Wallace and Daly

MFPM, it's not too late to stop digging. Wallace and Daly aren't going to be able to brazen this out. They admittedly have a few years grace before their potential re-election back to the gravy train (which comes with the sideline gig/benefit of being valuable to foreign autocracies). But I don't think that that people will forget and I think that the spotlight is on them too much. For once, they will realise that there can be such a thing as bad (self) publicity. The more you blindly defend them on here, the harder it will be for you to backtrack or walk away later.

Funny how the 'gravy train' is rolled out for Daly and Wallace but not Fitzgerald, Cuffe, Kelleher, Kelly, McGuinness etc...I see too you're repeating Naomi's false narrative and invalidating a correct critique of NATO or the West because Chinese or Russian state media choose to use it!

As for an election in 2+ years' time, that will take care of itself, you shouldn't be bothering your little head too much about such future events, though I'm sure Daly and Wallace would be touched by your concern for their electoral fate.

Are you being deliberately obtuse?

While we're at it may as well point out another error you made @MFPM.

You mocked the journalist for working 10 months on it. She had to observe the pattern over time (Wallace/Daly saying something, and subsequent reaction if any in state media and information spheres of authoritarian states).

There's no shortcut. Unless someone has a time machine.

'Nope' and then you repeat a question which demonstrates you being obtuse...go and think about it and try to work it out for yourself it's not that hard!

"Must try harder" would be the grade for your current attempts at deflection.

Nope no "bias" (no u!). How we twist and turn, you definitely seemed to be mocking the length of time spent, the fact it took 10 months. It was a lengthy enough newspaper article too as such things go with quite a lot of detail in it, but I have a feeling in my waters that you did not read it.

You said the the article was disingenous journalism, yet provided no evidence of that.

You said they had "no power to get her banned from EP", now that may be true (so not an "error"), but the article does say they called security on her when she tried to ask them questions and "requested the Irish Times reporter be barred from the European parliament". So they did their best according to the article.

Read every word of it and I'm familiar with her Twitter feed and the agenda she's been driving. She incorrectly stated that they had tried to get her banned, they have no power to do so but if they reported her and then they could only have done so if she broke Rule 25(2) of the European Parliament's Rules of Procedure which I suspect is what happened. I also suspect her line 'The reporter currently remains accredited with access to the parliament' is perhaps telling that the investigation isn't concluded...we'll see.

Well, I'm glad you've read it now. Didn't seem like it from those earlier posts. You see an "agenda" (you forgot "nefarious" there), I see, you know, journalism...They can't focus on everything. It just happens that interest in this is very timely, given the Russian invasion of Ukraine and our own MEPs positions on the sanctions, EU military aid and such. Oh sorry I forgot, silly me, Russia did not invade Ukraine. It was all a collective bad dream.

What is Rule 25 when its at home mr lawyer?

Yeah I googled it too out of curiousity and couldn't understand relevence to discussion + was hoping for some explanation from a legal mind!

Wallace- "Now you can't even say what you like"..............I suppose that might be the case when ya use your money (god knows where it is coming from) to try to silence a national broadcaster in the High Court.

Imagine comparing a fella being tried for spying with "the worst of what happened in Northern Ireland".

Bloody hell, you've only just realised Naomi is on twitter now??? Glad I was some service, she's been building her clicks for a good while now, no interest in anything Daly or Wallace did for 2 years but then she spotted an opportunity...it's uncanningly similar to the UK press and the campaign against Corbyn...

Sure anyone could report anyone for anything. It would likely have to be investigated. Although we actually only have MFPM's claim that there is even an investigation.

But the rule we are quoted that the journalist broke isn't one that she could have broken, as it pertains to the internal financial decisions of a body within the EU.

It would be a bit like claiming I'm being investigated for breaking a rule in the Department of Finance that states that their budget committee has to formally vote on departmental allocations for the year. When I don't work for the Depatment of Finance and never have