I know people regard me as an angry voice and yes I am here far more than I would like to be. But the argument I am having with @bondegezou is symptomatic.
Simply put 40 to 50 years ago a household could live on the wage of one earner. Policy really hasnt changed that much over that time and now its common for households with 2 full time earners to be struggling. The argument from people like him is oh we need to keep on doing what we are doing, this was also the argument for remaining.
Sadly for most people in this country what we are doing really isnt working for them and year by year they feel poorer and poorer and struggle more and more while the upper echelons of society seem to get richer and richer.
Things need to change, the brexit vote was a result of this, my diatribe about doing essentials is part of this. Will they work? I really have no idea. However for a lot of this country just carrying on with the same old same old is not an option as all they see from past experience is they will slowly have less and less.
The fact that Brexit was being promoted by precisely the same people (Thatcherite ideologues backed by footloose capital) who had engineered the whole rich get richer while everyone else struggles shenanigans in the first place didn't seem to register with people.
However, not just by those. It was also pushed by those on the far-left as well. Hence the views of a certain J Corbyn when it came to such matters.
"The police must investigate No. 10 parties!" - The parties are investigated and BJ and others get fined. "Look at the good job the police did! And there's more to come!" - The police don't issue more fines to BJ, but others do get them. "The police have done a horrid job! The top people have got away with it!"
Perhaps the underlings who got done are not a victim of some stitch-up by No. 10 and the police, but victims of the get-Boris campaign?
Then add in Beergate: "The police have investigated! There's nothing to see here! It's all a put-up job by the Mail!" - It turns out that the Labour Party had lied. "Why does it matter? The police investigated?" - More evidence comes out. "Why does it matter? The police investigated? And the Mail's awful!" - The investigation is reopened. "It's a waste of police time to investigate this!"
etc, etc.
You do know that is quite literally the Wail's position reversed. Attacks Labour's push on this - DON'T THEY KNOW THERE'S A WAR ON. Then 10 days of stories piling pressure on the police to do Starmer - one front page literally being TORY PRESSURE TO MAKE THE POLICE ACT. Then Starmer says "I'll quit" and they complain he's trying to pressure the police, then when newss breaks about the Met whitewhash its "WHAT A WASTE OF MONEY".
So you are right, but you're talking about the Tories.
Remember there is a very clear difference between the two sides. We have reams of evidence about Boris and Number 10 breaking the law over and over and over. She prepares a brutal report. Someone leans on the Met to provide cover. Which they do. With a narrow field of investigation. So that now the Gray report will come out and tear Number 10 apart the police have already found Him innocent by simply not investigating the hideous reportage and photos we're about to get. The establishment always looks after its own - if you are a civil servant with a gong you get protected whilst all your staff carry the can.#
If you want to gloat feel free. Not a good luck for the pro-establishment party as people starve.
I don't care if it's the Mail's position, or the opposite of it.
You were in denial over Beergate. I have no idea if Starmer or anyone else there will get a fine - the law appears to be so poorly written that pretty much anything could result. But it was clear the moment that it turned out that Labour had not told the truth about who had been there that the police investigation had not been thorough.
it would be good for you to be consistent.
I am being consistent. There was a prime fascie case against Johnson which the Met now appear to have investigated primarily to sweep under the carpet. There was not one against Starmer, and the "evidence" was not sufficient to suggest the law had been broken.
That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate.
I still think there is nothing to see and expect nobody to get fined. Buit if I'm wrong they fall on their sword and leave the stage. Which is more than can be said for Bonzo and his Clown Car circus. We're going to get the Gray report. Reams of it. Photos and all. And people like you will say "nothing to see here" for the various events the Met haven't even investigated because no fines have been issued.
I'm quite happy with the consistency of my position. Which on all things is apply the rules equally.
I'm actually going to reply again and say that some of the stuff you've written above is rubbish.
"That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate."
Yeah, right. Even Starmer himself cannot say for sure whether he broke the law or not. I am therefore unsure how you can say there is nothing to investigate. Are you a bigger-brained lawyer than Starmer?
"And people like you will say "nothing to see here" "
LOL. No. *You* are the one saying 'nothing to see here' about Durham. See above.
RP is consistent here.
I believe Starmer and Rayner probably broke the letter of the law, and if the law is applied with rigour they must go simply because they said they would. Richard Holden and the Daily Mail and Telegraph railroaded Durham Constabulary into a highly politicised investigation. Based on how they dealt with Cummings the precedent had been set to walk away.
Johnson personally drove a coach and horses through the rules. The Met launched a token case against him. It now transpires that they didn't even look at his more egregious breaches, they ignored the Abba night at number 10! And Case they ignored completely. Mainly Juniors and Women were fined. Cressida Dick's last hurrah was another operational failure.
The Met intervention rather than allowing justice to be served has allowed Johnson to dodge the Gray Report and remain in office. It has worked out so well for him, it looks very like a conspiratorial whitewash. Even his greatest foe in Government was brought down by a cake!
Tory hacks are laughing and they will laugh louder when Starmer gets his Beergate comeuppance. The reality is Team Johnson has taken the rest of us for a ride. And what about his clandestine meeting with Sue Gray last month...?
On what basis have you determined the police didn’t do their job? That you didn’t like the outcome?
AIUI all we know about the ABBA event is that the Met didn’t recommend any FPNs. We don’t know that they ignored it?
The Met have confirmed that of the 5 events Johnson was known to have attended the police only investigated him personally for two (questionnaires issued for just the two events) including the cake event, which handily brought down Sunak.
Reports are that Juniors were obliging to Gray whereas Seniors and some politicians in general were not. I suspect Sunak was truthful.They did not expect the Gray Report to be hijacked and used as evidence for the prosecution.
I personally think that Johnson not being investigated is remarkable, but Case, with the evidence we have seen ourselves not getting an FPN is astonishing.
Big Dog is saved...by the less than lamented Cressida Dick!
Sounds like the conspiracy theorists are out in force. Next we will have Big Dog saved by an unholy cabal of the Police, Freemasons and MI5
Someone on pb has already invoked freemasonry (Thursday?)
"The police must investigate No. 10 parties!" - The parties are investigated and BJ and others get fined. "Look at the good job the police did! And there's more to come!" - The police don't issue more fines to BJ, but others do get them. "The police have done a horrid job! The top people have got away with it!"
Perhaps the underlings who got done are not a victim of some stitch-up by No. 10 and the police, but victims of the get-Boris campaign?
Then add in Beergate: "The police have investigated! There's nothing to see here! It's all a put-up job by the Mail!" - It turns out that the Labour Party had lied. "Why does it matter? The police investigated?" - More evidence comes out. "Why does it matter? The police investigated? And the Mail's awful!" - The investigation is reopened. "It's a waste of police time to investigate this!"
etc, etc.
You do know that is quite literally the Wail's position reversed. Attacks Labour's push on this - DON'T THEY KNOW THERE'S A WAR ON. Then 10 days of stories piling pressure on the police to do Starmer - one front page literally being TORY PRESSURE TO MAKE THE POLICE ACT. Then Starmer says "I'll quit" and they complain he's trying to pressure the police, then when newss breaks about the Met whitewhash its "WHAT A WASTE OF MONEY".
So you are right, but you're talking about the Tories.
Remember there is a very clear difference between the two sides. We have reams of evidence about Boris and Number 10 breaking the law over and over and over. She prepares a brutal report. Someone leans on the Met to provide cover. Which they do. With a narrow field of investigation. So that now the Gray report will come out and tear Number 10 apart the police have already found Him innocent by simply not investigating the hideous reportage and photos we're about to get. The establishment always looks after its own - if you are a civil servant with a gong you get protected whilst all your staff carry the can.#
If you want to gloat feel free. Not a good luck for the pro-establishment party as people starve.
I don't care if it's the Mail's position, or the opposite of it.
You were in denial over Beergate. I have no idea if Starmer or anyone else there will get a fine - the law appears to be so poorly written that pretty much anything could result. But it was clear the moment that it turned out that Labour had not told the truth about who had been there that the police investigation had not been thorough.
it would be good for you to be consistent.
I am being consistent. There was a prime fascie case against Johnson which the Met now appear to have investigated primarily to sweep under the carpet. There was not one against Starmer, and the "evidence" was not sufficient to suggest the law had been broken.
That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate.
I still think there is nothing to see and expect nobody to get fined. Buit if I'm wrong they fall on their sword and leave the stage. Which is more than can be said for Bonzo and his Clown Car circus. We're going to get the Gray report. Reams of it. Photos and all. And people like you will say "nothing to see here" for the various events the Met haven't even investigated because no fines have been issued.
I'm quite happy with the consistency of my position. Which on all things is apply the rules equally.
I'm actually going to reply again and say that some of the stuff you've written above is rubbish.
"That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate."
Yeah, right. Even Starmer himself cannot say for sure whether he broke the law or not. I am therefore unsure how you can say there is nothing to investigate. Are you a bigger-brained lawyer than Starmer?
"And people like you will say "nothing to see here" "
LOL. No. *You* are the one saying 'nothing to see here' about Durham. See above.
RP is consistent here.
I believe Starmer and Rayner probably broke the letter of the law, and if the law is applied with rigour they must go simply because they said they would. Richard Holden and the Daily Mail and Telegraph railroaded Durham Constabulary into a highly politicised investigation. Based on how they dealt with Cummings the precedent had been set to walk away.
Johnson personally drove a coach and horses through the rules. The Met launched a token case against him. It now transpires that they didn't even look at his more egregious breaches, they ignored the Abba night at number 10! And Case they ignored completely. Mainly Juniors and Women were fined. Cressida Dick's last hurrah was another operational failure.
The Met intervention rather than allowing justice to be served has allowed Johnson to dodge the Gray Report and remain in office. It has worked out so well for him, it looks very like a conspiratorial whitewash. Even his greatest foe in Government was brought down by a cake!
Tory hacks are laughing and they will laugh louder when Starmer gets his Beergate comeuppance. The reality is Team Johnson has taken the rest of us for a ride. And what about his clandestine meeting with Sue Gray last month...?
On what basis have you determined the police didn’t do their job? That you didn’t like the outcome?
AIUI all we know about the ABBA event is that the Met didn’t recommend any FPNs. We don’t know that they ignored it?
The Met have confirmed that of the 5 events Johnson was known to have attended the police only investigated him personally for two (questionnaires issued for just the two events) including the cake event, which handily brought down Sunak.
Reports are that Juniors were obliging to Gray whereas Seniors and some politicians in general were not. I suspect Sunak was truthful.They did not expect the Gray Report to be hijacked and used as evidence for the prosecution.
I personally think that Johnson not being investigated is remarkable, but Case, with the evidence we have seen ourselves not getting an FPN is astonishing.
Big Dog is saved...by the less than lamented Cressida Dick!
I am more interested to know how issuing a few questionnaires and FPNs and looking at a few photos could take up a sufficient amount of staff time to cost £460,000.
They didn't even investigate properly, and most of the work had been done for them by Gray, so how on Earth could it come to that figure? That's the equivalent of hiring four full-time officers for a year.
12 officers for three months. Sounds about right.
As a tax payer I would have been happy to personally pay the postage to send Johnson the three questionnaires the Met inadvertently forgot to send him.
Andrew Bridgen has now declared Johnson has been given a clean bill of health, so all is good.
Looks like my McCormick bet will bust. He's a thousand votes behind so that means a recount but unless there is something systemic he won't overhaul Oz.
"The police must investigate No. 10 parties!" - The parties are investigated and BJ and others get fined. "Look at the good job the police did! And there's more to come!" - The police don't issue more fines to BJ, but others do get them. "The police have done a horrid job! The top people have got away with it!"
Perhaps the underlings who got done are not a victim of some stitch-up by No. 10 and the police, but victims of the get-Boris campaign?
Then add in Beergate: "The police have investigated! There's nothing to see here! It's all a put-up job by the Mail!" - It turns out that the Labour Party had lied. "Why does it matter? The police investigated?" - More evidence comes out. "Why does it matter? The police investigated? And the Mail's awful!" - The investigation is reopened. "It's a waste of police time to investigate this!"
etc, etc.
You do know that is quite literally the Wail's position reversed. Attacks Labour's push on this - DON'T THEY KNOW THERE'S A WAR ON. Then 10 days of stories piling pressure on the police to do Starmer - one front page literally being TORY PRESSURE TO MAKE THE POLICE ACT. Then Starmer says "I'll quit" and they complain he's trying to pressure the police, then when newss breaks about the Met whitewhash its "WHAT A WASTE OF MONEY".
So you are right, but you're talking about the Tories.
Remember there is a very clear difference between the two sides. We have reams of evidence about Boris and Number 10 breaking the law over and over and over. She prepares a brutal report. Someone leans on the Met to provide cover. Which they do. With a narrow field of investigation. So that now the Gray report will come out and tear Number 10 apart the police have already found Him innocent by simply not investigating the hideous reportage and photos we're about to get. The establishment always looks after its own - if you are a civil servant with a gong you get protected whilst all your staff carry the can.#
If you want to gloat feel free. Not a good luck for the pro-establishment party as people starve.
I don't care if it's the Mail's position, or the opposite of it.
You were in denial over Beergate. I have no idea if Starmer or anyone else there will get a fine - the law appears to be so poorly written that pretty much anything could result. But it was clear the moment that it turned out that Labour had not told the truth about who had been there that the police investigation had not been thorough.
it would be good for you to be consistent.
I am being consistent. There was a prime fascie case against Johnson which the Met now appear to have investigated primarily to sweep under the carpet. There was not one against Starmer, and the "evidence" was not sufficient to suggest the law had been broken.
That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate.
I still think there is nothing to see and expect nobody to get fined. Buit if I'm wrong they fall on their sword and leave the stage. Which is more than can be said for Bonzo and his Clown Car circus. We're going to get the Gray report. Reams of it. Photos and all. And people like you will say "nothing to see here" for the various events the Met haven't even investigated because no fines have been issued.
I'm quite happy with the consistency of my position. Which on all things is apply the rules equally.
I'm actually going to reply again and say that some of the stuff you've written above is rubbish.
"That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate."
Yeah, right. Even Starmer himself cannot say for sure whether he broke the law or not. I am therefore unsure how you can say there is nothing to investigate. Are you a bigger-brained lawyer than Starmer?
"And people like you will say "nothing to see here" "
LOL. No. *You* are the one saying 'nothing to see here' about Durham. See above.
RP is consistent here.
I believe Starmer and Rayner probably broke the letter of the law, and if the law is applied with rigour they must go simply because they said they would. Richard Holden and the Daily Mail and Telegraph railroaded Durham Constabulary into a highly politicised investigation. Based on how they dealt with Cummings the precedent had been set to walk away.
Johnson personally drove a coach and horses through the rules. The Met launched a token case against him. It now transpires that they didn't even look at his more egregious breaches, they ignored the Abba night at number 10! And Case they ignored completely. Mainly Juniors and Women were fined. Cressida Dick's last hurrah was another operational failure.
The Met intervention rather than allowing justice to be served has allowed Johnson to dodge the Gray Report and remain in office. It has worked out so well for him, it looks very like a conspiratorial whitewash. Even his greatest foe in Government was brought down by a cake!
Tory hacks are laughing and they will laugh louder when Starmer gets his Beergate comeuppance. The reality is Team Johnson has taken the rest of us for a ride. And what about his clandestine meeting with Sue Gray last month...?
On what basis have you determined the police didn’t do their job? That you didn’t like the outcome?
AIUI all we know about the ABBA event is that the Met didn’t recommend any FPNs. We don’t know that they ignored it?
The Met have confirmed that of the 5 events Johnson was known to have attended the police only investigated him personally for two (questionnaires issued for just the two events) including the cake event, which handily brought down Sunak.
Reports are that Juniors were obliging to Gray whereas Seniors and some politicians in general were not. I suspect Sunak was truthful.They did not expect the Gray Report to be hijacked and used as evidence for the prosecution.
I personally think that Johnson not being investigated is remarkable, but Case, with the evidence we have seen ourselves not getting an FPN is astonishing.
Big Dog is saved...by the less than lamented Cressida Dick!
I am more interested to know how issuing a few questionnaires and FPNs and looking at a few photos could take up a sufficient amount of staff time to cost £460,000.
They didn't even investigate properly, and most of the work had been done for them by Gray, so how on Earth could it come to that figure? That's the equivalent of hiring four full-time officers for a year.
I imagine that’s the fully loaded cost.
12 officers for 3 months = 4 for a year.
Inclusive of overhead of office space, HR, risk management, secretarial support etc etc
"The police must investigate No. 10 parties!" - The parties are investigated and BJ and others get fined. "Look at the good job the police did! And there's more to come!" - The police don't issue more fines to BJ, but others do get them. "The police have done a horrid job! The top people have got away with it!"
Perhaps the underlings who got done are not a victim of some stitch-up by No. 10 and the police, but victims of the get-Boris campaign?
Then add in Beergate: "The police have investigated! There's nothing to see here! It's all a put-up job by the Mail!" - It turns out that the Labour Party had lied. "Why does it matter? The police investigated?" - More evidence comes out. "Why does it matter? The police investigated? And the Mail's awful!" - The investigation is reopened. "It's a waste of police time to investigate this!"
etc, etc.
You do know that is quite literally the Wail's position reversed. Attacks Labour's push on this - DON'T THEY KNOW THERE'S A WAR ON. Then 10 days of stories piling pressure on the police to do Starmer - one front page literally being TORY PRESSURE TO MAKE THE POLICE ACT. Then Starmer says "I'll quit" and they complain he's trying to pressure the police, then when newss breaks about the Met whitewhash its "WHAT A WASTE OF MONEY".
So you are right, but you're talking about the Tories.
Remember there is a very clear difference between the two sides. We have reams of evidence about Boris and Number 10 breaking the law over and over and over. She prepares a brutal report. Someone leans on the Met to provide cover. Which they do. With a narrow field of investigation. So that now the Gray report will come out and tear Number 10 apart the police have already found Him innocent by simply not investigating the hideous reportage and photos we're about to get. The establishment always looks after its own - if you are a civil servant with a gong you get protected whilst all your staff carry the can.#
If you want to gloat feel free. Not a good luck for the pro-establishment party as people starve.
I don't care if it's the Mail's position, or the opposite of it.
You were in denial over Beergate. I have no idea if Starmer or anyone else there will get a fine - the law appears to be so poorly written that pretty much anything could result. But it was clear the moment that it turned out that Labour had not told the truth about who had been there that the police investigation had not been thorough.
it would be good for you to be consistent.
I am being consistent. There was a prime fascie case against Johnson which the Met now appear to have investigated primarily to sweep under the carpet. There was not one against Starmer, and the "evidence" was not sufficient to suggest the law had been broken.
That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate.
I still think there is nothing to see and expect nobody to get fined. Buit if I'm wrong they fall on their sword and leave the stage. Which is more than can be said for Bonzo and his Clown Car circus. We're going to get the Gray report. Reams of it. Photos and all. And people like you will say "nothing to see here" for the various events the Met haven't even investigated because no fines have been issued.
I'm quite happy with the consistency of my position. Which on all things is apply the rules equally.
I'm actually going to reply again and say that some of the stuff you've written above is rubbish.
"That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate."
Yeah, right. Even Starmer himself cannot say for sure whether he broke the law or not. I am therefore unsure how you can say there is nothing to investigate. Are you a bigger-brained lawyer than Starmer?
"And people like you will say "nothing to see here" "
LOL. No. *You* are the one saying 'nothing to see here' about Durham. See above.
RP is consistent here.
I believe Starmer and Rayner probably broke the letter of the law, and if the law is applied with rigour they must go simply because they said they would. Richard Holden and the Daily Mail and Telegraph railroaded Durham Constabulary into a highly politicised investigation. Based on how they dealt with Cummings the precedent had been set to walk away.
Johnson personally drove a coach and horses through the rules. The Met launched a token case against him. It now transpires that they didn't even look at his more egregious breaches, they ignored the Abba night at number 10! And Case they ignored completely. Mainly Juniors and Women were fined. Cressida Dick's last hurrah was another operational failure.
The Met intervention rather than allowing justice to be served has allowed Johnson to dodge the Gray Report and remain in office. It has worked out so well for him, it looks very like a conspiratorial whitewash. Even his greatest foe in Government was brought down by a cake!
Tory hacks are laughing and they will laugh louder when Starmer gets his Beergate comeuppance. The reality is Team Johnson has taken the rest of us for a ride. And what about his clandestine meeting with Sue Gray last month...?
On what basis have you determined the police didn’t do their job? That you didn’t like the outcome?
AIUI all we know about the ABBA event is that the Met didn’t recommend any FPNs. We don’t know that they ignored it?
I'm with @Mexicanpete. This has been a total establishment stitch-up to save the PM.
It stinks to high heaven.
Evidence please.
It'll come in time.
For a start, Johnson seems to have been taken at his lawyer's word that all these events he attended he considered to be work and therefore was allowed. But social events at work were not allowed. The only event he has been done for is one that is a joke - a cake turned up at the end of a meeting. The other events were massive piss-ups and we've seen some photo evidence and there's more to come no doubt now that only the kids and the women have actually been fined.
But, to be honest, what's the point anymore? I'm tired of it all. He's safe as houses until GE 2024.
Hopefully enough voters are as angry as I am and will not have forgotten by 2024.
"The police must investigate No. 10 parties!" - The parties are investigated and BJ and others get fined. "Look at the good job the police did! And there's more to come!" - The police don't issue more fines to BJ, but others do get them. "The police have done a horrid job! The top people have got away with it!"
Perhaps the underlings who got done are not a victim of some stitch-up by No. 10 and the police, but victims of the get-Boris campaign?
Then add in Beergate: "The police have investigated! There's nothing to see here! It's all a put-up job by the Mail!" - It turns out that the Labour Party had lied. "Why does it matter? The police investigated?" - More evidence comes out. "Why does it matter? The police investigated? And the Mail's awful!" - The investigation is reopened. "It's a waste of police time to investigate this!"
etc, etc.
You do know that is quite literally the Wail's position reversed. Attacks Labour's push on this - DON'T THEY KNOW THERE'S A WAR ON. Then 10 days of stories piling pressure on the police to do Starmer - one front page literally being TORY PRESSURE TO MAKE THE POLICE ACT. Then Starmer says "I'll quit" and they complain he's trying to pressure the police, then when newss breaks about the Met whitewhash its "WHAT A WASTE OF MONEY".
So you are right, but you're talking about the Tories.
Remember there is a very clear difference between the two sides. We have reams of evidence about Boris and Number 10 breaking the law over and over and over. She prepares a brutal report. Someone leans on the Met to provide cover. Which they do. With a narrow field of investigation. So that now the Gray report will come out and tear Number 10 apart the police have already found Him innocent by simply not investigating the hideous reportage and photos we're about to get. The establishment always looks after its own - if you are a civil servant with a gong you get protected whilst all your staff carry the can.#
If you want to gloat feel free. Not a good luck for the pro-establishment party as people starve.
I don't care if it's the Mail's position, or the opposite of it.
You were in denial over Beergate. I have no idea if Starmer or anyone else there will get a fine - the law appears to be so poorly written that pretty much anything could result. But it was clear the moment that it turned out that Labour had not told the truth about who had been there that the police investigation had not been thorough.
it would be good for you to be consistent.
I am being consistent. There was a prime fascie case against Johnson which the Met now appear to have investigated primarily to sweep under the carpet. There was not one against Starmer, and the "evidence" was not sufficient to suggest the law had been broken.
That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate.
I still think there is nothing to see and expect nobody to get fined. Buit if I'm wrong they fall on their sword and leave the stage. Which is more than can be said for Bonzo and his Clown Car circus. We're going to get the Gray report. Reams of it. Photos and all. And people like you will say "nothing to see here" for the various events the Met haven't even investigated because no fines have been issued.
I'm quite happy with the consistency of my position. Which on all things is apply the rules equally.
I'm actually going to reply again and say that some of the stuff you've written above is rubbish.
"That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate."
Yeah, right. Even Starmer himself cannot say for sure whether he broke the law or not. I am therefore unsure how you can say there is nothing to investigate. Are you a bigger-brained lawyer than Starmer?
"And people like you will say "nothing to see here" "
LOL. No. *You* are the one saying 'nothing to see here' about Durham. See above.
RP is consistent here.
I believe Starmer and Rayner probably broke the letter of the law, and if the law is applied with rigour they must go simply because they said they would. Richard Holden and the Daily Mail and Telegraph railroaded Durham Constabulary into a highly politicised investigation. Based on how they dealt with Cummings the precedent had been set to walk away.
Johnson personally drove a coach and horses through the rules. The Met launched a token case against him. It now transpires that they didn't even look at his more egregious breaches, they ignored the Abba night at number 10! And Case they ignored completely. Mainly Juniors and Women were fined. Cressida Dick's last hurrah was another operational failure.
The Met intervention rather than allowing justice to be served has allowed Johnson to dodge the Gray Report and remain in office. It has worked out so well for him, it looks very like a conspiratorial whitewash. Even his greatest foe in Government was brought down by a cake!
Tory hacks are laughing and they will laugh louder when Starmer gets his Beergate comeuppance. The reality is Team Johnson has taken the rest of us for a ride. And what about his clandestine meeting with Sue Gray last month...?
On what basis have you determined the police didn’t do their job? That you didn’t like the outcome?
AIUI all we know about the ABBA event is that the Met didn’t recommend any FPNs. We don’t know that they ignored it?
The Met have confirmed that of the 5 events Johnson was known to have attended the police only investigated him personally for two (questionnaires issued for just the two events) including the cake event, which handily brought down Sunak.
Reports are that Juniors were obliging to Gray whereas Seniors and some politicians in general were not. I suspect Sunak was truthful.They did not expect the Gray Report to be hijacked and used as evidence for the prosecution.
I personally think that Johnson not being investigated is remarkable, but Case, with the evidence we have seen ourselves not getting an FPN is astonishing.
Big Dog is saved...by the less than lamented Cressida Dick!
I am more interested to know how issuing a few questionnaires and FPNs and looking at a few photos could take up a sufficient amount of staff time to cost £460,000.
They didn't even investigate properly, and most of the work had been done for them by Gray, so how on Earth could it come to that figure? That's the equivalent of hiring four full-time officers for a year.
12 officers for three months. Sounds about right.
If 12 officers worked full time on looking at 250 bits of paper for three months, they need the sack.
"The police must investigate No. 10 parties!" - The parties are investigated and BJ and others get fined. "Look at the good job the police did! And there's more to come!" - The police don't issue more fines to BJ, but others do get them. "The police have done a horrid job! The top people have got away with it!"
Perhaps the underlings who got done are not a victim of some stitch-up by No. 10 and the police, but victims of the get-Boris campaign?
Then add in Beergate: "The police have investigated! There's nothing to see here! It's all a put-up job by the Mail!" - It turns out that the Labour Party had lied. "Why does it matter? The police investigated?" - More evidence comes out. "Why does it matter? The police investigated? And the Mail's awful!" - The investigation is reopened. "It's a waste of police time to investigate this!"
etc, etc.
You do know that is quite literally the Wail's position reversed. Attacks Labour's push on this - DON'T THEY KNOW THERE'S A WAR ON. Then 10 days of stories piling pressure on the police to do Starmer - one front page literally being TORY PRESSURE TO MAKE THE POLICE ACT. Then Starmer says "I'll quit" and they complain he's trying to pressure the police, then when newss breaks about the Met whitewhash its "WHAT A WASTE OF MONEY".
So you are right, but you're talking about the Tories.
Remember there is a very clear difference between the two sides. We have reams of evidence about Boris and Number 10 breaking the law over and over and over. She prepares a brutal report. Someone leans on the Met to provide cover. Which they do. With a narrow field of investigation. So that now the Gray report will come out and tear Number 10 apart the police have already found Him innocent by simply not investigating the hideous reportage and photos we're about to get. The establishment always looks after its own - if you are a civil servant with a gong you get protected whilst all your staff carry the can.#
If you want to gloat feel free. Not a good luck for the pro-establishment party as people starve.
I don't care if it's the Mail's position, or the opposite of it.
You were in denial over Beergate. I have no idea if Starmer or anyone else there will get a fine - the law appears to be so poorly written that pretty much anything could result. But it was clear the moment that it turned out that Labour had not told the truth about who had been there that the police investigation had not been thorough.
it would be good for you to be consistent.
I am being consistent. There was a prime fascie case against Johnson which the Met now appear to have investigated primarily to sweep under the carpet. There was not one against Starmer, and the "evidence" was not sufficient to suggest the law had been broken.
That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate.
I still think there is nothing to see and expect nobody to get fined. Buit if I'm wrong they fall on their sword and leave the stage. Which is more than can be said for Bonzo and his Clown Car circus. We're going to get the Gray report. Reams of it. Photos and all. And people like you will say "nothing to see here" for the various events the Met haven't even investigated because no fines have been issued.
I'm quite happy with the consistency of my position. Which on all things is apply the rules equally.
I'm actually going to reply again and say that some of the stuff you've written above is rubbish.
"That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate."
Yeah, right. Even Starmer himself cannot say for sure whether he broke the law or not. I am therefore unsure how you can say there is nothing to investigate. Are you a bigger-brained lawyer than Starmer?
"And people like you will say "nothing to see here" "
LOL. No. *You* are the one saying 'nothing to see here' about Durham. See above.
RP is consistent here.
I believe Starmer and Rayner probably broke the letter of the law, and if the law is applied with rigour they must go simply because they said they would. Richard Holden and the Daily Mail and Telegraph railroaded Durham Constabulary into a highly politicised investigation. Based on how they dealt with Cummings the precedent had been set to walk away.
Johnson personally drove a coach and horses through the rules. The Met launched a token case against him. It now transpires that they didn't even look at his more egregious breaches, they ignored the Abba night at number 10! And Case they ignored completely. Mainly Juniors and Women were fined. Cressida Dick's last hurrah was another operational failure.
The Met intervention rather than allowing justice to be served has allowed Johnson to dodge the Gray Report and remain in office. It has worked out so well for him, it looks very like a conspiratorial whitewash. Even his greatest foe in Government was brought down by a cake!
Tory hacks are laughing and they will laugh louder when Starmer gets his Beergate comeuppance. The reality is Team Johnson has taken the rest of us for a ride. And what about his clandestine meeting with Sue Gray last month...?
On what basis have you determined the police didn’t do their job? That you didn’t like the outcome?
AIUI all we know about the ABBA event is that the Met didn’t recommend any FPNs. We don’t know that they ignored it?
The Met have confirmed that of the 5 events Johnson was known to have attended the police only investigated him personally for two (questionnaires issued for just the two events) including the cake event, which handily brought down Sunak.
Reports are that Juniors were obliging to Gray whereas Seniors and some politicians in general were not. I suspect Sunak was truthful.They did not expect the Gray Report to be hijacked and used as evidence for the prosecution.
I personally think that Johnson not being investigated is remarkable, but Case, with the evidence we have seen ourselves not getting an FPN is astonishing.
Big Dog is saved...by the less than lamented Cressida Dick!
I am more interested to know how issuing a few questionnaires and FPNs and looking at a few photos could take up a sufficient amount of staff time to cost £460,000.
They didn't even investigate properly, and most of the work had been done for them by Gray, so how on Earth could it come to that figure? That's the equivalent of hiring four full-time officers for a year.
Just imagine how much more it would have cost had they actually investigated the events rather than just relying on Gray's report.
For those of us not cheering for Team Johnson our incredulity is off the scale.
"The police must investigate No. 10 parties!" - The parties are investigated and BJ and others get fined. "Look at the good job the police did! And there's more to come!" - The police don't issue more fines to BJ, but others do get them. "The police have done a horrid job! The top people have got away with it!"
Perhaps the underlings who got done are not a victim of some stitch-up by No. 10 and the police, but victims of the get-Boris campaign?
Then add in Beergate: "The police have investigated! There's nothing to see here! It's all a put-up job by the Mail!" - It turns out that the Labour Party had lied. "Why does it matter? The police investigated?" - More evidence comes out. "Why does it matter? The police investigated? And the Mail's awful!" - The investigation is reopened. "It's a waste of police time to investigate this!"
etc, etc.
You do know that is quite literally the Wail's position reversed. Attacks Labour's push on this - DON'T THEY KNOW THERE'S A WAR ON. Then 10 days of stories piling pressure on the police to do Starmer - one front page literally being TORY PRESSURE TO MAKE THE POLICE ACT. Then Starmer says "I'll quit" and they complain he's trying to pressure the police, then when newss breaks about the Met whitewhash its "WHAT A WASTE OF MONEY".
So you are right, but you're talking about the Tories.
Remember there is a very clear difference between the two sides. We have reams of evidence about Boris and Number 10 breaking the law over and over and over. She prepares a brutal report. Someone leans on the Met to provide cover. Which they do. With a narrow field of investigation. So that now the Gray report will come out and tear Number 10 apart the police have already found Him innocent by simply not investigating the hideous reportage and photos we're about to get. The establishment always looks after its own - if you are a civil servant with a gong you get protected whilst all your staff carry the can.#
If you want to gloat feel free. Not a good luck for the pro-establishment party as people starve.
I don't care if it's the Mail's position, or the opposite of it.
You were in denial over Beergate. I have no idea if Starmer or anyone else there will get a fine - the law appears to be so poorly written that pretty much anything could result. But it was clear the moment that it turned out that Labour had not told the truth about who had been there that the police investigation had not been thorough.
it would be good for you to be consistent.
I am being consistent. There was a prime fascie case against Johnson which the Met now appear to have investigated primarily to sweep under the carpet. There was not one against Starmer, and the "evidence" was not sufficient to suggest the law had been broken.
That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate.
I still think there is nothing to see and expect nobody to get fined. Buit if I'm wrong they fall on their sword and leave the stage. Which is more than can be said for Bonzo and his Clown Car circus. We're going to get the Gray report. Reams of it. Photos and all. And people like you will say "nothing to see here" for the various events the Met haven't even investigated because no fines have been issued.
I'm quite happy with the consistency of my position. Which on all things is apply the rules equally.
I'm actually going to reply again and say that some of the stuff you've written above is rubbish.
"That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate."
Yeah, right. Even Starmer himself cannot say for sure whether he broke the law or not. I am therefore unsure how you can say there is nothing to investigate. Are you a bigger-brained lawyer than Starmer?
"And people like you will say "nothing to see here" "
LOL. No. *You* are the one saying 'nothing to see here' about Durham. See above.
RP is consistent here.
I believe Starmer and Rayner probably broke the letter of the law, and if the law is applied with rigour they must go simply because they said they would. Richard Holden and the Daily Mail and Telegraph railroaded Durham Constabulary into a highly politicised investigation. Based on how they dealt with Cummings the precedent had been set to walk away.
Johnson personally drove a coach and horses through the rules. The Met launched a token case against him. It now transpires that they didn't even look at his more egregious breaches, they ignored the Abba night at number 10! And Case they ignored completely. Mainly Juniors and Women were fined. Cressida Dick's last hurrah was another operational failure.
The Met intervention rather than allowing justice to be served has allowed Johnson to dodge the Gray Report and remain in office. It has worked out so well for him, it looks very like a conspiratorial whitewash. Even his greatest foe in Government was brought down by a cake!
Tory hacks are laughing and they will laugh louder when Starmer gets his Beergate comeuppance. The reality is Team Johnson has taken the rest of us for a ride. And what about his clandestine meeting with Sue Gray last month...?
On what basis have you determined the police didn’t do their job? That you didn’t like the outcome?
AIUI all we know about the ABBA event is that the Met didn’t recommend any FPNs. We don’t know that they ignored it?
The Met have confirmed that of the 5 events Johnson was known to have attended the police only investigated him personally for two (questionnaires issued for just the two events) including the cake event, which handily brought down Sunak.
Reports are that Juniors were obliging to Gray whereas Seniors and some politicians in general were not. I suspect Sunak was truthful.They did not expect the Gray Report to be hijacked and used as evidence for the prosecution.
I personally think that Johnson not being investigated is remarkable, but Case, with the evidence we have seen ourselves not getting an FPN is astonishing.
Big Dog is saved...by the less than lamented Cressida Dick!
Sounds like the conspiracy theorists are out in force. Next we will have Big Dog saved by an unholy cabal of the Police, Freemasons and MI5
Perhaps, because to the untrained eye, that is exactly what it looks like.
The Save Big Dog Gant Chart did not deviate from the plan. Perfect!
"The police must investigate No. 10 parties!" - The parties are investigated and BJ and others get fined. "Look at the good job the police did! And there's more to come!" - The police don't issue more fines to BJ, but others do get them. "The police have done a horrid job! The top people have got away with it!"
Perhaps the underlings who got done are not a victim of some stitch-up by No. 10 and the police, but victims of the get-Boris campaign?
Then add in Beergate: "The police have investigated! There's nothing to see here! It's all a put-up job by the Mail!" - It turns out that the Labour Party had lied. "Why does it matter? The police investigated?" - More evidence comes out. "Why does it matter? The police investigated? And the Mail's awful!" - The investigation is reopened. "It's a waste of police time to investigate this!"
etc, etc.
You do know that is quite literally the Wail's position reversed. Attacks Labour's push on this - DON'T THEY KNOW THERE'S A WAR ON. Then 10 days of stories piling pressure on the police to do Starmer - one front page literally being TORY PRESSURE TO MAKE THE POLICE ACT. Then Starmer says "I'll quit" and they complain he's trying to pressure the police, then when newss breaks about the Met whitewhash its "WHAT A WASTE OF MONEY".
So you are right, but you're talking about the Tories.
Remember there is a very clear difference between the two sides. We have reams of evidence about Boris and Number 10 breaking the law over and over and over. She prepares a brutal report. Someone leans on the Met to provide cover. Which they do. With a narrow field of investigation. So that now the Gray report will come out and tear Number 10 apart the police have already found Him innocent by simply not investigating the hideous reportage and photos we're about to get. The establishment always looks after its own - if you are a civil servant with a gong you get protected whilst all your staff carry the can.#
If you want to gloat feel free. Not a good luck for the pro-establishment party as people starve.
I don't care if it's the Mail's position, or the opposite of it.
You were in denial over Beergate. I have no idea if Starmer or anyone else there will get a fine - the law appears to be so poorly written that pretty much anything could result. But it was clear the moment that it turned out that Labour had not told the truth about who had been there that the police investigation had not been thorough.
it would be good for you to be consistent.
I am being consistent. There was a prime fascie case against Johnson which the Met now appear to have investigated primarily to sweep under the carpet. There was not one against Starmer, and the "evidence" was not sufficient to suggest the law had been broken.
That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate.
I still think there is nothing to see and expect nobody to get fined. Buit if I'm wrong they fall on their sword and leave the stage. Which is more than can be said for Bonzo and his Clown Car circus. We're going to get the Gray report. Reams of it. Photos and all. And people like you will say "nothing to see here" for the various events the Met haven't even investigated because no fines have been issued.
I'm quite happy with the consistency of my position. Which on all things is apply the rules equally.
I'm actually going to reply again and say that some of the stuff you've written above is rubbish.
"That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate."
Yeah, right. Even Starmer himself cannot say for sure whether he broke the law or not. I am therefore unsure how you can say there is nothing to investigate. Are you a bigger-brained lawyer than Starmer?
"And people like you will say "nothing to see here" "
LOL. No. *You* are the one saying 'nothing to see here' about Durham. See above.
RP is consistent here.
I believe Starmer and Rayner probably broke the letter of the law, and if the law is applied with rigour they must go simply because they said they would. Richard Holden and the Daily Mail and Telegraph railroaded Durham Constabulary into a highly politicised investigation. Based on how they dealt with Cummings the precedent had been set to walk away.
Johnson personally drove a coach and horses through the rules. The Met launched a token case against him. It now transpires that they didn't even look at his more egregious breaches, they ignored the Abba night at number 10! And Case they ignored completely. Mainly Juniors and Women were fined. Cressida Dick's last hurrah was another operational failure.
The Met intervention rather than allowing justice to be served has allowed Johnson to dodge the Gray Report and remain in office. It has worked out so well for him, it looks very like a conspiratorial whitewash. Even his greatest foe in Government was brought down by a cake!
Tory hacks are laughing and they will laugh louder when Starmer gets his Beergate comeuppance. The reality is Team Johnson has taken the rest of us for a ride. And what about his clandestine meeting with Sue Gray last month...?
On what basis have you determined the police didn’t do their job? That you didn’t like the outcome?
AIUI all we know about the ABBA event is that the Met didn’t recommend any FPNs. We don’t know that they ignored it?
I'm with @Mexicanpete. This has been a total establishment stitch-up to save the PM.
It stinks to high heaven.
Evidence please.
Yes certainly, here you go. 🙂
Just the 1 FPN for the senior leadership group who created and and inspired this law breaking culture, the junior grades are the ones getting hammered for.
Clear whitewash. Clear stink up the nose of every voter. Do you really Need anything else to know for yourself something is wrong here?
"The police must investigate No. 10 parties!" - The parties are investigated and BJ and others get fined. "Look at the good job the police did! And there's more to come!" - The police don't issue more fines to BJ, but others do get them. "The police have done a horrid job! The top people have got away with it!"
Perhaps the underlings who got done are not a victim of some stitch-up by No. 10 and the police, but victims of the get-Boris campaign?
Then add in Beergate: "The police have investigated! There's nothing to see here! It's all a put-up job by the Mail!" - It turns out that the Labour Party had lied. "Why does it matter? The police investigated?" - More evidence comes out. "Why does it matter? The police investigated? And the Mail's awful!" - The investigation is reopened. "It's a waste of police time to investigate this!"
etc, etc.
You do know that is quite literally the Wail's position reversed. Attacks Labour's push on this - DON'T THEY KNOW THERE'S A WAR ON. Then 10 days of stories piling pressure on the police to do Starmer - one front page literally being TORY PRESSURE TO MAKE THE POLICE ACT. Then Starmer says "I'll quit" and they complain he's trying to pressure the police, then when newss breaks about the Met whitewhash its "WHAT A WASTE OF MONEY".
So you are right, but you're talking about the Tories.
Remember there is a very clear difference between the two sides. We have reams of evidence about Boris and Number 10 breaking the law over and over and over. She prepares a brutal report. Someone leans on the Met to provide cover. Which they do. With a narrow field of investigation. So that now the Gray report will come out and tear Number 10 apart the police have already found Him innocent by simply not investigating the hideous reportage and photos we're about to get. The establishment always looks after its own - if you are a civil servant with a gong you get protected whilst all your staff carry the can.#
If you want to gloat feel free. Not a good luck for the pro-establishment party as people starve.
I don't care if it's the Mail's position, or the opposite of it.
You were in denial over Beergate. I have no idea if Starmer or anyone else there will get a fine - the law appears to be so poorly written that pretty much anything could result. But it was clear the moment that it turned out that Labour had not told the truth about who had been there that the police investigation had not been thorough.
it would be good for you to be consistent.
I am being consistent. There was a prime fascie case against Johnson which the Met now appear to have investigated primarily to sweep under the carpet. There was not one against Starmer, and the "evidence" was not sufficient to suggest the law had been broken.
That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate.
I still think there is nothing to see and expect nobody to get fined. Buit if I'm wrong they fall on their sword and leave the stage. Which is more than can be said for Bonzo and his Clown Car circus. We're going to get the Gray report. Reams of it. Photos and all. And people like you will say "nothing to see here" for the various events the Met haven't even investigated because no fines have been issued.
I'm quite happy with the consistency of my position. Which on all things is apply the rules equally.
I'm actually going to reply again and say that some of the stuff you've written above is rubbish.
"That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate."
Yeah, right. Even Starmer himself cannot say for sure whether he broke the law or not. I am therefore unsure how you can say there is nothing to investigate. Are you a bigger-brained lawyer than Starmer?
"And people like you will say "nothing to see here" "
LOL. No. *You* are the one saying 'nothing to see here' about Durham. See above.
RP is consistent here.
I believe Starmer and Rayner probably broke the letter of the law, and if the law is applied with rigour they must go simply because they said they would. Richard Holden and the Daily Mail and Telegraph railroaded Durham Constabulary into a highly politicised investigation. Based on how they dealt with Cummings the precedent had been set to walk away.
Johnson personally drove a coach and horses through the rules. The Met launched a token case against him. It now transpires that they didn't even look at his more egregious breaches, they ignored the Abba night at number 10! And Case they ignored completely. Mainly Juniors and Women were fined. Cressida Dick's last hurrah was another operational failure.
The Met intervention rather than allowing justice to be served has allowed Johnson to dodge the Gray Report and remain in office. It has worked out so well for him, it looks very like a conspiratorial whitewash. Even his greatest foe in Government was brought down by a cake!
Tory hacks are laughing and they will laugh louder when Starmer gets his Beergate comeuppance. The reality is Team Johnson has taken the rest of us for a ride. And what about his clandestine meeting with Sue Gray last month...?
On what basis have you determined the police didn’t do their job? That you didn’t like the outcome?
AIUI all we know about the ABBA event is that the Met didn’t recommend any FPNs. We don’t know that they ignored it?
I'm with @Mexicanpete. This has been a total establishment stitch-up to save the PM.
It stinks to high heaven.
Surprised by you @rottenborough, I didn’t think you would jump in the conspiracy theory angle.
It’s unlikely to happen but, if Starmer gets a FPN, the collective head-exploding on here will be a sight to behold.
"The police must investigate No. 10 parties!" - The parties are investigated and BJ and others get fined. "Look at the good job the police did! And there's more to come!" - The police don't issue more fines to BJ, but others do get them. "The police have done a horrid job! The top people have got away with it!"
Perhaps the underlings who got done are not a victim of some stitch-up by No. 10 and the police, but victims of the get-Boris campaign?
Then add in Beergate: "The police have investigated! There's nothing to see here! It's all a put-up job by the Mail!" - It turns out that the Labour Party had lied. "Why does it matter? The police investigated?" - More evidence comes out. "Why does it matter? The police investigated? And the Mail's awful!" - The investigation is reopened. "It's a waste of police time to investigate this!"
etc, etc.
You do know that is quite literally the Wail's position reversed. Attacks Labour's push on this - DON'T THEY KNOW THERE'S A WAR ON. Then 10 days of stories piling pressure on the police to do Starmer - one front page literally being TORY PRESSURE TO MAKE THE POLICE ACT. Then Starmer says "I'll quit" and they complain he's trying to pressure the police, then when newss breaks about the Met whitewhash its "WHAT A WASTE OF MONEY".
So you are right, but you're talking about the Tories.
Remember there is a very clear difference between the two sides. We have reams of evidence about Boris and Number 10 breaking the law over and over and over. She prepares a brutal report. Someone leans on the Met to provide cover. Which they do. With a narrow field of investigation. So that now the Gray report will come out and tear Number 10 apart the police have already found Him innocent by simply not investigating the hideous reportage and photos we're about to get. The establishment always looks after its own - if you are a civil servant with a gong you get protected whilst all your staff carry the can.#
If you want to gloat feel free. Not a good luck for the pro-establishment party as people starve.
I don't care if it's the Mail's position, or the opposite of it.
You were in denial over Beergate. I have no idea if Starmer or anyone else there will get a fine - the law appears to be so poorly written that pretty much anything could result. But it was clear the moment that it turned out that Labour had not told the truth about who had been there that the police investigation had not been thorough.
it would be good for you to be consistent.
I am being consistent. There was a prime fascie case against Johnson which the Met now appear to have investigated primarily to sweep under the carpet. There was not one against Starmer, and the "evidence" was not sufficient to suggest the law had been broken.
That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate.
I still think there is nothing to see and expect nobody to get fined. Buit if I'm wrong they fall on their sword and leave the stage. Which is more than can be said for Bonzo and his Clown Car circus. We're going to get the Gray report. Reams of it. Photos and all. And people like you will say "nothing to see here" for the various events the Met haven't even investigated because no fines have been issued.
I'm quite happy with the consistency of my position. Which on all things is apply the rules equally.
I'm actually going to reply again and say that some of the stuff you've written above is rubbish.
"That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate."
Yeah, right. Even Starmer himself cannot say for sure whether he broke the law or not. I am therefore unsure how you can say there is nothing to investigate. Are you a bigger-brained lawyer than Starmer?
"And people like you will say "nothing to see here" "
LOL. No. *You* are the one saying 'nothing to see here' about Durham. See above.
RP is consistent here.
I believe Starmer and Rayner probably broke the letter of the law, and if the law is applied with rigour they must go simply because they said they would. Richard Holden and the Daily Mail and Telegraph railroaded Durham Constabulary into a highly politicised investigation. Based on how they dealt with Cummings the precedent had been set to walk away.
Johnson personally drove a coach and horses through the rules. The Met launched a token case against him. It now transpires that they didn't even look at his more egregious breaches, they ignored the Abba night at number 10! And Case they ignored completely. Mainly Juniors and Women were fined. Cressida Dick's last hurrah was another operational failure.
The Met intervention rather than allowing justice to be served has allowed Johnson to dodge the Gray Report and remain in office. It has worked out so well for him, it looks very like a conspiratorial whitewash. Even his greatest foe in Government was brought down by a cake!
Tory hacks are laughing and they will laugh louder when Starmer gets his Beergate comeuppance. The reality is Team Johnson has taken the rest of us for a ride. And what about his clandestine meeting with Sue Gray last month...?
On what basis have you determined the police didn’t do their job? That you didn’t like the outcome?
AIUI all we know about the ABBA event is that the Met didn’t recommend any FPNs. We don’t know that they ignored it?
The Met have confirmed that of the 5 events Johnson was known to have attended the police only investigated him personally for two (questionnaires issued for just the two events) including the cake event, which handily brought down Sunak.
Reports are that Juniors were obliging to Gray whereas Seniors and some politicians in general were not. I suspect Sunak was truthful.They did not expect the Gray Report to be hijacked and used as evidence for the prosecution.
I personally think that Johnson not being investigated is remarkable, but Case, with the evidence we have seen ourselves not getting an FPN is astonishing.
Big Dog is saved...by the less than lamented Cressida Dick!
I am more interested to know how issuing a few questionnaires and FPNs and looking at a few photos could take up a sufficient amount of staff time to cost £460,000.
They didn't even investigate properly, and most of the work had been done for them by Gray, so how on Earth could it come to that figure? That's the equivalent of hiring four full-time officers for a year.
Just imagine how much more it would have cost had they actually investigated the events rather than just relying on Gray's report.
For those of us not cheering for Team Johnson our incredulity is off the scale.
Johnson aside, how did Case avoid a fine?
Presumably in the same way he got to the top in the first place. Although what that is I don't know.
"The police must investigate No. 10 parties!" - The parties are investigated and BJ and others get fined. "Look at the good job the police did! And there's more to come!" - The police don't issue more fines to BJ, but others do get them. "The police have done a horrid job! The top people have got away with it!"
Perhaps the underlings who got done are not a victim of some stitch-up by No. 10 and the police, but victims of the get-Boris campaign?
Then add in Beergate: "The police have investigated! There's nothing to see here! It's all a put-up job by the Mail!" - It turns out that the Labour Party had lied. "Why does it matter? The police investigated?" - More evidence comes out. "Why does it matter? The police investigated? And the Mail's awful!" - The investigation is reopened. "It's a waste of police time to investigate this!"
etc, etc.
You do know that is quite literally the Wail's position reversed. Attacks Labour's push on this - DON'T THEY KNOW THERE'S A WAR ON. Then 10 days of stories piling pressure on the police to do Starmer - one front page literally being TORY PRESSURE TO MAKE THE POLICE ACT. Then Starmer says "I'll quit" and they complain he's trying to pressure the police, then when newss breaks about the Met whitewhash its "WHAT A WASTE OF MONEY".
So you are right, but you're talking about the Tories.
Remember there is a very clear difference between the two sides. We have reams of evidence about Boris and Number 10 breaking the law over and over and over. She prepares a brutal report. Someone leans on the Met to provide cover. Which they do. With a narrow field of investigation. So that now the Gray report will come out and tear Number 10 apart the police have already found Him innocent by simply not investigating the hideous reportage and photos we're about to get. The establishment always looks after its own - if you are a civil servant with a gong you get protected whilst all your staff carry the can.#
If you want to gloat feel free. Not a good luck for the pro-establishment party as people starve.
I don't care if it's the Mail's position, or the opposite of it.
You were in denial over Beergate. I have no idea if Starmer or anyone else there will get a fine - the law appears to be so poorly written that pretty much anything could result. But it was clear the moment that it turned out that Labour had not told the truth about who had been there that the police investigation had not been thorough.
it would be good for you to be consistent.
I am being consistent. There was a prime fascie case against Johnson which the Met now appear to have investigated primarily to sweep under the carpet. There was not one against Starmer, and the "evidence" was not sufficient to suggest the law had been broken.
That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate.
I still think there is nothing to see and expect nobody to get fined. Buit if I'm wrong they fall on their sword and leave the stage. Which is more than can be said for Bonzo and his Clown Car circus. We're going to get the Gray report. Reams of it. Photos and all. And people like you will say "nothing to see here" for the various events the Met haven't even investigated because no fines have been issued.
I'm quite happy with the consistency of my position. Which on all things is apply the rules equally.
I'm actually going to reply again and say that some of the stuff you've written above is rubbish.
"That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate."
Yeah, right. Even Starmer himself cannot say for sure whether he broke the law or not. I am therefore unsure how you can say there is nothing to investigate. Are you a bigger-brained lawyer than Starmer?
"And people like you will say "nothing to see here" "
LOL. No. *You* are the one saying 'nothing to see here' about Durham. See above.
RP is consistent here.
I believe Starmer and Rayner probably broke the letter of the law, and if the law is applied with rigour they must go simply because they said they would. Richard Holden and the Daily Mail and Telegraph railroaded Durham Constabulary into a highly politicised investigation. Based on how they dealt with Cummings the precedent had been set to walk away.
Johnson personally drove a coach and horses through the rules. The Met launched a token case against him. It now transpires that they didn't even look at his more egregious breaches, they ignored the Abba night at number 10! And Case they ignored completely. Mainly Juniors and Women were fined. Cressida Dick's last hurrah was another operational failure.
The Met intervention rather than allowing justice to be served has allowed Johnson to dodge the Gray Report and remain in office. It has worked out so well for him, it looks very like a conspiratorial whitewash. Even his greatest foe in Government was brought down by a cake!
Tory hacks are laughing and they will laugh louder when Starmer gets his Beergate comeuppance. The reality is Team Johnson has taken the rest of us for a ride. And what about his clandestine meeting with Sue Gray last month...?
On what basis have you determined the police didn’t do their job? That you didn’t like the outcome?
AIUI all we know about the ABBA event is that the Met didn’t recommend any FPNs. We don’t know that they ignored it?
I'm with @Mexicanpete. This has been a total establishment stitch-up to save the PM.
It stinks to high heaven.
Evidence please.
Yes certainly, here you go. 🙂
Just the 1 FPN for the senior leadership group who created and and inspired this law breaking culture, the junior grades are the ones getting hammered for.
Clear whitewash. Clear stink up the nose of every voter. Do you really Need anything else to know for yourself something is wrong here?
"The police must investigate No. 10 parties!" - The parties are investigated and BJ and others get fined. "Look at the good job the police did! And there's more to come!" - The police don't issue more fines to BJ, but others do get them. "The police have done a horrid job! The top people have got away with it!"
Perhaps the underlings who got done are not a victim of some stitch-up by No. 10 and the police, but victims of the get-Boris campaign?
Then add in Beergate: "The police have investigated! There's nothing to see here! It's all a put-up job by the Mail!" - It turns out that the Labour Party had lied. "Why does it matter? The police investigated?" - More evidence comes out. "Why does it matter? The police investigated? And the Mail's awful!" - The investigation is reopened. "It's a waste of police time to investigate this!"
etc, etc.
You do know that is quite literally the Wail's position reversed. Attacks Labour's push on this - DON'T THEY KNOW THERE'S A WAR ON. Then 10 days of stories piling pressure on the police to do Starmer - one front page literally being TORY PRESSURE TO MAKE THE POLICE ACT. Then Starmer says "I'll quit" and they complain he's trying to pressure the police, then when newss breaks about the Met whitewhash its "WHAT A WASTE OF MONEY".
So you are right, but you're talking about the Tories.
Remember there is a very clear difference between the two sides. We have reams of evidence about Boris and Number 10 breaking the law over and over and over. She prepares a brutal report. Someone leans on the Met to provide cover. Which they do. With a narrow field of investigation. So that now the Gray report will come out and tear Number 10 apart the police have already found Him innocent by simply not investigating the hideous reportage and photos we're about to get. The establishment always looks after its own - if you are a civil servant with a gong you get protected whilst all your staff carry the can.#
If you want to gloat feel free. Not a good luck for the pro-establishment party as people starve.
I don't care if it's the Mail's position, or the opposite of it.
You were in denial over Beergate. I have no idea if Starmer or anyone else there will get a fine - the law appears to be so poorly written that pretty much anything could result. But it was clear the moment that it turned out that Labour had not told the truth about who had been there that the police investigation had not been thorough.
it would be good for you to be consistent.
I am being consistent. There was a prime fascie case against Johnson which the Met now appear to have investigated primarily to sweep under the carpet. There was not one against Starmer, and the "evidence" was not sufficient to suggest the law had been broken.
That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate.
I still think there is nothing to see and expect nobody to get fined. Buit if I'm wrong they fall on their sword and leave the stage. Which is more than can be said for Bonzo and his Clown Car circus. We're going to get the Gray report. Reams of it. Photos and all. And people like you will say "nothing to see here" for the various events the Met haven't even investigated because no fines have been issued.
I'm quite happy with the consistency of my position. Which on all things is apply the rules equally.
I'm actually going to reply again and say that some of the stuff you've written above is rubbish.
"That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate."
Yeah, right. Even Starmer himself cannot say for sure whether he broke the law or not. I am therefore unsure how you can say there is nothing to investigate. Are you a bigger-brained lawyer than Starmer?
"And people like you will say "nothing to see here" "
LOL. No. *You* are the one saying 'nothing to see here' about Durham. See above.
RP is consistent here.
I believe Starmer and Rayner probably broke the letter of the law, and if the law is applied with rigour they must go simply because they said they would. Richard Holden and the Daily Mail and Telegraph railroaded Durham Constabulary into a highly politicised investigation. Based on how they dealt with Cummings the precedent had been set to walk away.
Johnson personally drove a coach and horses through the rules. The Met launched a token case against him. It now transpires that they didn't even look at his more egregious breaches, they ignored the Abba night at number 10! And Case they ignored completely. Mainly Juniors and Women were fined. Cressida Dick's last hurrah was another operational failure.
The Met intervention rather than allowing justice to be served has allowed Johnson to dodge the Gray Report and remain in office. It has worked out so well for him, it looks very like a conspiratorial whitewash. Even his greatest foe in Government was brought down by a cake!
Tory hacks are laughing and they will laugh louder when Starmer gets his Beergate comeuppance. The reality is Team Johnson has taken the rest of us for a ride. And what about his clandestine meeting with Sue Gray last month...?
On what basis have you determined the police didn’t do their job? That you didn’t like the outcome?
AIUI all we know about the ABBA event is that the Met didn’t recommend any FPNs. We don’t know that they ignored it?
The Met have confirmed that of the 5 events Johnson was known to have attended the police only investigated him personally for two (questionnaires issued for just the two events) including the cake event, which handily brought down Sunak.
Reports are that Juniors were obliging to Gray whereas Seniors and some politicians in general were not. I suspect Sunak was truthful.They did not expect the Gray Report to be hijacked and used as evidence for the prosecution.
I personally think that Johnson not being investigated is remarkable, but Case, with the evidence we have seen ourselves not getting an FPN is astonishing.
Big Dog is saved...by the less than lamented Cressida Dick!
So hearsay and rumour. Ok.
But if they didn’t expect the Gray report to be hijacked they are too naive to be in Downing Street.
We all know words would have gone on behind the scenes in private and deals done its just how things work
"The police must investigate No. 10 parties!" - The parties are investigated and BJ and others get fined. "Look at the good job the police did! And there's more to come!" - The police don't issue more fines to BJ, but others do get them. "The police have done a horrid job! The top people have got away with it!"
Perhaps the underlings who got done are not a victim of some stitch-up by No. 10 and the police, but victims of the get-Boris campaign?
Then add in Beergate: "The police have investigated! There's nothing to see here! It's all a put-up job by the Mail!" - It turns out that the Labour Party had lied. "Why does it matter? The police investigated?" - More evidence comes out. "Why does it matter? The police investigated? And the Mail's awful!" - The investigation is reopened. "It's a waste of police time to investigate this!"
etc, etc.
You do know that is quite literally the Wail's position reversed. Attacks Labour's push on this - DON'T THEY KNOW THERE'S A WAR ON. Then 10 days of stories piling pressure on the police to do Starmer - one front page literally being TORY PRESSURE TO MAKE THE POLICE ACT. Then Starmer says "I'll quit" and they complain he's trying to pressure the police, then when newss breaks about the Met whitewhash its "WHAT A WASTE OF MONEY".
So you are right, but you're talking about the Tories.
Remember there is a very clear difference between the two sides. We have reams of evidence about Boris and Number 10 breaking the law over and over and over. She prepares a brutal report. Someone leans on the Met to provide cover. Which they do. With a narrow field of investigation. So that now the Gray report will come out and tear Number 10 apart the police have already found Him innocent by simply not investigating the hideous reportage and photos we're about to get. The establishment always looks after its own - if you are a civil servant with a gong you get protected whilst all your staff carry the can.#
If you want to gloat feel free. Not a good luck for the pro-establishment party as people starve.
I don't care if it's the Mail's position, or the opposite of it.
You were in denial over Beergate. I have no idea if Starmer or anyone else there will get a fine - the law appears to be so poorly written that pretty much anything could result. But it was clear the moment that it turned out that Labour had not told the truth about who had been there that the police investigation had not been thorough.
it would be good for you to be consistent.
I am being consistent. There was a prime fascie case against Johnson which the Met now appear to have investigated primarily to sweep under the carpet. There was not one against Starmer, and the "evidence" was not sufficient to suggest the law had been broken.
That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate.
I still think there is nothing to see and expect nobody to get fined. Buit if I'm wrong they fall on their sword and leave the stage. Which is more than can be said for Bonzo and his Clown Car circus. We're going to get the Gray report. Reams of it. Photos and all. And people like you will say "nothing to see here" for the various events the Met haven't even investigated because no fines have been issued.
I'm quite happy with the consistency of my position. Which on all things is apply the rules equally.
I'm actually going to reply again and say that some of the stuff you've written above is rubbish.
"That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate."
Yeah, right. Even Starmer himself cannot say for sure whether he broke the law or not. I am therefore unsure how you can say there is nothing to investigate. Are you a bigger-brained lawyer than Starmer?
"And people like you will say "nothing to see here" "
LOL. No. *You* are the one saying 'nothing to see here' about Durham. See above.
RP is consistent here.
I believe Starmer and Rayner probably broke the letter of the law, and if the law is applied with rigour they must go simply because they said they would. Richard Holden and the Daily Mail and Telegraph railroaded Durham Constabulary into a highly politicised investigation. Based on how they dealt with Cummings the precedent had been set to walk away.
Johnson personally drove a coach and horses through the rules. The Met launched a token case against him. It now transpires that they didn't even look at his more egregious breaches, they ignored the Abba night at number 10! And Case they ignored completely. Mainly Juniors and Women were fined. Cressida Dick's last hurrah was another operational failure.
The Met intervention rather than allowing justice to be served has allowed Johnson to dodge the Gray Report and remain in office. It has worked out so well for him, it looks very like a conspiratorial whitewash. Even his greatest foe in Government was brought down by a cake!
Tory hacks are laughing and they will laugh louder when Starmer gets his Beergate comeuppance. The reality is Team Johnson has taken the rest of us for a ride. And what about his clandestine meeting with Sue Gray last month...?
On what basis have you determined the police didn’t do their job? That you didn’t like the outcome?
AIUI all we know about the ABBA event is that the Met didn’t recommend any FPNs. We don’t know that they ignored it?
The Met have confirmed that of the 5 events Johnson was known to have attended the police only investigated him personally for two (questionnaires issued for just the two events) including the cake event, which handily brought down Sunak.
Reports are that Juniors were obliging to Gray whereas Seniors and some politicians in general were not. I suspect Sunak was truthful.They did not expect the Gray Report to be hijacked and used as evidence for the prosecution.
I personally think that Johnson not being investigated is remarkable, but Case, with the evidence we have seen ourselves not getting an FPN is astonishing.
Big Dog is saved...by the less than lamented Cressida Dick!
Sounds like the conspiracy theorists are out in force. Next we will have Big Dog saved by an unholy cabal of the Police, Freemasons and MI5
Perhaps, because to the untrained eye, that is exactly what it looks like.
The Save Big Dog Gant Chart did not deviate from the plan. Perfect!
"The police must investigate No. 10 parties!" - The parties are investigated and BJ and others get fined. "Look at the good job the police did! And there's more to come!" - The police don't issue more fines to BJ, but others do get them. "The police have done a horrid job! The top people have got away with it!"
Perhaps the underlings who got done are not a victim of some stitch-up by No. 10 and the police, but victims of the get-Boris campaign?
Then add in Beergate: "The police have investigated! There's nothing to see here! It's all a put-up job by the Mail!" - It turns out that the Labour Party had lied. "Why does it matter? The police investigated?" - More evidence comes out. "Why does it matter? The police investigated? And the Mail's awful!" - The investigation is reopened. "It's a waste of police time to investigate this!"
etc, etc.
You do know that is quite literally the Wail's position reversed. Attacks Labour's push on this - DON'T THEY KNOW THERE'S A WAR ON. Then 10 days of stories piling pressure on the police to do Starmer - one front page literally being TORY PRESSURE TO MAKE THE POLICE ACT. Then Starmer says "I'll quit" and they complain he's trying to pressure the police, then when newss breaks about the Met whitewhash its "WHAT A WASTE OF MONEY".
So you are right, but you're talking about the Tories.
Remember there is a very clear difference between the two sides. We have reams of evidence about Boris and Number 10 breaking the law over and over and over. She prepares a brutal report. Someone leans on the Met to provide cover. Which they do. With a narrow field of investigation. So that now the Gray report will come out and tear Number 10 apart the police have already found Him innocent by simply not investigating the hideous reportage and photos we're about to get. The establishment always looks after its own - if you are a civil servant with a gong you get protected whilst all your staff carry the can.#
If you want to gloat feel free. Not a good luck for the pro-establishment party as people starve.
I don't care if it's the Mail's position, or the opposite of it.
You were in denial over Beergate. I have no idea if Starmer or anyone else there will get a fine - the law appears to be so poorly written that pretty much anything could result. But it was clear the moment that it turned out that Labour had not told the truth about who had been there that the police investigation had not been thorough.
it would be good for you to be consistent.
I am being consistent. There was a prime fascie case against Johnson which the Met now appear to have investigated primarily to sweep under the carpet. There was not one against Starmer, and the "evidence" was not sufficient to suggest the law had been broken.
That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate.
I still think there is nothing to see and expect nobody to get fined. Buit if I'm wrong they fall on their sword and leave the stage. Which is more than can be said for Bonzo and his Clown Car circus. We're going to get the Gray report. Reams of it. Photos and all. And people like you will say "nothing to see here" for the various events the Met haven't even investigated because no fines have been issued.
I'm quite happy with the consistency of my position. Which on all things is apply the rules equally.
I'm actually going to reply again and say that some of the stuff you've written above is rubbish.
"That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate."
Yeah, right. Even Starmer himself cannot say for sure whether he broke the law or not. I am therefore unsure how you can say there is nothing to investigate. Are you a bigger-brained lawyer than Starmer?
"And people like you will say "nothing to see here" "
LOL. No. *You* are the one saying 'nothing to see here' about Durham. See above.
RP is consistent here.
I believe Starmer and Rayner probably broke the letter of the law, and if the law is applied with rigour they must go simply because they said they would. Richard Holden and the Daily Mail and Telegraph railroaded Durham Constabulary into a highly politicised investigation. Based on how they dealt with Cummings the precedent had been set to walk away.
Johnson personally drove a coach and horses through the rules. The Met launched a token case against him. It now transpires that they didn't even look at his more egregious breaches, they ignored the Abba night at number 10! And Case they ignored completely. Mainly Juniors and Women were fined. Cressida Dick's last hurrah was another operational failure.
The Met intervention rather than allowing justice to be served has allowed Johnson to dodge the Gray Report and remain in office. It has worked out so well for him, it looks very like a conspiratorial whitewash. Even his greatest foe in Government was brought down by a cake!
Tory hacks are laughing and they will laugh louder when Starmer gets his Beergate comeuppance. The reality is Team Johnson has taken the rest of us for a ride. And what about his clandestine meeting with Sue Gray last month...?
On what basis have you determined the police didn’t do their job? That you didn’t like the outcome?
AIUI all we know about the ABBA event is that the Met didn’t recommend any FPNs. We don’t know that they ignored it?
The Met have confirmed that of the 5 events Johnson was known to have attended the police only investigated him personally for two (questionnaires issued for just the two events) including the cake event, which handily brought down Sunak.
Reports are that Juniors were obliging to Gray whereas Seniors and some politicians in general were not. I suspect Sunak was truthful.They did not expect the Gray Report to be hijacked and used as evidence for the prosecution.
I personally think that Johnson not being investigated is remarkable, but Case, with the evidence we have seen ourselves not getting an FPN is astonishing.
Big Dog is saved...by the less than lamented Cressida Dick!
Sounds like the conspiracy theorists are out in force. Next we will have Big Dog saved by an unholy cabal of the Police, Freemasons and MI5
Are you saying there was none? Anyway, at one level what saved Big Dog were his usual tactics of prevaricate and postpone. And it seems to have worked so well done, Boris!
"The police must investigate No. 10 parties!" - The parties are investigated and BJ and others get fined. "Look at the good job the police did! And there's more to come!" - The police don't issue more fines to BJ, but others do get them. "The police have done a horrid job! The top people have got away with it!"
Perhaps the underlings who got done are not a victim of some stitch-up by No. 10 and the police, but victims of the get-Boris campaign?
Then add in Beergate: "The police have investigated! There's nothing to see here! It's all a put-up job by the Mail!" - It turns out that the Labour Party had lied. "Why does it matter? The police investigated?" - More evidence comes out. "Why does it matter? The police investigated? And the Mail's awful!" - The investigation is reopened. "It's a waste of police time to investigate this!"
etc, etc.
You do know that is quite literally the Wail's position reversed. Attacks Labour's push on this - DON'T THEY KNOW THERE'S A WAR ON. Then 10 days of stories piling pressure on the police to do Starmer - one front page literally being TORY PRESSURE TO MAKE THE POLICE ACT. Then Starmer says "I'll quit" and they complain he's trying to pressure the police, then when newss breaks about the Met whitewhash its "WHAT A WASTE OF MONEY".
So you are right, but you're talking about the Tories.
Remember there is a very clear difference between the two sides. We have reams of evidence about Boris and Number 10 breaking the law over and over and over. She prepares a brutal report. Someone leans on the Met to provide cover. Which they do. With a narrow field of investigation. So that now the Gray report will come out and tear Number 10 apart the police have already found Him innocent by simply not investigating the hideous reportage and photos we're about to get. The establishment always looks after its own - if you are a civil servant with a gong you get protected whilst all your staff carry the can.#
If you want to gloat feel free. Not a good luck for the pro-establishment party as people starve.
I don't care if it's the Mail's position, or the opposite of it.
You were in denial over Beergate. I have no idea if Starmer or anyone else there will get a fine - the law appears to be so poorly written that pretty much anything could result. But it was clear the moment that it turned out that Labour had not told the truth about who had been there that the police investigation had not been thorough.
it would be good for you to be consistent.
I am being consistent. There was a prime fascie case against Johnson which the Met now appear to have investigated primarily to sweep under the carpet. There was not one against Starmer, and the "evidence" was not sufficient to suggest the law had been broken.
That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate.
I still think there is nothing to see and expect nobody to get fined. Buit if I'm wrong they fall on their sword and leave the stage. Which is more than can be said for Bonzo and his Clown Car circus. We're going to get the Gray report. Reams of it. Photos and all. And people like you will say "nothing to see here" for the various events the Met haven't even investigated because no fines have been issued.
I'm quite happy with the consistency of my position. Which on all things is apply the rules equally.
I'm actually going to reply again and say that some of the stuff you've written above is rubbish.
"That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate."
Yeah, right. Even Starmer himself cannot say for sure whether he broke the law or not. I am therefore unsure how you can say there is nothing to investigate. Are you a bigger-brained lawyer than Starmer?
"And people like you will say "nothing to see here" "
LOL. No. *You* are the one saying 'nothing to see here' about Durham. See above.
RP is consistent here.
I believe Starmer and Rayner probably broke the letter of the law, and if the law is applied with rigour they must go simply because they said they would. Richard Holden and the Daily Mail and Telegraph railroaded Durham Constabulary into a highly politicised investigation. Based on how they dealt with Cummings the precedent had been set to walk away.
Johnson personally drove a coach and horses through the rules. The Met launched a token case against him. It now transpires that they didn't even look at his more egregious breaches, they ignored the Abba night at number 10! And Case they ignored completely. Mainly Juniors and Women were fined. Cressida Dick's last hurrah was another operational failure.
The Met intervention rather than allowing justice to be served has allowed Johnson to dodge the Gray Report and remain in office. It has worked out so well for him, it looks very like a conspiratorial whitewash. Even his greatest foe in Government was brought down by a cake!
Tory hacks are laughing and they will laugh louder when Starmer gets his Beergate comeuppance. The reality is Team Johnson has taken the rest of us for a ride. And what about his clandestine meeting with Sue Gray last month...?
On what basis have you determined the police didn’t do their job? That you didn’t like the outcome?
AIUI all we know about the ABBA event is that the Met didn’t recommend any FPNs. We don’t know that they ignored it?
I'm with @Mexicanpete. This has been a total establishment stitch-up to save the PM.
It stinks to high heaven.
Surprised by you @rottenborough, I didn’t think you would jump in the conspiracy theory angle.
You were rock hard over Hunter Biden's laptop though.
"The police must investigate No. 10 parties!" - The parties are investigated and BJ and others get fined. "Look at the good job the police did! And there's more to come!" - The police don't issue more fines to BJ, but others do get them. "The police have done a horrid job! The top people have got away with it!"
Perhaps the underlings who got done are not a victim of some stitch-up by No. 10 and the police, but victims of the get-Boris campaign?
Then add in Beergate: "The police have investigated! There's nothing to see here! It's all a put-up job by the Mail!" - It turns out that the Labour Party had lied. "Why does it matter? The police investigated?" - More evidence comes out. "Why does it matter? The police investigated? And the Mail's awful!" - The investigation is reopened. "It's a waste of police time to investigate this!"
etc, etc.
You do know that is quite literally the Wail's position reversed. Attacks Labour's push on this - DON'T THEY KNOW THERE'S A WAR ON. Then 10 days of stories piling pressure on the police to do Starmer - one front page literally being TORY PRESSURE TO MAKE THE POLICE ACT. Then Starmer says "I'll quit" and they complain he's trying to pressure the police, then when newss breaks about the Met whitewhash its "WHAT A WASTE OF MONEY".
So you are right, but you're talking about the Tories.
Remember there is a very clear difference between the two sides. We have reams of evidence about Boris and Number 10 breaking the law over and over and over. She prepares a brutal report. Someone leans on the Met to provide cover. Which they do. With a narrow field of investigation. So that now the Gray report will come out and tear Number 10 apart the police have already found Him innocent by simply not investigating the hideous reportage and photos we're about to get. The establishment always looks after its own - if you are a civil servant with a gong you get protected whilst all your staff carry the can.#
If you want to gloat feel free. Not a good luck for the pro-establishment party as people starve.
I don't care if it's the Mail's position, or the opposite of it.
You were in denial over Beergate. I have no idea if Starmer or anyone else there will get a fine - the law appears to be so poorly written that pretty much anything could result. But it was clear the moment that it turned out that Labour had not told the truth about who had been there that the police investigation had not been thorough.
it would be good for you to be consistent.
I am being consistent. There was a prime fascie case against Johnson which the Met now appear to have investigated primarily to sweep under the carpet. There was not one against Starmer, and the "evidence" was not sufficient to suggest the law had been broken.
That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate.
I still think there is nothing to see and expect nobody to get fined. Buit if I'm wrong they fall on their sword and leave the stage. Which is more than can be said for Bonzo and his Clown Car circus. We're going to get the Gray report. Reams of it. Photos and all. And people like you will say "nothing to see here" for the various events the Met haven't even investigated because no fines have been issued.
I'm quite happy with the consistency of my position. Which on all things is apply the rules equally.
I'm actually going to reply again and say that some of the stuff you've written above is rubbish.
"That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate."
Yeah, right. Even Starmer himself cannot say for sure whether he broke the law or not. I am therefore unsure how you can say there is nothing to investigate. Are you a bigger-brained lawyer than Starmer?
"And people like you will say "nothing to see here" "
LOL. No. *You* are the one saying 'nothing to see here' about Durham. See above.
RP is consistent here.
I believe Starmer and Rayner probably broke the letter of the law, and if the law is applied with rigour they must go simply because they said they would. Richard Holden and the Daily Mail and Telegraph railroaded Durham Constabulary into a highly politicised investigation. Based on how they dealt with Cummings the precedent had been set to walk away.
Johnson personally drove a coach and horses through the rules. The Met launched a token case against him. It now transpires that they didn't even look at his more egregious breaches, they ignored the Abba night at number 10! And Case they ignored completely. Mainly Juniors and Women were fined. Cressida Dick's last hurrah was another operational failure.
The Met intervention rather than allowing justice to be served has allowed Johnson to dodge the Gray Report and remain in office. It has worked out so well for him, it looks very like a conspiratorial whitewash. Even his greatest foe in Government was brought down by a cake!
Tory hacks are laughing and they will laugh louder when Starmer gets his Beergate comeuppance. The reality is Team Johnson has taken the rest of us for a ride. And what about his clandestine meeting with Sue Gray last month...?
On what basis have you determined the police didn’t do their job? That you didn’t like the outcome?
AIUI all we know about the ABBA event is that the Met didn’t recommend any FPNs. We don’t know that they ignored it?
The Met have confirmed that of the 5 events Johnson was known to have attended the police only investigated him personally for two (questionnaires issued for just the two events) including the cake event, which handily brought down Sunak.
Reports are that Juniors were obliging to Gray whereas Seniors and some politicians in general were not. I suspect Sunak was truthful.They did not expect the Gray Report to be hijacked and used as evidence for the prosecution.
I personally think that Johnson not being investigated is remarkable, but Case, with the evidence we have seen ourselves not getting an FPN is astonishing.
Big Dog is saved...by the less than lamented Cressida Dick!
I am more interested to know how issuing a few questionnaires and FPNs and looking at a few photos could take up a sufficient amount of staff time to cost £460,000.
They didn't even investigate properly, and most of the work had been done for them by Gray, so how on Earth could it come to that figure? That's the equivalent of hiring four full-time officers for a year.
I imagine that’s the fully loaded cost.
12 officers for 3 months = 4 for a year.
Inclusive of overhead of office space, HR, risk management, secretarial support etc etc
It did allow the Daily Mail, The open beergate daily mail, to complain on front page two days ago about the cost of investigating these pointless things 🤣
"The police must investigate No. 10 parties!" - The parties are investigated and BJ and others get fined. "Look at the good job the police did! And there's more to come!" - The police don't issue more fines to BJ, but others do get them. "The police have done a horrid job! The top people have got away with it!"
Perhaps the underlings who got done are not a victim of some stitch-up by No. 10 and the police, but victims of the get-Boris campaign?
Then add in Beergate: "The police have investigated! There's nothing to see here! It's all a put-up job by the Mail!" - It turns out that the Labour Party had lied. "Why does it matter? The police investigated?" - More evidence comes out. "Why does it matter? The police investigated? And the Mail's awful!" - The investigation is reopened. "It's a waste of police time to investigate this!"
etc, etc.
You do know that is quite literally the Wail's position reversed. Attacks Labour's push on this - DON'T THEY KNOW THERE'S A WAR ON. Then 10 days of stories piling pressure on the police to do Starmer - one front page literally being TORY PRESSURE TO MAKE THE POLICE ACT. Then Starmer says "I'll quit" and they complain he's trying to pressure the police, then when newss breaks about the Met whitewhash its "WHAT A WASTE OF MONEY".
So you are right, but you're talking about the Tories.
Remember there is a very clear difference between the two sides. We have reams of evidence about Boris and Number 10 breaking the law over and over and over. She prepares a brutal report. Someone leans on the Met to provide cover. Which they do. With a narrow field of investigation. So that now the Gray report will come out and tear Number 10 apart the police have already found Him innocent by simply not investigating the hideous reportage and photos we're about to get. The establishment always looks after its own - if you are a civil servant with a gong you get protected whilst all your staff carry the can.#
If you want to gloat feel free. Not a good luck for the pro-establishment party as people starve.
I don't care if it's the Mail's position, or the opposite of it.
You were in denial over Beergate. I have no idea if Starmer or anyone else there will get a fine - the law appears to be so poorly written that pretty much anything could result. But it was clear the moment that it turned out that Labour had not told the truth about who had been there that the police investigation had not been thorough.
it would be good for you to be consistent.
I am being consistent. There was a prime fascie case against Johnson which the Met now appear to have investigated primarily to sweep under the carpet. There was not one against Starmer, and the "evidence" was not sufficient to suggest the law had been broken.
That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate.
I still think there is nothing to see and expect nobody to get fined. Buit if I'm wrong they fall on their sword and leave the stage. Which is more than can be said for Bonzo and his Clown Car circus. We're going to get the Gray report. Reams of it. Photos and all. And people like you will say "nothing to see here" for the various events the Met haven't even investigated because no fines have been issued.
I'm quite happy with the consistency of my position. Which on all things is apply the rules equally.
I'm actually going to reply again and say that some of the stuff you've written above is rubbish.
"That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate."
Yeah, right. Even Starmer himself cannot say for sure whether he broke the law or not. I am therefore unsure how you can say there is nothing to investigate. Are you a bigger-brained lawyer than Starmer?
"And people like you will say "nothing to see here" "
LOL. No. *You* are the one saying 'nothing to see here' about Durham. See above.
RP is consistent here.
I believe Starmer and Rayner probably broke the letter of the law, and if the law is applied with rigour they must go simply because they said they would. Richard Holden and the Daily Mail and Telegraph railroaded Durham Constabulary into a highly politicised investigation. Based on how they dealt with Cummings the precedent had been set to walk away.
Johnson personally drove a coach and horses through the rules. The Met launched a token case against him. It now transpires that they didn't even look at his more egregious breaches, they ignored the Abba night at number 10! And Case they ignored completely. Mainly Juniors and Women were fined. Cressida Dick's last hurrah was another operational failure.
The Met intervention rather than allowing justice to be served has allowed Johnson to dodge the Gray Report and remain in office. It has worked out so well for him, it looks very like a conspiratorial whitewash. Even his greatest foe in Government was brought down by a cake!
Tory hacks are laughing and they will laugh louder when Starmer gets his Beergate comeuppance. The reality is Team Johnson has taken the rest of us for a ride. And what about his clandestine meeting with Sue Gray last month...?
On what basis have you determined the police didn’t do their job? That you didn’t like the outcome?
AIUI all we know about the ABBA event is that the Met didn’t recommend any FPNs. We don’t know that they ignored it?
I'm with @Mexicanpete. This has been a total establishment stitch-up to save the PM.
It stinks to high heaven.
Evidence please.
It'll come in time.
For a start, Johnson seems to have been taken at his lawyer's word that all these events he attended he considered to be work and therefore was allowed. But social events at work were not allowed. The only event he has been done for is one that is a joke - a cake turned up at the end of a meeting. The other events were massive piss-ups and we've seen some photo evidence and there's more to come no doubt now that only the kids and the women have actually been fined.
But, to be honest, what's the point anymore? I'm tired of it all. He's safe as houses until GE 2024.
Hopefully enough voters are as angry as I am and will not have forgotten by 2024.
The only one I recall seeing pictures of is the garden party - there he was sitting with his wife and a couple of others. Everyone else in the garden appeared to be socially distanced groups. So it’s possible that Boris thought it was ok/ that it was a work meeting / drink with friends (I’ve lost track of what was allowed when).
"The police must investigate No. 10 parties!" - The parties are investigated and BJ and others get fined. "Look at the good job the police did! And there's more to come!" - The police don't issue more fines to BJ, but others do get them. "The police have done a horrid job! The top people have got away with it!"
Perhaps the underlings who got done are not a victim of some stitch-up by No. 10 and the police, but victims of the get-Boris campaign?
Then add in Beergate: "The police have investigated! There's nothing to see here! It's all a put-up job by the Mail!" - It turns out that the Labour Party had lied. "Why does it matter? The police investigated?" - More evidence comes out. "Why does it matter? The police investigated? And the Mail's awful!" - The investigation is reopened. "It's a waste of police time to investigate this!"
etc, etc.
You do know that is quite literally the Wail's position reversed. Attacks Labour's push on this - DON'T THEY KNOW THERE'S A WAR ON. Then 10 days of stories piling pressure on the police to do Starmer - one front page literally being TORY PRESSURE TO MAKE THE POLICE ACT. Then Starmer says "I'll quit" and they complain he's trying to pressure the police, then when newss breaks about the Met whitewhash its "WHAT A WASTE OF MONEY".
So you are right, but you're talking about the Tories.
Remember there is a very clear difference between the two sides. We have reams of evidence about Boris and Number 10 breaking the law over and over and over. She prepares a brutal report. Someone leans on the Met to provide cover. Which they do. With a narrow field of investigation. So that now the Gray report will come out and tear Number 10 apart the police have already found Him innocent by simply not investigating the hideous reportage and photos we're about to get. The establishment always looks after its own - if you are a civil servant with a gong you get protected whilst all your staff carry the can.#
If you want to gloat feel free. Not a good luck for the pro-establishment party as people starve.
I don't care if it's the Mail's position, or the opposite of it.
You were in denial over Beergate. I have no idea if Starmer or anyone else there will get a fine - the law appears to be so poorly written that pretty much anything could result. But it was clear the moment that it turned out that Labour had not told the truth about who had been there that the police investigation had not been thorough.
it would be good for you to be consistent.
I am being consistent. There was a prime fascie case against Johnson which the Met now appear to have investigated primarily to sweep under the carpet. There was not one against Starmer, and the "evidence" was not sufficient to suggest the law had been broken.
That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate.
I still think there is nothing to see and expect nobody to get fined. Buit if I'm wrong they fall on their sword and leave the stage. Which is more than can be said for Bonzo and his Clown Car circus. We're going to get the Gray report. Reams of it. Photos and all. And people like you will say "nothing to see here" for the various events the Met haven't even investigated because no fines have been issued.
I'm quite happy with the consistency of my position. Which on all things is apply the rules equally.
I'm actually going to reply again and say that some of the stuff you've written above is rubbish.
"That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate."
Yeah, right. Even Starmer himself cannot say for sure whether he broke the law or not. I am therefore unsure how you can say there is nothing to investigate. Are you a bigger-brained lawyer than Starmer?
"And people like you will say "nothing to see here" "
LOL. No. *You* are the one saying 'nothing to see here' about Durham. See above.
RP is consistent here.
I believe Starmer and Rayner probably broke the letter of the law, and if the law is applied with rigour they must go simply because they said they would. Richard Holden and the Daily Mail and Telegraph railroaded Durham Constabulary into a highly politicised investigation. Based on how they dealt with Cummings the precedent had been set to walk away.
Johnson personally drove a coach and horses through the rules. The Met launched a token case against him. It now transpires that they didn't even look at his more egregious breaches, they ignored the Abba night at number 10! And Case they ignored completely. Mainly Juniors and Women were fined. Cressida Dick's last hurrah was another operational failure.
The Met intervention rather than allowing justice to be served has allowed Johnson to dodge the Gray Report and remain in office. It has worked out so well for him, it looks very like a conspiratorial whitewash. Even his greatest foe in Government was brought down by a cake!
Tory hacks are laughing and they will laugh louder when Starmer gets his Beergate comeuppance. The reality is Team Johnson has taken the rest of us for a ride. And what about his clandestine meeting with Sue Gray last month...?
On what basis have you determined the police didn’t do their job? That you didn’t like the outcome?
AIUI all we know about the ABBA event is that the Met didn’t recommend any FPNs. We don’t know that they ignored it?
I'm with @Mexicanpete. This has been a total establishment stitch-up to save the PM.
It stinks to high heaven.
Evidence please.
Yes certainly, here you go. 🙂
Just the 1 FPN for the senior leadership group who created and and inspired this law breaking culture, the junior grades are the ones getting hammered for.
Clear whitewash. Clear stink up the nose of every voter. Do you really Need anything else to know for yourself something is wrong here?
"The police must investigate No. 10 parties!" - The parties are investigated and BJ and others get fined. "Look at the good job the police did! And there's more to come!" - The police don't issue more fines to BJ, but others do get them. "The police have done a horrid job! The top people have got away with it!"
Perhaps the underlings who got done are not a victim of some stitch-up by No. 10 and the police, but victims of the get-Boris campaign?
Then add in Beergate: "The police have investigated! There's nothing to see here! It's all a put-up job by the Mail!" - It turns out that the Labour Party had lied. "Why does it matter? The police investigated?" - More evidence comes out. "Why does it matter? The police investigated? And the Mail's awful!" - The investigation is reopened. "It's a waste of police time to investigate this!"
etc, etc.
You do know that is quite literally the Wail's position reversed. Attacks Labour's push on this - DON'T THEY KNOW THERE'S A WAR ON. Then 10 days of stories piling pressure on the police to do Starmer - one front page literally being TORY PRESSURE TO MAKE THE POLICE ACT. Then Starmer says "I'll quit" and they complain he's trying to pressure the police, then when newss breaks about the Met whitewhash its "WHAT A WASTE OF MONEY".
So you are right, but you're talking about the Tories.
Remember there is a very clear difference between the two sides. We have reams of evidence about Boris and Number 10 breaking the law over and over and over. She prepares a brutal report. Someone leans on the Met to provide cover. Which they do. With a narrow field of investigation. So that now the Gray report will come out and tear Number 10 apart the police have already found Him innocent by simply not investigating the hideous reportage and photos we're about to get. The establishment always looks after its own - if you are a civil servant with a gong you get protected whilst all your staff carry the can.#
If you want to gloat feel free. Not a good luck for the pro-establishment party as people starve.
I don't care if it's the Mail's position, or the opposite of it.
You were in denial over Beergate. I have no idea if Starmer or anyone else there will get a fine - the law appears to be so poorly written that pretty much anything could result. But it was clear the moment that it turned out that Labour had not told the truth about who had been there that the police investigation had not been thorough.
it would be good for you to be consistent.
I am being consistent. There was a prime fascie case against Johnson which the Met now appear to have investigated primarily to sweep under the carpet. There was not one against Starmer, and the "evidence" was not sufficient to suggest the law had been broken.
That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate.
I still think there is nothing to see and expect nobody to get fined. Buit if I'm wrong they fall on their sword and leave the stage. Which is more than can be said for Bonzo and his Clown Car circus. We're going to get the Gray report. Reams of it. Photos and all. And people like you will say "nothing to see here" for the various events the Met haven't even investigated because no fines have been issued.
I'm quite happy with the consistency of my position. Which on all things is apply the rules equally.
I'm actually going to reply again and say that some of the stuff you've written above is rubbish.
"That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate."
Yeah, right. Even Starmer himself cannot say for sure whether he broke the law or not. I am therefore unsure how you can say there is nothing to investigate. Are you a bigger-brained lawyer than Starmer?
"And people like you will say "nothing to see here" "
LOL. No. *You* are the one saying 'nothing to see here' about Durham. See above.
RP is consistent here.
I believe Starmer and Rayner probably broke the letter of the law, and if the law is applied with rigour they must go simply because they said they would. Richard Holden and the Daily Mail and Telegraph railroaded Durham Constabulary into a highly politicised investigation. Based on how they dealt with Cummings the precedent had been set to walk away.
Johnson personally drove a coach and horses through the rules. The Met launched a token case against him. It now transpires that they didn't even look at his more egregious breaches, they ignored the Abba night at number 10! And Case they ignored completely. Mainly Juniors and Women were fined. Cressida Dick's last hurrah was another operational failure.
The Met intervention rather than allowing justice to be served has allowed Johnson to dodge the Gray Report and remain in office. It has worked out so well for him, it looks very like a conspiratorial whitewash. Even his greatest foe in Government was brought down by a cake!
Tory hacks are laughing and they will laugh louder when Starmer gets his Beergate comeuppance. The reality is Team Johnson has taken the rest of us for a ride. And what about his clandestine meeting with Sue Gray last month...?
On what basis have you determined the police didn’t do their job? That you didn’t like the outcome?
AIUI all we know about the ABBA event is that the Met didn’t recommend any FPNs. We don’t know that they ignored it?
I'm with @Mexicanpete. This has been a total establishment stitch-up to save the PM.
It stinks to high heaven.
Evidence please.
Yes certainly, here you go. 🙂
Just the 1 FPN for the senior leadership group who created and and inspired this law breaking culture, the junior grades are the ones getting hammered for.
Clear whitewash. Clear stink up the nose of every voter. Do you really Need anything else to know for yourself something is wrong here?
"The police must investigate No. 10 parties!" - The parties are investigated and BJ and others get fined. "Look at the good job the police did! And there's more to come!" - The police don't issue more fines to BJ, but others do get them. "The police have done a horrid job! The top people have got away with it!"
Perhaps the underlings who got done are not a victim of some stitch-up by No. 10 and the police, but victims of the get-Boris campaign?
Then add in Beergate: "The police have investigated! There's nothing to see here! It's all a put-up job by the Mail!" - It turns out that the Labour Party had lied. "Why does it matter? The police investigated?" - More evidence comes out. "Why does it matter? The police investigated? And the Mail's awful!" - The investigation is reopened. "It's a waste of police time to investigate this!"
etc, etc.
You do know that is quite literally the Wail's position reversed. Attacks Labour's push on this - DON'T THEY KNOW THERE'S A WAR ON. Then 10 days of stories piling pressure on the police to do Starmer - one front page literally being TORY PRESSURE TO MAKE THE POLICE ACT. Then Starmer says "I'll quit" and they complain he's trying to pressure the police, then when newss breaks about the Met whitewhash its "WHAT A WASTE OF MONEY".
So you are right, but you're talking about the Tories.
Remember there is a very clear difference between the two sides. We have reams of evidence about Boris and Number 10 breaking the law over and over and over. She prepares a brutal report. Someone leans on the Met to provide cover. Which they do. With a narrow field of investigation. So that now the Gray report will come out and tear Number 10 apart the police have already found Him innocent by simply not investigating the hideous reportage and photos we're about to get. The establishment always looks after its own - if you are a civil servant with a gong you get protected whilst all your staff carry the can.#
If you want to gloat feel free. Not a good luck for the pro-establishment party as people starve.
I don't care if it's the Mail's position, or the opposite of it.
You were in denial over Beergate. I have no idea if Starmer or anyone else there will get a fine - the law appears to be so poorly written that pretty much anything could result. But it was clear the moment that it turned out that Labour had not told the truth about who had been there that the police investigation had not been thorough.
it would be good for you to be consistent.
I am being consistent. There was a prime fascie case against Johnson which the Met now appear to have investigated primarily to sweep under the carpet. There was not one against Starmer, and the "evidence" was not sufficient to suggest the law had been broken.
That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate.
I still think there is nothing to see and expect nobody to get fined. Buit if I'm wrong they fall on their sword and leave the stage. Which is more than can be said for Bonzo and his Clown Car circus. We're going to get the Gray report. Reams of it. Photos and all. And people like you will say "nothing to see here" for the various events the Met haven't even investigated because no fines have been issued.
I'm quite happy with the consistency of my position. Which on all things is apply the rules equally.
I'm actually going to reply again and say that some of the stuff you've written above is rubbish.
"That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate."
Yeah, right. Even Starmer himself cannot say for sure whether he broke the law or not. I am therefore unsure how you can say there is nothing to investigate. Are you a bigger-brained lawyer than Starmer?
"And people like you will say "nothing to see here" "
LOL. No. *You* are the one saying 'nothing to see here' about Durham. See above.
RP is consistent here.
I believe Starmer and Rayner probably broke the letter of the law, and if the law is applied with rigour they must go simply because they said they would. Richard Holden and the Daily Mail and Telegraph railroaded Durham Constabulary into a highly politicised investigation. Based on how they dealt with Cummings the precedent had been set to walk away.
Johnson personally drove a coach and horses through the rules. The Met launched a token case against him. It now transpires that they didn't even look at his more egregious breaches, they ignored the Abba night at number 10! And Case they ignored completely. Mainly Juniors and Women were fined. Cressida Dick's last hurrah was another operational failure.
The Met intervention rather than allowing justice to be served has allowed Johnson to dodge the Gray Report and remain in office. It has worked out so well for him, it looks very like a conspiratorial whitewash. Even his greatest foe in Government was brought down by a cake!
Tory hacks are laughing and they will laugh louder when Starmer gets his Beergate comeuppance. The reality is Team Johnson has taken the rest of us for a ride. And what about his clandestine meeting with Sue Gray last month...?
On what basis have you determined the police didn’t do their job? That you didn’t like the outcome?
AIUI all we know about the ABBA event is that the Met didn’t recommend any FPNs. We don’t know that they ignored it?
The Met have confirmed that of the 5 events Johnson was known to have attended the police only investigated him personally for two (questionnaires issued for just the two events) including the cake event, which handily brought down Sunak.
Reports are that Juniors were obliging to Gray whereas Seniors and some politicians in general were not. I suspect Sunak was truthful.They did not expect the Gray Report to be hijacked and used as evidence for the prosecution.
I personally think that Johnson not being investigated is remarkable, but Case, with the evidence we have seen ourselves not getting an FPN is astonishing.
Big Dog is saved...by the less than lamented Cressida Dick!
Sounds like the conspiracy theorists are out in force. Next we will have Big Dog saved by an unholy cabal of the Police, Freemasons and MI5
Are you saying there was none? Anyway, at one level what saved Big Dog were his usual tactics of prevaricate and postpone. And it seems to have worked so well done, Boris!
I’m saying that jumping to theories that BJ has been deliberately saved by the Police is not healthy.
Let’s also put it the other way. If SKS doesn’t get issued a FPN by Durham and the Tories say it’s because the Commissioner there leant on the Police, would you not be claiming the Tories are being conspiracy theorists?
"The police must investigate No. 10 parties!" - The parties are investigated and BJ and others get fined. "Look at the good job the police did! And there's more to come!" - The police don't issue more fines to BJ, but others do get them. "The police have done a horrid job! The top people have got away with it!"
Perhaps the underlings who got done are not a victim of some stitch-up by No. 10 and the police, but victims of the get-Boris campaign?
Then add in Beergate: "The police have investigated! There's nothing to see here! It's all a put-up job by the Mail!" - It turns out that the Labour Party had lied. "Why does it matter? The police investigated?" - More evidence comes out. "Why does it matter? The police investigated? And the Mail's awful!" - The investigation is reopened. "It's a waste of police time to investigate this!"
etc, etc.
You do know that is quite literally the Wail's position reversed. Attacks Labour's push on this - DON'T THEY KNOW THERE'S A WAR ON. Then 10 days of stories piling pressure on the police to do Starmer - one front page literally being TORY PRESSURE TO MAKE THE POLICE ACT. Then Starmer says "I'll quit" and they complain he's trying to pressure the police, then when newss breaks about the Met whitewhash its "WHAT A WASTE OF MONEY".
So you are right, but you're talking about the Tories.
Remember there is a very clear difference between the two sides. We have reams of evidence about Boris and Number 10 breaking the law over and over and over. She prepares a brutal report. Someone leans on the Met to provide cover. Which they do. With a narrow field of investigation. So that now the Gray report will come out and tear Number 10 apart the police have already found Him innocent by simply not investigating the hideous reportage and photos we're about to get. The establishment always looks after its own - if you are a civil servant with a gong you get protected whilst all your staff carry the can.#
If you want to gloat feel free. Not a good luck for the pro-establishment party as people starve.
I don't care if it's the Mail's position, or the opposite of it.
You were in denial over Beergate. I have no idea if Starmer or anyone else there will get a fine - the law appears to be so poorly written that pretty much anything could result. But it was clear the moment that it turned out that Labour had not told the truth about who had been there that the police investigation had not been thorough.
it would be good for you to be consistent.
I am being consistent. There was a prime fascie case against Johnson which the Met now appear to have investigated primarily to sweep under the carpet. There was not one against Starmer, and the "evidence" was not sufficient to suggest the law had been broken.
That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate.
I still think there is nothing to see and expect nobody to get fined. Buit if I'm wrong they fall on their sword and leave the stage. Which is more than can be said for Bonzo and his Clown Car circus. We're going to get the Gray report. Reams of it. Photos and all. And people like you will say "nothing to see here" for the various events the Met haven't even investigated because no fines have been issued.
I'm quite happy with the consistency of my position. Which on all things is apply the rules equally.
I'm actually going to reply again and say that some of the stuff you've written above is rubbish.
"That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate."
Yeah, right. Even Starmer himself cannot say for sure whether he broke the law or not. I am therefore unsure how you can say there is nothing to investigate. Are you a bigger-brained lawyer than Starmer?
"And people like you will say "nothing to see here" "
LOL. No. *You* are the one saying 'nothing to see here' about Durham. See above.
RP is consistent here.
I believe Starmer and Rayner probably broke the letter of the law, and if the law is applied with rigour they must go simply because they said they would. Richard Holden and the Daily Mail and Telegraph railroaded Durham Constabulary into a highly politicised investigation. Based on how they dealt with Cummings the precedent had been set to walk away.
Johnson personally drove a coach and horses through the rules. The Met launched a token case against him. It now transpires that they didn't even look at his more egregious breaches, they ignored the Abba night at number 10! And Case they ignored completely. Mainly Juniors and Women were fined. Cressida Dick's last hurrah was another operational failure.
The Met intervention rather than allowing justice to be served has allowed Johnson to dodge the Gray Report and remain in office. It has worked out so well for him, it looks very like a conspiratorial whitewash. Even his greatest foe in Government was brought down by a cake!
Tory hacks are laughing and they will laugh louder when Starmer gets his Beergate comeuppance. The reality is Team Johnson has taken the rest of us for a ride. And what about his clandestine meeting with Sue Gray last month...?
On what basis have you determined the police didn’t do their job? That you didn’t like the outcome?
AIUI all we know about the ABBA event is that the Met didn’t recommend any FPNs. We don’t know that they ignored it?
I'm with @Mexicanpete. This has been a total establishment stitch-up to save the PM.
It stinks to high heaven.
Evidence please.
Yes certainly, here you go. 🙂
Just the 1 FPN for the senior leadership group who created and and inspired this law breaking culture, the junior grades are the ones getting hammered for.
Clear whitewash. Clear stink up the nose of every voter. Do you really Need anything else to know for yourself something is wrong here?
"The police must investigate No. 10 parties!" - The parties are investigated and BJ and others get fined. "Look at the good job the police did! And there's more to come!" - The police don't issue more fines to BJ, but others do get them. "The police have done a horrid job! The top people have got away with it!"
Perhaps the underlings who got done are not a victim of some stitch-up by No. 10 and the police, but victims of the get-Boris campaign?
Then add in Beergate: "The police have investigated! There's nothing to see here! It's all a put-up job by the Mail!" - It turns out that the Labour Party had lied. "Why does it matter? The police investigated?" - More evidence comes out. "Why does it matter? The police investigated? And the Mail's awful!" - The investigation is reopened. "It's a waste of police time to investigate this!"
etc, etc.
You do know that is quite literally the Wail's position reversed. Attacks Labour's push on this - DON'T THEY KNOW THERE'S A WAR ON. Then 10 days of stories piling pressure on the police to do Starmer - one front page literally being TORY PRESSURE TO MAKE THE POLICE ACT. Then Starmer says "I'll quit" and they complain he's trying to pressure the police, then when newss breaks about the Met whitewhash its "WHAT A WASTE OF MONEY".
So you are right, but you're talking about the Tories.
Remember there is a very clear difference between the two sides. We have reams of evidence about Boris and Number 10 breaking the law over and over and over. She prepares a brutal report. Someone leans on the Met to provide cover. Which they do. With a narrow field of investigation. So that now the Gray report will come out and tear Number 10 apart the police have already found Him innocent by simply not investigating the hideous reportage and photos we're about to get. The establishment always looks after its own - if you are a civil servant with a gong you get protected whilst all your staff carry the can.#
If you want to gloat feel free. Not a good luck for the pro-establishment party as people starve.
I don't care if it's the Mail's position, or the opposite of it.
You were in denial over Beergate. I have no idea if Starmer or anyone else there will get a fine - the law appears to be so poorly written that pretty much anything could result. But it was clear the moment that it turned out that Labour had not told the truth about who had been there that the police investigation had not been thorough.
it would be good for you to be consistent.
I am being consistent. There was a prime fascie case against Johnson which the Met now appear to have investigated primarily to sweep under the carpet. There was not one against Starmer, and the "evidence" was not sufficient to suggest the law had been broken.
That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate.
I still think there is nothing to see and expect nobody to get fined. Buit if I'm wrong they fall on their sword and leave the stage. Which is more than can be said for Bonzo and his Clown Car circus. We're going to get the Gray report. Reams of it. Photos and all. And people like you will say "nothing to see here" for the various events the Met haven't even investigated because no fines have been issued.
I'm quite happy with the consistency of my position. Which on all things is apply the rules equally.
I'm actually going to reply again and say that some of the stuff you've written above is rubbish.
"That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate."
Yeah, right. Even Starmer himself cannot say for sure whether he broke the law or not. I am therefore unsure how you can say there is nothing to investigate. Are you a bigger-brained lawyer than Starmer?
"And people like you will say "nothing to see here" "
LOL. No. *You* are the one saying 'nothing to see here' about Durham. See above.
RP is consistent here.
I believe Starmer and Rayner probably broke the letter of the law, and if the law is applied with rigour they must go simply because they said they would. Richard Holden and the Daily Mail and Telegraph railroaded Durham Constabulary into a highly politicised investigation. Based on how they dealt with Cummings the precedent had been set to walk away.
Johnson personally drove a coach and horses through the rules. The Met launched a token case against him. It now transpires that they didn't even look at his more egregious breaches, they ignored the Abba night at number 10! And Case they ignored completely. Mainly Juniors and Women were fined. Cressida Dick's last hurrah was another operational failure.
The Met intervention rather than allowing justice to be served has allowed Johnson to dodge the Gray Report and remain in office. It has worked out so well for him, it looks very like a conspiratorial whitewash. Even his greatest foe in Government was brought down by a cake!
Tory hacks are laughing and they will laugh louder when Starmer gets his Beergate comeuppance. The reality is Team Johnson has taken the rest of us for a ride. And what about his clandestine meeting with Sue Gray last month...?
On what basis have you determined the police didn’t do their job? That you didn’t like the outcome?
AIUI all we know about the ABBA event is that the Met didn’t recommend any FPNs. We don’t know that they ignored it?
The Met have confirmed that of the 5 events Johnson was known to have attended the police only investigated him personally for two (questionnaires issued for just the two events) including the cake event, which handily brought down Sunak.
Reports are that Juniors were obliging to Gray whereas Seniors and some politicians in general were not. I suspect Sunak was truthful.They did not expect the Gray Report to be hijacked and used as evidence for the prosecution.
I personally think that Johnson not being investigated is remarkable, but Case, with the evidence we have seen ourselves not getting an FPN is astonishing.
Big Dog is saved...by the less than lamented Cressida Dick!
So hearsay and rumour. Ok.
But if they didn’t expect the Gray report to be hijacked they are too naive to be in Downing Street.
We all know words would have gone on behind the scenes in private and deals done its just how things work
I’m not sure ruling out hearsay in favour of conspiracy theories is a move in the right direction
"The police must investigate No. 10 parties!" - The parties are investigated and BJ and others get fined. "Look at the good job the police did! And there's more to come!" - The police don't issue more fines to BJ, but others do get them. "The police have done a horrid job! The top people have got away with it!"
Perhaps the underlings who got done are not a victim of some stitch-up by No. 10 and the police, but victims of the get-Boris campaign?
Then add in Beergate: "The police have investigated! There's nothing to see here! It's all a put-up job by the Mail!" - It turns out that the Labour Party had lied. "Why does it matter? The police investigated?" - More evidence comes out. "Why does it matter? The police investigated? And the Mail's awful!" - The investigation is reopened. "It's a waste of police time to investigate this!"
etc, etc.
You do know that is quite literally the Wail's position reversed. Attacks Labour's push on this - DON'T THEY KNOW THERE'S A WAR ON. Then 10 days of stories piling pressure on the police to do Starmer - one front page literally being TORY PRESSURE TO MAKE THE POLICE ACT. Then Starmer says "I'll quit" and they complain he's trying to pressure the police, then when newss breaks about the Met whitewhash its "WHAT A WASTE OF MONEY".
So you are right, but you're talking about the Tories.
Remember there is a very clear difference between the two sides. We have reams of evidence about Boris and Number 10 breaking the law over and over and over. She prepares a brutal report. Someone leans on the Met to provide cover. Which they do. With a narrow field of investigation. So that now the Gray report will come out and tear Number 10 apart the police have already found Him innocent by simply not investigating the hideous reportage and photos we're about to get. The establishment always looks after its own - if you are a civil servant with a gong you get protected whilst all your staff carry the can.#
If you want to gloat feel free. Not a good luck for the pro-establishment party as people starve.
I don't care if it's the Mail's position, or the opposite of it.
You were in denial over Beergate. I have no idea if Starmer or anyone else there will get a fine - the law appears to be so poorly written that pretty much anything could result. But it was clear the moment that it turned out that Labour had not told the truth about who had been there that the police investigation had not been thorough.
it would be good for you to be consistent.
I am being consistent. There was a prime fascie case against Johnson which the Met now appear to have investigated primarily to sweep under the carpet. There was not one against Starmer, and the "evidence" was not sufficient to suggest the law had been broken.
That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate.
I still think there is nothing to see and expect nobody to get fined. Buit if I'm wrong they fall on their sword and leave the stage. Which is more than can be said for Bonzo and his Clown Car circus. We're going to get the Gray report. Reams of it. Photos and all. And people like you will say "nothing to see here" for the various events the Met haven't even investigated because no fines have been issued.
I'm quite happy with the consistency of my position. Which on all things is apply the rules equally.
I'm actually going to reply again and say that some of the stuff you've written above is rubbish.
"That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate."
Yeah, right. Even Starmer himself cannot say for sure whether he broke the law or not. I am therefore unsure how you can say there is nothing to investigate. Are you a bigger-brained lawyer than Starmer?
"And people like you will say "nothing to see here" "
LOL. No. *You* are the one saying 'nothing to see here' about Durham. See above.
RP is consistent here.
I believe Starmer and Rayner probably broke the letter of the law, and if the law is applied with rigour they must go simply because they said they would. Richard Holden and the Daily Mail and Telegraph railroaded Durham Constabulary into a highly politicised investigation. Based on how they dealt with Cummings the precedent had been set to walk away.
Johnson personally drove a coach and horses through the rules. The Met launched a token case against him. It now transpires that they didn't even look at his more egregious breaches, they ignored the Abba night at number 10! And Case they ignored completely. Mainly Juniors and Women were fined. Cressida Dick's last hurrah was another operational failure.
The Met intervention rather than allowing justice to be served has allowed Johnson to dodge the Gray Report and remain in office. It has worked out so well for him, it looks very like a conspiratorial whitewash. Even his greatest foe in Government was brought down by a cake!
Tory hacks are laughing and they will laugh louder when Starmer gets his Beergate comeuppance. The reality is Team Johnson has taken the rest of us for a ride. And what about his clandestine meeting with Sue Gray last month...?
On what basis have you determined the police didn’t do their job? That you didn’t like the outcome?
AIUI all we know about the ABBA event is that the Met didn’t recommend any FPNs. We don’t know that they ignored it?
The Met have confirmed that of the 5 events Johnson was known to have attended the police only investigated him personally for two (questionnaires issued for just the two events) including the cake event, which handily brought down Sunak.
Reports are that Juniors were obliging to Gray whereas Seniors and some politicians in general were not. I suspect Sunak was truthful.They did not expect the Gray Report to be hijacked and used as evidence for the prosecution.
I personally think that Johnson not being investigated is remarkable, but Case, with the evidence we have seen ourselves not getting an FPN is astonishing.
Big Dog is saved...by the less than lamented Cressida Dick!
Sounds like the conspiracy theorists are out in force. Next we will have Big Dog saved by an unholy cabal of the Police, Freemasons and MI5
Are you saying there was none? Anyway, at one level what saved Big Dog were his usual tactics of prevaricate and postpone. And it seems to have worked so well done, Boris!
So Mr Ed you think backroom deals never go on If you think that you are so naive you shouldn't be let out
I know people regard me as an angry voice and yes I am here far more than I would like to be. But the argument I am having with @bondegezou is symptomatic.
Simply put 40 to 50 years ago a household could live on the wage of one earner. Policy really hasnt changed that much over that time and now its common for households with 2 full time earners to be struggling. The argument from people like him is oh we need to keep on doing what we are doing, this was also the argument for remaining.
Sadly for most people in this country what we are doing really isnt working for them and year by year they feel poorer and poorer and struggle more and more while the upper echelons of society seem to get richer and richer.
Things need to change, the brexit vote was a result of this, my diatribe about doing essentials is part of this. Will they work? I really have no idea. However for a lot of this country just carrying on with the same old same old is not an option as all they see from past experience is they will slowly have less and less.
The fact that Brexit was being promoted by precisely the same people (Thatcherite ideologues backed by footloose capital) who had engineered the whole rich get richer while everyone else struggles shenanigans in the first place didn't seem to register with people.
However Thatcher would not have approved at all of what the Tory party has become. Some of the disdain the likes of Clarke and Heseltine have for Bluekip would be shared by Thatcher, even if she would have been on the Brexit side.
"What exists — what people have created — is a system that allows certain favored people to position themselves as victims, and destroy those they have come to hate. Aside from the human tragedy here, think of the scientific discoveries that are now denied to us, because of this vengeful woman, and this vengeful, unjust system we have created — a system that is a Machine incapable of dealing with humanity, in all its complexity.
I have been hearing in private correspondence, and in this blog’s comments section, some people saying that they don’t recognize what America has become, and that they are exploring ways to leave. Others — I’m thinking of a friend who is a very well known academic — says that no matter what, he is staying to fight to the bitter end. The incredible thing is that we are having these conversations at all. I can do the work I do just fine here, for now, but if I were and up-and-coming Joshua Katz or David Sabatini, I would start looking to start my career in Europe or elsewhere abroad, where they aren’t as insane as Woke America has become.
And listen: the thing you see so clearly if you live any time abroad, as I have done in Hungary over the past year, is that America remains a cultural powerhouse, exporting our own insanity to the world. One of the reasons I strongly support Hungarian PM Viktor Orban is that he is not intimidated by any of it, and he understands the need to use what power he has as the country’s political leader to defy this insanity, and to prevent it from taking root in his country.
What I hope to see in our country is a Republican Party come to power on a platform of actively rolling back wokeness, institutionally and otherwise. Not just opposing it rhetorically, but using the power of the state to push it back, hard. No more Joshua Katzes. No more David Sabatinis. No more martyrs to this totalitarian ideology that is destroying our ability to live together as broken human beings."
I usually consider myself pretty anti-woke, but when I read this kind of shit it puts me right into the opposite camp. If you're prepared to dismantle democracy over trans-bathrooms, then maybe it's not woke that's the problem.
Just following up on this, because it makes me so angry. The rallying cry in this piece is "No more Joshua Katzes".
OK Fine. Joshua Katz lost a prestigious, but non-paying honorory position, at a private university for writing an unwoke article.
Lots of people have lost actual paying jobs at private Brigham Young University or at Liberty University for arguing that homosexuality should not be illegal.
Where is the cry about the stifling of debate when it is people expressing those views? If it's bad that Princetown said "no you can't have this position because you wrote this article", then it shold be just as bad when it is the other way around.
Freedom of speech is not just for those who agree with us.
I am not sure what is "Woke" about the Sabatini case. It reads to me to be a straightforward case of sexual harrassment. Or is refusing to tolerate sexual harrassment now "Woke"? If so what do the "anti-Woke" crowd want?
I would like everyone in science to read the painful, poignant description of what, exactly, Sabatini did to women under his mentorship. It should make you sick to your stomach. I don't think I could still be in science if I'd faced any of this. https://t.co/vJ5E7NWMEJ
The allegations about Russian soldiers conduct in Ukraine makes me sick to my stomach. Not this. It is a one sided list of allegations of inappropriate behaviour, put forward in a lawsuit by someone suing for damages for 'emotional distress' following a messy break up.
Our time would be better spent dealing with other, far more serious, things.
Sexual harrassment in the work place is not 'a messy break up'. A lot of the allegations in the paper are based upon the findings of the MIT investigation, they are not random stories.
It is perfectly possible to be both in favour of safe workplaces for women and against Russian war crimes.
Yes - but the MIT 'independent' investigation is alleged to be a sham, a biased kangaroo court. So the edifice is built on nothing. That, as I understand it, is Sabatini's defence. So actually, if you want to find out the truth, you would need to consider both sides- not just follow the zeitgeist.
As a general rule, those sanctioned by an investigation often question the process rather than accept their guilt. No one appeals when they are let off.
Either way, the Sabatini case is one of allegations of sexual harrassment in the work place, I don't see that as a "Woke" issue, so don't see his downfall as an issue of "Woke gone mad".
Do you think that is sufficiently serious to prevent him ever working again in his chosen career?
I can see why students don't want him as a supervisor.
"The police must investigate No. 10 parties!" - The parties are investigated and BJ and others get fined. "Look at the good job the police did! And there's more to come!" - The police don't issue more fines to BJ, but others do get them. "The police have done a horrid job! The top people have got away with it!"
Perhaps the underlings who got done are not a victim of some stitch-up by No. 10 and the police, but victims of the get-Boris campaign?
Then add in Beergate: "The police have investigated! There's nothing to see here! It's all a put-up job by the Mail!" - It turns out that the Labour Party had lied. "Why does it matter? The police investigated?" - More evidence comes out. "Why does it matter? The police investigated? And the Mail's awful!" - The investigation is reopened. "It's a waste of police time to investigate this!"
etc, etc.
You do know that is quite literally the Wail's position reversed. Attacks Labour's push on this - DON'T THEY KNOW THERE'S A WAR ON. Then 10 days of stories piling pressure on the police to do Starmer - one front page literally being TORY PRESSURE TO MAKE THE POLICE ACT. Then Starmer says "I'll quit" and they complain he's trying to pressure the police, then when newss breaks about the Met whitewhash its "WHAT A WASTE OF MONEY".
So you are right, but you're talking about the Tories.
Remember there is a very clear difference between the two sides. We have reams of evidence about Boris and Number 10 breaking the law over and over and over. She prepares a brutal report. Someone leans on the Met to provide cover. Which they do. With a narrow field of investigation. So that now the Gray report will come out and tear Number 10 apart the police have already found Him innocent by simply not investigating the hideous reportage and photos we're about to get. The establishment always looks after its own - if you are a civil servant with a gong you get protected whilst all your staff carry the can.#
If you want to gloat feel free. Not a good luck for the pro-establishment party as people starve.
I don't care if it's the Mail's position, or the opposite of it.
You were in denial over Beergate. I have no idea if Starmer or anyone else there will get a fine - the law appears to be so poorly written that pretty much anything could result. But it was clear the moment that it turned out that Labour had not told the truth about who had been there that the police investigation had not been thorough.
it would be good for you to be consistent.
I am being consistent. There was a prime fascie case against Johnson which the Met now appear to have investigated primarily to sweep under the carpet. There was not one against Starmer, and the "evidence" was not sufficient to suggest the law had been broken.
That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate.
I still think there is nothing to see and expect nobody to get fined. Buit if I'm wrong they fall on their sword and leave the stage. Which is more than can be said for Bonzo and his Clown Car circus. We're going to get the Gray report. Reams of it. Photos and all. And people like you will say "nothing to see here" for the various events the Met haven't even investigated because no fines have been issued.
I'm quite happy with the consistency of my position. Which on all things is apply the rules equally.
I'm actually going to reply again and say that some of the stuff you've written above is rubbish.
"That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate."
Yeah, right. Even Starmer himself cannot say for sure whether he broke the law or not. I am therefore unsure how you can say there is nothing to investigate. Are you a bigger-brained lawyer than Starmer?
"And people like you will say "nothing to see here" "
LOL. No. *You* are the one saying 'nothing to see here' about Durham. See above.
RP is consistent here.
I believe Starmer and Rayner probably broke the letter of the law, and if the law is applied with rigour they must go simply because they said they would. Richard Holden and the Daily Mail and Telegraph railroaded Durham Constabulary into a highly politicised investigation. Based on how they dealt with Cummings the precedent had been set to walk away.
Johnson personally drove a coach and horses through the rules. The Met launched a token case against him. It now transpires that they didn't even look at his more egregious breaches, they ignored the Abba night at number 10! And Case they ignored completely. Mainly Juniors and Women were fined. Cressida Dick's last hurrah was another operational failure.
The Met intervention rather than allowing justice to be served has allowed Johnson to dodge the Gray Report and remain in office. It has worked out so well for him, it looks very like a conspiratorial whitewash. Even his greatest foe in Government was brought down by a cake!
Tory hacks are laughing and they will laugh louder when Starmer gets his Beergate comeuppance. The reality is Team Johnson has taken the rest of us for a ride. And what about his clandestine meeting with Sue Gray last month...?
On what basis have you determined the police didn’t do their job? That you didn’t like the outcome?
AIUI all we know about the ABBA event is that the Met didn’t recommend any FPNs. We don’t know that they ignored it?
I'm with @Mexicanpete. This has been a total establishment stitch-up to save the PM.
It stinks to high heaven.
Evidence please.
It'll come in time.
For a start, Johnson seems to have been taken at his lawyer's word that all these events he attended he considered to be work and therefore was allowed. But social events at work were not allowed. The only event he has been done for is one that is a joke - a cake turned up at the end of a meeting. The other events were massive piss-ups and we've seen some photo evidence and there's more to come no doubt now that only the kids and the women have actually been fined.
But, to be honest, what's the point anymore? I'm tired of it all. He's safe as houses until GE 2024.
Hopefully enough voters are as angry as I am and will not have forgotten by 2024.
The only one I recall seeing pictures of is the garden party - there he was sitting with his wife and a couple of others. Everyone else in the garden appeared to be socially distanced groups. So it’s possible that Boris thought it was ok/ that it was a work meeting / drink with friends (I’ve lost track of what was allowed when).
The zoom quiz he was on zoom from what I recall.
But I’ve never really been interested
Well you should be. Imagine if Prime Minister Jeremy Corbyn had led us down this garden path. You would be outraged.
The wagons have been well and truly circled, but by whom is alarming.
"The police must investigate No. 10 parties!" - The parties are investigated and BJ and others get fined. "Look at the good job the police did! And there's more to come!" - The police don't issue more fines to BJ, but others do get them. "The police have done a horrid job! The top people have got away with it!"
Perhaps the underlings who got done are not a victim of some stitch-up by No. 10 and the police, but victims of the get-Boris campaign?
Then add in Beergate: "The police have investigated! There's nothing to see here! It's all a put-up job by the Mail!" - It turns out that the Labour Party had lied. "Why does it matter? The police investigated?" - More evidence comes out. "Why does it matter? The police investigated? And the Mail's awful!" - The investigation is reopened. "It's a waste of police time to investigate this!"
etc, etc.
You do know that is quite literally the Wail's position reversed. Attacks Labour's push on this - DON'T THEY KNOW THERE'S A WAR ON. Then 10 days of stories piling pressure on the police to do Starmer - one front page literally being TORY PRESSURE TO MAKE THE POLICE ACT. Then Starmer says "I'll quit" and they complain he's trying to pressure the police, then when newss breaks about the Met whitewhash its "WHAT A WASTE OF MONEY".
So you are right, but you're talking about the Tories.
Remember there is a very clear difference between the two sides. We have reams of evidence about Boris and Number 10 breaking the law over and over and over. She prepares a brutal report. Someone leans on the Met to provide cover. Which they do. With a narrow field of investigation. So that now the Gray report will come out and tear Number 10 apart the police have already found Him innocent by simply not investigating the hideous reportage and photos we're about to get. The establishment always looks after its own - if you are a civil servant with a gong you get protected whilst all your staff carry the can.#
If you want to gloat feel free. Not a good luck for the pro-establishment party as people starve.
I don't care if it's the Mail's position, or the opposite of it.
You were in denial over Beergate. I have no idea if Starmer or anyone else there will get a fine - the law appears to be so poorly written that pretty much anything could result. But it was clear the moment that it turned out that Labour had not told the truth about who had been there that the police investigation had not been thorough.
it would be good for you to be consistent.
I am being consistent. There was a prime fascie case against Johnson which the Met now appear to have investigated primarily to sweep under the carpet. There was not one against Starmer, and the "evidence" was not sufficient to suggest the law had been broken.
That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate.
I still think there is nothing to see and expect nobody to get fined. Buit if I'm wrong they fall on their sword and leave the stage. Which is more than can be said for Bonzo and his Clown Car circus. We're going to get the Gray report. Reams of it. Photos and all. And people like you will say "nothing to see here" for the various events the Met haven't even investigated because no fines have been issued.
I'm quite happy with the consistency of my position. Which on all things is apply the rules equally.
I'm actually going to reply again and say that some of the stuff you've written above is rubbish.
"That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate."
Yeah, right. Even Starmer himself cannot say for sure whether he broke the law or not. I am therefore unsure how you can say there is nothing to investigate. Are you a bigger-brained lawyer than Starmer?
"And people like you will say "nothing to see here" "
LOL. No. *You* are the one saying 'nothing to see here' about Durham. See above.
RP is consistent here.
I believe Starmer and Rayner probably broke the letter of the law, and if the law is applied with rigour they must go simply because they said they would. Richard Holden and the Daily Mail and Telegraph railroaded Durham Constabulary into a highly politicised investigation. Based on how they dealt with Cummings the precedent had been set to walk away.
Johnson personally drove a coach and horses through the rules. The Met launched a token case against him. It now transpires that they didn't even look at his more egregious breaches, they ignored the Abba night at number 10! And Case they ignored completely. Mainly Juniors and Women were fined. Cressida Dick's last hurrah was another operational failure.
The Met intervention rather than allowing justice to be served has allowed Johnson to dodge the Gray Report and remain in office. It has worked out so well for him, it looks very like a conspiratorial whitewash. Even his greatest foe in Government was brought down by a cake!
Tory hacks are laughing and they will laugh louder when Starmer gets his Beergate comeuppance. The reality is Team Johnson has taken the rest of us for a ride. And what about his clandestine meeting with Sue Gray last month...?
On what basis have you determined the police didn’t do their job? That you didn’t like the outcome?
AIUI all we know about the ABBA event is that the Met didn’t recommend any FPNs. We don’t know that they ignored it?
The Met have confirmed that of the 5 events Johnson was known to have attended the police only investigated him personally for two (questionnaires issued for just the two events) including the cake event, which handily brought down Sunak.
Reports are that Juniors were obliging to Gray whereas Seniors and some politicians in general were not. I suspect Sunak was truthful.They did not expect the Gray Report to be hijacked and used as evidence for the prosecution.
I personally think that Johnson not being investigated is remarkable, but Case, with the evidence we have seen ourselves not getting an FPN is astonishing.
Big Dog is saved...by the less than lamented Cressida Dick!
So hearsay and rumour. Ok.
But if they didn’t expect the Gray report to be hijacked they are too naive to be in Downing Street.
We all know words would have gone on behind the scenes in private and deals done its just how things work
I’m not sure ruling out hearsay in favour of conspiracy theories is a move in the right direction
Dim. Almost everything you know, you know by hearsay. Conspiracy theory does not mean what you think it means.
"The police must investigate No. 10 parties!" - The parties are investigated and BJ and others get fined. "Look at the good job the police did! And there's more to come!" - The police don't issue more fines to BJ, but others do get them. "The police have done a horrid job! The top people have got away with it!"
Perhaps the underlings who got done are not a victim of some stitch-up by No. 10 and the police, but victims of the get-Boris campaign?
Then add in Beergate: "The police have investigated! There's nothing to see here! It's all a put-up job by the Mail!" - It turns out that the Labour Party had lied. "Why does it matter? The police investigated?" - More evidence comes out. "Why does it matter? The police investigated? And the Mail's awful!" - The investigation is reopened. "It's a waste of police time to investigate this!"
etc, etc.
You do know that is quite literally the Wail's position reversed. Attacks Labour's push on this - DON'T THEY KNOW THERE'S A WAR ON. Then 10 days of stories piling pressure on the police to do Starmer - one front page literally being TORY PRESSURE TO MAKE THE POLICE ACT. Then Starmer says "I'll quit" and they complain he's trying to pressure the police, then when newss breaks about the Met whitewhash its "WHAT A WASTE OF MONEY".
So you are right, but you're talking about the Tories.
Remember there is a very clear difference between the two sides. We have reams of evidence about Boris and Number 10 breaking the law over and over and over. She prepares a brutal report. Someone leans on the Met to provide cover. Which they do. With a narrow field of investigation. So that now the Gray report will come out and tear Number 10 apart the police have already found Him innocent by simply not investigating the hideous reportage and photos we're about to get. The establishment always looks after its own - if you are a civil servant with a gong you get protected whilst all your staff carry the can.#
If you want to gloat feel free. Not a good luck for the pro-establishment party as people starve.
I don't care if it's the Mail's position, or the opposite of it.
You were in denial over Beergate. I have no idea if Starmer or anyone else there will get a fine - the law appears to be so poorly written that pretty much anything could result. But it was clear the moment that it turned out that Labour had not told the truth about who had been there that the police investigation had not been thorough.
it would be good for you to be consistent.
I am being consistent. There was a prime fascie case against Johnson which the Met now appear to have investigated primarily to sweep under the carpet. There was not one against Starmer, and the "evidence" was not sufficient to suggest the law had been broken.
That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate.
I still think there is nothing to see and expect nobody to get fined. Buit if I'm wrong they fall on their sword and leave the stage. Which is more than can be said for Bonzo and his Clown Car circus. We're going to get the Gray report. Reams of it. Photos and all. And people like you will say "nothing to see here" for the various events the Met haven't even investigated because no fines have been issued.
I'm quite happy with the consistency of my position. Which on all things is apply the rules equally.
I'm actually going to reply again and say that some of the stuff you've written above is rubbish.
"That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate."
Yeah, right. Even Starmer himself cannot say for sure whether he broke the law or not. I am therefore unsure how you can say there is nothing to investigate. Are you a bigger-brained lawyer than Starmer?
"And people like you will say "nothing to see here" "
LOL. No. *You* are the one saying 'nothing to see here' about Durham. See above.
RP is consistent here.
I believe Starmer and Rayner probably broke the letter of the law, and if the law is applied with rigour they must go simply because they said they would. Richard Holden and the Daily Mail and Telegraph railroaded Durham Constabulary into a highly politicised investigation. Based on how they dealt with Cummings the precedent had been set to walk away.
Johnson personally drove a coach and horses through the rules. The Met launched a token case against him. It now transpires that they didn't even look at his more egregious breaches, they ignored the Abba night at number 10! And Case they ignored completely. Mainly Juniors and Women were fined. Cressida Dick's last hurrah was another operational failure.
The Met intervention rather than allowing justice to be served has allowed Johnson to dodge the Gray Report and remain in office. It has worked out so well for him, it looks very like a conspiratorial whitewash. Even his greatest foe in Government was brought down by a cake!
Tory hacks are laughing and they will laugh louder when Starmer gets his Beergate comeuppance. The reality is Team Johnson has taken the rest of us for a ride. And what about his clandestine meeting with Sue Gray last month...?
On what basis have you determined the police didn’t do their job? That you didn’t like the outcome?
AIUI all we know about the ABBA event is that the Met didn’t recommend any FPNs. We don’t know that they ignored it?
The Met have confirmed that of the 5 events Johnson was known to have attended the police only investigated him personally for two (questionnaires issued for just the two events) including the cake event, which handily brought down Sunak.
Reports are that Juniors were obliging to Gray whereas Seniors and some politicians in general were not. I suspect Sunak was truthful.They did not expect the Gray Report to be hijacked and used as evidence for the prosecution.
I personally think that Johnson not being investigated is remarkable, but Case, with the evidence we have seen ourselves not getting an FPN is astonishing.
Big Dog is saved...by the less than lamented Cressida Dick!
Sounds like the conspiracy theorists are out in force. Next we will have Big Dog saved by an unholy cabal of the Police, Freemasons and MI5
Are you saying there was none? Anyway, at one level what saved Big Dog were his usual tactics of prevaricate and postpone. And it seems to have worked so well done, Boris!
I’m saying that jumping to theories that BJ has been deliberately saved by the Police is not healthy.
Let’s also put it the other way. If SKS doesn’t get issued a FPN by Durham and the Tories say it’s because the Commissioner there leant on the Police, would you not be claiming the Tories are being conspiracy theorists?
Why is it not healthy Mr Ed We have to face the reality of being run by a totally corrupt govt not Disney fantasies
I am sure @NickPalmer would have a view, but in my experience the ability of an MP to chat to a minister in the lobby is a very valuable informal channel to ensure their constituents are looked after
Interested in the "my experience" there - are you another former (or current) MP?
It's very easy to talk to a Minister informally (especially in your party as you'll be in the same lobby, but easy anyway). The Minister will *always* say non-committally "send me the details and I'll have a look", and they can do that online too - even now, 12 years after leaving Parliament, I have friendly online contact with both front benches. So I'm not sure that meeting in the lobby is really al lthat important.
I'm sure Hyfud will correct me, but I don't believe there's a single seat where the Coalition is currently on course for a gain.
They are projected to gain Gilmore in NSW from Labor, albeit most of the gains are to Labor, Greens and Independents as is the national swing to Labor, albeit by less than the final polls
"The police must investigate No. 10 parties!" - The parties are investigated and BJ and others get fined. "Look at the good job the police did! And there's more to come!" - The police don't issue more fines to BJ, but others do get them. "The police have done a horrid job! The top people have got away with it!"
Perhaps the underlings who got done are not a victim of some stitch-up by No. 10 and the police, but victims of the get-Boris campaign?
Then add in Beergate: "The police have investigated! There's nothing to see here! It's all a put-up job by the Mail!" - It turns out that the Labour Party had lied. "Why does it matter? The police investigated?" - More evidence comes out. "Why does it matter? The police investigated? And the Mail's awful!" - The investigation is reopened. "It's a waste of police time to investigate this!"
etc, etc.
You do know that is quite literally the Wail's position reversed. Attacks Labour's push on this - DON'T THEY KNOW THERE'S A WAR ON. Then 10 days of stories piling pressure on the police to do Starmer - one front page literally being TORY PRESSURE TO MAKE THE POLICE ACT. Then Starmer says "I'll quit" and they complain he's trying to pressure the police, then when newss breaks about the Met whitewhash its "WHAT A WASTE OF MONEY".
So you are right, but you're talking about the Tories.
Remember there is a very clear difference between the two sides. We have reams of evidence about Boris and Number 10 breaking the law over and over and over. She prepares a brutal report. Someone leans on the Met to provide cover. Which they do. With a narrow field of investigation. So that now the Gray report will come out and tear Number 10 apart the police have already found Him innocent by simply not investigating the hideous reportage and photos we're about to get. The establishment always looks after its own - if you are a civil servant with a gong you get protected whilst all your staff carry the can.#
If you want to gloat feel free. Not a good luck for the pro-establishment party as people starve.
I don't care if it's the Mail's position, or the opposite of it.
You were in denial over Beergate. I have no idea if Starmer or anyone else there will get a fine - the law appears to be so poorly written that pretty much anything could result. But it was clear the moment that it turned out that Labour had not told the truth about who had been there that the police investigation had not been thorough.
it would be good for you to be consistent.
I am being consistent. There was a prime fascie case against Johnson which the Met now appear to have investigated primarily to sweep under the carpet. There was not one against Starmer, and the "evidence" was not sufficient to suggest the law had been broken.
That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate.
I still think there is nothing to see and expect nobody to get fined. Buit if I'm wrong they fall on their sword and leave the stage. Which is more than can be said for Bonzo and his Clown Car circus. We're going to get the Gray report. Reams of it. Photos and all. And people like you will say "nothing to see here" for the various events the Met haven't even investigated because no fines have been issued.
I'm quite happy with the consistency of my position. Which on all things is apply the rules equally.
I'm actually going to reply again and say that some of the stuff you've written above is rubbish.
"That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate."
Yeah, right. Even Starmer himself cannot say for sure whether he broke the law or not. I am therefore unsure how you can say there is nothing to investigate. Are you a bigger-brained lawyer than Starmer?
"And people like you will say "nothing to see here" "
LOL. No. *You* are the one saying 'nothing to see here' about Durham. See above.
RP is consistent here.
I believe Starmer and Rayner probably broke the letter of the law, and if the law is applied with rigour they must go simply because they said they would. Richard Holden and the Daily Mail and Telegraph railroaded Durham Constabulary into a highly politicised investigation. Based on how they dealt with Cummings the precedent had been set to walk away.
Johnson personally drove a coach and horses through the rules. The Met launched a token case against him. It now transpires that they didn't even look at his more egregious breaches, they ignored the Abba night at number 10! And Case they ignored completely. Mainly Juniors and Women were fined. Cressida Dick's last hurrah was another operational failure.
The Met intervention rather than allowing justice to be served has allowed Johnson to dodge the Gray Report and remain in office. It has worked out so well for him, it looks very like a conspiratorial whitewash. Even his greatest foe in Government was brought down by a cake!
Tory hacks are laughing and they will laugh louder when Starmer gets his Beergate comeuppance. The reality is Team Johnson has taken the rest of us for a ride. And what about his clandestine meeting with Sue Gray last month...?
On what basis have you determined the police didn’t do their job? That you didn’t like the outcome?
AIUI all we know about the ABBA event is that the Met didn’t recommend any FPNs. We don’t know that they ignored it?
I'm with @Mexicanpete. This has been a total establishment stitch-up to save the PM.
It stinks to high heaven.
Evidence please.
Yes certainly, here you go. 🙂
Just the 1 FPN for the senior leadership group who created and and inspired this law breaking culture, the junior grades are the ones getting hammered for.
Clear whitewash. Clear stink up the nose of every voter. Do you really Need anything else to know for yourself something is wrong here?
"The police must investigate No. 10 parties!" - The parties are investigated and BJ and others get fined. "Look at the good job the police did! And there's more to come!" - The police don't issue more fines to BJ, but others do get them. "The police have done a horrid job! The top people have got away with it!"
Perhaps the underlings who got done are not a victim of some stitch-up by No. 10 and the police, but victims of the get-Boris campaign?
Then add in Beergate: "The police have investigated! There's nothing to see here! It's all a put-up job by the Mail!" - It turns out that the Labour Party had lied. "Why does it matter? The police investigated?" - More evidence comes out. "Why does it matter? The police investigated? And the Mail's awful!" - The investigation is reopened. "It's a waste of police time to investigate this!"
etc, etc.
You do know that is quite literally the Wail's position reversed. Attacks Labour's push on this - DON'T THEY KNOW THERE'S A WAR ON. Then 10 days of stories piling pressure on the police to do Starmer - one front page literally being TORY PRESSURE TO MAKE THE POLICE ACT. Then Starmer says "I'll quit" and they complain he's trying to pressure the police, then when newss breaks about the Met whitewhash its "WHAT A WASTE OF MONEY".
So you are right, but you're talking about the Tories.
Remember there is a very clear difference between the two sides. We have reams of evidence about Boris and Number 10 breaking the law over and over and over. She prepares a brutal report. Someone leans on the Met to provide cover. Which they do. With a narrow field of investigation. So that now the Gray report will come out and tear Number 10 apart the police have already found Him innocent by simply not investigating the hideous reportage and photos we're about to get. The establishment always looks after its own - if you are a civil servant with a gong you get protected whilst all your staff carry the can.#
If you want to gloat feel free. Not a good luck for the pro-establishment party as people starve.
I don't care if it's the Mail's position, or the opposite of it.
You were in denial over Beergate. I have no idea if Starmer or anyone else there will get a fine - the law appears to be so poorly written that pretty much anything could result. But it was clear the moment that it turned out that Labour had not told the truth about who had been there that the police investigation had not been thorough.
it would be good for you to be consistent.
I am being consistent. There was a prime fascie case against Johnson which the Met now appear to have investigated primarily to sweep under the carpet. There was not one against Starmer, and the "evidence" was not sufficient to suggest the law had been broken.
That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate.
I still think there is nothing to see and expect nobody to get fined. Buit if I'm wrong they fall on their sword and leave the stage. Which is more than can be said for Bonzo and his Clown Car circus. We're going to get the Gray report. Reams of it. Photos and all. And people like you will say "nothing to see here" for the various events the Met haven't even investigated because no fines have been issued.
I'm quite happy with the consistency of my position. Which on all things is apply the rules equally.
I'm actually going to reply again and say that some of the stuff you've written above is rubbish.
"That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate."
Yeah, right. Even Starmer himself cannot say for sure whether he broke the law or not. I am therefore unsure how you can say there is nothing to investigate. Are you a bigger-brained lawyer than Starmer?
"And people like you will say "nothing to see here" "
LOL. No. *You* are the one saying 'nothing to see here' about Durham. See above.
RP is consistent here.
I believe Starmer and Rayner probably broke the letter of the law, and if the law is applied with rigour they must go simply because they said they would. Richard Holden and the Daily Mail and Telegraph railroaded Durham Constabulary into a highly politicised investigation. Based on how they dealt with Cummings the precedent had been set to walk away.
Johnson personally drove a coach and horses through the rules. The Met launched a token case against him. It now transpires that they didn't even look at his more egregious breaches, they ignored the Abba night at number 10! And Case they ignored completely. Mainly Juniors and Women were fined. Cressida Dick's last hurrah was another operational failure.
The Met intervention rather than allowing justice to be served has allowed Johnson to dodge the Gray Report and remain in office. It has worked out so well for him, it looks very like a conspiratorial whitewash. Even his greatest foe in Government was brought down by a cake!
Tory hacks are laughing and they will laugh louder when Starmer gets his Beergate comeuppance. The reality is Team Johnson has taken the rest of us for a ride. And what about his clandestine meeting with Sue Gray last month...?
On what basis have you determined the police didn’t do their job? That you didn’t like the outcome?
AIUI all we know about the ABBA event is that the Met didn’t recommend any FPNs. We don’t know that they ignored it?
I'm with @Mexicanpete. This has been a total establishment stitch-up to save the PM.
It stinks to high heaven.
Evidence please.
Yes certainly, here you go. 🙂
Just the 1 FPN for the senior leadership group who created and and inspired this law breaking culture, the junior grades are the ones getting hammered for.
Clear whitewash. Clear stink up the nose of every voter. Do you really Need anything else to know for yourself something is wrong here?
That’s not evidence, that’s your interpretation of the facts ie an opinion
At least she's making an attempt to interpret the known facts. Twelve Met detectives didn't get that far "we're the Sweeney and we haven't had our dinner".
I am sure @NickPalmer would have a view, but in my experience the ability of an MP to chat to a minister in the lobby is a very valuable informal channel to ensure their constituents are looked after
Interested in the "my experience" there - are you another former (or current) MP?
It's very easy to talk to a Minister informally (especially in your party as you'll be in the same lobby, but easy anyway). The Minister will *always* say non-committally "send me the details and I'll have a look", and they can do that online too - even now, 12 years after leaving Parliament, I have friendly online contact with both front benches. So I'm not sure that meeting in the lobby is really al lthat important.
How much of that informal contact is with people you didn’t know and meet when you were in Parliament?
It’s more difficult to make new relationships in an online environment, than it is to maintain existing relationships.
I still maintain that many of these politicians must be secretly hoping that the place will ultimately burn down. They'd then be armed with an excuse for spending money on a shiny, modern replacement.
Itd make more sense. They made a decision, now have reopened and seemingly deferred it (things seem to have progressed bigger all in years) and whilst arguing about moving out was bound to happen (even though it'll be much quicker and cheaper), they wont even agree to the eminently sensible option of moving some of them across the street, which would also surely be quicker and cheaper, or elsewhere nearby.
The whole thing makes me spitting mad.
It makes no sense to do anything other than have them all move out. Rent the QEII centre and set up something there for a couple of years. Re-purpose any empty space in Whitehall as offices.
Why does it even need to exist? The MPs could have shit offices above a Ladbrokes in their constiuencies, debate on Zoom and vote on an app. I don't think we'd be conspicuously less well governed if that were the arrangement,
They can't molest each other so easily. That's another advantage. And as for subsidised food, just give them £10- Luncheon Vouchers or the equivalent in M&S tokens.
Or pass Anderson’s Rule and give them 30p per day for food.
"The police must investigate No. 10 parties!" - The parties are investigated and BJ and others get fined. "Look at the good job the police did! And there's more to come!" - The police don't issue more fines to BJ, but others do get them. "The police have done a horrid job! The top people have got away with it!"
Perhaps the underlings who got done are not a victim of some stitch-up by No. 10 and the police, but victims of the get-Boris campaign?
Then add in Beergate: "The police have investigated! There's nothing to see here! It's all a put-up job by the Mail!" - It turns out that the Labour Party had lied. "Why does it matter? The police investigated?" - More evidence comes out. "Why does it matter? The police investigated? And the Mail's awful!" - The investigation is reopened. "It's a waste of police time to investigate this!"
etc, etc.
You do know that is quite literally the Wail's position reversed. Attacks Labour's push on this - DON'T THEY KNOW THERE'S A WAR ON. Then 10 days of stories piling pressure on the police to do Starmer - one front page literally being TORY PRESSURE TO MAKE THE POLICE ACT. Then Starmer says "I'll quit" and they complain he's trying to pressure the police, then when newss breaks about the Met whitewhash its "WHAT A WASTE OF MONEY".
So you are right, but you're talking about the Tories.
Remember there is a very clear difference between the two sides. We have reams of evidence about Boris and Number 10 breaking the law over and over and over. She prepares a brutal report. Someone leans on the Met to provide cover. Which they do. With a narrow field of investigation. So that now the Gray report will come out and tear Number 10 apart the police have already found Him innocent by simply not investigating the hideous reportage and photos we're about to get. The establishment always looks after its own - if you are a civil servant with a gong you get protected whilst all your staff carry the can.#
If you want to gloat feel free. Not a good luck for the pro-establishment party as people starve.
I don't care if it's the Mail's position, or the opposite of it.
You were in denial over Beergate. I have no idea if Starmer or anyone else there will get a fine - the law appears to be so poorly written that pretty much anything could result. But it was clear the moment that it turned out that Labour had not told the truth about who had been there that the police investigation had not been thorough.
it would be good for you to be consistent.
I am being consistent. There was a prime fascie case against Johnson which the Met now appear to have investigated primarily to sweep under the carpet. There was not one against Starmer, and the "evidence" was not sufficient to suggest the law had been broken.
That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate.
I still think there is nothing to see and expect nobody to get fined. Buit if I'm wrong they fall on their sword and leave the stage. Which is more than can be said for Bonzo and his Clown Car circus. We're going to get the Gray report. Reams of it. Photos and all. And people like you will say "nothing to see here" for the various events the Met haven't even investigated because no fines have been issued.
I'm quite happy with the consistency of my position. Which on all things is apply the rules equally.
I'm actually going to reply again and say that some of the stuff you've written above is rubbish.
"That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate."
Yeah, right. Even Starmer himself cannot say for sure whether he broke the law or not. I am therefore unsure how you can say there is nothing to investigate. Are you a bigger-brained lawyer than Starmer?
"And people like you will say "nothing to see here" "
LOL. No. *You* are the one saying 'nothing to see here' about Durham. See above.
RP is consistent here.
I believe Starmer and Rayner probably broke the letter of the law, and if the law is applied with rigour they must go simply because they said they would. Richard Holden and the Daily Mail and Telegraph railroaded Durham Constabulary into a highly politicised investigation. Based on how they dealt with Cummings the precedent had been set to walk away.
Johnson personally drove a coach and horses through the rules. The Met launched a token case against him. It now transpires that they didn't even look at his more egregious breaches, they ignored the Abba night at number 10! And Case they ignored completely. Mainly Juniors and Women were fined. Cressida Dick's last hurrah was another operational failure.
The Met intervention rather than allowing justice to be served has allowed Johnson to dodge the Gray Report and remain in office. It has worked out so well for him, it looks very like a conspiratorial whitewash. Even his greatest foe in Government was brought down by a cake!
Tory hacks are laughing and they will laugh louder when Starmer gets his Beergate comeuppance. The reality is Team Johnson has taken the rest of us for a ride. And what about his clandestine meeting with Sue Gray last month...?
That does not appear to address the point I'm making about RP being inconsistent.
I still maintain that many of these politicians must be secretly hoping that the place will ultimately burn down. They'd then be armed with an excuse for spending money on a shiny, modern replacement.
Itd make more sense. They made a decision, now have reopened and seemingly deferred it (things seem to have progressed bigger all in years) and whilst arguing about moving out was bound to happen (even though it'll be much quicker and cheaper), they wont even agree to the eminently sensible option of moving some of them across the street, which would also surely be quicker and cheaper, or elsewhere nearby.
The whole thing makes me spitting mad.
It makes no sense to do anything other than have them all move out. Rent the QEII centre and set up something there for a couple of years. Re-purpose any empty space in Whitehall as offices.
Why does it even need to exist? The MPs could have shit offices above a Ladbrokes in their constiuencies, debate on Zoom and vote on an app. I don't think we'd be conspicuously less well governed if that were the arrangement,
They can't molest each other so easily. That's another advantage. And as for subsidised food, just give them £10- Luncheon Vouchers or the equivalent in M&S tokens.
I am sure @NickPalmer would have a view, but in my experience the ability of an MP to chat to a minister in the lobby is a very valuable informal channel to ensure their constituents are looked after
Works the other way, too - harder for the whips to threaten ...
Lots of chatter coming from the US that they're about to tell the EU to make the "deal that's available" on NI and stop bitching about it because they don't see the UK position moving at all and now there's a potential threat to western unity and violence breaking out in NI.
I get the feeling that within a few weeks we'll get a lot of behind the scenes movement and around September a new agreement will be revealed that the DUP still aren't on board with but will satisfy most concerns and take the heat out of it all.
My guess is that the agreement will be something like 70-80% of what the UK wants but fall down on key areas like ECJ jurisdiction because NI companies will need the ECJ as a final court of arbitration participate in the single market.
Sounds like could be subtantially correct.
Which is NOT same as giving Boris a total "Get-Out-of-Your-Own-Paddy-Wagon" card.
Just that quite a few in US government, including Biden, Pelosi, Schumer AND McConnell - heck, even McCarthy for what it's worth- are way morethan ready. to bang EU as well as UK heads together on Northern Ireland, for reasons you say.
Heck, they don't even have to worry overmuch about IRISH headbangers, in that most will be on-board with a US-brokered solution, either publically or covetly, again as you suggest.
Don't know about %s but of course will take a while for numbers shake out.
No, it's not. I think the Americans are just being realistic on the subject. I'm told someone said it's like America leaving NAFTA/USMCA but putting Alaska within Canadian jurisdiction to the Americans. Supposedly a very effective analogy because the US isn't in favour of Irish reunification publicly or otherwise.
As I said, I get the feeling the summer is going to be very important for this issue and I also get an overwhelming sense that whatever comes from the talks will end up being acceptable to both sides but the EU will move a lot more than they would have wanted to. Western unity is important and the potential for the UK to say "we are reconsidering our ongoing security commitment to continental Europe" is much higher than most realise.
There's supposed to be a lot of exasperation in Westminster that the EU is, on the one hand, asking for US and UK money ($28bn from the US so far and $3bn from the UK) to fund European defence in Ukraine but on the other creating a bunch of issues around NI and customs it doesn't need to. I could now see the UK pull out of all defence and intelligence cooperation with the EU and instead only go via NATO and bilateral treaties. I expect it's this potential flashpoint that has forced the US to come and force a solution.
"No, it's not." WHAT's not? NOT to me, what "it" is it that you are referrring? Or not?
Ah yeah poorly worded, just agreeing with your first point that it's not really a let off for Boris.
On 'partygate' I would suggest it is not so much a conspiracy, or whitewash, but an utter condemnation of the way the rules were written with more holes than a colander
I expect the MET were very concerned there may be a challenge to the FPN's which could have resulted in them being declared unlawful, with real problems with the many thousands that were issued
I can understand Boris's claims he was working, which is similar to Starmer's, and for that reason I expect Starmer to cleared, but not sure about Rayner though
On the wider point about Boris, if his mps now see him as the one to lead into GE 24, then that will happen but they are clearly taking a huge gamble with their own seats and careers
I am relaxed about GE 24 as it is fair to say Starmer does not frighten me, and it is more than likely he will need the Lib Dems to work alongside him and hopefully curtail the overspending that a labour government is known for
Someone referred to the article in the Telegraph this morning, and it should be compulsory reading for all conservative mps and supporters as it is a stark warning that they could see a 1997 style result in 24, though I cannot see that without a recovery in Scotland by labour
"The police must investigate No. 10 parties!" - The parties are investigated and BJ and others get fined. "Look at the good job the police did! And there's more to come!" - The police don't issue more fines to BJ, but others do get them. "The police have done a horrid job! The top people have got away with it!"
Perhaps the underlings who got done are not a victim of some stitch-up by No. 10 and the police, but victims of the get-Boris campaign?
Then add in Beergate: "The police have investigated! There's nothing to see here! It's all a put-up job by the Mail!" - It turns out that the Labour Party had lied. "Why does it matter? The police investigated?" - More evidence comes out. "Why does it matter? The police investigated? And the Mail's awful!" - The investigation is reopened. "It's a waste of police time to investigate this!"
etc, etc.
You do know that is quite literally the Wail's position reversed. Attacks Labour's push on this - DON'T THEY KNOW THERE'S A WAR ON. Then 10 days of stories piling pressure on the police to do Starmer - one front page literally being TORY PRESSURE TO MAKE THE POLICE ACT. Then Starmer says "I'll quit" and they complain he's trying to pressure the police, then when newss breaks about the Met whitewhash its "WHAT A WASTE OF MONEY".
So you are right, but you're talking about the Tories.
Remember there is a very clear difference between the two sides. We have reams of evidence about Boris and Number 10 breaking the law over and over and over. She prepares a brutal report. Someone leans on the Met to provide cover. Which they do. With a narrow field of investigation. So that now the Gray report will come out and tear Number 10 apart the police have already found Him innocent by simply not investigating the hideous reportage and photos we're about to get. The establishment always looks after its own - if you are a civil servant with a gong you get protected whilst all your staff carry the can.#
If you want to gloat feel free. Not a good luck for the pro-establishment party as people starve.
I don't care if it's the Mail's position, or the opposite of it.
You were in denial over Beergate. I have no idea if Starmer or anyone else there will get a fine - the law appears to be so poorly written that pretty much anything could result. But it was clear the moment that it turned out that Labour had not told the truth about who had been there that the police investigation had not been thorough.
it would be good for you to be consistent.
I am being consistent. There was a prime fascie case against Johnson which the Met now appear to have investigated primarily to sweep under the carpet. There was not one against Starmer, and the "evidence" was not sufficient to suggest the law had been broken.
That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate.
I still think there is nothing to see and expect nobody to get fined. Buit if I'm wrong they fall on their sword and leave the stage. Which is more than can be said for Bonzo and his Clown Car circus. We're going to get the Gray report. Reams of it. Photos and all. And people like you will say "nothing to see here" for the various events the Met haven't even investigated because no fines have been issued.
I'm quite happy with the consistency of my position. Which on all things is apply the rules equally.
I'm actually going to reply again and say that some of the stuff you've written above is rubbish.
"That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate."
Yeah, right. Even Starmer himself cannot say for sure whether he broke the law or not. I am therefore unsure how you can say there is nothing to investigate. Are you a bigger-brained lawyer than Starmer?
"And people like you will say "nothing to see here" "
LOL. No. *You* are the one saying 'nothing to see here' about Durham. See above.
RP is consistent here.
I believe Starmer and Rayner probably broke the letter of the law, and if the law is applied with rigour they must go simply because they said they would. Richard Holden and the Daily Mail and Telegraph railroaded Durham Constabulary into a highly politicised investigation. Based on how they dealt with Cummings the precedent had been set to walk away.
Johnson personally drove a coach and horses through the rules. The Met launched a token case against him. It now transpires that they didn't even look at his more egregious breaches, they ignored the Abba night at number 10! And Case they ignored completely. Mainly Juniors and Women were fined. Cressida Dick's last hurrah was another operational failure.
The Met intervention rather than allowing justice to be served has allowed Johnson to dodge the Gray Report and remain in office. It has worked out so well for him, it looks very like a conspiratorial whitewash. Even his greatest foe in Government was brought down by a cake!
Tory hacks are laughing and they will laugh louder when Starmer gets his Beergate comeuppance. The reality is Team Johnson has taken the rest of us for a ride. And what about his clandestine meeting with Sue Gray last month...?
That does not appear to address the point I'm making about RP being inconsistent.
@RochdalePioneers has said all along Beergate was a poor judgement call by the police, and despite what the Met have adjudicated, Johnson attended parties and as such misled the House.
I know people regard me as an angry voice and yes I am here far more than I would like to be. But the argument I am having with @bondegezou is symptomatic.
Simply put 40 to 50 years ago a household could live on the wage of one earner. Policy really hasnt changed that much over that time and now its common for households with 2 full time earners to be struggling. The argument from people like him is oh we need to keep on doing what we are doing, this was also the argument for remaining.
Sadly for most people in this country what we are doing really isnt working for them and year by year they feel poorer and poorer and struggle more and more while the upper echelons of society seem to get richer and richer.
Things need to change, the brexit vote was a result of this, my diatribe about doing essentials is part of this. Will they work? I really have no idea. However for a lot of this country just carrying on with the same old same old is not an option as all they see from past experience is they will slowly have less and less.
The fact that Brexit was being promoted by precisely the same people (Thatcherite ideologues backed by footloose capital) who had engineered the whole rich get richer while everyone else struggles shenanigans in the first place didn't seem to register with people.
Doesnt matter who was promoting it the fact was while in the eu the bottom half of the country had been sliding into poverty further and further....the argument to keep on as were doing therefore really didnt appeal to them because all that offered them was a continued slide into greater and greater poverty. You can certainly argue that it won't help but then staying in the eu wasn't going to help either so they rolled the dice and took a gamble that just maybe it would and for quite a few it has. People who are actually seeing payrises now whereas before they were condemned to minimum wage for the forseeable future. Oh yes forgot you are a left winger and the only good wage rises for the proles are those they get by hiking minimum wage
I'm sure people are very grateful for their below inflation pay rises.
I know people regard me as an angry voice and yes I am here far more than I would like to be. But the argument I am having with @bondegezou is symptomatic.
Simply put 40 to 50 years ago a household could live on the wage of one earner. Policy really hasnt changed that much over that time and now its common for households with 2 full time earners to be struggling. The argument from people like him is oh we need to keep on doing what we are doing, this was also the argument for remaining.
Sadly for most people in this country what we are doing really isnt working for them and year by year they feel poorer and poorer and struggle more and more while the upper echelons of society seem to get richer and richer.
Things need to change, the brexit vote was a result of this, my diatribe about doing essentials is part of this. Will they work? I really have no idea. However for a lot of this country just carrying on with the same old same old is not an option as all they see from past experience is they will slowly have less and less.
The fact that Brexit was being promoted by precisely the same people (Thatcherite ideologues backed by footloose capital) who had engineered the whole rich get richer while everyone else struggles shenanigans in the first place didn't seem to register with people.
Doesnt matter who was promoting it the fact was while in the eu the bottom half of the country had been sliding into poverty further and further....the argument to keep on as were doing therefore really didnt appeal to them because all that offered them was a continued slide into greater and greater poverty. You can certainly argue that it won't help but then staying in the eu wasn't going to help either so they rolled the dice and took a gamble that just maybe it would and for quite a few it has. People who are actually seeing payrises now whereas before they were condemned to minimum wage for the forseeable future. Oh yes forgot you are a left winger and the only good wage rises for the proles are those they get by hiking minimum wage
I'm sure people are very grateful for their below inflation pay rises.
And when we were in the eu people didnt get below inflation payrises in fact I am damn sure if we hadnt brexited people would be getting the same payrises now as they did then...the square root of fuck all
On 'partygate' I would suggest it is not so much a conspiracy, or whitewash, but an utter condemnation of the way the rules were written with more holes than a colander
I expect the MET were very concerned there may be a challenge to the FPN's which could have resulted in them being declared unlawful, with real problems with the many thousands that were issued
I can understand Boris's claims he was working, which is similar to Starmer's, and for that reason I expect Starmer to cleared, but not sure about Rayner though
On the wider point about Boris, if his mps now see him as the one to lead into GE 24, then that will happen but they are clearly taking a huge gamble with their own seats and careers
I am relaxed about GE 24 as it is fair to say Starmer does not frighten me, and it is more than likely he will need the Lib Dems to work alongside him and hopefully curtail the overspending that a labour government is known for
Someone referred to the article in the Telegraph this morning, and it should be compulsory reading for all conservative mps and supporters as it is a stark warning that they could see a 1997 style result in 24, though I cannot see that without a recovery in Scotland by labour
Oh give over BigG. You and serial lockdown breaker Kay Burley were demanding Starmer's nuts, and now you are happy that the Met investigation barely investigated Johnson.
On 'partygate' I would suggest it is not so much a conspiracy, or whitewash, but an utter condemnation of the way the rules were written with more holes than a colander
I expect the MET were very concerned there may be a challenge to the FPN's which could have resulted in them being declared unlawful, with real problems with the many thousands that were issued
I can understand Boris's claims he was working, which is similar to Starmer's, and for that reason I expect Starmer to cleared, but not sure about Rayner though
On the wider point about Boris, if his mps now see him as the one to lead into GE 24, then that will happen but they are clearly taking a huge gamble with their own seats and careers
I am relaxed about GE 24 as it is fair to say Starmer does not frighten me, and it is more than likely he will need the Lib Dems to work alongside him and hopefully curtail the overspending that a labour government is known for
Someone referred to the article in the Telegraph this morning, and it should be compulsory reading for all conservative mps and supporters as it is a stark warning that they could see a 1997 style result in 24, though I cannot see that without a recovery in Scotland by labour
I know people regard me as an angry voice and yes I am here far more than I would like to be. But the argument I am having with @bondegezou is symptomatic.
Simply put 40 to 50 years ago a household could live on the wage of one earner. Policy really hasnt changed that much over that time and now its common for households with 2 full time earners to be struggling. The argument from people like him is oh we need to keep on doing what we are doing, this was also the argument for remaining.
Sadly for most people in this country what we are doing really isnt working for them and year by year they feel poorer and poorer and struggle more and more while the upper echelons of society seem to get richer and richer.
Things need to change, the brexit vote was a result of this, my diatribe about doing essentials is part of this. Will they work? I really have no idea. However for a lot of this country just carrying on with the same old same old is not an option as all they see from past experience is they will slowly have less and less.
The fact that Brexit was being promoted by precisely the same people (Thatcherite ideologues backed by footloose capital) who had engineered the whole rich get richer while everyone else struggles shenanigans in the first place didn't seem to register with people.
Doesnt matter who was promoting it the fact was while in the eu the bottom half of the country had been sliding into poverty further and further....the argument to keep on as were doing therefore really didnt appeal to them because all that offered them was a continued slide into greater and greater poverty. You can certainly argue that it won't help but then staying in the eu wasn't going to help either so they rolled the dice and took a gamble that just maybe it would and for quite a few it has. People who are actually seeing payrises now whereas before they were condemned to minimum wage for the forseeable future. Oh yes forgot you are a left winger and the only good wage rises for the proles are those they get by hiking minimum wage
I'm sure people are very grateful for their below inflation pay rises.
And when we were in the eu people didnt get below inflation payrises in fact I am damn sure if we hadnt brexited people would be getting the same payrises now as they did then...the square root of fuck all
Don't forget it was a remainer who claimed brexit would lead to payrises in the campaign....Stuart Rose I think his name was......turns out the remain campaign wasn't all lies after all
Much like the UK and US the biggest swing against the Conservatives it seems in Australia so far is in affluent urban areas while Labor is doing worst and the Conservatives seeing least swing against them in poorer working class areas. In France too of course Macron did best in Paris
It’s Charlie’s Coffee and Brunch bar. By the harbour. I’ll get you an espresso
I am following your and Daughter's travel itineraries.
Any moment now I expect to find a picture of you both appearing in my WhatsApp ("Mum - I met someone else who reads PB for hours over a drink. Honestly you both need to get a life.").
Fantastic - we could see our first PB wedding, Leon and Cyclefree JR with Sean T as best man.
@Cyclefree is much more positive on the idea of her daughter meeting @Leon than she was when I suggested it a week ago!
On 'partygate' I would suggest it is not so much a conspiracy, or whitewash, but an utter condemnation of the way the rules were written with more holes than a colander
I expect the MET were very concerned there may be a challenge to the FPN's which could have resulted in them being declared unlawful, with real problems with the many thousands that were issued
I can understand Boris's claims he was working, which is similar to Starmer's, and for that reason I expect Starmer to cleared, but not sure about Rayner though
On the wider point about Boris, if his mps now see him as the one to lead into GE 24, then that will happen but they are clearly taking a huge gamble with their own seats and careers
I am relaxed about GE 24 as it is fair to say Starmer does not frighten me, and it is more than likely he will need the Lib Dems to work alongside him and hopefully curtail the overspending that a labour government is known for
Someone referred to the article in the Telegraph this morning, and it should be compulsory reading for all conservative mps and supporters as it is a stark warning that they could see a 1997 style result in 24, though I cannot see that without a recovery in Scotland by labour
Oh give over BigG. You and serial lockdown breaker Kay Burley were demanding Starmer's nuts, and now you are happy that the Met investigation barely investigated Johnson.
Work to do!
What a silly comment to a genuine piece
In view of the outcome of the MET investigation I do expect Starmer to be cleared if he can prove he was working and I have explained why I think the outcome has arisen in so far as the laws were an ass and frankly should never be enacted again
It’s Charlie’s Coffee and Brunch bar. By the harbour. I’ll get you an espresso
I am following your and Daughter's travel itineraries.
Any moment now I expect to find a picture of you both appearing in my WhatsApp ("Mum - I met someone else who reads PB for hours over a drink. Honestly you both need to get a life.").
Fantastic - we could see our first PB wedding, Leon and Cyclefree JR with Sean T as best man.
@Cyclefree is much more positive on the idea of her daughter meeting @Leon than she was when I suggested it a week ago!
I am preparing myself. Not encouraging it!
Considers the situation of Cyclefree being Leons new mother in law...decides i must be living in one of the stranger universes
"The police must investigate No. 10 parties!" - The parties are investigated and BJ and others get fined. "Look at the good job the police did! And there's more to come!" - The police don't issue more fines to BJ, but others do get them. "The police have done a horrid job! The top people have got away with it!"
Perhaps the underlings who got done are not a victim of some stitch-up by No. 10 and the police, but victims of the get-Boris campaign?
Then add in Beergate: "The police have investigated! There's nothing to see here! It's all a put-up job by the Mail!" - It turns out that the Labour Party had lied. "Why does it matter? The police investigated?" - More evidence comes out. "Why does it matter? The police investigated? And the Mail's awful!" - The investigation is reopened. "It's a waste of police time to investigate this!"
etc, etc.
You do know that is quite literally the Wail's position reversed. Attacks Labour's push on this - DON'T THEY KNOW THERE'S A WAR ON. Then 10 days of stories piling pressure on the police to do Starmer - one front page literally being TORY PRESSURE TO MAKE THE POLICE ACT. Then Starmer says "I'll quit" and they complain he's trying to pressure the police, then when newss breaks about the Met whitewhash its "WHAT A WASTE OF MONEY".
So you are right, but you're talking about the Tories.
Remember there is a very clear difference between the two sides. We have reams of evidence about Boris and Number 10 breaking the law over and over and over. She prepares a brutal report. Someone leans on the Met to provide cover. Which they do. With a narrow field of investigation. So that now the Gray report will come out and tear Number 10 apart the police have already found Him innocent by simply not investigating the hideous reportage and photos we're about to get. The establishment always looks after its own - if you are a civil servant with a gong you get protected whilst all your staff carry the can.#
If you want to gloat feel free. Not a good luck for the pro-establishment party as people starve.
I don't care if it's the Mail's position, or the opposite of it.
You were in denial over Beergate. I have no idea if Starmer or anyone else there will get a fine - the law appears to be so poorly written that pretty much anything could result. But it was clear the moment that it turned out that Labour had not told the truth about who had been there that the police investigation had not been thorough.
it would be good for you to be consistent.
I am being consistent. There was a prime fascie case against Johnson which the Met now appear to have investigated primarily to sweep under the carpet. There was not one against Starmer, and the "evidence" was not sufficient to suggest the law had been broken.
That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate.
I still think there is nothing to see and expect nobody to get fined. Buit if I'm wrong they fall on their sword and leave the stage. Which is more than can be said for Bonzo and his Clown Car circus. We're going to get the Gray report. Reams of it. Photos and all. And people like you will say "nothing to see here" for the various events the Met haven't even investigated because no fines have been issued.
I'm quite happy with the consistency of my position. Which on all things is apply the rules equally.
I'm actually going to reply again and say that some of the stuff you've written above is rubbish.
"That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate."
Yeah, right. Even Starmer himself cannot say for sure whether he broke the law or not. I am therefore unsure how you can say there is nothing to investigate. Are you a bigger-brained lawyer than Starmer?
"And people like you will say "nothing to see here" "
LOL. No. *You* are the one saying 'nothing to see here' about Durham. See above.
RP is consistent here.
I believe Starmer and Rayner probably broke the letter of the law, and if the law is applied with rigour they must go simply because they said they would. Richard Holden and the Daily Mail and Telegraph railroaded Durham Constabulary into a highly politicised investigation. Based on how they dealt with Cummings the precedent had been set to walk away.
Johnson personally drove a coach and horses through the rules. The Met launched a token case against him. It now transpires that they didn't even look at his more egregious breaches, they ignored the Abba night at number 10! And Case they ignored completely. Mainly Juniors and Women were fined. Cressida Dick's last hurrah was another operational failure.
The Met intervention rather than allowing justice to be served has allowed Johnson to dodge the Gray Report and remain in office. It has worked out so well for him, it looks very like a conspiratorial whitewash. Even his greatest foe in Government was brought down by a cake!
Tory hacks are laughing and they will laugh louder when Starmer gets his Beergate comeuppance. The reality is Team Johnson has taken the rest of us for a ride. And what about his clandestine meeting with Sue Gray last month...?
On what basis have you determined the police didn’t do their job? That you didn’t like the outcome?
AIUI all we know about the ABBA event is that the Met didn’t recommend any FPNs. We don’t know that they ignored it?
I'm with @Mexicanpete. This has been a total establishment stitch-up to save the PM.
It stinks to high heaven.
Evidence please.
It'll come in time.
For a start, Johnson seems to have been taken at his lawyer's word that all these events he attended he considered to be work and therefore was allowed. But social events at work were not allowed. The only event he has been done for is one that is a joke - a cake turned up at the end of a meeting. The other events were massive piss-ups and we've seen some photo evidence and there's more to come no doubt now that only the kids and the women have actually been fined.
But, to be honest, what's the point anymore? I'm tired of it all. He's safe as houses until GE 2024.
Hopefully enough voters are as angry as I am and will not have forgotten by 2024.
The only one I recall seeing pictures of is the garden party - there he was sitting with his wife and a couple of others. Everyone else in the garden appeared to be socially distanced groups. So it’s possible that Boris thought it was ok/ that it was a work meeting / drink with friends (I’ve lost track of what was allowed when).
The zoom quiz he was on zoom from what I recall.
But I’ve never really been interested
Well you should be. Imagine if Prime Minister Jeremy Corbyn had led us down this garden path. You would be outraged.
The wagons have been well and truly circled, but by whom is alarming.
Nah. Don’t really care. Both Johnson and Corbyn were unsuitable candidates for PM.
But whether or not he had a cake doesn’t change my view of him.
I know people regard me as an angry voice and yes I am here far more than I would like to be. But the argument I am having with @bondegezou is symptomatic.
Simply put 40 to 50 years ago a household could live on the wage of one earner. Policy really hasnt changed that much over that time and now its common for households with 2 full time earners to be struggling. The argument from people like him is oh we need to keep on doing what we are doing, this was also the argument for remaining.
Sadly for most people in this country what we are doing really isnt working for them and year by year they feel poorer and poorer and struggle more and more while the upper echelons of society seem to get richer and richer.
Things need to change, the brexit vote was a result of this, my diatribe about doing essentials is part of this. Will they work? I really have no idea. However for a lot of this country just carrying on with the same old same old is not an option as all they see from past experience is they will slowly have less and less.
The fact that Brexit was being promoted by precisely the same people (Thatcherite ideologues backed by footloose capital) who had engineered the whole rich get richer while everyone else struggles shenanigans in the first place didn't seem to register with people.
Doesnt matter who was promoting it the fact was while in the eu the bottom half of the country had been sliding into poverty further and further....the argument to keep on as were doing therefore really didnt appeal to them because all that offered them was a continued slide into greater and greater poverty. You can certainly argue that it won't help but then staying in the eu wasn't going to help either so they rolled the dice and took a gamble that just maybe it would and for quite a few it has. People who are actually seeing payrises now whereas before they were condemned to minimum wage for the forseeable future. Oh yes forgot you are a left winger and the only good wage rises for the proles are those they get by hiking minimum wage
I'm sure people are very grateful for their below inflation pay rises.
And when we were in the eu people didnt get below inflation payrises in fact I am damn sure if we hadnt brexited people would be getting the same payrises now as they did then...the square root of fuck all
Real wages are going down currently, whereas when we were in the EU they went up. I don't make any causal claims (I don't think real wages are going down mainly because of Brexit, it is more to do with global energy and food price inflation) but the idea that being in the EU led to lower real wages and leaving the EU has led to higher real wages isn't really supported by the data.
On 'partygate' I would suggest it is not so much a conspiracy, or whitewash, but an utter condemnation of the way the rules were written with more holes than a colander
I expect the MET were very concerned there may be a challenge to the FPN's which could have resulted in them being declared unlawful, with real problems with the many thousands that were issued
I can understand Boris's claims he was working, which is similar to Starmer's, and for that reason I expect Starmer to cleared, but not sure about Rayner though
On the wider point about Boris, if his mps now see him as the one to lead into GE 24, then that will happen but they are clearly taking a huge gamble with their own seats and careers
I am relaxed about GE 24 as it is fair to say Starmer does not frighten me, and it is more than likely he will need the Lib Dems to work alongside him and hopefully curtail the overspending that a labour government is known for
Someone referred to the article in the Telegraph this morning, and it should be compulsory reading for all conservative mps and supporters as it is a stark warning that they could see a 1997 style result in 24, though I cannot see that without a recovery in Scotland by labour
Oh give over BigG. You and serial lockdown breaker Kay Burley were demanding Starmer's nuts, and now you are happy that the Met investigation barely investigated Johnson.
Work to do!
What a silly comment to a genuine piece
In view of the outcome of the MET investigation I do expect Starmer to be cleared if he can prove he was working and I have explained why I think the outcome has arisen in so far as the laws were an ass and frankly should never be enacted again
Ha, yet you still cheer on the people who wrote and broke the laws you think were so terrible.....
"The police must investigate No. 10 parties!" - The parties are investigated and BJ and others get fined. "Look at the good job the police did! And there's more to come!" - The police don't issue more fines to BJ, but others do get them. "The police have done a horrid job! The top people have got away with it!"
Perhaps the underlings who got done are not a victim of some stitch-up by No. 10 and the police, but victims of the get-Boris campaign?
Then add in Beergate: "The police have investigated! There's nothing to see here! It's all a put-up job by the Mail!" - It turns out that the Labour Party had lied. "Why does it matter? The police investigated?" - More evidence comes out. "Why does it matter? The police investigated? And the Mail's awful!" - The investigation is reopened. "It's a waste of police time to investigate this!"
etc, etc.
You do know that is quite literally the Wail's position reversed. Attacks Labour's push on this - DON'T THEY KNOW THERE'S A WAR ON. Then 10 days of stories piling pressure on the police to do Starmer - one front page literally being TORY PRESSURE TO MAKE THE POLICE ACT. Then Starmer says "I'll quit" and they complain he's trying to pressure the police, then when newss breaks about the Met whitewhash its "WHAT A WASTE OF MONEY".
So you are right, but you're talking about the Tories.
Remember there is a very clear difference between the two sides. We have reams of evidence about Boris and Number 10 breaking the law over and over and over. She prepares a brutal report. Someone leans on the Met to provide cover. Which they do. With a narrow field of investigation. So that now the Gray report will come out and tear Number 10 apart the police have already found Him innocent by simply not investigating the hideous reportage and photos we're about to get. The establishment always looks after its own - if you are a civil servant with a gong you get protected whilst all your staff carry the can.#
If you want to gloat feel free. Not a good luck for the pro-establishment party as people starve.
I don't care if it's the Mail's position, or the opposite of it.
You were in denial over Beergate. I have no idea if Starmer or anyone else there will get a fine - the law appears to be so poorly written that pretty much anything could result. But it was clear the moment that it turned out that Labour had not told the truth about who had been there that the police investigation had not been thorough.
it would be good for you to be consistent.
I am being consistent. There was a prime fascie case against Johnson which the Met now appear to have investigated primarily to sweep under the carpet. There was not one against Starmer, and the "evidence" was not sufficient to suggest the law had been broken.
That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate.
I still think there is nothing to see and expect nobody to get fined. Buit if I'm wrong they fall on their sword and leave the stage. Which is more than can be said for Bonzo and his Clown Car circus. We're going to get the Gray report. Reams of it. Photos and all. And people like you will say "nothing to see here" for the various events the Met haven't even investigated because no fines have been issued.
I'm quite happy with the consistency of my position. Which on all things is apply the rules equally.
I'm actually going to reply again and say that some of the stuff you've written above is rubbish.
"That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate."
Yeah, right. Even Starmer himself cannot say for sure whether he broke the law or not. I am therefore unsure how you can say there is nothing to investigate. Are you a bigger-brained lawyer than Starmer?
"And people like you will say "nothing to see here" "
LOL. No. *You* are the one saying 'nothing to see here' about Durham. See above.
RP is consistent here.
I believe Starmer and Rayner probably broke the letter of the law, and if the law is applied with rigour they must go simply because they said they would. Richard Holden and the Daily Mail and Telegraph railroaded Durham Constabulary into a highly politicised investigation. Based on how they dealt with Cummings the precedent had been set to walk away.
Johnson personally drove a coach and horses through the rules. The Met launched a token case against him. It now transpires that they didn't even look at his more egregious breaches, they ignored the Abba night at number 10! And Case they ignored completely. Mainly Juniors and Women were fined. Cressida Dick's last hurrah was another operational failure.
The Met intervention rather than allowing justice to be served has allowed Johnson to dodge the Gray Report and remain in office. It has worked out so well for him, it looks very like a conspiratorial whitewash. Even his greatest foe in Government was brought down by a cake!
Tory hacks are laughing and they will laugh louder when Starmer gets his Beergate comeuppance. The reality is Team Johnson has taken the rest of us for a ride. And what about his clandestine meeting with Sue Gray last month...?
On what basis have you determined the police didn’t do their job? That you didn’t like the outcome?
AIUI all we know about the ABBA event is that the Met didn’t recommend any FPNs. We don’t know that they ignored it?
I'm with @Mexicanpete. This has been a total establishment stitch-up to save the PM.
It stinks to high heaven.
Evidence please.
It'll come in time.
For a start, Johnson seems to have been taken at his lawyer's word that all these events he attended he considered to be work and therefore was allowed. But social events at work were not allowed. The only event he has been done for is one that is a joke - a cake turned up at the end of a meeting. The other events were massive piss-ups and we've seen some photo evidence and there's more to come no doubt now that only the kids and the women have actually been fined.
But, to be honest, what's the point anymore? I'm tired of it all. He's safe as houses until GE 2024.
Hopefully enough voters are as angry as I am and will not have forgotten by 2024.
The only one I recall seeing pictures of is the garden party - there he was sitting with his wife and a couple of others. Everyone else in the garden appeared to be socially distanced groups. So it’s possible that Boris thought it was ok/ that it was a work meeting / drink with friends (I’ve lost track of what was allowed when).
The zoom quiz he was on zoom from what I recall.
But I’ve never really been interested
Well you should be. Imagine if Prime Minister Jeremy Corbyn had led us down this garden path. You would be outraged.
The wagons have been well and truly circled, but by whom is alarming.
Nah. Don’t really care. Both Johnson and Corbyn were unsuitable candidates for PM.
But whether or not he had a cake doesn’t change my view of him.
I really dont get the whole thing about partygate/beergate....politician lies through his teeth....its a dog bites postman style story
"The police must investigate No. 10 parties!" - The parties are investigated and BJ and others get fined. "Look at the good job the police did! And there's more to come!" - The police don't issue more fines to BJ, but others do get them. "The police have done a horrid job! The top people have got away with it!"
Perhaps the underlings who got done are not a victim of some stitch-up by No. 10 and the police, but victims of the get-Boris campaign?
Then add in Beergate: "The police have investigated! There's nothing to see here! It's all a put-up job by the Mail!" - It turns out that the Labour Party had lied. "Why does it matter? The police investigated?" - More evidence comes out. "Why does it matter? The police investigated? And the Mail's awful!" - The investigation is reopened. "It's a waste of police time to investigate this!"
etc, etc.
You do know that is quite literally the Wail's position reversed. Attacks Labour's push on this - DON'T THEY KNOW THERE'S A WAR ON. Then 10 days of stories piling pressure on the police to do Starmer - one front page literally being TORY PRESSURE TO MAKE THE POLICE ACT. Then Starmer says "I'll quit" and they complain he's trying to pressure the police, then when newss breaks about the Met whitewhash its "WHAT A WASTE OF MONEY".
So you are right, but you're talking about the Tories.
Remember there is a very clear difference between the two sides. We have reams of evidence about Boris and Number 10 breaking the law over and over and over. She prepares a brutal report. Someone leans on the Met to provide cover. Which they do. With a narrow field of investigation. So that now the Gray report will come out and tear Number 10 apart the police have already found Him innocent by simply not investigating the hideous reportage and photos we're about to get. The establishment always looks after its own - if you are a civil servant with a gong you get protected whilst all your staff carry the can.#
If you want to gloat feel free. Not a good luck for the pro-establishment party as people starve.
I don't care if it's the Mail's position, or the opposite of it.
You were in denial over Beergate. I have no idea if Starmer or anyone else there will get a fine - the law appears to be so poorly written that pretty much anything could result. But it was clear the moment that it turned out that Labour had not told the truth about who had been there that the police investigation had not been thorough.
it would be good for you to be consistent.
I am being consistent. There was a prime fascie case against Johnson which the Met now appear to have investigated primarily to sweep under the carpet. There was not one against Starmer, and the "evidence" was not sufficient to suggest the law had been broken.
That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate.
I still think there is nothing to see and expect nobody to get fined. Buit if I'm wrong they fall on their sword and leave the stage. Which is more than can be said for Bonzo and his Clown Car circus. We're going to get the Gray report. Reams of it. Photos and all. And people like you will say "nothing to see here" for the various events the Met haven't even investigated because no fines have been issued.
I'm quite happy with the consistency of my position. Which on all things is apply the rules equally.
I'm actually going to reply again and say that some of the stuff you've written above is rubbish.
"That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate."
Yeah, right. Even Starmer himself cannot say for sure whether he broke the law or not. I am therefore unsure how you can say there is nothing to investigate. Are you a bigger-brained lawyer than Starmer?
"And people like you will say "nothing to see here" "
LOL. No. *You* are the one saying 'nothing to see here' about Durham. See above.
RP is consistent here.
I believe Starmer and Rayner probably broke the letter of the law, and if the law is applied with rigour they must go simply because they said they would. Richard Holden and the Daily Mail and Telegraph railroaded Durham Constabulary into a highly politicised investigation. Based on how they dealt with Cummings the precedent had been set to walk away.
Johnson personally drove a coach and horses through the rules. The Met launched a token case against him. It now transpires that they didn't even look at his more egregious breaches, they ignored the Abba night at number 10! And Case they ignored completely. Mainly Juniors and Women were fined. Cressida Dick's last hurrah was another operational failure.
The Met intervention rather than allowing justice to be served has allowed Johnson to dodge the Gray Report and remain in office. It has worked out so well for him, it looks very like a conspiratorial whitewash. Even his greatest foe in Government was brought down by a cake!
Tory hacks are laughing and they will laugh louder when Starmer gets his Beergate comeuppance. The reality is Team Johnson has taken the rest of us for a ride. And what about his clandestine meeting with Sue Gray last month...?
On what basis have you determined the police didn’t do their job? That you didn’t like the outcome?
AIUI all we know about the ABBA event is that the Met didn’t recommend any FPNs. We don’t know that they ignored it?
The Met have confirmed that of the 5 events Johnson was known to have attended the police only investigated him personally for two (questionnaires issued for just the two events) including the cake event, which handily brought down Sunak.
Reports are that Juniors were obliging to Gray whereas Seniors and some politicians in general were not. I suspect Sunak was truthful.They did not expect the Gray Report to be hijacked and used as evidence for the prosecution.
I personally think that Johnson not being investigated is remarkable, but Case, with the evidence we have seen ourselves not getting an FPN is astonishing.
Big Dog is saved...by the less than lamented Cressida Dick!
So hearsay and rumour. Ok.
But if they didn’t expect the Gray report to be hijacked they are too naive to be in Downing Street.
We all know words would have gone on behind the scenes in private and deals done its just how things work
I’m not sure ruling out hearsay in favour of conspiracy theories is a move in the right direction
Dim. Almost everything you know, you know by hearsay. Conspiracy theory does not mean what you think it means.
Started drinking early today?
I asked @Mexicanpete for evidence of the allegations he made. He replied “rumours say”. That’s not evidence.
The @GaryL jumped with”everybody knows it’s a stitch up” which has even less evidential value
On 'partygate' I would suggest it is not so much a conspiracy, or whitewash, but an utter condemnation of the way the rules were written with more holes than a colander
I expect the MET were very concerned there may be a challenge to the FPN's which could have resulted in them being declared unlawful, with real problems with the many thousands that were issued
I can understand Boris's claims he was working, which is similar to Starmer's, and for that reason I expect Starmer to cleared, but not sure about Rayner though
On the wider point about Boris, if his mps now see him as the one to lead into GE 24, then that will happen but they are clearly taking a huge gamble with their own seats and careers
I am relaxed about GE 24 as it is fair to say Starmer does not frighten me, and it is more than likely he will need the Lib Dems to work alongside him and hopefully curtail the overspending that a labour government is known for
Someone referred to the article in the Telegraph this morning, and it should be compulsory reading for all conservative mps and supporters as it is a stark warning that they could see a 1997 style result in 24, though I cannot see that without a recovery in Scotland by labour
Oh give over BigG. You and serial lockdown breaker Kay Burley were demanding Starmer's nuts, and now you are happy that the Met investigation barely investigated Johnson.
Work to do!
What a silly comment to a genuine piece
In view of the outcome of the MET investigation I do expect Starmer to be cleared if he can prove he was working and I have explained why I think the outcome has arisen in so far as the laws were an ass and frankly should never be enacted again
Ha, yet you still cheer on the people who wrote and broke the laws you think were so terrible.....
"The police must investigate No. 10 parties!" - The parties are investigated and BJ and others get fined. "Look at the good job the police did! And there's more to come!" - The police don't issue more fines to BJ, but others do get them. "The police have done a horrid job! The top people have got away with it!"
Perhaps the underlings who got done are not a victim of some stitch-up by No. 10 and the police, but victims of the get-Boris campaign?
Then add in Beergate: "The police have investigated! There's nothing to see here! It's all a put-up job by the Mail!" - It turns out that the Labour Party had lied. "Why does it matter? The police investigated?" - More evidence comes out. "Why does it matter? The police investigated? And the Mail's awful!" - The investigation is reopened. "It's a waste of police time to investigate this!"
etc, etc.
You do know that is quite literally the Wail's position reversed. Attacks Labour's push on this - DON'T THEY KNOW THERE'S A WAR ON. Then 10 days of stories piling pressure on the police to do Starmer - one front page literally being TORY PRESSURE TO MAKE THE POLICE ACT. Then Starmer says "I'll quit" and they complain he's trying to pressure the police, then when newss breaks about the Met whitewhash its "WHAT A WASTE OF MONEY".
So you are right, but you're talking about the Tories.
Remember there is a very clear difference between the two sides. We have reams of evidence about Boris and Number 10 breaking the law over and over and over. She prepares a brutal report. Someone leans on the Met to provide cover. Which they do. With a narrow field of investigation. So that now the Gray report will come out and tear Number 10 apart the police have already found Him innocent by simply not investigating the hideous reportage and photos we're about to get. The establishment always looks after its own - if you are a civil servant with a gong you get protected whilst all your staff carry the can.#
If you want to gloat feel free. Not a good luck for the pro-establishment party as people starve.
I don't care if it's the Mail's position, or the opposite of it.
You were in denial over Beergate. I have no idea if Starmer or anyone else there will get a fine - the law appears to be so poorly written that pretty much anything could result. But it was clear the moment that it turned out that Labour had not told the truth about who had been there that the police investigation had not been thorough.
it would be good for you to be consistent.
I am being consistent. There was a prime fascie case against Johnson which the Met now appear to have investigated primarily to sweep under the carpet. There was not one against Starmer, and the "evidence" was not sufficient to suggest the law had been broken.
That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate.
I still think there is nothing to see and expect nobody to get fined. Buit if I'm wrong they fall on their sword and leave the stage. Which is more than can be said for Bonzo and his Clown Car circus. We're going to get the Gray report. Reams of it. Photos and all. And people like you will say "nothing to see here" for the various events the Met haven't even investigated because no fines have been issued.
I'm quite happy with the consistency of my position. Which on all things is apply the rules equally.
I'm actually going to reply again and say that some of the stuff you've written above is rubbish.
"That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate."
Yeah, right. Even Starmer himself cannot say for sure whether he broke the law or not. I am therefore unsure how you can say there is nothing to investigate. Are you a bigger-brained lawyer than Starmer?
"And people like you will say "nothing to see here" "
LOL. No. *You* are the one saying 'nothing to see here' about Durham. See above.
RP is consistent here.
I believe Starmer and Rayner probably broke the letter of the law, and if the law is applied with rigour they must go simply because they said they would. Richard Holden and the Daily Mail and Telegraph railroaded Durham Constabulary into a highly politicised investigation. Based on how they dealt with Cummings the precedent had been set to walk away.
Johnson personally drove a coach and horses through the rules. The Met launched a token case against him. It now transpires that they didn't even look at his more egregious breaches, they ignored the Abba night at number 10! And Case they ignored completely. Mainly Juniors and Women were fined. Cressida Dick's last hurrah was another operational failure.
The Met intervention rather than allowing justice to be served has allowed Johnson to dodge the Gray Report and remain in office. It has worked out so well for him, it looks very like a conspiratorial whitewash. Even his greatest foe in Government was brought down by a cake!
Tory hacks are laughing and they will laugh louder when Starmer gets his Beergate comeuppance. The reality is Team Johnson has taken the rest of us for a ride. And what about his clandestine meeting with Sue Gray last month...?
On what basis have you determined the police didn’t do their job? That you didn’t like the outcome?
AIUI all we know about the ABBA event is that the Met didn’t recommend any FPNs. We don’t know that they ignored it?
I'm with @Mexicanpete. This has been a total establishment stitch-up to save the PM.
It stinks to high heaven.
Evidence please.
It'll come in time.
For a start, Johnson seems to have been taken at his lawyer's word that all these events he attended he considered to be work and therefore was allowed. But social events at work were not allowed. The only event he has been done for is one that is a joke - a cake turned up at the end of a meeting. The other events were massive piss-ups and we've seen some photo evidence and there's more to come no doubt now that only the kids and the women have actually been fined.
But, to be honest, what's the point anymore? I'm tired of it all. He's safe as houses until GE 2024.
Hopefully enough voters are as angry as I am and will not have forgotten by 2024.
The only one I recall seeing pictures of is the garden party - there he was sitting with his wife and a couple of others. Everyone else in the garden appeared to be socially distanced groups. So it’s possible that Boris thought it was ok/ that it was a work meeting / drink with friends (I’ve lost track of what was allowed when).
The zoom quiz he was on zoom from what I recall.
But I’ve never really been interested
Well you should be. Imagine if Prime Minister Jeremy Corbyn had led us down this garden path. You would be outraged.
The wagons have been well and truly circled, but by whom is alarming.
Nah. Don’t really care. Both Johnson and Corbyn were unsuitable candidates for PM.
But whether or not he had a cake doesn’t change my view of him.
I really dont get the whole thing about partygate/beergate....politician lies through his teeth....its a dog bites postman style story
Not supposed to do it to Parliament. Very much not. That's one key issue, and still unresolved.
I am sure @NickPalmer would have a view, but in my experience the ability of an MP to chat to a minister in the lobby is a very valuable informal channel to ensure their constituents are looked after
Interested in the "my experience" there - are you another former (or current) MP?
It's very easy to talk to a Minister informally (especially in your party as you'll be in the same lobby, but easy anyway). The Minister will *always* say non-committally "send me the details and I'll have a look", and they can do that online too - even now, 12 years after leaving Parliament, I have friendly online contact with both front benches. So I'm not sure that meeting in the lobby is really al lthat important.
Sure they are not committal. But it means they are looking out for the email.
"The police must investigate No. 10 parties!" - The parties are investigated and BJ and others get fined. "Look at the good job the police did! And there's more to come!" - The police don't issue more fines to BJ, but others do get them. "The police have done a horrid job! The top people have got away with it!"
Perhaps the underlings who got done are not a victim of some stitch-up by No. 10 and the police, but victims of the get-Boris campaign?
Then add in Beergate: "The police have investigated! There's nothing to see here! It's all a put-up job by the Mail!" - It turns out that the Labour Party had lied. "Why does it matter? The police investigated?" - More evidence comes out. "Why does it matter? The police investigated? And the Mail's awful!" - The investigation is reopened. "It's a waste of police time to investigate this!"
etc, etc.
You do know that is quite literally the Wail's position reversed. Attacks Labour's push on this - DON'T THEY KNOW THERE'S A WAR ON. Then 10 days of stories piling pressure on the police to do Starmer - one front page literally being TORY PRESSURE TO MAKE THE POLICE ACT. Then Starmer says "I'll quit" and they complain he's trying to pressure the police, then when newss breaks about the Met whitewhash its "WHAT A WASTE OF MONEY".
So you are right, but you're talking about the Tories.
Remember there is a very clear difference between the two sides. We have reams of evidence about Boris and Number 10 breaking the law over and over and over. She prepares a brutal report. Someone leans on the Met to provide cover. Which they do. With a narrow field of investigation. So that now the Gray report will come out and tear Number 10 apart the police have already found Him innocent by simply not investigating the hideous reportage and photos we're about to get. The establishment always looks after its own - if you are a civil servant with a gong you get protected whilst all your staff carry the can.#
If you want to gloat feel free. Not a good luck for the pro-establishment party as people starve.
I don't care if it's the Mail's position, or the opposite of it.
You were in denial over Beergate. I have no idea if Starmer or anyone else there will get a fine - the law appears to be so poorly written that pretty much anything could result. But it was clear the moment that it turned out that Labour had not told the truth about who had been there that the police investigation had not been thorough.
it would be good for you to be consistent.
I am being consistent. There was a prime fascie case against Johnson which the Met now appear to have investigated primarily to sweep under the carpet. There was not one against Starmer, and the "evidence" was not sufficient to suggest the law had been broken.
That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate.
I still think there is nothing to see and expect nobody to get fined. Buit if I'm wrong they fall on their sword and leave the stage. Which is more than can be said for Bonzo and his Clown Car circus. We're going to get the Gray report. Reams of it. Photos and all. And people like you will say "nothing to see here" for the various events the Met haven't even investigated because no fines have been issued.
I'm quite happy with the consistency of my position. Which on all things is apply the rules equally.
I'm actually going to reply again and say that some of the stuff you've written above is rubbish.
"That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate."
Yeah, right. Even Starmer himself cannot say for sure whether he broke the law or not. I am therefore unsure how you can say there is nothing to investigate. Are you a bigger-brained lawyer than Starmer?
"And people like you will say "nothing to see here" "
LOL. No. *You* are the one saying 'nothing to see here' about Durham. See above.
RP is consistent here.
I believe Starmer and Rayner probably broke the letter of the law, and if the law is applied with rigour they must go simply because they said they would. Richard Holden and the Daily Mail and Telegraph railroaded Durham Constabulary into a highly politicised investigation. Based on how they dealt with Cummings the precedent had been set to walk away.
Johnson personally drove a coach and horses through the rules. The Met launched a token case against him. It now transpires that they didn't even look at his more egregious breaches, they ignored the Abba night at number 10! And Case they ignored completely. Mainly Juniors and Women were fined. Cressida Dick's last hurrah was another operational failure.
The Met intervention rather than allowing justice to be served has allowed Johnson to dodge the Gray Report and remain in office. It has worked out so well for him, it looks very like a conspiratorial whitewash. Even his greatest foe in Government was brought down by a cake!
Tory hacks are laughing and they will laugh louder when Starmer gets his Beergate comeuppance. The reality is Team Johnson has taken the rest of us for a ride. And what about his clandestine meeting with Sue Gray last month...?
On what basis have you determined the police didn’t do their job? That you didn’t like the outcome?
AIUI all we know about the ABBA event is that the Met didn’t recommend any FPNs. We don’t know that they ignored it?
I'm with @Mexicanpete. This has been a total establishment stitch-up to save the PM.
It stinks to high heaven.
Evidence please.
It'll come in time.
For a start, Johnson seems to have been taken at his lawyer's word that all these events he attended he considered to be work and therefore was allowed. But social events at work were not allowed. The only event he has been done for is one that is a joke - a cake turned up at the end of a meeting. The other events were massive piss-ups and we've seen some photo evidence and there's more to come no doubt now that only the kids and the women have actually been fined.
But, to be honest, what's the point anymore? I'm tired of it all. He's safe as houses until GE 2024.
Hopefully enough voters are as angry as I am and will not have forgotten by 2024.
The only one I recall seeing pictures of is the garden party - there he was sitting with his wife and a couple of others. Everyone else in the garden appeared to be socially distanced groups. So it’s possible that Boris thought it was ok/ that it was a work meeting / drink with friends (I’ve lost track of what was allowed when).
The zoom quiz he was on zoom from what I recall.
But I’ve never really been interested
Well you should be. Imagine if Prime Minister Jeremy Corbyn had led us down this garden path. You would be outraged.
The wagons have been well and truly circled, but by whom is alarming.
Nah. Don’t really care. Both Johnson and Corbyn were unsuitable candidates for PM.
But whether or not he had a cake doesn’t change my view of him.
I really dont get the whole thing about partygate/beergate....politician lies through his teeth....its a dog bites postman style story
Not supposed to do it to Parliament. Very much not. That's one key issue, and still unresolved.
Based on the Met's findings, it's difficult to see exactly where the lie to parliament was.
I know people regard me as an angry voice and yes I am here far more than I would like to be. But the argument I am having with @bondegezou is symptomatic.
Simply put 40 to 50 years ago a household could live on the wage of one earner. Policy really hasnt changed that much over that time and now its common for households with 2 full time earners to be struggling. The argument from people like him is oh we need to keep on doing what we are doing, this was also the argument for remaining.
Sadly for most people in this country what we are doing really isnt working for them and year by year they feel poorer and poorer and struggle more and more while the upper echelons of society seem to get richer and richer.
Things need to change, the brexit vote was a result of this, my diatribe about doing essentials is part of this. Will they work? I really have no idea. However for a lot of this country just carrying on with the same old same old is not an option as all they see from past experience is they will slowly have less and less.
The fact that Brexit was being promoted by precisely the same people (Thatcherite ideologues backed by footloose capital) who had engineered the whole rich get richer while everyone else struggles shenanigans in the first place didn't seem to register with people.
Doesnt matter who was promoting it the fact was while in the eu the bottom half of the country had been sliding into poverty further and further....the argument to keep on as were doing therefore really didnt appeal to them because all that offered them was a continued slide into greater and greater poverty. You can certainly argue that it won't help but then staying in the eu wasn't going to help either so they rolled the dice and took a gamble that just maybe it would and for quite a few it has. People who are actually seeing payrises now whereas before they were condemned to minimum wage for the forseeable future. Oh yes forgot you are a left winger and the only good wage rises for the proles are those they get by hiking minimum wage
I'm sure people are very grateful for their below inflation pay rises.
And when we were in the eu people didnt get below inflation payrises in fact I am damn sure if we hadnt brexited people would be getting the same payrises now as they did then...the square root of fuck all
Real wages are going down currently, whereas when we were in the EU they went up. I don't make any causal claims (I don't think real wages are going down mainly because of Brexit, it is more to do with global energy and food price inflation) but the idea that being in the EU led to lower real wages and leaving the EU has led to higher real wages isn't really supported by the data.
Well if as you say reall wages were going up while we were in the eu strange that most people earning above min wage but lower than 50k a year saw bugger all evidence of it. Real wages were going up for those on min wage due to government mandated pay rises, real wages were certainly going up for company execs. Not so much for people between that. A common refrain from those I know was no pay rise again this year for the xth year running not even cost of living. I even know a couple of people who quit there job and went doing things like shelf stacking because they didn't make enough over minimum wage any more to make the extra stress and responsibilty worth it.
When min wage came in I was earning about 3.5 times it...now I am earning 2.1 times it
I am sure @NickPalmer would have a view, but in my experience the ability of an MP to chat to a minister in the lobby is a very valuable informal channel to ensure their constituents are looked after
Interested in the "my experience" there - are you another former (or current) MP?
It's very easy to talk to a Minister informally (especially in your party as you'll be in the same lobby, but easy anyway). The Minister will *always* say non-committally "send me the details and I'll have a look", and they can do that online too - even now, 12 years after leaving Parliament, I have friendly online contact with both front benches. So I'm not sure that meeting in the lobby is really al lthat important.
How much of that informal contact is with people you didn’t know and meet when you were in Parliament?
It’s more difficult to make new relationships in an online environment, than it is to maintain existing relationships.
My position is unusual because my job involves ongoing contact with Ministers and Shadows, including people who I never met when I was in Parliament because they've come in since 2010. But in most cases I've only met them online now! If Parliament was entirely online, I expect the same would apply.
There is a WhatsApp group for the 1997 Labour wave that I belong to, but nearly everyone there has retired from Parliament, and in fact I'm unusual on that in still having a full-time job.
Will be interesting to see if the pitch invasions continue this weekend Both leeds and Burnley involved in high stakes relegation games
Teams in the top two divisions obviously shouldn't be doing pitch invasions as they can't get it right.
Time to introduce points penalties for pitch invasions from next season, 9 points should cover it.
Preposterous. When celebratory pitch invasions are done right, there's no problem with them. Look at Edgeley Park last Sunday - 10, 15 minutes of sheer unbridled joy, celebrating with the players - and then clearing the pitch so they could have the trophy presentation. And no threat to anyone.
"The police must investigate No. 10 parties!" - The parties are investigated and BJ and others get fined. "Look at the good job the police did! And there's more to come!" - The police don't issue more fines to BJ, but others do get them. "The police have done a horrid job! The top people have got away with it!"
Perhaps the underlings who got done are not a victim of some stitch-up by No. 10 and the police, but victims of the get-Boris campaign?
Then add in Beergate: "The police have investigated! There's nothing to see here! It's all a put-up job by the Mail!" - It turns out that the Labour Party had lied. "Why does it matter? The police investigated?" - More evidence comes out. "Why does it matter? The police investigated? And the Mail's awful!" - The investigation is reopened. "It's a waste of police time to investigate this!"
etc, etc.
You do know that is quite literally the Wail's position reversed. Attacks Labour's push on this - DON'T THEY KNOW THERE'S A WAR ON. Then 10 days of stories piling pressure on the police to do Starmer - one front page literally being TORY PRESSURE TO MAKE THE POLICE ACT. Then Starmer says "I'll quit" and they complain he's trying to pressure the police, then when newss breaks about the Met whitewhash its "WHAT A WASTE OF MONEY".
So you are right, but you're talking about the Tories.
Remember there is a very clear difference between the two sides. We have reams of evidence about Boris and Number 10 breaking the law over and over and over. She prepares a brutal report. Someone leans on the Met to provide cover. Which they do. With a narrow field of investigation. So that now the Gray report will come out and tear Number 10 apart the police have already found Him innocent by simply not investigating the hideous reportage and photos we're about to get. The establishment always looks after its own - if you are a civil servant with a gong you get protected whilst all your staff carry the can.#
If you want to gloat feel free. Not a good luck for the pro-establishment party as people starve.
I don't care if it's the Mail's position, or the opposite of it.
You were in denial over Beergate. I have no idea if Starmer or anyone else there will get a fine - the law appears to be so poorly written that pretty much anything could result. But it was clear the moment that it turned out that Labour had not told the truth about who had been there that the police investigation had not been thorough.
it would be good for you to be consistent.
I am being consistent. There was a prime fascie case against Johnson which the Met now appear to have investigated primarily to sweep under the carpet. There was not one against Starmer, and the "evidence" was not sufficient to suggest the law had been broken.
That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate.
I still think there is nothing to see and expect nobody to get fined. Buit if I'm wrong they fall on their sword and leave the stage. Which is more than can be said for Bonzo and his Clown Car circus. We're going to get the Gray report. Reams of it. Photos and all. And people like you will say "nothing to see here" for the various events the Met haven't even investigated because no fines have been issued.
I'm quite happy with the consistency of my position. Which on all things is apply the rules equally.
I'm actually going to reply again and say that some of the stuff you've written above is rubbish.
"That Durham plod are now reinvestigating is as much because it became politically untenable for them not to do so as because there is anything to investigate."
Yeah, right. Even Starmer himself cannot say for sure whether he broke the law or not. I am therefore unsure how you can say there is nothing to investigate. Are you a bigger-brained lawyer than Starmer?
"And people like you will say "nothing to see here" "
LOL. No. *You* are the one saying 'nothing to see here' about Durham. See above.
RP is consistent here.
I believe Starmer and Rayner probably broke the letter of the law, and if the law is applied with rigour they must go simply because they said they would. Richard Holden and the Daily Mail and Telegraph railroaded Durham Constabulary into a highly politicised investigation. Based on how they dealt with Cummings the precedent had been set to walk away.
Johnson personally drove a coach and horses through the rules. The Met launched a token case against him. It now transpires that they didn't even look at his more egregious breaches, they ignored the Abba night at number 10! And Case they ignored completely. Mainly Juniors and Women were fined. Cressida Dick's last hurrah was another operational failure.
The Met intervention rather than allowing justice to be served has allowed Johnson to dodge the Gray Report and remain in office. It has worked out so well for him, it looks very like a conspiratorial whitewash. Even his greatest foe in Government was brought down by a cake!
Tory hacks are laughing and they will laugh louder when Starmer gets his Beergate comeuppance. The reality is Team Johnson has taken the rest of us for a ride. And what about his clandestine meeting with Sue Gray last month...?
On what basis have you determined the police didn’t do their job? That you didn’t like the outcome?
AIUI all we know about the ABBA event is that the Met didn’t recommend any FPNs. We don’t know that they ignored it?
I'm with @Mexicanpete. This has been a total establishment stitch-up to save the PM.
It stinks to high heaven.
Evidence please.
It'll come in time.
For a start, Johnson seems to have been taken at his lawyer's word that all these events he attended he considered to be work and therefore was allowed. But social events at work were not allowed. The only event he has been done for is one that is a joke - a cake turned up at the end of a meeting. The other events were massive piss-ups and we've seen some photo evidence and there's more to come no doubt now that only the kids and the women have actually been fined.
But, to be honest, what's the point anymore? I'm tired of it all. He's safe as houses until GE 2024.
Hopefully enough voters are as angry as I am and will not have forgotten by 2024.
The only one I recall seeing pictures of is the garden party - there he was sitting with his wife and a couple of others. Everyone else in the garden appeared to be socially distanced groups. So it’s possible that Boris thought it was ok/ that it was a work meeting / drink with friends (I’ve lost track of what was allowed when).
The zoom quiz he was on zoom from what I recall.
But I’ve never really been interested
Well you should be. Imagine if Prime Minister Jeremy Corbyn had led us down this garden path. You would be outraged.
The wagons have been well and truly circled, but by whom is alarming.
Nah. Don’t really care. Both Johnson and Corbyn were unsuitable candidates for PM.
But whether or not he had a cake doesn’t change my view of him.
I really dont get the whole thing about partygate/beergate....politician lies through his teeth....its a dog bites postman style story
Not supposed to do it to Parliament. Very much not. That's one key issue, and still unresolved.
Why should parliament be priveleged to not be lied to when they lie through their teeth to the rest of us?
Will be interesting to see if the pitch invasions continue this weekend Both leeds and Burnley involved in high stakes relegation games
Teams in the top two divisions obviously shouldn't be doing pitch invasions as they can't get it right.
Time to introduce points penalties for pitch invasions from next season, 9 points should cover it.
Preposterous. When celebratory pitch invasions are done right, there's no problem with them. Look at Edgeley Park last Sunday - 10, 15 minutes of sheer unbridled joy, celebrating with the players - and then clearing the pitch so they could have the trophy presentation. And no threat to anyone.
Well you could start with -9 for pitch invasions *during* the game...
Still not much from WA. Coalition held 10 of 15. Unless they pick up a couple it is getting hard to see them forming a government. Most likely we won't know for weeks. Postals haven't been counted anywhere either.
Will be interesting to see if the pitch invasions continue this weekend Both leeds and Burnley involved in high stakes relegation games
Teams in the top two divisions obviously shouldn't be doing pitch invasions as they can't get it right.
Time to introduce points penalties for pitch invasions from next season, 9 points should cover it.
Preposterous. When celebratory pitch invasions are done right, there's no problem with them. Look at Edgeley Park last Sunday - 10, 15 minutes of sheer unbridled joy, celebrating with the players - and then clearing the pitch so they could have the trophy presentation. And no threat to anyone.
Well you could start with -9 for pitch invasions *during* the game...
That's an entirely different thing - for a start, it's incredibly rare to have a mass pitch invasion during a game, and the only ones I can think of have been protests, like with Oldham a few weeks back. I'm not sure such a thing would be deterred by a points deduction.
I know people regard me as an angry voice and yes I am here far more than I would like to be. But the argument I am having with @bondegezou is symptomatic.
Simply put 40 to 50 years ago a household could live on the wage of one earner. Policy really hasnt changed that much over that time and now its common for households with 2 full time earners to be struggling. The argument from people like him is oh we need to keep on doing what we are doing, this was also the argument for remaining.
Sadly for most people in this country what we are doing really isnt working for them and year by year they feel poorer and poorer and struggle more and more while the upper echelons of society seem to get richer and richer.
Things need to change, the brexit vote was a result of this, my diatribe about doing essentials is part of this. Will they work? I really have no idea. However for a lot of this country just carrying on with the same old same old is not an option as all they see from past experience is they will slowly have less and less.
The fact that Brexit was being promoted by precisely the same people (Thatcherite ideologues backed by footloose capital) who had engineered the whole rich get richer while everyone else struggles shenanigans in the first place didn't seem to register with people.
Doesnt matter who was promoting it the fact was while in the eu the bottom half of the country had been sliding into poverty further and further....the argument to keep on as were doing therefore really didnt appeal to them because all that offered them was a continued slide into greater and greater poverty. You can certainly argue that it won't help but then staying in the eu wasn't going to help either so they rolled the dice and took a gamble that just maybe it would and for quite a few it has. People who are actually seeing payrises now whereas before they were condemned to minimum wage for the forseeable future. Oh yes forgot you are a left winger and the only good wage rises for the proles are those they get by hiking minimum wage
I'm sure people are very grateful for their below inflation pay rises.
And when we were in the eu people didnt get below inflation payrises in fact I am damn sure if we hadnt brexited people would be getting the same payrises now as they did then...the square root of fuck all
Real wages are going down currently, whereas when we were in the EU they went up. I don't make any causal claims (I don't think real wages are going down mainly because of Brexit, it is more to do with global energy and food price inflation) but the idea that being in the EU led to lower real wages and leaving the EU has led to higher real wages isn't really supported by the data.
Well if as you say reall wages were going up while we were in the eu strange that most people earning above min wage but lower than 50k a year saw bugger all evidence of it. Real wages were going up for those on min wage due to government mandated pay rises, real wages were certainly going up for company execs. Not so much for people between that. A common refrain from those I know was no pay rise again this year for the xth year running not even cost of living. I even know a couple of people who quit there job and went doing things like shelf stacking because they didn't make enough over minimum wage any more to make the extra stress and responsibilty worth it.
When min wage came in I was earning about 3.5 times it...now I am earning 2.1 times it
On your last point, when the minimum wage was introduced it was set deliberately at a low level because they were worried it might lead to unemployment. Over time it has been increased both in nominal terms and as a fraction of average wages as they have become more confident that it doesn't destroy jobs at a higher level. So it isn't surprising that it has risen relative to your wages and isn't necessarily a sign that your wages have fallen behind.
Comments
Labor 50.1% Coalition 49.9% on 2PP so far.
Anthony Green, poll guru for ABC, saying a hung parliament most likely outcome
https://www.royalmail.com/sending/uk/1st-class
12 officers for 3 months = 4 for a year.
Inclusive of overhead of office space, HR, risk management, secretarial support etc etc
For a start, Johnson seems to have been taken at his lawyer's word that all these events he attended he considered to be work and therefore was allowed. But social events at work were not allowed. The only event he has been done for is one that is a joke - a cake turned up at the end of a meeting. The other events were massive piss-ups and we've seen some photo evidence and there's more to come no doubt now that only the kids and the women have actually been fined.
But, to be honest, what's the point anymore? I'm tired of it all. He's safe as houses until GE 2024.
Hopefully enough voters are as angry as I am and will not have forgotten by 2024.
For those of us not cheering for Team Johnson our incredulity is off the scale.
Johnson aside, how did Case avoid a fine?
The Save Big Dog Gant Chart did not deviate from the plan. Perfect!
Just the 1 FPN for the senior leadership group who created and and inspired this law breaking culture, the junior grades are the ones getting hammered for.
Clear whitewash. Clear stink up the nose of every voter. Do you really Need anything else to know for yourself something is wrong here?
https://www.politico.eu/article/12-times-boris-johnsons-tories-party-during-lockdown/
It’s unlikely to happen but, if Starmer gets a FPN, the collective head-exploding on here will be a sight to behold.
But, yes, remarkable how BJ has come through.
The zoom quiz he was on zoom from what I recall.
But I’ve never really been interested
Let’s also put it the other way. If SKS doesn’t get issued a FPN by Durham and the Tories say it’s because the Commissioner there leant on the Police, would you not be claiming the Tories are being conspiracy theorists?
Phatboi is a corrupt liar and this is a stitch up. THE END.
Coalition majority: 4.1
Coalition minority: 4
Labor majority: 1.03
Labor minority: 2.18
So if your man thinks there will be a minority government of either shade...
There is a market on whether there will be a majority government but that is 1.03 each of two.
The wagons have been well and truly circled, but by whom is alarming.
It's very easy to talk to a Minister informally (especially in your party as you'll be in the same lobby, but easy anyway). The Minister will *always* say non-committally "send me the details and I'll have a look", and they can do that online too - even now, 12 years after leaving Parliament, I have friendly online contact with both front benches. So I'm not sure that meeting in the lobby is really al lthat important.
This is the bottom line.
Conservative Politicians, past and current, would have owned this and resigned. The party would then have moved on.
Don’t allow yourself to be distracted from this bottom line.
It’s more difficult to make new relationships in an online environment, than it is to maintain existing relationships.
Lab 50.3%
Coalition 49.7%
Also not far off the 2016 result where Turnbull got a majority of 1
On 'partygate' I would suggest it is not so much a conspiracy, or whitewash, but an utter condemnation of the way the rules were written with more holes than a colander
I expect the MET were very concerned there may be a challenge to the FPN's which could have resulted in them being declared unlawful, with real problems with the many thousands that were issued
I can understand Boris's claims he was working, which is similar to Starmer's, and for that reason I expect Starmer to cleared, but not sure about Rayner though
On the wider point about Boris, if his mps now see him as the one to lead into GE 24, then that will happen but they are clearly taking a huge gamble with their own seats and careers
I am relaxed about GE 24 as it is fair to say Starmer does not frighten me, and it is more than likely he will need the Lib Dems to work alongside him and hopefully curtail the overspending that a labour government is known for
Someone referred to the article in the Telegraph this morning, and it should be compulsory reading for all conservative mps and supporters as it is a stark warning that they could see a 1997 style result in 24, though I cannot see that without a recovery in Scotland by labour
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/05/21/heading-1997/
RP has been straight down the fairway consistent.
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/world/article-teal-wave-in-australia-sees-voters-backing-climate-focused-independent/
Work to do!
I’m in the car now!
https://twitter.com/srpeatling/status/1527907231454621696?s=20&t=OP6nSr-rbsFoUtVtHfTxGg
Edit. I think that might be Liberal. Nats are Green. Which makes it awkward for the Greens I guess...
In view of the outcome of the MET investigation I do expect Starmer to be cleared if he can prove he was working and I have explained why I think the outcome has arisen in so far as the laws were an ass and frankly should never be enacted again
https://www.pollbludger.net/2022/05/21/federal-election-live-3/comment-page-16/#comments
But whether or not he had a cake doesn’t change my view of him.
Much more accurate odds than earlier.
I asked @Mexicanpete for evidence of the allegations he made. He replied “rumours say”. That’s not evidence.
The @GaryL jumped with”everybody knows it’s a stitch up” which has even less evidential value
Not going to identify myself though 😏
When min wage came in I was earning about 3.5 times it...now I am earning 2.1 times it
There is a WhatsApp group for the 1997 Labour wave that I belong to, but nearly everyone there has retired from Parliament, and in fact I'm unusual on that in still having a full-time job.
Unless they pick up a couple it is getting hard to see them forming a government.
Most likely we won't know for weeks.
Postals haven't been counted anywhere either.