A Brexit campaigner has reported that Vote Leave cheated in the 2016 election by over-spending. However, the Prime Minister’s political secretary states the accusations are factually incorrect and misleading and revealed the accuser as homosexual.
A whistle-blower, who maintains he was outed as a homosexual by the Prime Minister’s political secretary in a fight over cheating allegations in the Brexit campaign, has maintained that the EU Referendum wasn’t legitimate.
In a discussion, Shahmir Sanni, who helped manage the BeLeave offshoot campaign, stated that people have been lied to, continuing that he knows that Vote Leave cheated.
He stated that leaving the European Union, he agreed with. However, he doesn’t agree with losing what it purports to be British in that process, losing what it means to follow the rules, losing what it means to be quite literally a functioning government.
Theresa May’s political secretary Stephen Parkinson has been blamed for outing Sanni after he was invited to answer to allegations of deception by Brexiteers and Stephen Parkinson states the two had been in a relationship for 18-months, which he later suggests distorted his judgement of events.
Channel 4 News can further reveal that Shahmir Sanni went to the Electoral Commission with two other pro-Brexit campaigning friends with their evidence.
They informed the Commission in detail why they believe Vote Leave violated the law throughout the Referendum and surpassed the legal spending limits.
Their lawyers gave the Commission signed statements from the three whistle-blowers and Channel 4 News has seen a copy of the 46-page report prepared by two top QCs, and three thick ring-binders of supporting reports.
The deception dispute centres around the links between Vote Leave and third-party campaign group BeLeave.
Under election laws, Vote Leave was only permitted to spend £7 million on its campaign. However, there were scores of other separate campaign groups who could each spend up to £700,000, if they registered as authorised members.
Nevertheless, spending by each of these groups had to remain really independent, and not governed by, the principal assigned campaigns.
Sanni states he was originally a Vote Leave outreach volunteer. However, he maintained Stephen Parkinson then assigned him to another Brexit group called BeLeave, where he worked with the group’s founder, Darren Grimes.
BeLeave’s headquarters were inside the Vote Leave headquarters and Darren Grimes was photographed holding a Vote Leave banner on the day of the Election and Sanni states that he and Darren Grimes always reported to Stephen Parkinson.
There was no time where anything BeLeave did that didn’t go through Stephen Parkinson. Any kind of article that Sanni posted or an editorial that Sanni wrote, he would run it through Stephen Parkinson and Sanni would ask if it was all right.
This was after they became a separate organisation and Sanni had sent Stephen Parkinson a draft of his speech, and he said ‘Hey, what do you think?’ and collectively, they allege they acted hand in glove with Stephen Parkinson.
In the last ten days of the campaign, Vote Leave donated a total of £625,000 to Grimes, who was listed as an authorised member and the contributions went straight to Canadian data firm Aggregate IQ (AIQ).
Sanni claims that Grimes was not really independent of Vote Leave and was not in control of how the funds were used and he maintains Grimes and BeLeave were used by Vote Leave to get around limits on how much they could legitimately use.
If correct, they could have overspent by about ten percent. Furthermore, there have been many connections between AIQ and Cambridge Analytica’s parent company SCL.
Talking about the donation, Sanni stated that when Darren informed him that it was nearly £700,000, the first thing Sanni asked was, okay so can I get some of my travel fees refunded, reimbursed?
Sanni wasn’t at work and he had only just come out of graduation and he was volunteering. Consequently, Sanni asked for money and Darren responded that he didn’t think they could and the only way for them to get it was if they gave it to AIQ, which Sanni thought was a little odd.
Questioned whether they could have declined to use the money on AIQ, Sanni stated that they didn’t ever feel like they had that level of power and that they never felt like they had authority over the or, over the organisation itself.
They were elected duties but in the terms of that kind of money, they never had a say over that. They never had power over that.
The outcome, they used BeLeave to over-spend, and not simply by a tiny amount, nearly two-thirds of a million pounds makes all the difference and it wasn’t legal.
They stated that it wasn’t coordinated, but it was and therefore the notion that the campaign was legal is misleading.
Stephen Parkinson issued a personal statement:
“I have seen the statements issued by Shahmir and his lawyers, and am saddened by them. They are factually incorrect and misleading. My statement to Channel 4 News and The Observer was issued in my personal capacity and was solely a response to the serious and untrue allegations made against me by Shahmir, Chris Wylie, and others.
“It would be surprising if Shahmir, Mr Wylie, or those advising them thought I would be able to defend myself against those allegations without revealing my relationship with Shahmir. Sadly, the allegations they have chosen to make are so serious that I have been compelled to do so. I cannot see how our relationship, which was ongoing at the time of the referendum and which is a material fact in the allegations being made, could have remained private once Shahmir decided to publicise his false claims in this way.
“The matters raised in tonight’s Channel 4 News programme are already with the Electoral Commission.
“At the relevant time during the referendum period, the Commission advised Vote Leave that it was permissible to make a donation in the way it proposed to do to BeLeave.
“Twice since the referendum, the Commission has investigated this matter, and twice it has found no evidence of wrongdoing. A third investigation into the same issue is currently taking place.
“The Electoral Commission has not contacted me in relation to any of these inquiries, but I will, of course, be happy to assist them if they wish me to do so.
“I firmly deny the allegations in the programme. I had no responsibility for digital campaigning or donations on the Vote Leave campaign, and am confident that I stayed within the law and strict spending rules at all times.”
A solicitor for Vote Leave said: “Vote Leave has twice been cleared on this matter by the Electoral Commission. There are a number of new accusations and allegations being made in what you have sent us. While many of them seem irrelevant or trivial, some are serious and potentially damaging to the reputations of those caught up in those allegations. As has been the case throughout, Vote Leave is obligated to review – to the extent it can after this long elapsed period since the referendum – all such allegations and is doing so. We will as appropriate share any relevant findings with the Electoral Commission, again as we have always done.”
Lawyers for Aggregate IQ said: “Aggregate IQ is a digital advertising, web and software development company based in Canada. It is and has always been 100 percent Canadian owned and operated. Aggregate IQ has never entered into a contract with Cambridge Analytica. Aggregate IQ works in full compliance with all legal and regulatory requirements in all jurisdictions where it operates. It has never knowingly been involved in any illegal activity.
“All work Aggregate IQ does for each client is kept separate. The services carried out by Aggregate IQ for Vote Leave were in accordance with the instructions of Vote Leave. The services carried out for BeLeave were in accordance with the instructions of BeLeave. The accounts were kept separate at all times and there was no overlap or merging in any way.”
Darren Grimes denies all the allegations, however, shouldn’t the police be examining the Tory party over the £700,000 benefaction, exploitation and embezzlement?
Some people might be all right with this but do we simply sit back and do nothing rather than addressing the distortions and dishonesty?
This sort of deception should come with a prison punishment for all those that have been shown to have lied throughout the campaigning in the elections or votes because it’s gaining an advantage through deception and until the perpetrators pay a personal price it will continue and losing their position is no deterrent.
There is no example that has been set that a specific level of electoral deception is acceptable and there should be prison time for people that intentionally grab the reins of control illegally.
I really feel sorry for this lad. He’s had to take safety precautions for his family in Pakistan because of the Tories outing him.
The government has attempted to make this all about Shahmir Sanni and his homosexual involvement as opposed to the information that was presented. They outed him and made him feel like he was a vile person because the snobbish fools had to cover their own butt.
The Tories actually are the most obnoxious people and what a farce this has become and they’re always bungling something or another. However, this time they should be allowed to flounder in their own faeces.