[Liam-]

[Crimson Dynamo]

"I know it’s quite rightly making quite a splash."

[Zizu]

Byline expose

Part 5

https://bylinetimes.com/2023/07/28/m...s-and-the-bbc/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[jet]

Originally Posted by Zizu

Byline expose

Part 5

https://bylinetimes.com/2023/07/28/m...s-and-the-bbc/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Part 67 coming soon!!!
Give us more money!

[The Slim Reaper]

Originally Posted by jet

Part 67 coming soon!!!
Give us more money!

Who knew that the Byline times would expose themselves (sorry Dan), to financial ruin, in order to make money. that's some con they're running.

[Crimson Dynamo]

F me part 5 and no one cares except this 2 man hard left blog



🤡

[Zizu]

Interesting !!!

https://youtu.be/HJJb-DozMR4


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[hijaxers]

Originally Posted by Zizu

Interesting !!!

https://youtu.be/HJJb-DozMR4


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Not really , repetition from same tools.

[Crimson Dynamo]

its not

[Liam-]

It just goes to show how hypocritical these rags are, knowing they’re actively protecting someone accused of awful, heinous, sexually criminal things, while trying to ruin other peoples lives and careers and targeting organisations with accusations of the things they’re doing themselves, absolute shambles

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Liam-

It just goes to show how hypocritical these rags are, knowing they’re actively protecting someone accused of awful, heinous, sexually criminal things, while trying to ruin other peoples lives and careers and targeting organisations with accusations of the things they’re doing themselves, absolute shambles

why haven't the left leaning papers picked it up do you suppose?

[The Slim Reaper]

I don't like Dan Wooton, but funny how Liam ran Scofield's paedophile ring for him.

[jet]

Seen this posted elsewhere taken from a site called ‘Votewatch’, which the poster credits as a reputable source….

IS THE BYLINE TIMES A CREDIBLE AND RELIABLE NEWS OUTLET?

The short answer is no. The Byline Times has a history of printing false information and politically-motivated smear pieces.
More concerningly, the Byline Times has been successfully sued multiple times, including on one occasion for publishing false information relating to sexual abuse allegations.
In 2017, regulatory body Impress, of which the Byline Times was a member, ruled that its journalists had lied when reporting about allegations related to former Prime Minister Edward Heath, with Byline Times being forced to pay compensation and then ultimately deciding to abandon Impress and thus become unregulated.

The site’s owner, Peter Jukes, is a former Labour member who frequently engages in online trolling and attacks against people whom he disagrees with politically, using Byline Times to produce propaganda, often proven to contain demonstrably false information, to attack his critics.
Mr Jukes himself has been accused of sexual impropriety, with some of the allegations first being published by Politicalite. In retaliation, two years ago Jukes launched a crowdfunder, claiming that he would use all of the money raised to sue Politicalite and anyone involved in publishing the story containing the allegations made against him – including the editor of VoteWatch, yours truly.
Jukes raised over £60,000 from his followers on social media. To date, however, none of the people whom Jukes mentioned in his crowdfunder have ever been sued. Neither Jukes nor the law firm he uses (with one of the senior lawyers at the company being his close friend) have filed any legal action against any of the individuals. The Byline Times and Peter Jukes have also failed to make donors aware of this, have not disclosed what the money was spent on, and have not offered any of the donors refunds.

This is not the only example of Peter Jukes, a well-known conspiracy theorist, using his website and political sensationalism on social media to mislead donors – as VoteWatch will reveal in an exclusive next week.
Furthermore, the Byline Times has accepted large donations from millionaires linked to antisemitism and from anti-west conspiracy theorists based in China.

Recently, one of the Byline Times’ most well-known journalists was found to have been publishing demonstrably false information to demonise Israel, before being slammed for tweeting racist and xenophobic comments about Prime Minister Rishi Sunak.
The Byline Times appears not to employ any fact-checkers and has been caught printing false information throughout its existence – always targeting Conservatives and the right-wing with demonstrably lies. Recent examples include a fake ‘investigation’ relating to Priti Patel.
In fact, Jukes and the Byline Times have been embroiled in a string of scandals including links to antisemites, and the publication of fake news, including repeatedly printing disinformation about a ‘pedophile ring’ that was later proven to not have existed.

[The Slim Reaper]

Dan Wooton is yet to deny any of the charges, or deny that he and Martin Branning are the same people. Let's see if he is willing to do what any of us on here would do if we were falsely hit with these claims - deny them. The only reason he wouldn't is because his lawyers have very clearly told him not to. But who knows what the reason for that is...

[The Slim Reaper]

Originally Posted by jet

Seen this posted elsewhere taken from a site called ‘Votewatch’, which the poster credits as a reputable source….

IS THE BYLINE TIMES A CREDIBLE AND RELIABLE NEWS OUTLET?

The short answer is no. The Byline Times has a history of printing false information and politically-motivated smear pieces.
More concerningly, the Byline Times has been successfully sued multiple times, including on one occasion for publishing false information relating to sexual abuse allegations.
In 2017, regulatory body Impress, of which the Byline Times was a member, ruled that its journalists had lied when reporting about allegations related to former Prime Minister Edward Heath, with Byline Times being forced to pay compensation and then ultimately deciding to abandon Impress and thus become unregulated.

The site’s owner, Peter Jukes, is a former Labour member who frequently engages in online trolling and attacks against people whom he disagrees with politically, using Byline Times to produce propaganda, often proven to contain demonstrably false information, to attack his critics.
Mr Jukes himself has been accused of sexual impropriety, with some of the allegations first being published by Politicalite. In retaliation, two years ago Jukes launched a crowdfunder, claiming that he would use all of the money raised to sue Politicalite and anyone involved in publishing the story containing the allegations made against him – including the editor of VoteWatch, yours truly.
Jukes raised over £60,000 from his followers on social media. To date, however, none of the people whom Jukes mentioned in his crowdfunder have ever been sued. Neither Jukes nor the law firm he uses (with one of the senior lawyers at the company being his close friend) have filed any legal action against any of the individuals. The Byline Times and Peter Jukes have also failed to make donors aware of this, have not disclosed what the money was spent on, and have not offered any of the donors refunds.

This is not the only example of Peter Jukes, a well-known conspiracy theorist, using his website and political sensationalism on social media to mislead donors – as VoteWatch will reveal in an exclusive next week.
Furthermore, the Byline Times has accepted large donations from millionaires linked to antisemitism and from anti-west conspiracy theorists based in China.

Recently, one of the Byline Times’ most well-known journalists was found to have been publishing demonstrably false information to demonise Israel, before being slammed for tweeting racist and xenophobic comments about Prime Minister Rishi Sunak.
The Byline Times appears not to employ any fact-checkers and has been caught printing false information throughout its existence – always targeting Conservatives and the right-wing with demonstrably lies. Recent examples include a fake ‘investigation’ relating to Priti Patel.
In fact, Jukes and the Byline Times have been embroiled in a string of scandals including links to antisemites, and the publication of fake news, including repeatedly printing disinformation about a ‘pedophile ring’ that was later proven to not have existed.

Post the link, my brother.

[Zizu]

Originally Posted by jet

Seen this posted elsewhere taken from a site called ‘Votewatch’, which the poster credits as a reputable source….

IS THE BYLINE TIMES A CREDIBLE AND RELIABLE NEWS OUTLET?

The short answer is no. The Byline Times has a history of printing false information and politically-motivated smear pieces.
More concerningly, the Byline Times has been successfully sued multiple times, including on one occasion for publishing false information relating to sexual abuse allegations.
In 2017, regulatory body Impress, of which the Byline Times was a member, ruled that its journalists had lied when reporting about allegations related to former Prime Minister Edward Heath, with Byline Times being forced to pay compensation and then ultimately deciding to abandon Impress and thus become unregulated.

The site’s owner, Peter Jukes, is a former Labour member who frequently engages in online trolling and attacks against people whom he disagrees with politically, using Byline Times to produce propaganda, often proven to contain demonstrably false information, to attack his critics.
Mr Jukes himself has been accused of sexual impropriety, with some of the allegations first being published by Politicalite. In retaliation, two years ago Jukes launched a crowdfunder, claiming that he would use all of the money raised to sue Politicalite and anyone involved in publishing the story containing the allegations made against him – including the editor of VoteWatch, yours truly.
Jukes raised over £60,000 from his followers on social media. To date, however, none of the people whom Jukes mentioned in his crowdfunder have ever been sued. Neither Jukes nor the law firm he uses (with one of the senior lawyers at the company being his close friend) have filed any legal action against any of the individuals. The Byline Times and Peter Jukes have also failed to make donors aware of this, have not disclosed what the money was spent on, and have not offered any of the donors refunds.

This is not the only example of Peter Jukes, a well-known conspiracy theorist, using his website and political sensationalism on social media to mislead donors – as VoteWatch will reveal in an exclusive next week.
Furthermore, the Byline Times has accepted large donations from millionaires linked to antisemitism and from anti-west conspiracy theorists based in China.

Recently, one of the Byline Times’ most well-known journalists was found to have been publishing demonstrably false information to demonise Israel, before being slammed for tweeting racist and xenophobic comments about Prime Minister Rishi Sunak.
The Byline Times appears not to employ any fact-checkers and has been caught printing false information throughout its existence – always targeting Conservatives and the right-wing with demonstrably lies. Recent examples include a fake ‘investigation’ relating to Priti Patel.
In fact, Jukes and the Byline Times have been embroiled in a string of scandals including links to antisemites, and the publication of fake news, including repeatedly printing disinformation about a ‘pedophile ring’ that was later proven to not have existed.

I’ve only seen good reports / reviews of Byline Times

For example





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Crimson Dynamo]

from that website

BBC – Bias and Credibility

HIGH

[arista]

Slim

Dan is back 9PM Monday Live

[The Slim Reaper]

Arista

Ok.

[Zizu]

It’s odd that Dan Wootton gives about 20 minutes of his nightly show to highlighting the Farage debacle yet Farage has yet to go public and support Wootton in his time of need


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Crimson Dynamo]

"in his time of need"

[Zizu]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

"in his time of need"

First page of Google isn’t a good look ..








Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[arista]

"First page of Google"


Sure
but it is still Not on UK TV News.

[Zizu]

Originally Posted by arista

"First page of Google"


Sure
but it is still Not on UK TV News.

It’s still probably the most viewed homepage seen everyday in the world


Are you both suggesting that it isn’t damaging to Wootton ?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[arista]

Originally Posted by Zizu

It’s still probably the most viewed homepage seen everyday in the world


Are you both suggesting that it isn’t damaging to Wootton ?

If he has Raped a lad
it would go Front page.

It has not.

If it becomes Main TV news
then I would expect,
His 9PM show to go.

Nothing has changed
it is the same Website
Every other day.


For some Reason, it is not damaging him enough to
stop his Live show tonight at 9PM

Until he is off air
I do not think it is damaging