I almost admire the fact* you’re still defending this. You lied about who you were. You tried to deceive people. During a debate where the question was asked how can we trust you. It is truly dystopian and immoral. *do not check this fact with factcheckuk. It’s a fake site.
So David, are you also going to call out this “fact-check” site? Is this “grimly dystopian”? It is a Labour Party account and website. Your hypocrisy is breathtaking. https://twitter.com/DavidLammy/status/1197058469674790912 …pic.twitter.com/e8npExGxjS
-
-
-
Isn't it rather telling that the party did this, had to know it would be noticed, and this would be the focus of attention. doesn't it show 1) lack of confidence in Johnsons ability in debate 2) vapidity of own sides arguments
- 3 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Things that are completely different are the same, according to Mr Cleverly. 'Fact' is the same as 'fact-check', just as 'dog' is the same as 'dog-food' or 'car' is the same as 'car-park'. I daresay we'll get used to the new rules in time-travel.
-
You missed clever and Cleverly
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Mr Cleverly. The official Tory party press office Twitter account rebranded itself during the leadership debate to 'FactcheckUK' in what was IMO an attempt to make people believe it was a genuine fact checking account. As party chairman may I ask you did you sanction that action?
-
He doesn’t have the spine or balls to answer the question. If it was an idiotic idea, then of course it was Cleverly’s. Worst case of nominative determinism ever.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Pull the other one. The tag makes very clear it's the views of the Labour Party, as opposed to the cryptic "CCHQ "which was all that identified last night's stunt, and will mean precisely nothing to 99% of the general population. But, of course, you know that. Pure whataboutery!
-
More importantly, it's not stylised to look identical to a reputable fact checking site, unlike last night's shameful stunt. It's a line NO party should ever cross, yet CCHQ went so far over it last night that it disappeared over the horizon.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I would be fired from my job for lying like this.
-
Yes but his boss is Johnson... he can't really use lying as a reason to fire someone can he? Nor stupidity. It's a tough one!
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.