Page 10 | Boris Downfall Part 5

Notonthestairs · 01/02/2022 08:37

@ClaudineClare

It is clear that the Tories are cherry picking lines from the report and twisting them so that they aim the blame at civil servants and Spads. The government are a bunch of gaslighting, lying scumbags led by a sociopath. There are Certain Posters who today will be trying those same tactics. I suggest ignore, ignore, ignore.

Anyone who has ever been a civil servant knows how these sorts of reports are produced and written and how the language is very carefully crafted and deliberately restrained(unlike mine!). Bearing all that in mind, the report is damning and I can feel Sue Gray's wrath between the lines.

Yes they are essentially saying it's a structural issue - no mention of the personal responsibility of the Prime Minister.

Florianus · 01/02/2022 08:39

ClaudineClare:
It is clear that the Tories are cherry picking lines from the report and twisting them so that they aim the blame at civil servants and Spads.

Officials are mentioned by Sue Gray. Do you think she should have let them off the hook?

Florianus · 01/02/2022 08:40

Notonthestairs:
Yes they are essentially saying it's a structural issue - no mention of the personal responsibility of the Prime Minister.

No mention of the personal responsibility of anyone. Sue Gray was asked by the Met not to name names at this stage.

Alexandra2001 · 01/02/2022 08:41

Why can't the Speaker ask BJ to withdraw the Saville claim?

He has the power to interpret the rules (Erskin May) but as i ve said before, he is weak.

Notonthestairs · 01/02/2022 08:42

The Telegraph are reporting that No 10 has asked Sue Gray to produce a further "update" to be published.
Her report is complete and has been legalled so there is no reason to publish that.

Peregrina · 01/02/2022 08:43

As widely discussed at the time, the Roman Catholic church does not recognise the validity of non-Catholic marriage services.

Trust Florianus to jump in. Tell that to every Catholic who was denied a Church wedding because they wanted to marry a divorcee. Do you know any such people? Because I do. And they were furious and still are about Johnson's behaviour. (Of course it was always said that the rich would get an annulment but that is a slightly different matter.)

DePfeffoff · 01/02/2022 08:45

@CryingAtTheDiscotheque

Is Nadir Dorries drunk?

Things have really got serious if Nadir has to get herself pissed before she can bring herself to defend Johnson.

DuncinToffee · 01/02/2022 08:46

Keir Starmer was asked about the comment on Sky this morning

#KayBurley - I didn't understand what the PM was talking about when he brought up Jimmy Savile... what's that about?

Keir Starmer - It's a ridiculous slur, peddled by right-wing trolls... he tries to drag everybody into the gutter with him...

Video clip in tweet
twitter.com/haggis_uk/status/1488424102918602753?s=21

jgw1 · 01/02/2022 08:51

@littledrummergirl

Raab on bbc1 right now thinks we are all idiots. We are able to read, listen and understand. How dare he presume to tell me what conclusions I should be drawing. Arrogant fucking insulting ...

I heard him on the radio. I have to say I agreed with him, it was not the least bit clear what the Prime Minister was apologising for.

ClaudineClare · 01/02/2022 08:51

@Florianus

ClaudineClare: It is clear that the Tories are cherry picking lines from the report and twisting them so that they aim the blame at civil servants and Spads.

Officials are mentioned by Sue Gray. Do you think she should have let them off the hook?

Hi Flo. Hope you are having a nice morning.

Peregrina · 01/02/2022 08:52

That clip is interesting. Starmer makes enough statements which could be challenged as being slanderous. Why doesn't Johnson sue?

Piggywaspushed · 01/02/2022 08:52

I have met Nadir IRL. Shan't say too much as outing, obviously. But this was maybe 10 years ago in a situation where it would be very bad form to be drunk and she spoke like that then. She also appeared entirely disinterested in the important (1 to 1) conversation we were having and unable to string a full sentence together in response.

My excuse - if it is one- is that she is very dim and has no social skills. Or that she was very tired and paying lipservice to caring.

DuncinToffee · 01/02/2022 08:54

Rory Stewart on that Dorries car crash

The sheer tawdry Trumpian shabbiness of the whole thing - it is difficult to see how much more of this the party or our political system can survive.

Piggywaspushed · 01/02/2022 08:54

I give it less than a day before the Savile Slur gets mentioned on a MN thread as a 'but Keir' comment.

TomPinch · 01/02/2022 08:55

@Peregrina

As widely discussed at the time, the Roman Catholic church does not recognise the validity of non-Catholic marriage services.

Trust Florianus to jump in. Tell that to every Catholic who was denied a Church wedding because they wanted to marry a divorcee. Do you know any such people? Because I do. And they were furious and still are about Johnson's behaviour. (Of course it was always said that the rich would get an annulment but that is a slightly different matter.)

I remember RC priests complaining at the time that Johnson had got special treatment.

He did better than Henry VIII I suppose.

Happygirl79 · 01/02/2022 08:57

The Guardian today

Happygirl79 · 01/02/2022 08:58

Well that didn't work well.

DePfeffoff · 01/02/2022 08:58

The fact that Johnson repeatedly refused to comment on straight questions about whether he was present at the 13th November party is very revealing. There was never any reason why he couldn't comment, and if he hadn't been there he would have been very quick to say so. And, or course, realistically if a party was held to celebrate Cummings leaving, there is no way he wouldn't have been life and soul of that party.

If I were Cummings I wouldn't be impressed. I wonder if he's going to make sure Johnson has cause to regret it?

DuncinToffee · 01/02/2022 08:58

@Piggywaspushed

I give it less than a day before the Savile Slur gets mentioned on a MN thread as a 'but Keir' comment.

Still no squirrels around

But yes they will show up and that will be one of the whataboutery defence

Florianus · 01/02/2022 08:59

@Peregrina

As widely discussed at the time, the Roman Catholic church does not recognise the validity of non-Catholic marriage services.

Trust Florianus to jump in. Tell that to every Catholic who was denied a Church wedding because they wanted to marry a divorcee. Do you know any such people? Because I do. And they were furious and still are about Johnson's behaviour. (Of course it was always said that the rich would get an annulment but that is a slightly different matter.)

If the divorcees you know who were denied a church wedding were previously wed in a Roman Catholic church, then they would, according to RC doctrine, be denied a church wedding. Johnson was not previously married in a Roman Catholic church. He was married in an Anglican church.

You need to understand RC doctrine: the Roman Catholic Church teaches that Anglican clergy are not valid priests and cannot therefore conduct any of the sacraments - any marriage over which they officiate is invalid.

It is for the same reason that Roman Catholics - even Bishops and Cardinals - will not take Communion in an Anglican church as they believe that an Anglican celebrant cannot validly consecrate the host and the wine.

rambleonplease · 01/02/2022 09:02

Does anyone think that any of the cabinet are going to abandon BJ? If he sinks, surely they all do, there must come a point when it's political suicide to sit silently by his side?

Florianus · 01/02/2022 09:02

TomPinch:
I remember RC priests complaining at the time that Johnson had got special treatment.

Yes, one or two didn't understand the doctrine, but Westminster Cathedral soon put them right.

DePfeffoff · 01/02/2022 09:04

Raab was a bit of a car crash on R4 this morning. If ever a man was blatantly incredibly uncomfortable, it's him.

Florianus · 01/02/2022 09:07

Here is part of the statement issued by Westminster Cathedral at the time:

The church holds that a Catholic, defined as a person who was baptized or formally received into the Catholic Church, who wishes to enter a marriage which is recognized as valid in the eyes of the Catholic Church must exchange marital consent before a Catholic priest/deacon or receive special permission to exchange marital consent in another setting. If a Catholic does not observe this rule the marriage is considered not to be valid under Catholic Canon Law.

(Sorry that this is getting off-topic, but things often do when someone tries to argue the toss in the face of the facts)

ClaudineClare · 01/02/2022 09:10

Please don't let Flo derail the thread, or they will be spamming it all day. Start a new thread on the intricacies of the RC church.