(or maybe he was waving it around while ranting, Kuenssberg doesn't bother to say):
Laura Kuenssberg ✔
@bbclaurak
1. No 10 source: We think the Supreme Court is wrong and has made a serious mistake in extending its reach to these political matters."
2. Source goes on... "Further, the Supreme Court has made it clear that its reasons are connected to the Parliamentary disputes over, and timetable for, leaving the European Union. We think this is a further serious mistake. "
3. No 10 - "We think this is a further serious mistake. We will study the judgement carefully to consider how we can best respond in these unique circumstances. As always the government will respect the law and comply with the courts.
"No. 10 source" is widely believed to be code for Cummings himself, and the attitude in his earlier tweet I posted above would seem to bear this out.
Kuenssberg is roundly (and rightly) being taken to task in the replies for serving as the stenographer for this "source" and offering no journalistic comment, context or identification of the source of these scurrilous rabble-rousing sore-loser ravings that will no doubt play well with the base. For example, the first reply:
jimexplore
@jimexplore
Do you do much other than amplify anonymous government soundbites? Ask them to go on the record or refuse to repeat it. We need proper journalism, not just parroting. These are not 'scoops'. Impartiality is more important than access.
This really hits home. Without her elite insider contacts list, Kuenssberg has nothing, and is an utterly crap "journalist", really more of a propagandist. I may watch the BBC news tonight for the first time in ages, to watch her squirm, if nothing else.