Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Joe Biden’s VP pick – we’ve now got a date

12345679»

Comments

  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,421
    tlg86 said:

    TGOHF666 said:
    As I said when the PCC raised this with his force, this was not likely to work in the favour of the government's opponents.
    I would disagree. Imagine if they had found against him on all points and slapped him with a thousand quid fine (well, £960). He’d have had to resign and somebody credible, competent and intelligent might have replaced him.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 28,902

    Scott_xP said:
    I'm sure the Attorney General cares deeply indeed about what this anonymous random thinks about her.
    She probably doesn't. Being held in contempt by the legal profession is a good career move for the AG.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,929
    tlg86 said:

    TGOHF666 said:
    As I said when the PCC raised this with his force, this was not likely to work in the favour of the government's opponents.
    But what of the government's opponents who want Cummings to stay, and the government supporters who want Cummings out?
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,676
    No further action because they do not want to act retrospectively
  • TGOHF666TGOHF666 Posts: 2,052

    I don't see how a police force can condone somebody driving 30 miles to see if they can see properly.

    They don't - they say they would have wagged their finger at him.

    Hardly a resigning issue.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,935
    Can she even read?
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 63,102

    Wait did Durham Police say he "did" break the rules on Barnhard Castle or he "might" have but it's minor? Those are two very different things.

    Either way he's been cleared of the main accusation.

    Telegraph says

    BREAKING: A Durham Police investigation has concluded that Dominic Cummings DID breach lockdown rules when he drove to Barnard Castle, the Telegraph has learned
    You need to read the full report on the BBC before passing judgment
  • TGOHF666TGOHF666 Posts: 2,052
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,868

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    For a minor breach of rules a verbal warning is an appropriate sanction for an employee unless they're already on a verbal/written warning. It isn't Gross Misconduct.

    But you've been telling us for days that no rules were broken. Which is it?
    I also said there should be an independent investigation too ...

    There has been one. I'm happy to accept it's results. According to that I was right about the trip to Durham and wrong about Barnhard Castle. Fair enough.

    Given the primary one of concern has been cleared of being a breach and the secondary one is minor then a warning and an apology would be appropriate in my eyes.
    He wrote the lockdown rules and then broke them, it's a resigning matter. We're way beyond apologies.
    No. Even people who write rules can make errors in interpreting them. Errors of judgement are not a resigning matter.
    Yes they are. It's like the head of the highways agency driving at 75mph, he knows what the speed limit is. Dom knew what the guidelines were and broke them many times. He broke quarantine and then made an unnecessary trip to the castle. His actions were calculated and the government response has been very carefully worded because they know how calculated everything is. His excuse for driving to the castle is completely laughable and your defence of him I'd both disappointing and predictable.

    The Tory party is handing the 2024 election to Labour in defence of one person. You're losing millions of marginal voters over this and you just don't seem to care.
    Only if you're vindictive. If the rule isn't clear and the breach is minor then clear it up for next time.
    No, you can't have people who wrote the rules breaking them. It's why the bonking scientist and the idiot woman in Scotland had to go as well.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,226
    Monkeys said:

    I see we've moved rapidly from the 'he did nothing wrong' stage to the 'what he did wrong was minor' one. Prediction: uncontrolled foot stamping and 'but Emily Maitliss' next.

    I've been saying since the start: You can drive to Durham. You risk a small fine. Weed is a bigger fine. Everyone smokes weed.
    You've been saying from the start of all this that everyone smokes weed?

    That's a novel take! Hats off.
  • FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 4,681

    Wait did Durham Police say he "did" break the rules on Barnhard Castle or he "might" have but it's minor? Those are two very different things.

    Either way he's been cleared of the main accusation.

    Yes, the 'might' clears this up. The police haven't actually said he is guilty of anything at all.
  • TGOHF666TGOHF666 Posts: 2,052
    RobD said:

    Can she even read?
    She's shown that the truth is a foreign country.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,421
    If Renault production is shifted to Sunderland Macron will go mental given the size of bribe he slipped them a few days ago to move it to France.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,413
    TGOHF666 said:
    More importantly Im waiting for Scott to blame him.

    Explains Dom's trip up North :smiley:
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,929
    TGOHF666 said:

    I don't see how a police force can condone somebody driving 30 miles to see if they can see properly.

    They don't - they say they would have wagged their finger at him.

    Hardly a resigning issue.
    60 miles there and back, breaking the guidelines and possibly the RTA on defective vision and due care and attention, and all because he was too stupid to admit it was a jolly for the wife's birthday.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,935

    Wait did Durham Police say he "did" break the rules on Barnhard Castle or he "might" have but it's minor? Those are two very different things.

    Either way he's been cleared of the main accusation.

    Yes, the 'might' clears this up. The police haven't actually said he is guilty of anything at all.
    The key words in there are

    "Durham Constabulary does not consider that by locating himself at his father's premises, Mr Cummings committed an offence"

    and that "there might have been a minor breach of Regulation"

    How on earth she concludes that they are saying he DID break the lockdown rules is beyond me.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,176

    tlg86 said:

    TGOHF666 said:
    As I said when the PCC raised this with his force, this was not likely to work in the favour of the government's opponents.
    But what of the government's opponents who want Cummings to stay, and the government supporters who want Cummings out?
    Obviously it doesn't stop people thinking that what Cummings did was wrong. I still think Johnson have taken a big gamble with this, but I would say the police intervention is beneficial to the government.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 63,102
    RobD said:

    Can she even read?
    I really despair at the quality of journalism when you read a headline like that without reading the context
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    LOL Piers Morgan lied! The Police don't say Barnhard Castle did breach the rules just that it "might have" but is so minor they're not investigating further. 😂🙈

    So I was right after all! Durham visit wasn't a breach of the rules. Barnhard Castle might have been but is so minor we will never know either way.

    Move on already. What a farce!
  • TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 12,454
    RobD said:

    Wait did Durham Police say he "did" break the rules on Barnhard Castle or he "might" have but it's minor? Those are two very different things.

    Either way he's been cleared of the main accusation.

    Yes, the 'might' clears this up. The police haven't actually said he is guilty of anything at all.
    The key words in there are

    "Durham Constabulary does not consider that by locating himself at his father's premises, Mr Cummings committed an offence"

    and that "there might have been a minor breach of Regulation"

    How on earth she concludes that they are saying he DID break the lockdown rules is beyond me.
    They can't say he did break the rules without a conviction, can they!
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,176
    ydoethur said:

    tlg86 said:

    TGOHF666 said:
    As I said when the PCC raised this with his force, this was not likely to work in the favour of the government's opponents.
    I would disagree. Imagine if they had found against him on all points and slapped him with a thousand quid fine (well, £960). He’d have had to resign and somebody credible, competent and intelligent might have replaced him.
    Whilst Cummings has clearly become a household name because of this, I don't think his competence or otherwise is part of the equation.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 63,102

    No further action because they do not want to act retrospectively
    And what would they have done at the time. Why not explain it on here BJO
  • TGOHF666TGOHF666 Posts: 2,052
    ydoethur said:

    If Renault production is shifted to Sunderland Macron will go mental given the size of bribe he slipped them a few days ago to move it to France.
    Renault and Nissan are divorcing - Sunderland will be a Nissan plant in 2years.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    For a minor breach of rules a verbal warning is an appropriate sanction for an employee unless they're already on a verbal/written warning. It isn't Gross Misconduct.

    But you've been telling us for days that no rules were broken. Which is it?
    I also said there should be an independent investigation too ...

    There has been one. I'm happy to accept it's results. According to that I was right about the trip to Durham and wrong about Barnhard Castle. Fair enough.

    Given the primary one of concern has been cleared of being a breach and the secondary one is minor then a warning and an apology would be appropriate in my eyes.
    He wrote the lockdown rules and then broke them, it's a resigning matter. We're way beyond apologies.
    No. Even people who write rules can make errors in interpreting them. Errors of judgement are not a resigning matter.
    Yes they are. It's like the head of the highways agency driving at 75mph, he knows what the speed limit is. Dom knew what the guidelines were and broke them many times. He broke quarantine and then made an unnecessary trip to the castle. His actions were calculated and the government response has been very carefully worded because they know how calculated everything is. His excuse for driving to the castle is completely laughable and your defence of him I'd both disappointing and predictable.

    The Tory party is handing the 2024 election to Labour in defence of one person. You're losing millions of marginal voters over this and you just don't seem to care.
    Only if you're vindictive. If the rule isn't clear and the breach is minor then clear it up for next time.
    No, you can't have people who wrote the rules breaking them. It's why the bonking scientist and the idiot woman in Scotland had to go as well.
    But he didn't. Nothings been broken. Durham trip was legal and Barnhard Castle is so minor we will never know either way.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,935

    RobD said:

    Wait did Durham Police say he "did" break the rules on Barnhard Castle or he "might" have but it's minor? Those are two very different things.

    Either way he's been cleared of the main accusation.

    Yes, the 'might' clears this up. The police haven't actually said he is guilty of anything at all.
    The key words in there are

    "Durham Constabulary does not consider that by locating himself at his father's premises, Mr Cummings committed an offence"

    and that "there might have been a minor breach of Regulation"

    How on earth she concludes that they are saying he DID break the lockdown rules is beyond me.
    They can't say he did break the rules without a conviction, can they!
    They could issue a fixed penalty notice, couldn't they? Obviously Cummings would have room to appeal in court.
  • TGOHF666TGOHF666 Posts: 2,052
    Especially schools near 5G masts..
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    I wonder how many people who spent the last six days pronouncing that the Durham visit was illegal will have the humility and good grace to admit they were wrong?
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,999
    tlg86 said:

    ydoethur said:

    tlg86 said:

    TGOHF666 said:
    As I said when the PCC raised this with his force, this was not likely to work in the favour of the government's opponents.
    I would disagree. Imagine if they had found against him on all points and slapped him with a thousand quid fine (well, £960). He’d have had to resign and somebody credible, competent and intelligent might have replaced him.
    Whilst Cummings has clearly become a household name because of this, I don't think his competence or otherwise is part of the equation.
    Isn't becoming a household name incompetent for an éminence grise (or whatever arsey form Cummings like to apply to his very important personage)?
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,851
    Hi all. This may seem very self indulgent but please spare a thought for us Cardiffians. Still under lockdown - other than the one hour exercise per day - and a BBC forecast recording temperatures 25, 25, 26, 27, 25, 25, 26 for the next seven days with just one day of moderate cloud cover. Not even too hot to go out! Happens here once in a blue moon. Sigh.
  • eekeek Posts: 28,405
    tlg86 said:

    ydoethur said:

    tlg86 said:

    TGOHF666 said:
    As I said when the PCC raised this with his force, this was not likely to work in the favour of the government's opponents.
    I would disagree. Imagine if they had found against him on all points and slapped him with a thousand quid fine (well, £960). He’d have had to resign and somebody credible, competent and intelligent might have replaced him.
    Whilst Cummings has clearly become a household name because of this, I don't think his competence or otherwise is part of the equation.
    I think it's the conniving scumminess which was the bigger issue and the inability for Boris not to see how to shut down the issue immediately.

    As I've continually said the solution was to resign and for the resignation to be refused due to circumstances. that would have been Job done.
  • BromBrom Posts: 3,760
    Dom pretty much in the clear then? slap on wrists at best
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,421
    edited May 2020

    LOL Piers Morgan lied! The Police don't say Barnhard Castle did breach the rules just that it "might have" but is so minor they're not investigating further. 😂🙈

    So I was right after all! Durham visit wasn't a breach of the rules. Barnhard Castle might have been but is so minor we will never know either way.

    Move on already. What a farce!

    You misunderstand. The language is effectively saying that he did breach the lockdown rules, but the normal penalty is he would have been ordered to return home. Only if people refused to return home have Durham been handing out fines. Which, in fairness, is a very sensible approach.

    It is interesting also that while they say they do not feel there is clear cut evidence of a breach of the actual regulations - which after the Attorney General’s exceptionally stupid comments, they could hardly have said otherwise - they do make it clear that in their view he had acted contrary to government advice.

    Hope your daughter didn’t take the news about school too badly, btw.

    ETA - I wonder if there will be complaints about his actions under s96 now.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,885

    Scott_xP said:
    Everything pinned on “trip to Durham” with the birthday eye test drive to Barnard Castle ignored.
    Even then Durham Police fined two gents for drivng to Durham (well, the county anyway). The difference escapes me ...
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,929
    tlg86 said:

    tlg86 said:

    TGOHF666 said:
    As I said when the PCC raised this with his force, this was not likely to work in the favour of the government's opponents.
    But what of the government's opponents who want Cummings to stay, and the government supporters who want Cummings out?
    Obviously it doesn't stop people thinking that what Cummings did was wrong. I still think Johnson have taken a big gamble with this, but I would say the police intervention is beneficial to the government.
    The question is not whether what Cummings did was wrong, or illegal, or even bloody stupid, but whether voters who have endured many hardships through lockdown and isolation will see it as blatant hypocrisy. That's what did for Major's government, and may have been a factor in "a plague on all your houses" after the expenses scandal.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,676
    So they would have turned him back and only if he refused to return (a distinct possibility knowing Cummings) would they have taken any further action

    So he did breach the rules at the time.

    The matter is not closed despite No 10 statement.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 28,902

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    For a minor breach of rules a verbal warning is an appropriate sanction for an employee unless they're already on a verbal/written warning. It isn't Gross Misconduct.

    But you've been telling us for days that no rules were broken. Which is it?
    I also said there should be an independent investigation too ...

    There has been one. I'm happy to accept it's results. According to that I was right about the trip to Durham and wrong about Barnhard Castle. Fair enough.

    Given the primary one of concern has been cleared of being a breach and the secondary one is minor then a warning and an apology would be appropriate in my eyes.
    He wrote the lockdown rules and then broke them, it's a resigning matter. We're way beyond apologies.
    No. Even people who write rules can make errors in interpreting them. Errors of judgement are not a resigning matter.
    Yes they are. It's like the head of the highways agency driving at 75mph, he knows what the speed limit is. Dom knew what the guidelines were and broke them many times. He broke quarantine and then made an unnecessary trip to the castle. His actions were calculated and the government response has been very carefully worded because they know how calculated everything is. His excuse for driving to the castle is completely laughable and your defence of him I'd both disappointing and predictable.

    The Tory party is handing the 2024 election to Labour in defence of one person. You're losing millions of marginal voters over this and you just don't seem to care.
    Only if you're vindictive. If the rule isn't clear and the breach is minor then clear it up for next time.
    You and I both know there is a difference between the rules - what copshop can enforce - and the guidance. Indeed you have made some very strong arguments to that effect. It was always the case that being told to go home was the initial sanction available to the police and they have been shown telling people in parks etc to sod off. If you get arsey then here's your FPN, really arsey we'll escort you home, really really arsey yer nicked. Much of the whataboutery has been hurled at Stephen Kinnock, who was spoken to by Welsh copshop.

    But the rules backed up by the law has never been the issue. Its been the guidance. Stay Home, Save Lives. If you travel you risk us all. Don't put pressure on the NHS somewhere else by travelling to a second residence. Cummings devised the strategy at least in part to issue what ManCock described as instructions. Which has seen families kept apart, parents dying alone etc etc. That the person who set out the instructions flagrantly ignores it, puts out a fallacy about being in London and continues to lie about it is what has fucked people off, not that Durham plod could have sent him away from BC and didn't.

    Basic political problem. You are an intelligent man. Politically astute. Yet continue to hold a line long since lost to ridicule and mass scorn. Even from Tory papers and Tory voters. I know why small of brain contributors say it - they know no better. You however are worth better than even almost a week on continuing to tunnel to Java.
  • kjhkjh Posts: 11,805
    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    For a minor breach of rules a verbal warning is an appropriate sanction for an employee unless they're already on a verbal/written warning. It isn't Gross Misconduct.

    But you've been telling us for days that no rules were broken. Which is it?
    I also said there should be an independent investigation too ...

    There has been one. I'm happy to accept it's results. According to that I was right about the trip to Durham and wrong about Barnhard Castle. Fair enough.

    Given the primary one of concern has been cleared of being a breach and the secondary one is minor then a warning and an apology would be appropriate in my eyes.
    He wrote the lockdown rules and then broke them, it's a resigning matter. We're way beyond apologies.
    No. Even people who write rules can make errors in interpreting them. Errors of judgement are not a resigning matter.
    Yes they are. It's like the head of the highways agency driving at 75mph, he knows what the speed limit is. Dom knew what the guidelines were and broke them many times. He broke quarantine and then made an unnecessary trip to the castle. His actions were calculated and the government response has been very carefully worded because they know how calculated everything is. His excuse for driving to the castle is completely laughable and your defence of him I'd both disappointing and predictable.

    The Tory party is handing the 2024 election to Labour in defence of one person. You're losing millions of marginal voters over this and you just don't seem to care.
    Only if you're vindictive. If the rule isn't clear and the breach is minor then clear it up for next time.
    No, you can't have people who wrote the rules breaking them. It's why the bonking scientist and the idiot woman in Scotland had to go as well.
    I agree and in their cases the situation was less damaging. They broke lockdown rules not quarantine which is very different and they were responsible for scientific advice not policy. I was conflicted regarding both of them. It seemed stupid to remove these advisors and weaken your team, yet if you don't it becomes a case of different rules for us and them and thus impacting the public's behaviour.
  • LOL Piers Morgan lied! The Police don't say Barnhard Castle did breach the rules just that it "might have" but is so minor they're not investigating further. 😂🙈

    So I was right after all! Durham visit wasn't a breach of the rules. Barnhard Castle might have been but is so minor we will never know either way.

    Move on already. What a farce!

    Yet the way it is being reported on some of the online sites is that this announcement is confirming his guilt.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,868

    I wonder how many people who spent the last six days pronouncing that the Durham visit was illegal will have the humility and good grace to admit they were wrong?

    He broke the guidelines. The same guidelines that locked the rest of us at home. You're not going to escape that with legalism and neither is the Tory party. You're losing the 2024 election and millions of voters now believe the Tory party lives by different rules to the rest of us.

    You're part of the problem, unfortunately.
  • BluestBlueBluestBlue Posts: 4,556

    I wonder how many people who spent the last six days pronouncing that the Durham visit was illegal will have the humility and good grace to admit they were wrong?

    No chance of that. Though to be fair, they also think that Cummings killed JFK, stole Shergar, and was responsible for the false flag attacks on 9/11.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 63,102
    The detailed Police report to any fair minded person will be accepted and that it is a story that has been used for political purposes. I do not blame Cummings for his trip but I do in regard to the damage it has caused to HMG
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,421
    tlg86 said:

    ydoethur said:

    tlg86 said:

    TGOHF666 said:
    As I said when the PCC raised this with his force, this was not likely to work in the favour of the government's opponents.
    I would disagree. Imagine if they had found against him on all points and slapped him with a thousand quid fine (well, £960). He’d have had to resign and somebody credible, competent and intelligent might have replaced him.
    Whilst Cummings has clearly become a household name because of this, I don't think his competence or otherwise is part of the equation.
    True. That would imply he had some.
  • TGOHF666TGOHF666 Posts: 2,052

    tlg86 said:

    tlg86 said:

    TGOHF666 said:
    As I said when the PCC raised this with his force, this was not likely to work in the favour of the government's opponents.
    But what of the government's opponents who want Cummings to stay, and the government supporters who want Cummings out?
    Obviously it doesn't stop people thinking that what Cummings did was wrong. I still think Johnson have taken a big gamble with this, but I would say the police intervention is beneficial to the government.
    The question is not whether what Cummings did was wrong, or illegal, or even bloody stupid, but whether voters who have endured many hardships through lockdown and isolation will see it as blatant hypocrisy. That's what did for Major's government, and may have been a factor in "a plague on all your houses" after the expenses scandal.
    Well Durham plod have stated they aren't treating Dom any different.

    So your beef should be with them.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,468
    @Philip_Thompson everyone knows why Dom really drove to Barnard Castle. You know. I know. The Police know. Stop pretending otherwise.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,935

    @Philip_Thompson everyone knows why Dom really drove to Barnard Castle. You know. I know. The Police know. Stop pretending otherwise.

    What's the real reason?
  • NorthstarNorthstar Posts: 140

    No further action because they do not want to act retrospectively
    The statement literally says ‘might’ - the journalist is incorrectly summarising, which is hardy surprising
  • kjhkjh Posts: 11,805
    TGOHF666 said:

    Especially schools near 5G masts..
    Naughty.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,708

    tlg86 said:

    ydoethur said:

    tlg86 said:

    TGOHF666 said:
    As I said when the PCC raised this with his force, this was not likely to work in the favour of the government's opponents.
    I would disagree. Imagine if they had found against him on all points and slapped him with a thousand quid fine (well, £960). He’d have had to resign and somebody credible, competent and intelligent might have replaced him.
    Whilst Cummings has clearly become a household name because of this, I don't think his competence or otherwise is part of the equation.
    Isn't becoming a household name incompetent for an éminence grise (or whatever arsey form Cummings like to apply to his very important personage)?
    Maybe one of the miscalculations they're making is that they thought he already was a household name, rather than someone only known to unusually politically-engaged people.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,729
    new thread
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,608

    I wonder how many people who spent the last six days pronouncing that the Durham visit was illegal will have the humility and good grace to admit they were wrong?

    None. Cummings is STILL the architect of Brexit, and that carries a life sentence in their eyes...
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,421

    @Philip_Thompson everyone knows why Dom really drove to Barnard Castle. You know. I know. The Police know. Stop pretending otherwise.

    Just as we all know the real reasons why he drove to Durham, which bear no resemblance to the reasons he gave.

    The snag would be proving it to a standard necessary to convict, even though his peculiar contradictory statements wouldn’t sound good in a lawsuit.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    MaxPB said:

    I wonder how many people who spent the last six days pronouncing that the Durham visit was illegal will have the humility and good grace to admit they were wrong?

    He broke the guidelines. The same guidelines that locked the rest of us at home. You're not going to escape that with legalism and neither is the Tory party. You're losing the 2024 election and millions of voters now believe the Tory party lives by different rules to the rest of us.

    You're part of the problem, unfortunately.
    He didn't break the law with the Durham trip, he's been cleared of that. I was laughed at here by many people but I was right, they were wrong, and Ihave been vindicated for my view. Who has the humility to apologise?

    Time will roll on and the Tories will be judged at the next election by how good or bad a job they do over the next 4 years. As they should be. If Dom helps them do a good job then keeping him will win more votes in the long run.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 63,102

    So they would have turned him back and only if he refused to return (a distinct possibility knowing Cummings) would they have taken any further action

    So he did breach the rules at the time.

    The matter is not closed despite No 10 statement.

    It is over BJO

    The Police have issued a full report which deemed the trip to Durham legal and he may have committed a minor breach but only if he had refused police advice at the time at Barnards Cadtle

    Cummings is going nowhere now
  • I wonder how many people who spent the last six days pronouncing that the Durham visit was illegal will have the humility and good grace to admit they were wrong?

    To be honest that is all secondary. The damage is already done, the impression will stick. Even if they admit they were wrong (as the second Guardian story partly was) it doesn't matter. Shitty game politics.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,482
    'People' in this instance can really just fuck off.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,608

    @Philip_Thompson everyone knows why Dom really drove to Barnard Castle. You know. I know. The Police know. Stop pretending otherwise.

    Fish and chips takeaway at 149?
  • BluestBlueBluestBlue Posts: 4,556
    RobD said:

    Can she even read?
    Evidently not. The Mirror should fire her now for spreading bullshit! :lol:
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,676

    LOL Piers Morgan lied! The Police don't say Barnhard Castle did breach the rules just that it "might have" but is so minor they're not investigating further. 😂🙈

    So I was right after all! Durham visit wasn't a breach of the rules. Barnhard Castle might have been but is so minor we will never know either way.

    Move on already. What a farce!


    They would have turned him back as it was too dangerous to travel.

    If he had turned back they would have not taken enforcement action

    Ministers have been saying Barnard Castle was not a breach the police would not have allowed him to complete his journey.

    The optics just get worse
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 4,382

    I don't see how a police force can condone somebody driving 30 miles to see if they can see properly.

    Hard to believe the Police even looked into this.
    Once he had explained the 60 miles round trip , was to test his eyesight.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,413
    MaxPB said:

    I wonder how many people who spent the last six days pronouncing that the Durham visit was illegal will have the humility and good grace to admit they were wrong?

    He broke the guidelines. The same guidelines that locked the rest of us at home. You're not going to escape that with legalism and neither is the Tory party. You're losing the 2024 election and millions of voters now believe the Tory party lives by different rules to the rest of us.

    You're part of the problem, unfortunately.
    Yes. It is not about the technical legality but the morality, and the idea the rules don't apply.
    It is why tax payers get annoyed about complex, yet entirely legal but piss taking tax avoidance schemes.
    And the relish they display at being cleverer than ordinary folk.
  • So now Durham Police have concluded rules were broken will PB Tories call for him to go?
  • I wonder how many people who spent the last six days pronouncing that the Durham visit was illegal will have the humility and good grace to admit they were wrong?

    None. Cummings is STILL the architect of Brexit, and that carries a life sentence in their eyes...
    Yes. that is very much the case. It is still the same old figures fighting a battle long since over.

    It's the same with the obsession on social media with Darren Grimes.
  • StockyStocky Posts: 10,222

    RobD said:

    Can she even read?
    Evidently not. The Mirror should fire her now for spreading bullshit! :lol:
    The press need to print some retractions fast.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,868

    MaxPB said:

    I wonder how many people who spent the last six days pronouncing that the Durham visit was illegal will have the humility and good grace to admit they were wrong?

    He broke the guidelines. The same guidelines that locked the rest of us at home. You're not going to escape that with legalism and neither is the Tory party. You're losing the 2024 election and millions of voters now believe the Tory party lives by different rules to the rest of us.

    You're part of the problem, unfortunately.
    He didn't break the law with the Durham trip, he's been cleared of that. I was laughed at here by many people but I was right, they were wrong, and Ihave been vindicated for my view. Who has the humility to apologise?

    Time will roll on and the Tories will be judged at the next election by how good or bad a job they do over the next 4 years. As they should be. If Dom helps them do a good job then keeping him will win more votes in the long run.
    It's not the law, its the "stay home, protect the NHS and save lives" he broke. He didn't stay home, he didn't protect the NHS and he put people in danger by driving 300 miles and then again to the castle.

    You have not been vindicated, you are still dancing on the same head of the same pin trying to obfuscate to legalism when that's never been the question. It's the British sense of fair play that has been shattered and that's why it hurts the Tory party the most. The Tory party has always been the party of "if you play fair, we'll help you get on in life by not getting involved". That is completely destroyed. The reason that party exists is completely destroyed, the party is about helping people who stick to the rules get on, now it's not. It's about protecting the elite who break them (yes, waffle on about how he didn't technical break regulation 1322.5.e or whatever) and telling those who stuck to them to suck it up.
  • Daveyboy1961Daveyboy1961 Posts: 3,883

    I wonder how many people who spent the last six days pronouncing that the Durham visit was illegal will have the humility and good grace to admit they were wrong?

    None. Cummings is STILL the architect of Brexit, and that carries a life sentence in their eyes...
    None. because he used a loophole inserted to help child abuse sufferers which the vast majority of people didn't know about. He is effectively saying the people who obeyed the rules are stupid and don't have the interests of their own children at heart.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,313

    MaxPB said:

    I wonder how many people who spent the last six days pronouncing that the Durham visit was illegal will have the humility and good grace to admit they were wrong?

    He broke the guidelines. The same guidelines that locked the rest of us at home. You're not going to escape that with legalism and neither is the Tory party. You're losing the 2024 election and millions of voters now believe the Tory party lives by different rules to the rest of us.

    You're part of the problem, unfortunately.
    He didn't break the law with the Durham trip, he's been cleared of that. I was laughed at here by many people but I was right, they were wrong, and Ihave been vindicated for my view. Who has the humility to apologise?

    Time will roll on and the Tories will be judged at the next election by how good or bad a job they do over the next 4 years. As they should be. If Dom helps them do a good job then keeping him will win more votes in the long run.
    You are delusional, and the arrogance of your very silly post demonstrates why you venerate the totally repulsive Mr Cummings. He broke the spirit of the guidelines. Only a completely emotionally retarded moron would think what he did was OK, let alone try to defend it. Even if he did break an actual law rather than a guideline the police would have to think that the Crown Prosecution Service would stand a chance of conviction, which one could understand why they would shrink away from something so hyperpolitical. You have not been vindicated in your view. It is still the view of the politically myopic.
  • kjhkjh Posts: 11,805

    MaxPB said:

    I wonder how many people who spent the last six days pronouncing that the Durham visit was illegal will have the humility and good grace to admit they were wrong?

    He broke the guidelines. The same guidelines that locked the rest of us at home. You're not going to escape that with legalism and neither is the Tory party. You're losing the 2024 election and millions of voters now believe the Tory party lives by different rules to the rest of us.

    You're part of the problem, unfortunately.
    He didn't break the law with the Durham trip, he's been cleared of that. I was laughed at here by many people but I was right, they were wrong, and Ihave been vindicated for my view. Who has the humility to apologise?

    Time will roll on and the Tories will be judged at the next election by how good or bad a job they do over the next 4 years. As they should be. If Dom helps them do a good job then keeping him will win more votes in the long run.
    Does anyone in the entire country have a clue what the law is now?

    We (including the Police) only had a loose grasp on it before this.

    A few weeks ago the Police thought it illegal to buy Easter Eggs ffs.

    Now you can drive from London to Durham while infected it appears.

    Times change so quickly.
  • StockyStocky Posts: 10,222

    So now Durham Police have concluded rules were broken will PB Tories call for him to go?

    "Might have been a minor breach" - i.e. not even serious enough for a £100 fine.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,608

    So now Durham Police have concluded rules were broken will PB Tories call for him to go?

    BBC: "might have been a minor breach" says the police.

    So give it up. If the cops don't know, you don't know, so let it drop - and start attacking the Govt. about 20,000 care home deaths. Or else people will think you don't care about them, only about the great political game of revenge for the Brexit vote. Which is not a good look.
  • kjh said:

    MaxPB said:

    I wonder how many people who spent the last six days pronouncing that the Durham visit was illegal will have the humility and good grace to admit they were wrong?

    He broke the guidelines. The same guidelines that locked the rest of us at home. You're not going to escape that with legalism and neither is the Tory party. You're losing the 2024 election and millions of voters now believe the Tory party lives by different rules to the rest of us.

    You're part of the problem, unfortunately.
    He didn't break the law with the Durham trip, he's been cleared of that. I was laughed at here by many people but I was right, they were wrong, and Ihave been vindicated for my view. Who has the humility to apologise?

    Time will roll on and the Tories will be judged at the next election by how good or bad a job they do over the next 4 years. As they should be. If Dom helps them do a good job then keeping him will win more votes in the long run.
    Does anyone in the entire country have a clue what the law is now?

    We (including the Police) only had a loose grasp on it before this.

    A few weeks ago the Police thought it illegal to buy Easter Eggs ffs.

    Now you can drive from London to Durham while infected it appears.

    Times change so quickly.
    THe Police in some parts of the country have been pathetic. Even going to a supermarket to check people weren't in "non essential" aisles.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,837
    dixiedean said:

    MaxPB said:

    I wonder how many people who spent the last six days pronouncing that the Durham visit was illegal will have the humility and good grace to admit they were wrong?

    He broke the guidelines. The same guidelines that locked the rest of us at home. You're not going to escape that with legalism and neither is the Tory party. You're losing the 2024 election and millions of voters now believe the Tory party lives by different rules to the rest of us.

    You're part of the problem, unfortunately.
    Yes. It is not about the technical legality but the morality, and the idea the rules don't apply.
    It is why tax payers get annoyed about complex, yet entirely legal but piss taking tax avoidance schemes.
    And the relish they display at being cleverer than ordinary folk.
    The blatant lies made it worse as well.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 17,466
    Lesson - its time to reopen schools, but be prepared to temporarily shut a few again for a period of time.
  • northern_monkeynorthern_monkey Posts: 1,639
    Great bit of politicking by the Durham Police - both sides can read into it precisely what they want. Outstanding.
  • Be interested to see polling in the coming days, to see whether it's a temporary blip or a more sustained fall
  • I wonder how many people who spent the last six days pronouncing that the Durham visit was illegal will have the humility and good grace to admit they were wrong?

    None. Cummings is STILL the architect of Brexit, and that carries a life sentence in their eyes...
    None. because he used a loophole inserted to help child abuse sufferers which the vast majority of people didn't know about. He is effectively saying the people who obeyed the rules are stupid and don't have the interests of their own children at heart.
    His trip to Durham was either lawful or it wasn't, and it was. End of story.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,608
    kjh said:

    MaxPB said:

    I wonder how many people who spent the last six days pronouncing that the Durham visit was illegal will have the humility and good grace to admit they were wrong?

    He broke the guidelines. The same guidelines that locked the rest of us at home. You're not going to escape that with legalism and neither is the Tory party. You're losing the 2024 election and millions of voters now believe the Tory party lives by different rules to the rest of us.

    You're part of the problem, unfortunately.
    He didn't break the law with the Durham trip, he's been cleared of that. I was laughed at here by many people but I was right, they were wrong, and Ihave been vindicated for my view. Who has the humility to apologise?

    Time will roll on and the Tories will be judged at the next election by how good or bad a job they do over the next 4 years. As they should be. If Dom helps them do a good job then keeping him will win more votes in the long run.
    Does anyone in the entire country have a clue what the law is now?

    We (including the Police) only had a loose grasp on it before this.

    A few weeks ago the Police thought it illegal to buy Easter Eggs ffs.

    Now you can drive from London to Durham while infected it appears.

    Times change so quickly.
    I think the Dominic Cummings episode will ultimately have demonstrated to the nation that it is now unlikely the police will do you for buying Easter eggs.

    It's been THAT important.
  • DeClareDeClare Posts: 483
    I'm so fed up with this Cummings stuff, he's obviously not getting the sack so lets move on now shall we.

    On topic: I agree that Biden will choose a woman as his running mate but Kamala Harris is too short priced, when she tried to run for President herself she got nowhere and her state is a Democrat shoo-in so why her?

    Elizabeth Warren is too old, she would have been a good choice 12 or 16 years ago but as Biden is a geriatric himself, he should get someone younger.

    Michelle Obama? we'll be able to hear Trump laughing his head off from here if she is Biden's pick.

    I'd lay those three candidates and you can also lay Hillary Clinton at 50/1 and bizarrely even Barack Obama is available to lay at 120/1.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,676

    So now Durham Police have concluded rules were broken will PB Tories call for him to go?

    BBC: "might have been a minor breach" says the police.

    So give it up. If the cops don't know, you don't know, so let it drop - and start attacking the Govt. about 20,000 care home deaths. Or else people will think you don't care about them, only about the great political game of revenge for the Brexit vote. Which is not a good look.
    they would have turned him back providing advice on the dangers of travelling during the pandemic crisis.

    The optics just got worse.
  • Be interested to see polling in the coming days, to see whether it's a temporary blip or a more sustained fall

    I suspect it will be sustained. This whole saga, irrespective of the truth, has been another nail in a hapless year for the Tories on the PR side. Ironic really when the SNP have been more incompetent on Covid19 than the Tories and the Welsh Administration little better than the UK govt. Only the regime in the North or Ireland have done adequately.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,999

    Lesson - its time to reopen schools, but be prepared to temporarily shut a few again for a period of time.
    This government is nowhere near brave enough to take the headlines for that outcome.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 18,434

    I wonder how many people who spent the last six days pronouncing that the Durham visit was illegal will have the humility and good grace to admit they were wrong?

    As the police said, they only looked at the regulations - ie the law - and not the advice.

    You were very keen to draw a distinction between these two recently. It was the advice that he broke, but perhaps that no longer matters to you?
This discussion has been closed.