Poledancing on while Miller gets emotionally detached

It's not all over. Johnson might still have had dodgy relations with an American entrepreneuse (or is it entreprenx)

Fury as decision on police inquiry into PM shelved until after election

Labour ‘shocked’ as police watchdog freezes investigation into Jennifer Arcuri scandal

reports the Observer:

Jon Trickett, shadow Cabinet Office minister, said: “This is incredible. It’s a suppression of information which the public is entitled to have. Given the fact we’re in a general election there should be maximum transparency.” He added. “This decision must be reversed immediately.” ...Caroline Pidgeon, a Lib Dem member of the London assembly’s oversight committee, said the delay raised the possibility of Downing Street contact with the IOPC before its decision. “It raises questions over how independent the IOPC really is and whether the prime minister’s lawyers have been exerting undue pressure,” she said.

The usual legs (sic) are added:

The news follows a chaotic week for Johnson, the government and the Conservative party....Saturday’s latest Opinium poll for the Observer suggests the Tories’ rocky campaign start could already be doing damage to the party’s election prospects. 

Then some stuff for any nerds still reading (and a possible Chritsmas bonus for lawyers):

the IOPC decided to cite election “purdah”...Trickett said: “There can be no possible excuse for purdah in this case.”...Pidgeon added: “An independent agency shouldn’t be hiding behind purdah rules that may not even apply to it. This is absolutely in the public interest.”...Tom Copley, a Labour member of the assembly oversight committee, which has launched its own inquiry into allegations related to Johnson’s relationship with Arcuri, said: “If it is true that the IOPC is hiding behind purdah rules, then that would be outrageous...When asked, a Cabinet Office spokeswoman said she was “unable to confirm” if purdah rules applied to the IOPC...An IOPC spokesman admitted he was “not entirely sure” whether purdah rules applied

And, a balancing item nearly at the end:

“The IOPC strongly refutes claims published in the Observer. This matter has not been finalised. We have not delayed any announcements on the status of this referral. Our assessment of this matter is ongoing as we continue to collect information and seek legal advice.”

Elsewhere:

And then there were three: Remain tactical voting sites fail to agree

 

Two new campaigns launch – one led by Gina Miller, the other by the People’s Vote [and the third?] – but their analysis may only confuse voters 

 

The egregious G Miller, who has always seemed quite certain what 'the national interest' is and what 'Parliamentary democracy' means said:

 

“What is going to upset a lot of parties is that we have no emotional attachment. This is going to be driven by the data  

Is that why the Observer worries that voters will be connfused? They need strong simple emotional messages after all.  Miller is allied with data dark artiste N Smith, she of the MPR Method Tendency:

We are a data-driven campaign, and we’ve used the latest and best seat-level data to make recommendations. High-quality data is expensive and understanding it is extremely time-consuming, requiring hard work from a committed team.

Why dont we let Miller and Smith do all the hard work and then just tell the rest of us simpletons who to support?