And, by Christ, we've seen the Tories chopping onions up to create the desired liberal effect in the last few days. They are actually now seem confident enough that they can spin the cops into soft-pedalling the Leaky Galley investigation! It's working!
For all of the attack on 'Labour spin' over the past decade or so, this weekend has given us a master-class in the creative running of a story.
When all of this started, like a lot of pro-Labour people, I was outraged by the lack of respect for Parliament. But the degree to which the Tories have been gaming it is beginning to look like the worst construction open to us may have some substance?
Damian Green's arrest, we've been told was a 'Stalinesque' spectacle carried out by 'terror police' - at Labour's behest and in 'contempt of Parlaimentary privilege' (and they totally called him a paedo!!?!?!).
The usual useful idiots have chimed in on cue.
These people aren't liberal. They aren't even close, and all of this nonsense about aynchunt liberties has been a huge smokescreen designed to take things back to the 1980s - when the cops were a good deal more circumspect around politically sensitive investigations.
And the latest? Well, why - in this fawning 'do you have a message for the nation' interview, is a Tory columnist from a Tory newspaper (the most uncomplicatedly Conserative newspaper that has taken no steps to conceal it's role as a political instrument to the party) asked David Davis.... (paraphrasing)
"Mr Davis, after this awful anti-democratic spectacle, surely the NuLieBoreNazi terror police will now not have the audacity to ask someone as squeaky as yourself any impertinent questions"
....to which Davis (now mysteriously transmogrified into 'friends of Davis') actually feels emboldened to reply (again, paraphrasing)
"Yeah! And if they do, I'll tell 'em, 'you ain't getting nuffink out of me copper! I know my rights!'"
(Do read it - it really isn't very far off). Money quote:
"Of course, it would be a rather dim copper who decided to gift the Tories a chance to turn Davis into even more of a civil liberties martyr."
Waugh's story in The Standard reeks of a put-up job. Why the suprise at the likelihood that the Rozzers may want a word with the former Shadow Home Secretary? Why is he discussing it and getting his answers in early? Note more cut-out 'liberal' outrage by the way:
"I have to say in all my four and a half years as Shadow Home Secretary, it is something of a novelty to hear police speculate about who they intend to question next..."
Because it is not out of the question that, in his former job, he knew Mr Galley's identity, is it? Correct me if I'm wrong here?
And it is not out of the question that he may have wished to use Mr Galley's ability to 'find' all sorts of awkward things? Again, do tell me if I've missed summink here?
Davis is - pre-emptively - saying that he will not answer questions because it would violate his 'Parliamentary Privilege'. Balls.
The cops may - and I stress, MAY have reason to beleive that Mr Davis commissioned the crime that Mr Galley stands accused of. The public interest defence on material that is widely acknowledged be be primarily embarrassment material is non-existent.
You watch over the next few days. Watch the useful idiots line up behind this rubbish. But remember, if it turns out that more than one Conservative frontbencher was actively soliciting Mr Galley to find politically embarrasing materials in the Home Office in order to pass them on, we are then in very serious territory.
Perhaps Mr Davis audacity here isn't a confidence that the papers will help him avoid answering these questions, but the worry that Plod won't play the game? Either way, the stakes are now somewhat higher than a few Tory frontbenchers' careers if the line of enquiry that the police seem to be following have any substance.
In the meantime Mr Davies, you should co-operate with the police fully, no matter what your stooges on The Standard think you should be allowed to get away with.