There was definitely a crime committed
Not all crimes are equal.
Police resources are not infinite.
Both of these are facts and given those facts it is a reasonable question to ask why are significant police resources being applied to this case.
The very fact of the search may deter future whistleblowers.
A cynical person who believed that this government is corrupt and dishonest might believe that deterrence of future whistleblowers was precisely the point.
I'm so glad I live in a civilised democracy where the police force do not intimidate journalists who dare to embarrass the government of the day by publishing inconvenient truths.
He basically committed a shoulder charge, his arms weren’t making a tackling motion, that’s for sure.
It was stupid and ill-disciplined, simple as that.
As were numerous "tackles" during the game - most of which were ignored. That is the point.
I used to watch rugby quite a lot and now find myself only watching when it's convenient as it happened to be on Sunday. What struck me was just how many rules can be broken in rugby, for the most part any minute of play seems to have two or three situations where a rule is broken, most of which go unnoticed by the referee or are "waved on", essentially the referee deciding he can't be arsed stopping play.
The local TV crew could pick any of those breeches of the rules to replay on loop at the ground. It seems weird that rugby does not have a rule about which source of information can be used by the referee - or more accurately does not have five different and contradictory rules that might apply.
I really do love watching the talent and energy on display during a good rugby match but honestly they really need to get their shit together and sort out the rules to allow the game to flow better and not simply at the discretion of the referee.
Having just watched a reasonable amount of the American game it's hard to say rugby flows better and the American game is designed to be played in 15 second bursts!
Quite some change in stagecraft. Not surprising of course.
And if I ever end up ruling a fascist dystopia
Doesn't everyone want one of those for Christmas?
You might want to look the word up.
You used that word, not James. You are framing his letter in your words and then arguing semantics. Not up to your usual standard Ben.
issuing an ultimatum
I honestly did not read it that way.
To me it read as him saying that if Cunliffe is the preferred Labour leader then it means that Labour is not the party he thought it was and he would not want to be a part of it.
That seems to be a perfectly reasonable statement. And to be fair given the last few years I can see a lot of people unsure what the Labour party is meant to be and hence questioning their own attachment to the party.
None of that says that the Labour party can't be the party that Cunliffe represents, just that some people would prefer to be represented by a different kind of party.
Must be tough being back to irrelevancy.
But he isn't. He will be used by the MSM exactly as he was before, because simply they do not care.
If you’re angry that Labour is doing this process in a rushed way without time for a proper review and good data, get angry at David Cunliffe. This is what he wanted, from election night onward.
Don't worry I am.