Clarence Mitchell fails in latest bid to be Tory candidate.

[Vertigo Swirl]

Sounds a 'shoe in' for politics then

Obviously Mitchell wasn't morally bankrupt enough for the Tory party. 

[jassi]

Obviously Mitchell wasn't morally bankrupt enough for the Tory party.

He was selected by them for Brighton. Perhaps Peterborough were more particular in their choice of candidate.

[The General]

Having lurked for over a week and witnessed the continual petty squabbling and back biting, I decided I'd rather not get involved.
I posted as I struggle to square any defence for Mitchell; a man whose stock in trade is professional obfuscation, attempting a return to politics.

[The General]

He's a pivotal figure in the subject matter, let's not lose sight of his role. So the link is, he routinely 'spins' for some reprehensible characters. Moreover, in my opinion, that excludes him from being a viable candidate as an MP (a role he probably doesn't actually want, he wants a cabinet position).

[slartibartfast]

He's a pivotal figure in the subject matter, let's not lose sight of his role. So the link is, he routinely 'spins' for some reprehensible characters. Moreover, in my opinion, that excludes him from being a viable candidate as an MP (a role he probably doesn't actually want, he wants a cabinet position).

You mean someone who moulds the truth into what he wants it to be isn’t a good candidate for politics?

[The General]

You mean someone who moulds the truth into what he wants it to be isn’t a good candidate for politics?

Point taken.
But this guy is a serial social climber; imo he doesn't want to serve the constituents of Backwater, East Sussex, he wants to push / define policy for his influencers.

[Sunny]

Point taken.
But this guy is a serial social climber; imo he doesn't want to serve the constituents of Backwater, East Sussex, he wants to push / define policy for his influencers.

Welcome to the forum General S.  You have made some interesting posts so far and I look forward to reading more of them.

[Vertigo Swirl]

He's a pivotal figure in the subject matter, let's not lose sight of his role. So the link is, he routinely 'spins' for some reprehensible characters. Moreover, in my opinion, that excludes him from being a viable candidate as an MP (a role he probably doesn't actually want, he wants a cabinet position).

And now you're pretending to know what Clarence does and doesn't want. 

[The General]

And now you're pretending to know what Clarence does and doesn't want.

I did state that it was my opinion. However if opinions are not permitted to be expressed, then duly noted.

[The General]

Welcome to the forum General S.  You have made some interesting posts so far and I look forward to reading more of them.

Thanks Sunny for the warm welcome.
I've been lurking for a short while to get a grasp of the rules and prevailing theme before interjecting.
I've seen your recent posts and, if I may say so, you have some interesting points of your own.
I have a particular interest in this case and have researched extensively, as I can see most of the members here have, but I'm no expert. So I have a few questions and have formed an opinion, hence my joining.

[G-Unit]

He's a pivotal figure in the subject matter, let's not lose sight of his role. So the link is, he routinely 'spins' for some reprehensible characters. Moreover, in my opinion, that excludes him from being a viable candidate as an MP (a role he probably doesn't actually want, he wants a cabinet position).

Mitchell has committed no crimes as far as I know but his career has required him to be an expert in painting what some see as  dubious characters in the best possible light. Is he available to anyone willing to pay him, or does he choose his clients using other criteria?

[The General]

Mitchell has committed no crimes as far as I know but his career has required him to be an expert in painting what some see as  dubious characters in the best possible light. Is he available to anyone willing to pay him, or does he choose his clients using other criteria?

His 'work' with Cambridge Analytica is a case in point as to his moral standpoint. He stated on C4, https://www.channel4.com/news/clarence-mitchell-the-new-face-of-cambridge-analytica as their official spokes man:“Cambridge Analytica did not harvest the data". However Chris Wylie, former contractor to CA stated  Wylie told the Observer: “We exploited Facebook to harvest millions of people’s profiles. And built models to exploit what we knew about them and target their inner demons. That was the basis the entire company was built on.”

[Vertigo Swirl]

In what way is Clarence Mitchell a pivotal figure in the case of the disappearance of Madeleine McCann?  How has he influenced the investigation(s) into her disappearance in your view?

[Vertigo Swirl]

His 'work' with Cambridge Analytica is a case in point as to his moral standpoint. He stated on C4, https://www.channel4.com/news/clarence-mitchell-the-new-face-of-cambridge-analytica as their official spokes man:“Cambridge Analytica did not harvest the data". However Chris Wylie, former contractor to CA stated  Wylie told the Observer: “We exploited Facebook to harvest millions of people’s profiles. And built models to exploit what we knew about them and target their inner demons. That was the basis the entire company was built on.”

Also can you pin point exactly where in that interview Clarence states categorically that Cambridge Analytica did not harvest data?  Cos I've listened to it and he doesn't seem to say that to me...

[Sunny]

Also can you pin point exactly where in that interview Clarence states categorically that Cambridge Analytica did not harvest data?  Cos I've listened to it and he doesn't seem to say that to me...

The Steeple Times seems to think that he did

Now describing himself as “the new face of Cambridge Analytica” on Twitter, Mitchell appeared at a press conference for his new clients earlier this week. Later in an interview with Channel 4 News, he described the operation as not being “some Bond villain” and said he was “perfectly proud to… defend the company.” He added:

 

“You say why are [Cambridge Analytic] not speaking to Channel 4. Well I say, I am speaking to Channel 4. Some companies would say: ‘We’re not speaking to ‘[Channel 4] after their expose.’”

 

“Cambridge Analytica has not [used a honeytrap] ever… I can’t discuss it whilst the independent investigation is being conducted… It would be wrong for me to pre-judge it.”

 

“Cambridge Analytica did not harvest the data… The figure for the data received by [Cambridge Analytica] was mind boggling… But I can guarantee that everything has gone from the systems… It’s a mess certainly… But I am clearing up their mess for them… I’ve come in to assist them to get them through this crisis where I can.”


Clarence Mitchell has once again proven that there are people out there willing to defend the indefensible. Who out there might need him next? Perhaps Bashar al-Assad, Kim Jong-un and Donald Trump should give him a tinkle-tankle for a bit of a chit-chat.

http://thesteepletimes.com/the-fog/not-so-bright-clarence-mitchell/