy and Israel will have pumped far more direct money into subverting democracy through political funding and lobbying than Russia over the past decade or so, and in the UK that will mean that labour and the tories will have been the biggest recipients of that money.
The man earned 1.2 million from second jobs in the last year. It's not surprising that he could forget small sums like 25k here and there for a speaking arrangement or two.
Is Reform still a limited company instead of a proper parliamentry party?
yeah particularly the ones where he gets to sniff the arse of his orange pal + entourage.
Btw Lord Haw Haw did not broadcast foreign propaganda. The United States born German national was broadcasting his own country's propaganda.
That's somewhat selective, Ernie, and grossly misleading. Lord Haw Haw was an American born in the US to a Northern Irish father. He obtained British nationality thanks to his father's origins in the 30s. He only obtained German nationality during the second world war. At the Nurenberg trial he had his British nationality so was tried for treason and hanged.
Joyce was a British Fascist... his cause was fascism, and nothing to do with any affinity or loyalty to Germany before it was became enthralled to and controlled by the Nazis (he was naturalised under them IIRC).
More Tory rejects welcomed into the Reform fold, including missing link Johnathan Gullis. To be fair to him, he does have the same intellectual heft as Lee Anderson, so I’m sure the two of them will get on well
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cgr12e7259xo.amp
Be interesting to hear the conservative response as it looks like they would be the junior party . I suspect some of them would sell their mum for a ministers position. 
Be interesting to hear the conservative response as it looks like they would be the junior party
I would be more interested in hearing what some of the current reform supporters who rant about the "uniparty" think of this idea.
Whilst I dont disagree with the idea that the two major parties have got a bit too close in terms of policies I am not sure how a hostile takeover of one of them would solve this.
https://www.gbnews.com/politics/reform-uk-richard-tice-christmas-party-croydon-cancelled
It is hardly a case of "bullying" .....SUTR has no means of bullying the owners and management of Grand Sapphire, they can rent out their venue to whoever they want.
The Grand Sapphire is actually a British Asian owned venue. It was built and is managed as an Asian owned business. It serves primarily the Asian community which uses it extensively for weddings and other celebrations.
I suspect that persuasion was the tool that was used. It surely can't be that hard to persuade a British Asian owned venue that they shouldn't facilitate the fundraising exercise of a bunch of bigots and racists?
But whatever the reason I think it's hilarious that icancelled 3 days before Reform's Christmas extravaganza event 😂
Tbh I don't understand how it is even legal for them to cancel but presumably it is.
This is who’s funding Farage, who ‘forgot’ to declare the money…
He looks like a bad AI hallucination of Aphex Twin.
Whilst I dont disagree with the idea that the two major parties have got a bit too close in terms of policies I am not sure how a hostile takeover of one of them would solve this.
I'm sure Farage will be aware of this . I think for most people Reform is Farage , infact i heard something where the majority of reform voters didn't recognize Richard Tice , and he'll be aware there'll be a point when Reform just look like rebadged Tories.
The question is will it shift the dial at all in terms of people voting for reform . Whilst they're the only real option in terms of a coalition for Reform surely the population of the UK wouldn't accept the Tories back in government already , even as a junior party . How the heck did we go from a labour landslide to contemplating a Reform Tory coalition in a year and a half
Are there stats for toady's work as an MP? Days attended and surgeries held? How much time spent in his constituency?
Do the reform voters think he'll be dedicated as a potential PM?
I don't think he wants to be PM. I think he wants to do what Jimmny Åkesson is doing for the Swedish Democrats is doing to Lil' Uffe of Moderaterna here in Sweden: Shaping the discussion, moving policy, but avoiding the main responsibility as the head person.
Assume Kemi is still leader of the Tories when there is an election. How quickly would she do a deal with Reform to be PM in a coalition with them? Farage could be deputy, do almost nothing, but threaten a split every time he wanted crypto de-regulated or something and he would get a result.
In the meantime, how much do you think a deputy PM could charge on the speaking circuit or as a friendly ear to crypto-bros?
Are there stats for toady's work as an MP? Days attended and surgeries held? How much time spent in his constituency?
Not really. About the closest you get is they work for us with voting history/speeches.
Someone did try getting the HoP security pass records to show how often MPs were attending but in response the last tory government changed the system so MP records get deleted after seven days so thats no longer an option.
How the heck did we go from a labour landslide to contemplating a Reform Tory coalition in a year and a half
You need to ask Starmer and his useless cabinet. I did state that the next government will be a Reform Tory coalition about a year ago, in fact I was even offered a bet on it but the person offering it reneged on it and went back to searching for Monty Python images.
Assume Kemi is still leader of the Tories when there is an election.
Unlikely, really.
I've said for a long time that Reform will end up occupying the hollowed out shell of the Tories, and the process seems to be ongoing as Tory support continues to erode. My view now is that, with so many Tories drifting to Reform, there will eventually be a leadership contest, a candidate who is effectively 'Reform-approved' and Farage will be the kingmaker.
Not sure who it will be, Jenrick maybe, he seems the right combination of corrupt and weak. Whether this leads to a full merger so that Farage can be PM, or a placeholder Medvedev/Putin arrangement, we will see. Farage has always liked the Russian model of doing things.
Reform received a single £9m donation from a Brit living in Thailand, we're doomed.
Funding of political parties really needs to be looked at - also Reform surely need to become a party at somepoint, we cannot have a business running the UK can we?
Not sure who it will be, Jenrick maybe, he seems the right combination of corrupt and weak. Whether this leads to a full merger so that Farage can be PM, or a placeholder Medvedev/Putin arrangement, we will see. Farage has always liked the Russian model of doing things.
Any merger or deal, does have the potential to fall into the "they're all the same" trap.
we cannot have a business running the UK can we?
People keep crapping on about "needing a businessman to run the ****ry" so why not a put an actual business in charge?
That was ironic in case it wasn't obvious.
Funding of political parties really needs to be looked at
Yep but it won't be looked at by Starmer as he is in the trough with donations, lobbyists etc,.
Could a **** like Musk, in theory, give Reform a billion pounds?
Of course! Reform is a limited company and a billion is only a few times more than the Thai resident gave Farage's company.
Funding of political parties really needs to be looked at - also Reform surely need to become a party at somepoint, we cannot have a business running the UK can we?
This whole "Reform is a company" point is really meaningless. A company is not necessarily a business. The Lib Dems are also a company. I can't be bothered to do the other parties but I am sure there will be other examples.
What is important is whether a party is registered with the electoral commission etc.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cgexg4lz2q5o
You've got to admit he's played a blinder with this.....
Farage said the Today programme interview was a "disgrace" and demanded the BBC apologise for 1970s TV shows such as "It Ain't Half Hot Mum" and the "The Black and White Minstrel Show," which he said were homophobic and racist.
He also mentions Bernard Manning which I guess is fair if they want to go back 45 years.
What probably isn't fair though is blaming the BBC. They didn't dig up this story about Nigel Farage's schooldays 45 years ago Labour did, the BBC is simply reporting it.
I love how the article says that the BBC has been contacted, of course they have, they wrote the ****ing article!
which he said were homophobic and racist.
The fallacy here is whatabout-ism. If Nigel wants to have a discussion about early 70's TV he's more than entitled to, the rest of us are discussing the fact he's [still] a racist.
Does anyone remember a TV show from their childhood where Jews were told they should be gassed? Pretending his vile behaviour was “normal for the time” is just another deflection.
Also, Manning is not the person here running a political party. If he were alive and had a chance of becoming PM, I would hope his past behaviour would be pointed out and scrutinised by other politicans and the media as well.
You've got to admit he's played a blinder with this.....
He really hasn't.
He's come up with a load of whataboutery and thrown a tantrum when he's been called out on it.
Does anyone remember a TV show from their childhood where Jews were told they should be gassed? Pretending his vile behaviour was “normal for the time” is just another deflection.
Nigel Farage hasn't been accused of being responsible for a TV show during his childhood.
What I do remember from my childhood is coming home from school and being genuinely mystified when my mother didn't find the hilarious joke I had heard doing the rounds concerning Jews and laughing gas, and a couple of other equally tasteless "jokes" about concentration camps, funny.
I was brought up in a deeply anti-fascist environment thanks to my father from whom I inherited much of my politics, but I simply could not understand why something which was clearly imo a very funny joke, and which all my mates had laughed at as it did the rounds at school, should cause my mother to frown and walk away instead of laughing.
Children can be incredibly crass and insensitive. I think children justify that sort of insensitive and deeply unpleasant "humour" because they believe that it isn't physically hurting anyone and they lack any serious insight into the consequences of that sort of unpleasant humour.
I am not defending Farage btw, I have no doubt that he was as much of an arsehole when he 13 as he is now, in fact almost certainly more so than he is now, but I think it is a waste of time trying to smear politicians for what they said during their childhoods. Most voters will dismiss it as irrelevant.
As I have said previously the only people likely to be outraged by what Farage might have said when he was a child are people who hate him anyway and would never vote for him or any of his many parties.
You've got to admit he's played a blinder with this.....
He really hasn't.
He's come up with a load of whataboutery and thrown a tantrum when he's been called out on it.
This story has been rumbling on for a week or so, and it has come to the surface before more than once over the years, there is no evidence that it is causing him any damage now. And it certainly smacks of desperation by Starmer and McSweeney. If he is throwing a tantrum over it he's a fool.
If Nigel wants to have a discussion about early 70's TV he's more than entitled to
Don't give him ideas - Reform's next manifesto will include a commitment to a new state-funded PBTC (Proper British Telly Channel). 24/7/365 broadcast of Mind Your Language, Jim Davidson, Bernard Manning, Black & White Minstrels, and Romany Jones. It'll be very popular with his base!
And it certainly smacks of desperation by Starmer and McSweeney.
I've seen loads of reports on the story in different sources and nothing linking it to Starmer and McSweeney, even from Farage supporters.
If he is throwing a tantrum over it he's a fool.
The latter was never in doubt, the tantrum throwing looked and sounded incredibly Trumpian. Which just exposed him for what he is.
I've seen loads of reports on the story in different sources and nothing linking it to Starmer and McSweeney, even from Farage supporters.
The current story is based on a piece of deep investigative research by The Guardian, which identified 15+ witnesses to and targets of Farage's abuse.
Starmer and Lammy have stuck their oar in, but if Farageists are trying to make out this is some kind of deep state stitch up by the government...they need to loosen their tinfoil hats.
The story that Nigel Farage was a massive racist and neo-fascist whilst a pupil at Dulwich College first broke about 12 years ago and was very extensively covered at the time.
It was credible then as it now. I am not sure what the point of digging it all up again now is. If you are going to have this sort of smear campaign against a politician then the time to do it is during the election campaign in an attempt to swing the undecideds. This will all be forgotten by 2029 and any attempt to regurgitate it yet again then will be seen for what it will be, a cynical smear tactic.
https://www.channel4.com/news/nigel-farage-ukip-letter-school-concerns-racism-fascism