Lavrov - Putin’s Gromyko - eats Liz Truss alive on camera, dismissing her as an ignorant lightweight who spends too much time on social media. Easy to have anticipated this payback ! https://twitter.com/lionelbarber/status/1491747869803560966
Lavrov - Putin’s Gromyko - eats Liz Truss alive on camera, dismissing her as an ignorant lightweight who spends too much time on social media. Easy to have anticipated this payback ! https://twitter.com/lionelbarber/status/1491747869803560966
I'm really not sure it reflects poorly on Truss to have childish theatrics from other foreign ministers directed at her. What's next, he turns to her and goes all 'I will break you' like Ivan Drago?
No it doesn't boost her, but shit talking from Russian diplomats is like professional boxers doing it - meaningless.
Just to add, if the Mirror actually did publish the doctored image, then they are in deep shit
But, I don't think they did
The fact that doctored photos are being used in a weird way in an attempt to bring down the PM is not good.
I don't think that's a fact.
Well someone has definitely doctored the photo
Yeah, to muddy the waters. It seems obvious that the one without the bottle or tinsel is the one that has been altered. Quite how that is bringing down the PM is beyond me.
I dont think we can be 100% sure that both photos are not doctored.
If you look at the architrave behind the bottle, in the one where the bottle is missing the architrave extends much further than where the bottle would cover it up.
There's no evidence that the photo with the bottle is fake. There's plenty of evidence the other one is.
How do you explain the architrave being in view when if you had removed the bottle there would be no architrave to see.
I think something else smaller has been removed and the bottle then added.
Someone made a half-arsed attempt to conceal the removal of the bottle? It's obvious the tinsel and bottle have been removed from the original photo.
No doubt about that, but if you had the skills to add the achitrave back in you would added it in completely, not partially
Well quite, but the fact is they didn't have the skills, as is obvious from the clear manipulation of the original image.
But either what was removed from the original photo was much smaller than the champagne bottle, or someone partially and professionally added the architrave back in, when it would have been just as easy to add it fully back in. I have no doubt that both photos are photoshopped
Partially and professionally? I dispute the second part. Whoever removed the bottle and tinsel clearly did a crap job at it, it is blindingly obvious in the doctored photo.
There's no evidence that the other photo has been doctored.
Look at the the architrave in the photo without the bottle, it extends past where the bottle would be covering it. It does not look like it has been added back in, so either some added it back in professionally or what was removed from the photo was much smaller than the champagne bottle.
Yes, I can see that. But you seem to think that the person doing the editing was actually good at what they are doing. The evidence suggests otherwise.
I think they are terrible at it, but the fact that the so much of the architrave is visible in the picture without the bottle, demonstrates that what was removed was much smaller than the champagne bottle. It is even clearer in the link you provided.
No, it doesn't demonstrate that at all. It only demonstrates that the person who doctored it was terrible at it. There is no evidence that the other photo has been doctored. Artefacts from the incompetence of whoever produced the photo without the bottle do not count.
Why would some of the archtitrave rail be missing when another around 3 inches of it should also be missing?
but there's absolubtely no mention of any sort of photo doctoring going on. Instead ' @Ann06957684 Ann #BackBoris.' "source" is Chris @creynolds1975 - whose twitter feed with 30 followers is entirely anti-Labour ranting who has replied to Guido's twitter thread; this is entirely made up by no mark Boris fans on twitter.
This seems worryingly straight out of the Trump play book. Get some tame conspiracy obsessed far right website to suggest that an inconvenient photograph or other piece of evidence that most normal people would thing incriminating of Trump/Johnson and claim it has been "doctored" by the "Establishment" and further whip up a frenzy among the most gullible nutters in society.
There has always been a ton of garbage like that out there.
Remember Bush's National Guard records - "Fake, But Accurate"
The mistake is to buy into any of it. Left, Right, Middle or plain Bat Shit. That's the mistake CNN made.
I can send you a pile of PDFs conclusively proving that just about any moderately famous politician is guilt of {insert evil crime here}.
On photoshopgate: isn't the point that Johnson has been happy to deny anything that he either believes to be untrue, or that he believes is not provable? (I realise those may not be concepts he can distinguish). If the photo was fake and there wasn't a bottle, it would already have been decried as a fake and the account of the event denied. Given that Zahawi is on the record saying there was no alcohol, if the recollection of everyone present is that there was indeed no alcohol, I'm sure he'd be eager to say that he stands by his account and he doesn't see that a fake photo changes it.
Throughout most of Johnson's Parliamentary non-apology sessions, he denied plenty of accusations, and mainly resorted to saying that he couldn't comment before the report was out when accused of things that may have been true. That seems the best context for interpreting what's happened here.
What is most baffling about the interview-by-email plan, is it gives the suspects the chance to coordinate their stories. Sit 50 people down separately and they won't know whether to swear there was no alcohol/a lone bottle of prosecco/5 cases of Buckies because they don't know who else has said what
What on earth is baffling about it? It is simply a reflection of the reality that the police will be doing their best to avoid having to take any action against the PM, whilst giving them a minimum level of plausibility that they are investigating fairly.
West Ham's Michail Antonio has questioned the reaction to the Kurt Zouma cat-kicking incident, saying: "Is it worse than players convicted of racism?".
Question to which the answer is yes.
I agree, cats (animals) have no voice.
He's an utter shithead.
I love cats, even though they are arseholes, but I love them.
Notably my West Ham fan contact wanted him sacked over this.
West Ham's Michail Antonio has questioned the reaction to the Kurt Zouma cat-kicking incident, saying: "Is it worse than players convicted of racism?".
Question to which the answer is yes.
Even if the answer is no, what the heck does that even mean? People can be mad at two things at once.
Lavrov - Putin’s Gromyko - eats Liz Truss alive on camera, dismissing her as an ignorant lightweight who spends too much time on social media. Easy to have anticipated this payback ! https://twitter.com/lionelbarber/status/1491747869803560966
How pathetic it is that people here in the UK allow their partisan grudges to attack UK Ministers standing up against foreign aggression. Lavrov is an evil man and the Kremlin is laughing at useful idiots in the West pushing their talking points.
“ increase motorway speed limits to 100mph “ Yessssssssssssss! I’d even be tempted to switch party allegiance to the “it’s all about Boris” Party.
They would probably do it for electric cars only. Would make a much bigger dead cat.
I would like that idea.
Trouble is, electric cars have terrible range at higher speed. Tesla model 3 with a stated range of 330 miles would struggle to do 140 miles at 100mph.
On photoshopgate: isn't the point that Johnson has been happy to deny anything that he either believes to be untrue, or that he believes is not provable? (I realise those may not be concepts he can distinguish). If the photo was fake and there wasn't a bottle, it would already have been decried as a fake and the account of the event denied. Given that Zahawi is on the record saying there was no alcohol, if the recollection of everyone present is that there was indeed no alcohol, I'm sure he'd be eager to say that he stands by his account and he doesn't see that a fake photo changes it.
Throughout most of Johnson's Parliamentary non-apology sessions, he denied plenty of accusations, and mainly resorted to saying that he couldn't comment before the report was out when accused of things that may have been true. That seems the best context for interpreting what's happened here.
What is most baffling about the interview-by-email plan, is it gives the suspects the chance to coordinate their stories. Sit 50 people down separately and they won't know whether to swear there was no alcohol/a lone bottle of prosecco/5 cases of Buckies because they don't know who else has said what
What on earth is baffling about it? It is simply a reflection of the reality that the police will be doing their best to avoid having to take any action against the PM, whilst giving them a minimum level of plausibility that they are investigating fairly.
Is there also an angle that this type of "investigation" means that other witnesses don't get interviewed? Such as, to mention just one potential class of witness, members of the Met who were inside and outside No. 10 at the time.
“ increase motorway speed limits to 100mph “ Yessssssssssssss! I’d even be tempted to switch party allegiance to the “it’s all about Boris” Party.
They would probably do it for electric cars only. Would make a much bigger dead cat.
I would like that idea.
Trouble is, electric cars have terrible range at higher speed. Tesla model 3 with a stated range of 330 miles would struggle to do 140 miles at 100mph.
Just to add, if the Mirror actually did publish the doctored image, then they are in deep shit
But, I don't think they did
The fact that doctored photos are being used in a weird way in an attempt to bring down the PM is not good.
I don't think that's a fact.
Well someone has definitely doctored the photo
Yeah, to muddy the waters. It seems obvious that the one without the bottle or tinsel is the one that has been altered. Quite how that is bringing down the PM is beyond me.
I dont think we can be 100% sure that both photos are not doctored.
If you look at the architrave behind the bottle, in the one where the bottle is missing the architrave extends much further than where the bottle would cover it up.
There's no evidence that the photo with the bottle is fake. There's plenty of evidence the other one is.
How do you explain the architrave being in view when if you had removed the bottle there would be no architrave to see.
I think something else smaller has been removed and the bottle then added.
Someone made a half-arsed attempt to conceal the removal of the bottle? It's obvious the tinsel and bottle have been removed from the original photo.
No doubt about that, but if you had the skills to add the achitrave back in you would added it in completely, not partially
Well quite, but the fact is they didn't have the skills, as is obvious from the clear manipulation of the original image.
But either what was removed from the original photo was much smaller than the champagne bottle, or someone partially and professionally added the architrave back in, when it would have been just as easy to add it fully back in. I have no doubt that both photos are photoshopped
Partially and professionally? I dispute the second part. Whoever removed the bottle and tinsel clearly did a crap job at it, it is blindingly obvious in the doctored photo.
There's no evidence that the other photo has been doctored.
Look at the the architrave in the photo without the bottle, it extends past where the bottle would be covering it. It does not look like it has been added back in, so either some added it back in professionally or what was removed from the photo was much smaller than the champagne bottle.
Yes, I can see that. But you seem to think that the person doing the editing was actually good at what they are doing. The evidence suggests otherwise.
I think they are terrible at it, but the fact that the so much of the architrave is visible in the picture without the bottle, demonstrates that what was removed was much smaller than the champagne bottle. It is even clearer in the link you provided.
No, it doesn't demonstrate that at all. It only demonstrates that the person who doctored it was terrible at it. There is no evidence that the other photo has been doctored. Artefacts from the incompetence of whoever produced the photo without the bottle do not count.
Why would some of the archtitrave rail be missing when another around 3 inches of it should also be missing?
but there's absolubtely no mention of any sort of photo doctoring going on. Instead ' @Ann06957684 Ann #BackBoris.' "source" is Chris @creynolds1975 - whose twitter feed with 30 followers is entirely anti-Labour ranting who has replied to Guido's twitter thread; this is entirely made up by no mark Boris fans on twitter.
This seems worryingly straight out of the Trump play book. Get some tame conspiracy obsessed far right website to suggest that an inconvenient photograph or other piece of evidence that most normal people would thing incriminating of Trump/Johnson and claim it has been "doctored" by the "Establishment" and further whip up a frenzy among the most gullible nutters in society.
There has always been a ton of garbage like that out there.
Remember Bush's National Guard records - "Fake, But Accurate"
The mistake is to buy into any of it. Left, Right, Middle or plain Bat Shit. That's the mistake CNN made.
I can send you a pile of PDFs conclusively proving that just about any moderately famous politician is guilt of {insert evil crime here}.
Perhaps, and sure we have always had fake news, from "Freddie Star ate my Hamster" to "Lancaster Bomber Found on Moon", but rarely has it been so prevalent as it is today, and I do not ever recall a PM, or any frontbench spokesperson using deliberately defamatory fake news from the dispatch box. That is the reason why this type of thing is concerning.
As promised. As well as making the two greatest bowls of tagliatelle ever, I have spoken to my dad about Conservative politics 🙂
I FaceTimed quite excited by politics, but it ended up a bit of a downer. He has been a Conservative member for decades, but is a remainer so keeps his head down, so no doxing him. When it was quiet after Christmas and the polls closing up, and I said it’s all going to kick off and Boris gone soon, and quite a lot of you disagreed, it wasn’t my thinking it was my Dad telling me it was going to happen.
I’ll bullet point relevant bits to be brief.
If there is a leadership election how would you vote? Rishi Sunak. Is a vote of no conference going to happen? At some point, maybe anytime now. But surely they only let it to happen if they aren’t going to hand Boris a win in it? Nope. It could happen any time. Boris could win it. Like Steve Baker said they may need more than one vote. once it’s going to happen everyone on the fence will have to get off it. But you don’t like Steve Baker? This is not a Brexit/Remain thing. This is about propriety in politics. If Steve Baker was in Boris government he would have resigned by now over this, maybe didn’t join because he suspected this end and saw Boris packing the cabinet with useless sycophants.
I said I have bets on both Harper and Javid, will they win? Nope was the reply. So I explained my thinking Is they could get on a roll because the media will like them, a Top Tory brought up in flat above a high street shop. And he said nope, Javid has a long way to go convincing people in a leadership election he is good choice for leader. Actually before that he said, do a lot of people bet on politics? 🤦♀️
There was then a more complicated discussion where he felt I didn’t appreciate how significant September and October 2019 was. Which is probably true, I was shopping and partying a lot before and during the election. Dads point was, not the Maastricht rebels or wets under Lady Thatcher were thrown or driven out the party before, it was always important to respect one another and keep the wings working together, Boris wrecked the party being a broad church, it lost many experienced and talented up and coming moderate conservatives, just look at the talent in the list of names that disappeared. I said will the next leader after Boris allow them to come back? He answered it will be more complicated than that as it changed the party at parliament, but many moderate members in the party took a que from that to stop paying subs and drift away - what top quality moderate candidates will moderate members have they can vote for in a leadership election, what Boris done changed the party, the price for the damage will be paid for a long time.
And there you have it. Make of it what you will.
It all sounds a bit unexpectedly sad 🙁
It is all very sad.
One caveat is that, if a party really wants to change and moderate, it can do so remarkably quickly. The Conservatives took less than five years to go from electing IDS to electing Cameron. Starmer is showing similar efficiency in moving on from the Corbyn years. I'm hopeful that, once the party is ready to listen, there will be sufficient numbers of sufficiently smart, sufficiently attractive people prepared to think about sane Conservative politics.
The tricky part is getting to a point where the party really does want to change. Milestone 1 will be ditching Bozza. Milestone 2 will be recognising that the 2019 manifesto, whilst electorally popular, is a con trick that's impossible to implement. You can't be low tax and high spend for long without the roof falling in.
And there's no sign at all that the Conservatives have begun that journey. It's not easy to see how they can without being in opposition first.
Boris is actually left of Cameron on economics and much more of a big spender.
The idea the Conservatives are going to go on any journey back to the centre for a decade or more is laughable. The party has won most seats for 4 general elections in a row and been in power for 12 years. Once Boris goes if anything the party will move further to the Thatcherite right economically and if it loses the next general election even further to the populist right too.
It took 8 years in opposition and 3 general election defeats and the leaderships of Hague, IDS and Howard before the party decided to move to the centre with Cameron. It took 10 years in opposition and 4 general election defeats and the leaderships of Ed Miliband and Corbyn for Labour to move to the centre under Starmer.
In fact the journey to the right of the Tories has barely even begun
So you agree with my post? The party DID do something different than what it traditionally does that Autumn 19? the party DID change its DNA - and you concede it is weaker at politics today for the loss of so many experienced and talented moderate conservatives, at every level of the party?
Not at all.
No offence to you or your dad but it's Remain extremist nonsense to claim that "moderates" were purged in Autumn 19. Or that anything different happened in Autumn 19 to the past.
There's been an attempt by the extremist Remainers to rebrand themselves as "moderate" but there's nothing moderate about the likes of Dominic Grieve being elected promising to respect the referendum result then working night and day to overturn it and rejecting every single leave option.
Furthermore there's nothing new either. What Boris did in Autumn 19 was make not extending Article 50 a "confidence" issue and anyone who votes against the government on a confidence issue is automatically expelled. That's not without precedence, it's the same trick that John Major (with Ken Clarke in the Cabinet) pulled with the Maastricht Treaty to force the Maastricht rebels to vote for it. And no the passing of the ridiculous fixed term Parliament Act doesn't change the precedence or principle.
The only difference between Autumn 19 and Maastricht is that all but one of John Major's "bastards" backed down when he called Maastricht a confidence issue, the one who didn't vote for it was expelled from the Party despite being out of the country. The Autumn 19 so-called misnamed "moderates" went further than the "bastards" did even voting against once it was a confidence motion.
They knew the consequences. It was their choice to vote against. Nothing new except that the die hard Remainers moderated their behaviour even less than the Bastards.
Thank you very much for taking the time to reply. But this is not a “why” question, going into the unprovable grey area of was it necessary, did they have no choice or not - this is the provable black and white question of the party DID actually do something different than what it traditionally does - not just the few moderates forced out, but all the ones who walked, at every level of the party.
Autumn 19 is overlooked for the significance that the Conservative party changed its DNA - that it is weaker at politics today for the loss of so many experienced and talented moderate conservatives that would provide the checks and balances a Democratic Party needs to function well. For example you are right, if the “bastards in the cabinet” were not tolerated in cabinet, or the wets in Lady Thatchers government not tolerated, or the Maastricht rebels expelled, this is more than just couple of dozen people who defied a whip, it would have changed the DNA, changed the way party does things, the overlooked and underestimated checks and balances that makes democracy work. If Thatcher or Major or Cameron or May had tried to govern just as Boris has, surrounded by Sycophant’s and himself overly promoted above party, by that definition you see you are wrong - if Autumn 19 had not happened Boris would not be clinging on today, he would been clearly vonked and dealt with by now, AND the next leader chosen from a stronger pool of talent, AND the cabinet they would put together would be far stronger in its communication and decision making.
At the last party conference Boris had a stage built for his speech in a different hall, his cabinet were not allowed to use. Is this something you would have no problem doing yourself, or do you see how stupid it is for a party to put one person ahead of party?
It’s not just Boris that needs to be dealt with, but the crimes of Boris.
Any prizes for guessing what happens next… . Scotland considers women-only train carriages to boost safety Many women feel too scared to travel on public transport because of men's behaviour, the SNP transport minister Jenny Gilruth said
Lavrov - Putin’s Gromyko - eats Liz Truss alive on camera, dismissing her as an ignorant lightweight who spends too much time on social media. Easy to have anticipated this payback ! https://twitter.com/lionelbarber/status/1491747869803560966
I'm really not sure it reflects poorly on Truss to have childish theatrics from other foreign ministers directed at her. What's next, he turns to her and goes all 'I will break you' like Ivan Drago?
No it doesn't boost her, but shit talking from Russian diplomats is like professional boxers doing it - meaningless.
Lavrov’s useful idiots performing their expected role.
“ increase motorway speed limits to 100mph “ Yessssssssssssss! I’d even be tempted to switch party allegiance to the “it’s all about Boris” Party.
They would probably do it for electric cars only. Would make a much bigger dead cat.
I would like that idea.
Trouble is, electric cars have terrible range at higher speed. Tesla model 3 with a stated range of 330 miles would struggle to do 140 miles at 100mph.
No different to petrol cars then
But the petrol cars only take five minutes to recharge, going 100mph gets them to their destination faster.
As promised. As well as making the two greatest bowls of tagliatelle ever, I have spoken to my dad about Conservative politics 🙂
I FaceTimed quite excited by politics, but it ended up a bit of a downer. He has been a Conservative member for decades, but is a remainer so keeps his head down, so no doxing him. When it was quiet after Christmas and the polls closing up, and I said it’s all going to kick off and Boris gone soon, and quite a lot of you disagreed, it wasn’t my thinking it was my Dad telling me it was going to happen.
I’ll bullet point relevant bits to be brief.
If there is a leadership election how would you vote? Rishi Sunak. Is a vote of no conference going to happen? At some point, maybe anytime now. But surely they only let it to happen if they aren’t going to hand Boris a win in it? Nope. It could happen any time. Boris could win it. Like Steve Baker said they may need more than one vote. once it’s going to happen everyone on the fence will have to get off it. But you don’t like Steve Baker? This is not a Brexit/Remain thing. This is about propriety in politics. If Steve Baker was in Boris government he would have resigned by now over this, maybe didn’t join because he suspected this end and saw Boris packing the cabinet with useless sycophants.
I said I have bets on both Harper and Javid, will they win? Nope was the reply. So I explained my thinking Is they could get on a roll because the media will like them, a Top Tory brought up in flat above a high street shop. And he said nope, Javid has a long way to go convincing people in a leadership election he is good choice for leader. Actually before that he said, do a lot of people bet on politics? 🤦♀️
There was then a more complicated discussion where he felt I didn’t appreciate how significant September and October 2019 was. Which is probably true, I was shopping and partying a lot before and during the election. Dads point was, not the Maastricht rebels or wets under Lady Thatcher were thrown or driven out the party before, it was always important to respect one another and keep the wings working together, Boris wrecked the party being a broad church, it lost many experienced and talented up and coming moderate conservatives, just look at the talent in the list of names that disappeared. I said will the next leader after Boris allow them to come back? He answered it will be more complicated than that as it changed the party at parliament, but many moderate members in the party took a que from that to stop paying subs and drift away - what top quality moderate candidates will moderate members have they can vote for in a leadership election, what Boris done changed the party, the price for the damage will be paid for a long time.
And there you have it. Make of it what you will.
It all sounds a bit unexpectedly sad 🙁
It is all very sad.
One caveat is that, if a party really wants to change and moderate, it can do so remarkably quickly. The Conservatives took less than five years to go from electing IDS to electing Cameron. Starmer is showing similar efficiency in moving on from the Corbyn years. I'm hopeful that, once the party is ready to listen, there will be sufficient numbers of sufficiently smart, sufficiently attractive people prepared to think about sane Conservative politics.
The tricky part is getting to a point where the party really does want to change. Milestone 1 will be ditching Bozza. Milestone 2 will be recognising that the 2019 manifesto, whilst electorally popular, is a con trick that's impossible to implement. You can't be low tax and high spend for long without the roof falling in.
And there's no sign at all that the Conservatives have begun that journey. It's not easy to see how they can without being in opposition first.
Boris is actually left of Cameron on economics and much more of a big spender.
The idea the Conservatives are going to go on any journey back to the centre for a decade or more is laughable. The party has won most seats for 4 general elections in a row and been in power for 12 years. Once Boris goes if anything the party will move further to the Thatcherite right economically and if it loses the next general election even further to the populist right too.
It took 8 years in opposition and 3 general election defeats and the leaderships of Hague, IDS and Howard before the party decided to move to the centre with Cameron. It took 10 years in opposition and 4 general election defeats and the leaderships of Ed Miliband and Corbyn for Labour to move to the centre under Starmer.
In fact the journey to the right of the Tories has barely even begun
So you agree with my post? The party DID do something different than what it traditionally does that Autumn 19? the party DID change its DNA - and you concede it is weaker at politics today for the loss of so many experienced and talented moderate conservatives, at every level of the party?
Not at all.
No offence to you or your dad but it's Remain extremist nonsense to claim that "moderates" were purged in Autumn 19. Or that anything different happened in Autumn 19 to the past.
There's been an attempt by the extremist Remainers to rebrand themselves as "moderate" but there's nothing moderate about the likes of Dominic Grieve being elected promising to respect the referendum result then working night and day to overturn it and rejecting every single leave option.
Furthermore there's nothing new either. What Boris did in Autumn 19 was make not extending Article 50 a "confidence" issue and anyone who votes against the government on a confidence issue is automatically expelled. That's not without precedence, it's the same trick that John Major (with Ken Clarke in the Cabinet) pulled with the Maastricht Treaty to force the Maastricht rebels to vote for it. And no the passing of the ridiculous fixed term Parliament Act doesn't change the precedence or principle.
The only difference between Autumn 19 and Maastricht is that all but one of John Major's "bastards" backed down when he called Maastricht a confidence issue, the one who didn't vote for it was expelled from the Party despite being out of the country. The Autumn 19 so-called misnamed "moderates" went further than the "bastards" did even voting against once it was a confidence motion.
They knew the consequences. It was their choice to vote against. Nothing new except that the die hard Remainers moderated their behaviour even less than the Bastards.
Thank you very much for taking the time to reply. But this is not a “why” question, going into the unprovable grey area of was it necessary, did they have no choice or not - this is the provable black and white question of the party DID actually do something different than what it traditionally does - not just the few moderates forced out, but all the ones who walked, at every level of the party.
Autumn 19 is overlooked for the significance that the Conservative party changed its DNA - that it is weaker at politics today for the loss of so many experienced and talented moderate conservatives that would provide the checks and balances a Democratic Party needs to function well. For example you are right, if the “bastards in the cabinet” were not tolerated in cabinet, or the wets in Lady Thatchers government not tolerated, or the Maastricht rebels expelled, this is more than just couple of dozen people who defied a whip, it would have changed the DNA, changed the way party does things, the overlooked and underestimated checks and balances that makes democracy work. If Thatcher or Major or Cameron or May had tried to govern just as Boris has, surrounded by Sycophant’s and himself overly promoted above party, by that definition you see you are wrong - if Autumn 19 had not happened Boris would not be clinging on today, he would been clearly vonked and dealt with by now, AND the next leader chosen from a stronger pool of talent, AND the cabinet they would put together would be far stronger in its communication and decision making.
At the last party conference Boris had a stage built for his speech in a different hall, his cabinet were not allowed to use. Is this something you would have no problem doing yourself, or do you see how stupid it is for a party to put one person ahead of party?
It’s not just Boris that needs to be dealt with, but the crimes of Boris.
On photoshopgate: isn't the point that Johnson has been happy to deny anything that he either believes to be untrue, or that he believes is not provable? (I realise those may not be concepts he can distinguish). If the photo was fake and there wasn't a bottle, it would already have been decried as a fake and the account of the event denied. Given that Zahawi is on the record saying there was no alcohol, if the recollection of everyone present is that there was indeed no alcohol, I'm sure he'd be eager to say that he stands by his account and he doesn't see that a fake photo changes it.
Throughout most of Johnson's Parliamentary non-apology sessions, he denied plenty of accusations, and mainly resorted to saying that he couldn't comment before the report was out when accused of things that may have been true. That seems the best context for interpreting what's happened here.
What is most baffling about the interview-by-email plan, is it gives the suspects the chance to coordinate their stories. Sit 50 people down separately and they won't know whether to swear there was no alcohol/a lone bottle of prosecco/5 cases of Buckies because they don't know who else has said what
What on earth is baffling about it? It is simply a reflection of the reality that the police will be doing their best to avoid having to take any action against the PM, whilst giving them a minimum level of plausibility that they are investigating fairly.
Is there also an angle that this type of "investigation" means that other witnesses don't get interviewed? Such as, to mention just one potential class of witness, members of the Met who were inside and outside No. 10 at the time.
"To get through the gates manned by the Met protection officers you have to show a pass and all comings and goings – including those in fancy dress and Santa Claus jumpers toting bottle bags – are recorded on the CCTV.
Inside Number 10 the first room on the right is where the huge bank of screens showing the feeds from the cameras, watching everywhere, including the garden, are located."
“ increase motorway speed limits to 100mph “ Yessssssssssssss! I’d even be tempted to switch party allegiance to the “it’s all about Boris” Party.
They would probably do it for electric cars only. Would make a much bigger dead cat.
I would like that idea.
Trouble is, electric cars have terrible range at higher speed. Tesla model 3 with a stated range of 330 miles would struggle to do 140 miles at 100mph.
I am not sure the decrease in range is quite that severe , but it would be fun to do 100mph for 140 miles, if you could find anywhere in the UK with good enough roads that were not swarming with traffic. Failing that it'd be good to be able to legally do a little faster than a speed limit that was designed for family cars that had the stopping distance from 70mph of about 2 miles!
Just to add, if the Mirror actually did publish the doctored image, then they are in deep shit
But, I don't think they did
The fact that doctored photos are being used in a weird way in an attempt to bring down the PM is not good.
I don't think that's a fact.
Well someone has definitely doctored the photo
Yeah, to muddy the waters. It seems obvious that the one without the bottle or tinsel is the one that has been altered. Quite how that is bringing down the PM is beyond me.
I dont think we can be 100% sure that both photos are not doctored.
If you look at the architrave behind the bottle, in the one where the bottle is missing the architrave extends much further than where the bottle would cover it up.
There's no evidence that the photo with the bottle is fake. There's plenty of evidence the other one is.
How do you explain the architrave being in view when if you had removed the bottle there would be no architrave to see.
I think something else smaller has been removed and the bottle then added.
Someone made a half-arsed attempt to conceal the removal of the bottle? It's obvious the tinsel and bottle have been removed from the original photo.
No doubt about that, but if you had the skills to add the achitrave back in you would added it in completely, not partially
Well quite, but the fact is they didn't have the skills, as is obvious from the clear manipulation of the original image.
But either what was removed from the original photo was much smaller than the champagne bottle, or someone partially and professionally added the architrave back in, when it would have been just as easy to add it fully back in. I have no doubt that both photos are photoshopped
Partially and professionally? I dispute the second part. Whoever removed the bottle and tinsel clearly did a crap job at it, it is blindingly obvious in the doctored photo.
There's no evidence that the other photo has been doctored.
Look at the the architrave in the photo without the bottle, it extends past where the bottle would be covering it. It does not look like it has been added back in, so either some added it back in professionally or what was removed from the photo was much smaller than the champagne bottle.
Yes, I can see that. But you seem to think that the person doing the editing was actually good at what they are doing. The evidence suggests otherwise.
I think they are terrible at it, but the fact that the so much of the architrave is visible in the picture without the bottle, demonstrates that what was removed was much smaller than the champagne bottle. It is even clearer in the link you provided.
No, it doesn't demonstrate that at all. It only demonstrates that the person who doctored it was terrible at it. There is no evidence that the other photo has been doctored. Artefacts from the incompetence of whoever produced the photo without the bottle do not count.
Why would some of the archtitrave rail be missing when another around 3 inches of it should also be missing?
but there's absolubtely no mention of any sort of photo doctoring going on. Instead ' @Ann06957684 Ann #BackBoris.' "source" is Chris @creynolds1975 - whose twitter feed with 30 followers is entirely anti-Labour ranting who has replied to Guido's twitter thread; this is entirely made up by no mark Boris fans on twitter.
This seems worryingly straight out of the Trump play book. Get some tame conspiracy obsessed far right website to suggest that an inconvenient photograph or other piece of evidence that most normal people would thing incriminating of Trump/Johnson and claim it has been "doctored" by the "Establishment" and further whip up a frenzy among the most gullible nutters in society.
There has always been a ton of garbage like that out there.
Remember Bush's National Guard records - "Fake, But Accurate"
The mistake is to buy into any of it. Left, Right, Middle or plain Bat Shit. That's the mistake CNN made.
I can send you a pile of PDFs conclusively proving that just about any moderately famous politician is guilt of {insert evil crime here}.
Perhaps, and sure we have always had fake news, from "Freddie Star ate my Hamster" to "Lancaster Bomber Found on Moon", but rarely has it been so prevalent as it is today, and I do not ever recall a PM, or any frontbench spokesperson using deliberately defamatory fake news from the dispatch box. That is the reason why this type of thing is concerning.
It's been going on a long time.
Nonce Finder General using parliamentary privilege?
Accusations that people were "grooming" a leaking civil servant?
I've never seen so many words written about a photo as on here this morning. Am I alone in not giving a flying fuck what its provenance is?
After all, it's not as if this photo is an essential piece of evidence to demonstrate that the PM broke the rules/guidance/law, is it?
For once Leon has the only interesting post on it!
Two angles, who benefits is an interesting question. I'd say its Boris so probably one of his team but that might be my bias.
Secondly that in a few years time we won't have a way of differentiating real and fake photos, that does seem frightening if true (and seems plausible).
On photoshopgate: isn't the point that Johnson has been happy to deny anything that he either believes to be untrue, or that he believes is not provable? (I realise those may not be concepts he can distinguish). If the photo was fake and there wasn't a bottle, it would already have been decried as a fake and the account of the event denied. Given that Zahawi is on the record saying there was no alcohol, if the recollection of everyone present is that there was indeed no alcohol, I'm sure he'd be eager to say that he stands by his account and he doesn't see that a fake photo changes it.
Throughout most of Johnson's Parliamentary non-apology sessions, he denied plenty of accusations, and mainly resorted to saying that he couldn't comment before the report was out when accused of things that may have been true. That seems the best context for interpreting what's happened here.
What is most baffling about the interview-by-email plan, is it gives the suspects the chance to coordinate their stories. Sit 50 people down separately and they won't know whether to swear there was no alcohol/a lone bottle of prosecco/5 cases of Buckies because they don't know who else has said what
What on earth is baffling about it? It is simply a reflection of the reality that the police will be doing their best to avoid having to take any action against the PM, whilst giving them a minimum level of plausibility that they are investigating fairly.
Is there also an angle that this type of "investigation" means that other witnesses don't get interviewed? Such as, to mention just one potential class of witness, members of the Met who were inside and outside No. 10 at the time.
Indeed. Surely there’s a detailed log kept, by the team of police in charge of keeping one of the most sensitive buildings in the country secure?
Sir John Major is a man of principles and values who places integrity and honesty at the top of the priority list above partisanship and personal profit.
Such a man has no place in the amoral disgraceful modern Tory party as HY and the other remaining sycophants have no doubt already proven.
I've never seen so many words written about a photo as on here this morning. Am I alone in not giving a flying fuck what its provenance is?
After all, it's not as if this photo is an essential piece of evidence to demonstrate that the PM broke the rules/guidance/law, is it?
For once Leon has the only interesting post on it!
Two angles, who benefits is an interesting question. I'd say its Boris so probably one of his team but that might be my bias.
Secondly that in a few years time we won't have a way of differentiating real and fake photos, that does seem frightening if true (and seems plausible).
You can actually make a hash of an image as it is taken (I.e. generate a number based on number and distribution of pixels, based on a secret algorithm) , and compare purported versions of the image with the hash
“ increase motorway speed limits to 100mph “ Yessssssssssssss! I’d even be tempted to switch party allegiance to the “it’s all about Boris” Party.
They would probably do it for electric cars only. Would make a much bigger dead cat.
I would like that idea.
Trouble is, electric cars have terrible range at higher speed. Tesla model 3 with a stated range of 330 miles would struggle to do 140 miles at 100mph.
I am not sure the decrease in range is quite that severe , but it would be fun to do 100mph for 140 miles, if you could find anywhere in the UK with good enough roads that were not swarming with traffic. Failing that it'd be good to be able to legally do a little faster than a speed limit that was designed for family cars that had the stopping distance from 70mph of about 2 miles!
On a serious note - R in Wales and Scotland are going up.
Any ideas why?
Return of football?
Loosening of restrictions, so a small increase that England has worked through already. Its always been about getting the % with antibodies as high as possible in the safest way.
Sir John Major is a man of principles and values who places integrity and honesty at the top of the priority list above partisanship and personal profit.
Such a man has no place in the amoral disgraceful modern Tory party as HY and the other remaining sycophants have no doubt already proven.
On photoshopgate: isn't the point that Johnson has been happy to deny anything that he either believes to be untrue, or that he believes is not provable? (I realise those may not be concepts he can distinguish). If the photo was fake and there wasn't a bottle, it would already have been decried as a fake and the account of the event denied. Given that Zahawi is on the record saying there was no alcohol, if the recollection of everyone present is that there was indeed no alcohol, I'm sure he'd be eager to say that he stands by his account and he doesn't see that a fake photo changes it.
Throughout most of Johnson's Parliamentary non-apology sessions, he denied plenty of accusations, and mainly resorted to saying that he couldn't comment before the report was out when accused of things that may have been true. That seems the best context for interpreting what's happened here.
What is most baffling about the interview-by-email plan, is it gives the suspects the chance to coordinate their stories. Sit 50 people down separately and they won't know whether to swear there was no alcohol/a lone bottle of prosecco/5 cases of Buckies because they don't know who else has said what
What on earth is baffling about it? It is simply a reflection of the reality that the police will be doing their best to avoid having to take any action against the PM, whilst giving them a minimum level of plausibility that they are investigating fairly.
But that's my point. It doesn't even give a minimum level of plausibility.
Do other suspects get sent questionnaires?
Did others with FPNs get sent questionnaires?
If no, why with this case? Is some MP or even that useless nitwit Sadiq Khan ask this obvious question of that other bigger nitwit, Cressida Dick?
West Ham's Michail Antonio has questioned the reaction to the Kurt Zouma cat-kicking incident, saying: "Is it worse than players convicted of racism?".
Question to which the answer is yes.
I agree, cats (animals) have no voice.
He's an utter shithead.
I love cats, even though they are arseholes, but I love them.
My cat is a complete and utter shit, all the time. Still love him, even if he winds me up constantly. I will admit to using the 'encourager'* on him when he decides he didn't really want to go out after all...
*See Total Wipeout for the foam hammer that pushes contestants. I gently use the boot to suggest he IS going outside...
the Kremlin is laughing at useful idiots in the West
Yes, they are laughing at Liz Truss
People like you, that side with despotic regimes who murder journalists and Britis citizens, just to score political points, are terrible human beings. Traitors in miniature.
Sir John Major is a man of principles and values who places integrity and honesty at the top of the priority list above partisanship and personal profit.
Such a man has no place in the amoral disgraceful modern Tory party as HY and the other remaining sycophants have no doubt already proven.
Interesting take given the attacks on his govt at time for sleaze.
Indeed it was one of the things that brought them down.
As for principles and values, did that extend to him humping Edwina Currie while married ?
“ increase motorway speed limits to 100mph “ Yessssssssssssss! I’d even be tempted to switch party allegiance to the “it’s all about Boris” Party.
They would probably do it for electric cars only. Would make a much bigger dead cat.
I would like that idea.
Trouble is, electric cars have terrible range at higher speed. Tesla model 3 with a stated range of 330 miles would struggle to do 140 miles at 100mph.
I am not sure the decrease in range is quite that severe , but it would be fun to do 100mph for 140 miles, if you could find anywhere in the UK with good enough roads that were not swarming with traffic. Failing that it'd be good to be able to legally do a little faster than a speed limit that was designed for family cars that had the stopping distance from 70mph of about 2 miles!
It's probably best if I don't give too much detail about how I know !
On photoshopgate: isn't the point that Johnson has been happy to deny anything that he either believes to be untrue, or that he believes is not provable? (I realise those may not be concepts he can distinguish). If the photo was fake and there wasn't a bottle, it would already have been decried as a fake and the account of the event denied. Given that Zahawi is on the record saying there was no alcohol, if the recollection of everyone present is that there was indeed no alcohol, I'm sure he'd be eager to say that he stands by his account and he doesn't see that a fake photo changes it.
Throughout most of Johnson's Parliamentary non-apology sessions, he denied plenty of accusations, and mainly resorted to saying that he couldn't comment before the report was out when accused of things that may have been true. That seems the best context for interpreting what's happened here.
What is most baffling about the interview-by-email plan, is it gives the suspects the chance to coordinate their stories. Sit 50 people down separately and they won't know whether to swear there was no alcohol/a lone bottle of prosecco/5 cases of Buckies because they don't know who else has said what
What on earth is baffling about it? It is simply a reflection of the reality that the police will be doing their best to avoid having to take any action against the PM, whilst giving them a minimum level of plausibility that they are investigating fairly.
But that's my point. It doesn't even give a minimum level of plausibility.
Do other suspects get sent questionnaires?
Did others with FPNs get sent questionnaires?
If no, why with this case? Is some MP or even that useless nitwit Sadiq Khan ask this obvious question of that other bigger nitwit, Cressida Dick?
They don't need minimum level of plausibility with experienced investigators and lawyers. If they have it with people who spend <5 mins a day thinking about current affairs that is sufficient to keep the charade going.
Most people who got the FPNs over covid would have had a few mins attention from a PC who got out of bed on the wrong side that morning, and as you often point out, would not even have known the rules in the first place. They don't get several month long investigations with the PCs assumptions challenged at every opportunity by internal lawyers.
the Kremlin is laughing at useful idiots in the West
Yes, they are laughing at Liz Truss
People like you, that side with despotic regimes who murder journalists and Britis citizens, just to score political points, are terrible human beings. Traitors in miniature.
West Ham's Michail Antonio has questioned the reaction to the Kurt Zouma cat-kicking incident, saying: "Is it worse than players convicted of racism?".
Question to which the answer is yes.
I agree, cats (animals) have no voice.
He's an utter shithead.
I love cats, even though they are arseholes, but I love them.
West Ham's Michail Antonio has questioned the reaction to the Kurt Zouma cat-kicking incident, saying: "Is it worse than players convicted of racism?".
Question to which the answer is yes.
I agree, cats (animals) have no voice.
He's an utter shithead.
I love cats, even though they are arseholes, but I love them.
My cat is a complete and utter shit, all the time. Still love him, even if he winds me up constantly. I will admit to using the 'encourager'* on him when he decides he didn't really want to go out after all...
*See Total Wipeout for the foam hammer that pushes contestants. I gently use the boot to suggest he IS going outside...
The moment you realise you are not a cat owner but a slave to the cat life becomes easier.
The first cat I owned (technically my then other half's cat) gave me quite the intro to cats.
Even if you had fed him 10 minutes earlier the ginger tosser (as I named him) would demand to eat your food, if you didn't, he would go the litter tray and do a number 2 to make sure you couldn't enjoy your food and yet this would be me and the other half later on (obviously not a dress for me.)
Sir John Major is a man of principles and values who places integrity and honesty at the top of the priority list above partisanship and personal profit.
Such a man has no place in the amoral disgraceful modern Tory party as HY and the other remaining sycophants have no doubt already proven.
Interesting take given the attacks on his govt at time for sleaze.
Indeed it was one of the things that brought them down.
As for principles and values, did that extend to him humping Edwina Currie while married ?
Major was rumbled after he left office. And the sleaze (which by Johnsonian standards might now be described as good, honest healthy fun) was always a step away from Major personally.
“ increase motorway speed limits to 100mph “ Yessssssssssssss! I’d even be tempted to switch party allegiance to the “it’s all about Boris” Party.
They would probably do it for electric cars only. Would make a much bigger dead cat.
I would like that idea.
Trouble is, electric cars have terrible range at higher speed. Tesla model 3 with a stated range of 330 miles would struggle to do 140 miles at 100mph.
I am not sure the decrease in range is quite that severe , but it would be fun to do 100mph for 140 miles, if you could find anywhere in the UK with good enough roads that were not swarming with traffic. Failing that it'd be good to be able to legally do a little faster than a speed limit that was designed for family cars that had the stopping distance from 70mph of about 2 miles!
Found this
Was that from the quora thread ; ? Tests seem to have been performed under optimum conditions.
I see that today is going to be the day that Major's adultery is going to be used as an excuse for not listening to or thinking about any of the points he makes.
Since none us is perfect - or, if you prefer, without sin - we can never criticise anyone else at all, let alone Boris. Which is very convenient for him.
A bit of a bummer in a democracy, mind you. Oh well.
If Johnson has tampered with that photo to remove the booze isn't it potentially Obstruction of Justice and jail time?
Come on - you think the fat oaf has the ability to doctor photos?
I don't no. No chance. But he could have got Dorries or Ree .. Dorries to do it. She is ultra loyal. There's little she wouldn't do for Johnson. She is his Luca Brasi.
West Ham's Michail Antonio has questioned the reaction to the Kurt Zouma cat-kicking incident, saying: "Is it worse than players convicted of racism?".
Question to which the answer is yes.
I agree, cats (animals) have no voice.
He's an utter shithead.
I love cats, even though they are arseholes, but I love them.
My cat is a complete and utter shit, all the time. Still love him, even if he winds me up constantly. I will admit to using the 'encourager'* on him when he decides he didn't really want to go out after all...
*See Total Wipeout for the foam hammer that pushes contestants. I gently use the boot to suggest he IS going outside...
The moment you realise you are not a cat owner but a slave to the cat life becomes easier.
The first cat I owned (technically my then other half's cat) gave me quite the intro to cats.
Even if you had fed him 10 minutes earlier the ginger tosser (as I named him) would demand to eat your food, if you didn't, he would go the litter tray and do a number 2 to make sure you couldn't enjoy your food and yet this would be later on (obviously not a dress.)
My wife's cat (we have two, and they have expressed a preference) delights in shitting in the litter tray at 7.00 am when I am about to eat breakfast and then again when I get home to cook dinner. At least my cat has the decency to the use the field next door...
Sir John Major is a man of principles and values who places integrity and honesty at the top of the priority list above partisanship and personal profit.
Such a man has no place in the amoral disgraceful modern Tory party as HY and the other remaining sycophants have no doubt already proven.
This is the guy that cheated on his wife?
And if I may say so, a rank amateur in the art, when compared with Mr Johnson.
On photoshopgate: isn't the point that Johnson has been happy to deny anything that he either believes to be untrue, or that he believes is not provable? (I realise those may not be concepts he can distinguish). If the photo was fake and there wasn't a bottle, it would already have been decried as a fake and the account of the event denied. Given that Zahawi is on the record saying there was no alcohol, if the recollection of everyone present is that there was indeed no alcohol, I'm sure he'd be eager to say that he stands by his account and he doesn't see that a fake photo changes it.
Throughout most of Johnson's Parliamentary non-apology sessions, he denied plenty of accusations, and mainly resorted to saying that he couldn't comment before the report was out when accused of things that may have been true. That seems the best context for interpreting what's happened here.
What is most baffling about the interview-by-email plan, is it gives the suspects the chance to coordinate their stories. Sit 50 people down separately and they won't know whether to swear there was no alcohol/a lone bottle of prosecco/5 cases of Buckies because they don't know who else has said what
What on earth is baffling about it? It is simply a reflection of the reality that the police will be doing their best to avoid having to take any action against the PM, whilst giving them a minimum level of plausibility that they are investigating fairly.
But that's my point. It doesn't even give a minimum level of plausibility.
Do other suspects get sent questionnaires?
Did others with FPNs get sent questionnaires?
If no, why with this case? Is some MP or even that useless nitwit Sadiq Khan ask this obvious question of that other bigger nitwit, Cressida Dick?
My guess is that in dragging things out the Tories are making it worse for themselves in the long run when everything does come out. Better to have a new leader in place sooner rather than later. They need to feel confident in choosing the right person though.
“ increase motorway speed limits to 100mph “ Yessssssssssssss! I’d even be tempted to switch party allegiance to the “it’s all about Boris” Party.
They would probably do it for electric cars only. Would make a much bigger dead cat.
I would like that idea.
Trouble is, electric cars have terrible range at higher speed. Tesla model 3 with a stated range of 330 miles would struggle to do 140 miles at 100mph.
I am not sure the decrease in range is quite that severe , but it would be fun to do 100mph for 140 miles, if you could find anywhere in the UK with good enough roads that were not swarming with traffic. Failing that it'd be good to be able to legally do a little faster than a speed limit that was designed for family cars that had the stopping distance from 70mph of about 2 miles!
It's probably best if I don't give too much detail about how I know !
Have a video of an American journalist, using 40% of an EV battery in 17 miles, by spanking it on the Yankee equivalent of a B road. https://youtube.com/watch?v=WONuaO9KzxQ
Sir John Major is a man of principles and values who places integrity and honesty at the top of the priority list above partisanship and personal profit.
Such a man has no place in the amoral disgraceful modern Tory party as HY and the other remaining sycophants have no doubt already proven.
Fuck off. His “principles” extended to cancelling the vote of 17.4 million people, because “they got it wrong”, and having a second vote to reverse the first, without ever enacting the LEAVE vote. And he accuses Boris of generating “mistrust in democracy”? How much mistrust would be have generated if he’d managed to actually CANCEL democracy
The man is a rancid hypocrite. A c*nt of the lowest order. He should be ignored. He should not be in public life. He should fuck off at great speed to I-have-now-fucked-off-istan, and the government there should expel him to the tiny village of Fuck Off Again, whence he will be exiled into the surrounding FUCK OFF JOHN MAJOR RAINFOREST and hopefully eaten half to death by great big fuck off ants with faces like Nigel Farage
“ increase motorway speed limits to 100mph “ Yessssssssssssss! I’d even be tempted to switch party allegiance to the “it’s all about Boris” Party.
They would probably do it for electric cars only. Would make a much bigger dead cat.
I would like that idea.
Trouble is, electric cars have terrible range at higher speed. Tesla model 3 with a stated range of 330 miles would struggle to do 140 miles at 100mph.
No different to petrol cars then
At 170mph my 997 is at 90% injector duty cycle and flowing 3,900cc/min so just over 3mpg.
“ increase motorway speed limits to 100mph “ Yessssssssssssss! I’d even be tempted to switch party allegiance to the “it’s all about Boris” Party.
They would probably do it for electric cars only. Would make a much bigger dead cat.
I would like that idea.
Trouble is, electric cars have terrible range at higher speed. Tesla model 3 with a stated range of 330 miles would struggle to do 140 miles at 100mph.
I am not sure the decrease in range is quite that severe , but it would be fun to do 100mph for 140 miles, if you could find anywhere in the UK with good enough roads that were not swarming with traffic. Failing that it'd be good to be able to legally do a little faster than a speed limit that was designed for family cars that had the stopping distance from 70mph of about 2 miles!
Found this
Was that from the quora thread ; ? Tests seem to have been performed under optimum conditions.
....and then we are back to theoretical ships speeds vs the Maplin Mile at low or high tide....
Tho that does not explain the odd size and tilting (however the latter could be a lens effect, as you say)
It's all decidedly fishy as when these photos first emerged there was no tinsel or bottle. So someone edited them out, then put them back in? WTF?
At this late decadent stage of partygate, it could be anyone doing anything. It could be some guy in a Croydon basement making photos for the lolz
Brilliant twitter conversation
I think it's the same game as the Andrew/Virginia thing - photoshop him out, then claim he was photoshopped *in*. It is not the case that the Mirror ever published the no-bottle photo, that's misdirection.
Yes, could be
However I certainly would not rule out my explanation. Release a doctored, more innocent, bottle-free image first, get Boris to say Oh it was a Zoom call, not a party, you can tell from the photo - THEN release the real photo, with tinsel and bottle, and make Boris look even more of a liar, and elongate the "scandal" by another week or two
I reckon the photo without the tinsel and bottle is the genuine one. Boris's people then photoshopped on the bottle and the tinsel and then leaked it to the Mirror. They then disseminated the innocent original one on social media. This is straight out of the Putin playbook: bombard everyone with so much confusion and fakery that in the end no one knows what to believe and just gives up.
I'm tending to @IshmaelZ's explanation.... probably
The doctored photo is the one without the bottle and the tinsel. You can tell. It isn't even doctored very well (see below). The removal of the bottle and tinsel have left blurs and lacunae, it's quite poorly done
The question then is: who did it? Did the Mirror really publish this badly doctored image, ever? There is no proof they did, so it is more likely someone has taken the doctored image and stuck MIRROR EXCLUSIVE on top of it, to cast doubt on the whole of partygate and on the Mirror
Note that the original tweet which kicked this all off came from a Boris fan account.
Fabulously murky. And this points to quite a scary and imminent future: in a couple of years photoshopping will be a billion times better than this, thanks to GPT82, and so we will never be able to distinguish between the fakes and reality. Ominous.
But was the fake picture really the work of a Boris zealot? My guess is that it's a Cummings/Rishi sock puppet, and the intention was to make Boris supporters look a little unhinged. I mean - who would waste their time cobbling together a clumsy photoshop in the lame attempt to get Boris Johnson, of all people, off the hook over Partygate?
That also occurred to me. It could be a triple, quadruple, dudecaduple bluff, and the crap bottle-removing photo-doctoring was done by Boris-haters hoping that Boris-lovers would buy it and look insane...
Or maybe Putin did it in his tea break because he's fucked off that he's screwed up his Ukrainian War
I asked the Grand Council to ask the Illuminati who asked the Bildbergers who asked the Trilateral Commission who asked the Zeta Reticullans who asked the Lizard Men.
The Lizard Men denied having anything to do with the photo.
Sir John Major is a man of principles and values who places integrity and honesty at the top of the priority list above partisanship and personal profit.
Such a man has no place in the amoral disgraceful modern Tory party as HY and the other remaining sycophants have no doubt already proven.
Fuck off. His “principles” extended to cancelling the vote of 17.4 million people, because “they got it wrong”, and having a second vote to reverse the first, without ever enacting the LEAVE vote. And he accuses Boris of generating “mistrust in democracy”? How much mistrust would be have generated if he’d managed to actually CANCEL democracy
The man is a rancid hypocrite. A c*nt of the lowest order. He should be ignored. He should not be in public life. He should fuck off at great speed to I-have-now-fucked-off-istan, and the government there should expel him to the tiny village of Fuck Off Again, whence he will be exiled into the surrounding FUCK OFF JOHN MAJOR RAINFOREST and hopefully eaten half to death by great big fuck off ants with faces like Nigel Farage
You won Brexit. Be pleased about it, own it but ffs stop going on about it so aggressively.
I see that today is going to be the day that Major's adultery is going to be used as an excuse for not listening to or thinking about any of the points he makes.
Since none us is perfect - or, if you prefer, without sin - we can never criticise anyone else at all, let alone Boris. Which is very convenient for him.
A bit of a bummer in a democracy, mind you. Oh well.
His adultery has nothing to do with it. Major’s attempt to annul democracy by cancelling the Brexit referendum and rerunning it, because he “didn’t like the result” very much DOES. He’s repulsive. They all are. All the 2nd voters. And they shall not be allowed to forget it, until they die, and then we shall remind their children, and their grandchildren
Tho that does not explain the odd size and tilting (however the latter could be a lens effect, as you say)
It's all decidedly fishy as when these photos first emerged there was no tinsel or bottle. So someone edited them out, then put them back in? WTF?
At this late decadent stage of partygate, it could be anyone doing anything. It could be some guy in a Croydon basement making photos for the lolz
Brilliant twitter conversation
I think it's the same game as the Andrew/Virginia thing - photoshop him out, then claim he was photoshopped *in*. It is not the case that the Mirror ever published the no-bottle photo, that's misdirection.
Yes, could be
However I certainly would not rule out my explanation. Release a doctored, more innocent, bottle-free image first, get Boris to say Oh it was a Zoom call, not a party, you can tell from the photo - THEN release the real photo, with tinsel and bottle, and make Boris look even more of a liar, and elongate the "scandal" by another week or two
I reckon the photo without the tinsel and bottle is the genuine one. Boris's people then photoshopped on the bottle and the tinsel and then leaked it to the Mirror. They then disseminated the innocent original one on social media. This is straight out of the Putin playbook: bombard everyone with so much confusion and fakery that in the end no one knows what to believe and just gives up.
I'm tending to @IshmaelZ's explanation.... probably
The doctored photo is the one without the bottle and the tinsel. You can tell. It isn't even doctored very well (see below). The removal of the bottle and tinsel have left blurs and lacunae, it's quite poorly done
The question then is: who did it? Did the Mirror really publish this badly doctored image, ever? There is no proof they did, so it is more likely someone has taken the doctored image and stuck MIRROR EXCLUSIVE on top of it, to cast doubt on the whole of partygate and on the Mirror
Note that the original tweet which kicked this all off came from a Boris fan account.
Fabulously murky. And this points to quite a scary and imminent future: in a couple of years photoshopping will be a billion times better than this, thanks to GPT82, and so we will never be able to distinguish between the fakes and reality. Ominous.
But was the fake picture really the work of a Boris zealot? My guess is that it's a Cummings/Rishi sock puppet, and the intention was to make Boris supporters look a little unhinged. I mean - who would waste their time cobbling together a clumsy photoshop in the lame attempt to get Boris Johnson, of all people, off the hook over Partygate?
That also occurred to me. It could be a triple, quadruple, dudecaduple bluff, and the crap bottle-removing photo-doctoring was done by Boris-haters hoping that Boris-lovers would buy it and look insane...
Or maybe Putin did it in his tea break because he's fucked off that he's screwed up his Ukrainian War
I asked the Grand Council to ask the Illuminati who asked the Bildbergers who asked the Trilateral Commission who asked the Zeta Reticullans who asked the Lizard Men.
The Lizard Men denied having anything to do with the photo.
The word "also" is doing a lot of work here, since she seems to be avoiding the question about obligations to fulfil the code, in favour of doing other good stuff. I may, of example, be really good at meeting legal obligations in filling out tax returns, but also breaking all kinds of other laws.
Sir John Major is a man of principles and values who places integrity and honesty at the top of the priority list above partisanship and personal profit.
Such a man has no place in the amoral disgraceful modern Tory party as HY and the other remaining sycophants have no doubt already proven.
Fuck off. His “principles” extended to cancelling the vote of 17.4 million people, because “they got it wrong”, and having a second vote to reverse the first, without ever enacting the LEAVE vote. And he accuses Boris of generating “mistrust in democracy”? How much mistrust would be have generated if he’d managed to actually CANCEL democracy
The man is a rancid hypocrite. A c*nt of the lowest order. He should be ignored. He should not be in public life. He should fuck off at great speed to I-have-now-fucked-off-istan, and the government there should expel him to the tiny village of Fuck Off Again, whence he will be exiled into the surrounding FUCK OFF JOHN MAJOR RAINFOREST and hopefully eaten half to death by great big fuck off ants with faces like Nigel Farage
You won Brexit. Be pleased about it, own it but ffs stop going on about it so aggressively.
WTF??????
I’m not attacking anyone here. I’m attacking an ex prime minister who wanted to abolish democracy, and who now has the brass neck to lecture us about “breeding mistrust in democracy”
A little bit of ire is, to say the least, justified
I see that today is going to be the day that Major's adultery is going to be used as an excuse for not listening to or thinking about any of the points he makes.
Since none us is perfect - or, if you prefer, without sin - we can never criticise anyone else at all, let alone Boris. Which is very convenient for him.
A bit of a bummer in a democracy, mind you. Oh well.
His adultery has nothing to do with it. Major’s attempt to annul democracy by cancelling the Brexit referendum and rerunning it, because he “didn’t like the result” very much DOES. He’s repulsive. They all are. All the 2nd voters. And they shall not be allowed to forget it, until they die, and then we shall remind their children, and their grandchildren
It was @Aslan and @Taz who specifically referenced his adultery. Not Brexit. You did that.
Still, let's ignore opinions because of who gives them eh. Always a good idea that. Just as you yourself pointed out over that BNP chap and grooming gangs. Or did you say the opposite? It's hard to keep up sometimes.
It strikes me that "I am not guilty of stealing the Smarties I just consumed but didn't pay for, because I paid for the M and M's, which also tasted very nice"
West Ham's Michail Antonio has questioned the reaction to the Kurt Zouma cat-kicking incident, saying: "Is it worse than players convicted of racism?".
Question to which the answer is yes.
I agree, cats (animals) have no voice.
He's an utter shithead.
I love cats, even though they are arseholes, but I love them.
My cat is a complete and utter shit, all the time. Still love him, even if he winds me up constantly. I will admit to using the 'encourager'* on him when he decides he didn't really want to go out after all...
*See Total Wipeout for the foam hammer that pushes contestants. I gently use the boot to suggest he IS going outside...
The moment you realise you are not a cat owner but a slave to the cat life becomes easier.
The first cat I owned (technically my then other half's cat) gave me quite the intro to cats.
Even if you had fed him 10 minutes earlier the ginger tosser (as I named him) would demand to eat your food, if you didn't, he would go the litter tray and do a number 2 to make sure you couldn't enjoy your food and yet this would be me and the other half later on (obviously not a dress for me.)
Your mistake was to have the cat in the house, rather than the shed.
Sir John Major is a man of principles and values who places integrity and honesty at the top of the priority list above partisanship and personal profit.
Such a man has no place in the amoral disgraceful modern Tory party as HY and the other remaining sycophants have no doubt already proven.
Fuck off. His “principles” extended to cancelling the vote of 17.4 million people, because “they got it wrong”, and having a second vote to reverse the first, without ever enacting the LEAVE vote. And he accuses Boris of generating “mistrust in democracy”? How much mistrust would be have generated if he’d managed to actually CANCEL democracy
The man is a rancid hypocrite. A c*nt of the lowest order. He should be ignored. He should not be in public life. He should fuck off at great speed to I-have-now-fucked-off-istan, and the government there should expel him to the tiny village of Fuck Off Again, whence he will be exiled into the surrounding FUCK OFF JOHN MAJOR RAINFOREST and hopefully eaten half to death by great big fuck off ants with faces like Nigel Farage
You won Brexit. Be pleased about it, own it but ffs stop going on about it so aggressively.
WTF??????
I’m not attacking anyone here. I’m attacking an ex prime minister who wanted to abolish democracy, and who now has the brass neck to lecture us about “breeding mistrust in democracy”
A little bit of ire is, to say the least, justified
Forget your remoaners, it is you moaning about something to do with Brexit every other day.....aren't the winners supposed to be enjoying victory?
Sir John Major is a man of principles and values who places integrity and honesty at the top of the priority list above partisanship and personal profit.
Such a man has no place in the amoral disgraceful modern Tory party as HY and the other remaining sycophants have no doubt already proven.
Interesting take given the attacks on his govt at time for sleaze.
Indeed it was one of the things that brought them down.
As for principles and values, did that extend to him humping Edwina Currie while married ?
Major was rumbled after he left office. And the sleaze (which by Johnsonian standards might now be described as good, honest healthy fun) was always a step away from Major personally.
Major prorogued parliament three weeks early to avoid publication of a critical report coming before a general election.
Then when Boris prorogued parliament a week early when prorogation was long overdue, he sued.
Sir John Major is a man of principles and values who places integrity and honesty at the top of the priority list above partisanship and personal profit.
Such a man has no place in the amoral disgraceful modern Tory party as HY and the other remaining sycophants have no doubt already proven.
Fuck off. His “principles” extended to cancelling the vote of 17.4 million people, because “they got it wrong”, and having a second vote to reverse the first, without ever enacting the LEAVE vote. And he accuses Boris of generating “mistrust in democracy”? How much mistrust would be have generated if he’d managed to actually CANCEL democracy
The man is a rancid hypocrite. A c*nt of the lowest order. He should be ignored. He should not be in public life. He should fuck off at great speed to I-have-now-fucked-off-istan, and the government there should expel him to the tiny village of Fuck Off Again, whence he will be exiled into the surrounding FUCK OFF JOHN MAJOR RAINFOREST and hopefully eaten half to death by great big fuck off ants with faces like Nigel Farage
You won Brexit. Be pleased about it, own it but ffs stop going on about it so aggressively.
WTF??????
I’m not attacking anyone here. I’m attacking an ex prime minister who wanted to abolish democracy, and who now has the brass neck to lecture us about “breeding mistrust in democracy”
A little bit of ire is, to say the least, justified
I see that today is going to be the day that Major's adultery is going to be used as an excuse for not listening to or thinking about any of the points he makes.
Since none us is perfect - or, if you prefer, without sin - we can never criticise anyone else at all, let alone Boris. Which is very convenient for him.
A bit of a bummer in a democracy, mind you. Oh well.
When I become unDictator of the UK I will, of course appoint myself Head of the Supreme Court.
Since attacking the decisions of the Supreme Court is a vile attack on the law & democracy, it will of course be punishable by life without parole.
I see that today is going to be the day that Major's adultery is going to be used as an excuse for not listening to or thinking about any of the points he makes.
Since none us is perfect - or, if you prefer, without sin - we can never criticise anyone else at all, let alone Boris. Which is very convenient for him.
A bit of a bummer in a democracy, mind you. Oh well.
His adultery has nothing to do with it. Major’s attempt to annul democracy by cancelling the Brexit referendum and rerunning it, because he “didn’t like the result” very much DOES. He’s repulsive. They all are. All the 2nd voters. And they shall not be allowed to forget it, until they die, and then we shall remind their children, and their grandchildren
It was @Aslan and @Taz who specifically referenced his adultery. Not Brexit. You did that.
Still, let's ignore opinions because of who gives them eh. Always a good idea that. Just as you yourself pointed out over that BNP chap and grooming gangs. Or did you say the opposite? It's hard to keep up sometimes.
His attitude to Brexit is 100% germane, here. His adultery is not. I don’t give a toss who he shags or does not shag, never did.
But if he is going to make lofty superior speeches about “trust in British politics” well then yes his outrageous reaction to the Brexit vote comes into our purview. How can it not. He tried to betray British politics. He tried to do something far far worse than the oafish Boris has ever done
This cannot be wished away. What we need is some of the 2nd voters to start saying SORRY. Only then can the poison be lanced
Sir John Major is a man of principles and values who places integrity and honesty at the top of the priority list above partisanship and personal profit.
Such a man has no place in the amoral disgraceful modern Tory party as HY and the other remaining sycophants have no doubt already proven.
Fuck off. His “principles” extended to cancelling the vote of 17.4 million people, because “they got it wrong”, and having a second vote to reverse the first, without ever enacting the LEAVE vote. And he accuses Boris of generating “mistrust in democracy”? How much mistrust would be have generated if he’d managed to actually CANCEL democracy
The man is a rancid hypocrite. A c*nt of the lowest order. He should be ignored. He should not be in public life. He should fuck off at great speed to I-have-now-fucked-off-istan, and the government there should expel him to the tiny village of Fuck Off Again, whence he will be exiled into the surrounding FUCK OFF JOHN MAJOR RAINFOREST and hopefully eaten half to death by great big fuck off ants with faces like Nigel Farage
I see that today is going to be the day that Major's adultery is going to be used as an excuse for not listening to or thinking about any of the points he makes.
Since none us is perfect - or, if you prefer, without sin - we can never criticise anyone else at all, let alone Boris. Which is very convenient for him.
A bit of a bummer in a democracy, mind you. Oh well.
When I become unDictator of the UK I will, of course appoint myself Head of the Supreme Court.
Since attacking the decisions of the Supreme Court is a vile attack on the law & democracy, it will of course be punishable by life without parole.
I see that today is going to be the day that Major's adultery is going to be used as an excuse for not listening to or thinking about any of the points he makes.
Since none us is perfect - or, if you prefer, without sin - we can never criticise anyone else at all, let alone Boris. Which is very convenient for him.
A bit of a bummer in a democracy, mind you. Oh well.
His adultery has nothing to do with it. Major’s attempt to annul democracy by cancelling the Brexit referendum and rerunning it, because he “didn’t like the result” very much DOES. He’s repulsive. They all are. All the 2nd voters. And they shall not be allowed to forget it, until they die, and then we shall remind their children, and their grandchildren
It was @Aslan and @Taz who specifically referenced his adultery. Not Brexit. You did that.
Still, let's ignore opinions because of who gives them eh. Always a good idea that. Just as you yourself pointed out over that BNP chap and grooming gangs. Or did you say the opposite? It's hard to keep up sometimes.
His attitude to Brexit is 100% germane, here. His adultery is not. I don’t give a toss who he shags or does not shag, never did.
But if he is going to make lofty superior speeches about “trust in British politics” well then yes his outrageous reaction to the Brexit vote comes into our purview. How can it not. He tried to betray British politics. He tried to do something far far worse than the oafish Boris has ever done
This cannot be wished away. What we need is some of the 2nd voters to start saying SORRY. Only then can the poison be lanced
Absolutely it is a stain on the collective moral character of the UK.
And also, I put forward that the next GE shall be the last one. Ever. Because it is no good having the British people changing their mind every four or five years. They will make a decision and must stick with it until the heat death of the universe.
I see that today is going to be the day that Major's adultery is going to be used as an excuse for not listening to or thinking about any of the points he makes.
Since none us is perfect - or, if you prefer, without sin - we can never criticise anyone else at all, let alone Boris. Which is very convenient for him.
A bit of a bummer in a democracy, mind you. Oh well.
His adultery has nothing to do with it. Major’s attempt to annul democracy by cancelling the Brexit referendum and rerunning it, because he “didn’t like the result” very much DOES. He’s repulsive. They all are. All the 2nd voters. And they shall not be allowed to forget it, until they die, and then we shall remind their children, and their grandchildren
It was @Aslan and @Taz who specifically referenced his adultery. Not Brexit. You did that.
Still, let's ignore opinions because of who gives them eh. Always a good idea that. Just as you yourself pointed out over that BNP chap and grooming gangs. Or did you say the opposite? It's hard to keep up sometimes.
His attitude to Brexit is 100% germane, here. His adultery is not. I don’t give a toss who he shags or does not shag, never did.
But if he is going to make lofty superior speeches about “trust in British politics” well then yes his outrageous reaction to the Brexit vote comes into our purview. How can it not. He tried to betray British politics. He tried to do something far far worse than the oafish Boris has ever done
This cannot be wished away. What we need is some of the 2nd voters to start saying SORRY. Only then can the poison be lanced
Boris doesn't agree with you. He gave brother Jo, who quit the government explicitly to campaign for a second referendum, a peerage.
Sir John Major is a man of principles and values who places integrity and honesty at the top of the priority list above partisanship and personal profit.
Such a man has no place in the amoral disgraceful modern Tory party as HY and the other remaining sycophants have no doubt already proven.
Fuck off. His “principles” extended to cancelling the vote of 17.4 million people, because “they got it wrong”, and having a second vote to reverse the first, without ever enacting the LEAVE vote. And he accuses Boris of generating “mistrust in democracy”? How much mistrust would be have generated if he’d managed to actually CANCEL democracy
The man is a rancid hypocrite. A c*nt of the lowest order. He should be ignored. He should not be in public life. He should fuck off at great speed to I-have-now-fucked-off-istan, and the government there should expel him to the tiny village of Fuck Off Again, whence he will be exiled into the surrounding FUCK OFF JOHN MAJOR RAINFOREST and hopefully eaten half to death by great big fuck off ants with faces like Nigel Farage
The true spirit of Brexit.
It’s nothing to do with Brexit per se. It is the Trumpite attempt to reverse a legal, democratic vote: the campaign for a 2nd EU vote without enacting the first
i guess Americans should just shrug and say Oh well Biden won anyway, let’s forget January 6…?
Of course they shouldn’t. Nor should we forget what happened in the UK, post 2016
I see that today is going to be the day that Major's adultery is going to be used as an excuse for not listening to or thinking about any of the points he makes.
Since none us is perfect - or, if you prefer, without sin - we can never criticise anyone else at all, let alone Boris. Which is very convenient for him.
A bit of a bummer in a democracy, mind you. Oh well.
His adultery has nothing to do with it. Major’s attempt to annul democracy by cancelling the Brexit referendum and rerunning it, because he “didn’t like the result” very much DOES. He’s repulsive. They all are. All the 2nd voters. And they shall not be allowed to forget it, until they die, and then we shall remind their children, and their grandchildren
It was @Aslan and @Taz who specifically referenced his adultery. Not Brexit. You did that.
Still, let's ignore opinions because of who gives them eh. Always a good idea that. Just as you yourself pointed out over that BNP chap and grooming gangs. Or did you say the opposite? It's hard to keep up sometimes.
His attitude to Brexit is 100% germane, here. His adultery is not. I don’t give a toss who he shags or does not shag, never did.
But if he is going to make lofty superior speeches about “trust in British politics” well then yes his outrageous reaction to the Brexit vote comes into our purview. How can it not. He tried to betray British politics. He tried to do something far far worse than the oafish Boris has ever done
This cannot be wished away. What we need is some of the 2nd voters to start saying SORRY. Only then can the poison be lanced
Promoting a vote to confirm the Brexit deal was NOT cancelling democracy, no matter how many times you repeat that rubbish to ease your own pain.
Maybe, if the f*cking shambles of a 'deal' Johnson signed-up to had been put to a vote the British electorate would have cast their democratic opinion on its uselessness.
Sir John Major is a man of principles and values who places integrity and honesty at the top of the priority list above partisanship and personal profit.
Such a man has no place in the amoral disgraceful modern Tory party as HY and the other remaining sycophants have no doubt already proven.
Fuck off. His “principles” extended to cancelling the vote of 17.4 million people, because “they got it wrong”, and having a second vote to reverse the first, without ever enacting the LEAVE vote. And he accuses Boris of generating “mistrust in democracy”? How much mistrust would be have generated if he’d managed to actually CANCEL democracy
The man is a rancid hypocrite. A c*nt of the lowest order. He should be ignored. He should not be in public life. He should fuck off at great speed to I-have-now-fucked-off-istan, and the government there should expel him to the tiny village of Fuck Off Again, whence he will be exiled into the surrounding FUCK OFF JOHN MAJOR RAINFOREST and hopefully eaten half to death by great big fuck off ants with faces like Nigel Farage
Is this post high-brow intellectual comedy, or just a laboured and unfunny profane rant? Asking for a friend.
We are heading into exceedingly choppy fiscal and economic waters and this is unlike the traditional situation of tough measures early on in a parliament in order to finesse the economy for the end of term.
The Conservatives are in a bad way. Will this really improve in 18 months? I think they need as long as they can possibly get.
In 1992 John Major went for the full 5 years and ... won. That now is imho the tories' best hope.
I see that today is going to be the day that Major's adultery is going to be used as an excuse for not listening to or thinking about any of the points he makes.
Since none us is perfect - or, if you prefer, without sin - we can never criticise anyone else at all, let alone Boris. Which is very convenient for him.
A bit of a bummer in a democracy, mind you. Oh well.
His adultery has nothing to do with it. Major’s attempt to annul democracy by cancelling the Brexit referendum and rerunning it, because he “didn’t like the result” very much DOES. He’s repulsive. They all are. All the 2nd voters. And they shall not be allowed to forget it, until they die, and then we shall remind their children, and their grandchildren
It was @Aslan and @Taz who specifically referenced his adultery. Not Brexit. You did that.
Still, let's ignore opinions because of who gives them eh. Always a good idea that. Just as you yourself pointed out over that BNP chap and grooming gangs. Or did you say the opposite? It's hard to keep up sometimes.
His attitude to Brexit is 100% germane, here. His adultery is not. I don’t give a toss who he shags or does not shag, never did.
But if he is going to make lofty superior speeches about “trust in British politics” well then yes his outrageous reaction to the Brexit vote comes into our purview. How can it not. He tried to betray British politics. He tried to do something far far worse than the oafish Boris has ever done
This cannot be wished away. What we need is some of the 2nd voters to start saying SORRY. Only then can the poison be lanced
What we need is some of those who told us about all the good things to come from Brexit - like Jacob Rees-Mogg, for instance - to actually implement them. Instead of writing pathetic articles in the Sun some six years later asking us to tell him what he should do.
If he doesn't know what laws to repeal some SIX YEARS AFTER the referendum and all the promises he and others now in government made, he's the one who should be saying sorry. Over and over.
These people made promises they have not kept. And now it turns out they don't even know what they're supposed to be doing. They mis-sold. Mis-selling is a fraud. So enough with your whining about Remoaners and politicians who have been out of power for decades. There's plenty of shit to be hurled from the other side of the fence, if we want to get into shit-flinging game.
I see that today is going to be the day that Major's adultery is going to be used as an excuse for not listening to or thinking about any of the points he makes.
Since none us is perfect - or, if you prefer, without sin - we can never criticise anyone else at all, let alone Boris. Which is very convenient for him.
A bit of a bummer in a democracy, mind you. Oh well.
When I become unDictator of the UK I will, of course appoint myself Head of the Supreme Court.
Since attacking the decisions of the Supreme Court is a vile attack on the law & democracy, it will of course be punishable by life without parole.
So all my decisions.....
Any flaws you can see with this plan?
Yes - I should be the Dictator. 😁
No no. unDictator. Being a Dictator is very unBritish (think Roderick Spode).
The title would be some like the "Lord Deputy Advisor To The Second Privy". Due to legislation combined with the entire of Parliament being accidentally sent on the first manned mission to Pluto, I will temporarily keep things running.
Anyone who calls me Dictator will be attacking the Head of the Supreme Court etc etc...
Comments
https://twitter.com/lionelbarber/status/1491747869803560966
No it doesn't boost her, but shit talking from Russian diplomats is like professional boxers doing it - meaningless.
Remember Bush's National Guard records - "Fake, But Accurate"
The mistake is to buy into any of it. Left, Right, Middle or plain Bat Shit. That's the mistake CNN made.
I can send you a pile of PDFs conclusively proving that just about any moderately famous politician is guilt of {insert evil crime here}.
After all, it's not as if this photo is an essential piece of evidence to demonstrate that the PM broke the rules/guidance/law, is it?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-60325643
Autumn 19 is overlooked for the significance that the Conservative party changed its DNA - that it is weaker at politics today for the loss of so many experienced and talented moderate conservatives that would provide the checks and balances a Democratic Party needs to function well. For example you are right, if the “bastards in the cabinet” were not tolerated in cabinet, or the wets in Lady Thatchers government not tolerated, or the Maastricht rebels expelled, this is more than just couple of dozen people who defied a whip, it would have changed the DNA, changed the way party does things, the overlooked and underestimated checks and balances that makes democracy work. If Thatcher or Major or Cameron or May had tried to govern just as Boris has, surrounded by Sycophant’s and himself overly promoted above party, by that definition you see you are wrong - if Autumn 19 had not happened Boris would not be clinging on today, he would been clearly vonked and dealt with by now, AND the next leader chosen from a stronger pool of talent, AND the cabinet they would put together would be far stronger in its communication and decision making.
At the last party conference Boris had a stage built for his speech in a different hall, his cabinet were not allowed to use. Is this something you would have no problem doing yourself, or do you see how stupid it is for a party to put one person ahead of party?
It’s not just Boris that needs to be dealt with, but the crimes of Boris.
Notice that everyone arguing about the which/what/why is trying to use the fakeness or otherwise to prove their view justified.
Read the Gray Report. Which seems to be based on actual evidence.
A picture of a picture of picture. On the internet. It literally has no value.
All of the trains out of the toon after 9PM would need several, but its a great idea
https://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/19851813.no-secret-metropolitan-police-far-refused-investigate-downing-street-parties/
"To get through the gates manned by the Met protection officers you have to show a pass and all comings and goings – including those in fancy dress and Santa Claus jumpers toting bottle bags – are recorded on the CCTV.
Inside Number 10 the first room on the right is where the huge bank of screens showing the feeds from the cameras, watching everywhere, including the garden, are located."
Nonce Finder General using parliamentary privilege?
Accusations that people were "grooming" a leaking civil servant?
And there is more and more.....
All the way back to Horatio Bottomley and beyond
Two angles, who benefits is an interesting question. I'd say its Boris so probably one of his team but that might be my bias.
Secondly that in a few years time we won't have a way of differentiating real and fake photos, that does seem frightening if true (and seems plausible).
Such a man has no place in the amoral disgraceful modern Tory party as HY and the other remaining sycophants have no doubt already proven.
Do other suspects get sent questionnaires?
Did others with FPNs get sent questionnaires?
If no, why with this case? Is some MP or even that useless nitwit Sadiq Khan ask this obvious question of that other bigger nitwit, Cressida Dick?
Yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah yeh yeh yeh yeh yehhhNo no no no no no no YEAH
*See Total Wipeout for the foam hammer that pushes contestants. I gently use the boot to suggest he IS going outside...
Indeed it was one of the things that brought them down.
As for principles and values, did that extend to him humping Edwina Currie while married ?
Most people who got the FPNs over covid would have had a few mins attention from a PC who got out of bed on the wrong side that morning, and as you often point out, would not even have known the rules in the first place. They don't get several month long investigations with the PCs assumptions challenged at every opportunity by internal lawyers.
Truss is a lightweight
She tried the Thatcher tribute act because she wants to take over from BoZo
And got spanked
That is not an endorsement of Russia
The first cat I owned (technically my then other half's cat) gave me quite the intro to cats.
Even if you had fed him 10 minutes earlier the ginger tosser (as I named him) would demand to eat your food, if you didn't, he would go the litter tray and do a number 2 to make sure you couldn't enjoy your food and yet this would be me and the other half later on (obviously not a dress for me.)
Since none us is perfect - or, if you prefer, without sin - we can never criticise anyone else at all, let alone Boris. Which is very convenient for him.
A bit of a bummer in a democracy, mind you. Oh well.
The man is a rancid hypocrite. A c*nt of the lowest order. He should be ignored. He should not be in public life. He should fuck off at great speed to I-have-now-fucked-off-istan, and the government there should expel him to the tiny village of Fuck Off Again, whence he will be exiled into the surrounding FUCK OFF JOHN MAJOR RAINFOREST and hopefully eaten half to death by great big fuck off ants with faces like Nigel Farage
@RupaHuq asks if breaches of the ministerial code will mean resignations
Attorney General @SuellaBraverman: "I would just say fundamental to the rule of law is also democracy & I'm very proud to be supporting this PM - a PM who has honoured democracy by delivering Brexit" https://twitter.com/SamCoatesSky/status/1491764137457819651/video/1
I’m not attacking anyone here. I’m attacking an ex prime minister who wanted to abolish democracy, and who now has the brass neck to lecture us about “breeding mistrust in democracy”
A little bit of ire is, to say the least, justified
Still, let's ignore opinions because of who gives them eh. Always a good idea that. Just as you yourself pointed out over that BNP chap and grooming gangs. Or did you say the opposite? It's hard to keep up sometimes.
It strikes me that "I am not guilty of stealing the Smarties I just consumed but didn't pay for, because I paid for the M and M's, which also tasted very nice"
Then when Boris prorogued parliament a week early when prorogation was long overdue, he sued.
Since attacking the decisions of the Supreme Court is a vile attack on the law & democracy, it will of course be punishable by life without parole.
So all my decisions.....
Any flaws you can see with this plan?
But if he is going to make lofty superior speeches about “trust in British politics” well then yes his outrageous reaction to the Brexit vote comes into our purview. How can it not. He tried to betray British politics. He tried to do something far far worse than the oafish Boris has ever done
This cannot be wished away. What we need is some of the 2nd voters to start saying SORRY. Only then can the poison be lanced
And also, I put forward that the next GE shall be the last one. Ever. Because it is no good having the British people changing their mind every four or five years. They will make a decision and must stick with it until the heat death of the universe.
i guess Americans should just shrug and say Oh well Biden won anyway, let’s forget January 6…?
Of course they shouldn’t. Nor should we forget what happened in the UK, post 2016
Any question you like.
But Brexit...
Maybe, if the f*cking shambles of a 'deal' Johnson signed-up to had been put to a vote the British electorate would have cast their democratic opinion on its uselessness.
Autumn 2023 would be under 4 years.
We are heading into exceedingly choppy fiscal and economic waters and this is unlike the traditional situation of tough measures early on in a parliament in order to finesse the economy for the end of term.
The Conservatives are in a bad way. Will this really improve in 18 months? I think they need as long as they can possibly get.
In 1992 John Major went for the full 5 years and ... won. That now is imho the tories' best hope.
It's not undemocratic to ask for more advice
If he doesn't know what laws to repeal some SIX YEARS AFTER the referendum and all the promises he and others now in government made, he's the one who should be saying sorry. Over and over.
These people made promises they have not kept. And now it turns out they don't even know what they're supposed to be doing. They mis-sold. Mis-selling is a fraud. So enough with your whining about Remoaners and politicians who have been out of power for decades. There's plenty of shit to be hurled from the other side of the fence, if we want to get into shit-flinging game.
The title would be some like the "Lord Deputy Advisor To The Second Privy". Due to legislation combined with the entire of Parliament being accidentally sent on the first manned mission to Pluto, I will temporarily keep things running.
Anyone who calls me Dictator will be attacking the Head of the Supreme Court etc etc...