Martin G

Personal account. Views my own. Frequently not serious.

[Martin G @OverworldEye]

@ATRightMovies Quatermass

[Martin G @OverworldEye]

@Alexand65232592 @ItsReal_Ivy @KINGGGE_ Unless they’re bearer shares…

[Martin G @OverworldEye]

@GunnerPuls Sterling

[Martin G @OverworldEye]

@Gemini @SpaceX @xai Only in the US I assume? If so - significant information to be omitting in the general celebratory hoohah…

[Martin G @OverworldEye]

@BrianRoemmele I’ve always been a Vance man, so none of them!

[Martin G @OverworldEye]

@Truth12123 @MarkVipond @SkyNews @BethRigby What a weird, narrow take - of course verbal evidence to facts directly known by the person giving it is evidence.

[Martin G @OverworldEye]

@shay_o54223 @Jztujj @SkyNews @BethRigby The evidence given was that it was borderline - and I am not sure there is any evidence so far to the contrary? It was UKSV that opined it was borderline and Robbins signed off on the mitigation steps and an approval. He hasn’t named individuals and was clear why.

[Martin G @OverworldEye]

@shay_o54223 @Jztujj @SkyNews @BethRigby It was the UKSV. It was borderline, he said he was told, and Robbins signed off on it being dealt with by mitigating measures - a decision he firmly stood behind in his appearance today.

[Martin G @OverworldEye]

@Truth12123 @MarkVipond @SkyNews @BethRigby Robbins dealt with it clearly in his evidence, and he was the one signing off on the decision. I can’t see what “independent” evidence of his statements could exist. So far the best evidence we have is that given today by Robbins.

[Martin G @OverworldEye]

@JSw034694552901 @SkyNews @BethRigby That’s what I’m saying. For some reason, despite this being extensively explained, they were “confused” by it.

[Martin G @OverworldEye]

@Truth12123 @MarkVipond @SkyNews @BethRigby Robbins, who took responsibility for the decision, just gave evidence of that. He was completely clear on the subject.

[Martin G @OverworldEye]

@80zGamer @MistlethrushB @KemiBadenoch @adamboultonTABB BBC may say that, but Robbins’ evidence was crystal clear that such was not the process in FCO vetting.

[Martin G @OverworldEye]

@JSw034694552901 @SkyNews @BethRigby They seemed confused that content was not shared, only outcome, when the reason for that was explained repeatedly and extensively. I suspect they just weren’t paying attention.

[Martin G @OverworldEye]

@Jztujj @SkyNews @BethRigby Robbin’s’ evidence directly and repeatedly contradicted your statement. He said that the decision rested with FCO, it was not an overrule of a decision, but approval with mitigating measures to deal with the issues that led to the UKSV “leaning” towards recommending fail.

[Martin G @OverworldEye]

@Truth12123 @MarkVipond @SkyNews @BethRigby The evidence was that the pressure had no impact on the decision, therefore no override. What the evidence pointed to was poor judgement (already I think well established) not process failure

[Martin G @OverworldEye]

@Jztujj @shay_o54223 @SkyNews @BethRigby As mentioned elsewhere, the evidence given today was that Mandelson did not fail vetting. It was passed with mitigating measures in place. It was exhaustively explained that outcome only is communicated, and why.

[Martin G @OverworldEye]

@Jztujj @SkyNews @BethRigby The evidence was that, in the case of FCO, UKSV recommends; in this case they were “leaning towards” recommending no, but FCO can implement mitigation - it is FCO decision not UKSV. Therefore he didn’t fail DV.

[Martin G @OverworldEye]

@MarkVipond @SkyNews @BethRigby Which part of the evidence we have just heard leads you to say that due process was not followed?

[Martin G @OverworldEye]

@shay_o54223 @Jztujj @SkyNews @BethRigby It was his job to approve with mitigation or deny; the vetting team told him it was borderline. The reason Mandelson was sacked was not the subject of the vetting reservations

[Martin G @OverworldEye]

@Jztujj @SkyNews @BethRigby He did stand up to the pressure. He gave ample evidence about why only the outcome is communicated not the content. Whether everyone likes this or not, Robbin’s evidence is that process was followed.