Page 14 | Boris - new low

daimbarsatemydogsbone · 2022-02-01T16:50:34+00:00

Obviously he's running scared from his own side as well and Labour and the excellent contribution from Ian Blackford - no doubt Dennis Skinner would have done the same if still an MP. However, there was no need for Johnson to stoop to the level of more lies - this time trying smear Kier Starmer with untrue allegations about Jimmy Savile. [[https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/60213975]]

Notonthestairs · 03/02/2022 08:00

@countrygirl99

I think the key point is that when Starmer discovered things had gone wrong with Saville he set about improving the situation going forward and prosecutions for child abuse rose. Compare and contrast to Johnson who is flapping around, lying and trying to distract.

Agree with this.

Lying to Parliament to cover up breaking his Government's law isn't a good look.

jgw1 · 03/02/2022 08:01

[quote WendyTreetops]@jgw1
Again, you would come across much better if you admitted you were wrong and were 'inadvertently' misleading people about the UK's covid death toll.

I know you're not keen on facts, but Starmer was DPP and thus head of the CPS when it decided not to prosecute Savile. There are separate questions of whether that decision was wrong and whether Starmer was personally involved in that decision (I suspect the answer is 'no' to both those questions). But it's entirely accepted for a senior public servant to be criticised for the actions of the organisations which they lead (or, in this case, led). So, Johnson might have behaved reprehensibly in his comment about Starmer, but he didn't lie. Let me add a point in parallel: saying a country's covid death toll is bad compared to others without allowing for different population sizes isn't lying, but it is deceitful.[/quote]
I am flabbergasted that someone who thinks it is acceptable for the Prime Minister to lie about whether or not someone had anything to do with prosecuting a sex offender in Parliament is lecturing me on how I should come across.

Do you similarly defend Boris' comment about letterboxes?

WhatdoImean · 03/02/2022 08:05

So.... if this is true, why do NO other politicians (Raab etc.) actually say this is true when out side of Parliament? They rely on Parliamentary privilege to protect themselves. They know if they make these same claims outside of Parliament, they will most likely be sued for slander....

WendyTreetops · 03/02/2022 08:09

@jgw1
Please don't be dishonest. I have unambiguously criticised Johnson for his comment and you're being deceitful to pretend otherwise. Seems you've no intention of acknowledging that you were misleading people about the covid death toll, let alone apologising for it. And you've got the gall to critique other people's honesty ...

Alexandra2001 · 03/02/2022 08:20

[quote WendyTreetops]@jgw1
Please don't be dishonest. I have unambiguously criticised Johnson for his comment and you're being deceitful to pretend otherwise. Seems you've no intention of acknowledging that you were misleading people about the covid death toll, let alone apologising for it. And you've got the gall to critique other people's honesty ...[/quote]
What your doing is suggesting BJ was wrong to say the Saville slur but then defend it, thereby supporting this lie, clever use of words.

BJ specifically said it was Starmer who failed to prosecute Saville...

"spent most of his time prosecuting journalists and failing to prosecute Jimmy Savile"

Its a lie, which is why no one in Govt will repeat it and BJ was warned by the Speaker... not that he took any notice.

longwayoff · 03/02/2022 08:25

In government, if you say it 3 times, it apparently becomes the truth. 'The PM is good for the people, good for the country and good for everything else'. Repeat until any unbelievers fall into line.

cakeorwine · 03/02/2022 08:26

Its a lie, which is why no one in Govt will repeat it and BJ was warned by the Speaker... not that he took any notice

This. And you have to wonder the thought processes that decided to come up with this.

They knew it would be talked about. I am glad that decent Tories are disowning it and disowning him.

WendyTreetops · 03/02/2022 08:29

@Alexandra2001
You're struggling with the logic here. I think Johnson was wrong to say what he said, but that doesn't mean the comment was a lie. As I've patiently explained before, it is generally accepted that senior figures can be criticised for the actions of the organisations they lead. My pointing out that people like you are wrong in not understanding that point doesn't make Johnson's comment any better.

lotsofdogshere · 03/02/2022 08:35

@cakeorwine

Its a lie, which is why no one in Govt will repeat it and BJ was warned by the Speaker... not that he took any notice

This. And you have to wonder the thought processes that decided to come up with this.

They knew it would be talked about. I am glad that decent Tories are disowning it and disowning him.

Daily Mail report the slur was discussed in Downing Street in prep for PMQs. Johnson advised by colleagues and lawyers not to use it. Senior Tory told the DM ‘he just can’t help himself’

He’s disgusting

SueSaid · 03/02/2022 08:36

[quote WendyTreetops]@jgw1
UK doesn't have the highest covid death toll in Europe. It has the second highest absolute toll (and has the third largest population) and in terms of deaths as a proportion of population it's 19th.[/quote]
Exactly. I don't think some people understand the relevance of per capita regarding deaths.

To make it very simple if we had one country with 1000 people and 10 deaths and another country with 10 people and 5 deaths would they seriously think the country with 10 deaths had the worst death rate?!

www.statista.com/statistics/1111779/coronavirus-death-rate-europe-by-country/

cakeorwine · 03/02/2022 08:37

[quote WendyTreetops]@Alexandra2001
You're struggling with the logic here. I think Johnson was wrong to say what he said, but that doesn't mean the comment was a lie. As I've patiently explained before, it is generally accepted that senior figures can be criticised for the actions of the organisations they lead. My pointing out that people like you are wrong in not understanding that point doesn't make Johnson's comment any better.[/quote]
I suppose it's how you define 'He'.

Instead, this Leader of the Opposition, a former Director of Public Prosecutions—although he spent most of his time prosecuting journalists and failing to prosecute Jimmy Savile, as far as I can make out—chose to use this moment continually to prejudge a police inquiry.

Did he as the former DPP spend most of his time failing to prosecute Jimmy Saville?

That is a lie. The words 'he' and 'most of his time'.

cakeorwine · 03/02/2022 08:39

@janiejones

Still waiting for those qualities about Johnson that make him the best leader for this country at this time and to lead us out of the pandemic.

cakeorwine · 03/02/2022 08:41

Daily Mail report the slur was discussed in Downing Street in prep for PMQs. Johnson advised by colleagues and lawyers not to use it. Senior Tory told the DM ‘he just can’t help himself

I hope it costs him support with decent Tories. I don't think he learnt from North Shropshire.

Notonthestairs · 03/02/2022 08:42

twitter.com/mattgreencomedy/status/1488879535785455616?s=21

How to Deploy a Dead Cat - sums it up rather well I think.

SueSaid · 03/02/2022 08:42

'Daily Mail report the slur was discussed in Downing Street in prep for PMQs. Johnson advised by colleagues and lawyers not to use it. Senior Tory told the DM ‘he just can’t help himself’

How does the dm know what was discussed. I wouldn't believe everything the media tell you.

Whether he should have said or not is at this stage irrelevant. He said it. However the buck either stops with the boss or it doesn't. 'The fish either rots from the head' or it doesn't (an Ange quote I believe). They have to be consistent they can't say yeah but no but when they're in the spotlight.

DePfeffoff · 03/02/2022 08:54

I'm sure the DM has contacts in Downing Street who tell them all about what is going on.

cakeorwine · 03/02/2022 08:59

They have to be consistent they can't say yeah but no but when they're in the spotlight

We do know he was at some parties.

For someone who claims not to be a Tory supporter...you are doing a very good cheerleading job.

Except on those qualities. Can't you Google them? The personality of Boris Johnson?

longwayoff · 03/02/2022 08:59

Truth twisters, deniers and obfuscators. Orwellian Newspeak in action.

Alexandra2001 · 03/02/2022 09:01

@WendyTreetops

No i disagree... Stating as fact that Starmer was personally involved in the decision not to prosecute Saville is a lie, pure and simple and BJ knows it.

Now, on taking responsibility... Starmer had a QC led inquiry and apologised for departmental failings - all a matter of public record.

As for the buck stops at the top, well that would be the Attorney General who is answerable to Parliament.

On Saville more generally, the failure to prosecute him, both under the Tory and Labour Governments is of national shame - JS was even used in promotional Con literature in GE's.

Clavinova · 03/02/2022 09:20

cakeorwine
qualities about Johnson

Intelligent, optimistic, appeals to a broad spectrum of people, good at winning elections and gets things 'over the line'.

Or did you prefer "Corbyn Grey"?

www.trade-point.co.uk/departments/corbyn-grey-wood-effect-ceiling-light/1513700_TP.prd

SueSaid · 03/02/2022 09:27

'Stating as fact that Starmer was personally involved in the decision not to prosecute Saville is a lie, pure and simple and BJ knows it.'

He was head of the cps at the time. He apologised for their failures so he clearly felt some responsibility.

'Now, on taking responsibility... Starmer had a QC led inquiry and apologised for departmental failings - all a matter of public record'

Well ditto BJ. They had an inquiry led by Sue Gray. He also apologised for failings and they are making changes. All a matter of public record.

So either bosses are always responsible for the failures of their staff or they aren't.

Original poster

daimbarsatemydogsbone · 03/02/2022 09:34

@JaniieJones

'Stating as fact that Starmer was personally involved in the decision not to prosecute Saville is a lie, pure and simple and BJ knows it.'

He was head of the cps at the time. He apologised for their failures so he clearly felt some responsibility.

'Now, on taking responsibility... Starmer had a QC led inquiry and apologised for departmental failings - all a matter of public record'

Well ditto BJ. They had an inquiry led by Sue Gray. He also apologised for failings and they are making changes. All a matter of public record.

So either bosses are always responsible for the failures of their staff or they aren't.

Starmer didn't start off by saying "There is no such person as Jimmy Savile".

That's the difference you refuse to recognise.

OP posts:

Peregrina · 03/02/2022 09:35

He apologised for their failures so he clearly felt some responsibility.

He took responsibility and made sure that changes were implemented.

When caught Johnson made a half hearted apology, and said he will make changes. Words are cheap with him. The proof of the pudding will be in the eating. He failed to answer the question of whether he was in his flat at the time the parties were held. He failed to answer Theresa May's direct questions.

Let's see him come out at make that slur about Starmer outside Parliament then, if it's correct.

VikingOnTheFridge · 03/02/2022 09:36

@WhatdoImean

So.... if this is true, why do NO other politicians (Raab etc.) actually say this is true when out side of Parliament? They rely on Parliamentary privilege to protect themselves. They know if they make these same claims outside of Parliament, they will most likely be sued for slander....

Bingo.

Clavinova · 03/02/2022 09:37

He was head of the cps at the time

Indeed - similar situation here:

2012
News International and Phone-hacking - Culture, Media and Sport Committee.

255. Neither former Acting Deputy Commissioner Yates nor the Director of Public Prosecutions Keir Starmer were personally involved in the key events that occurred in 2006-07. Given the extraordinary revelations in the media and in civil court cases in the years that followed, however, they both bear culpability for failing to ensure that the evidence held by the Metropolitan Police was properly investigated in the years afterwards, given all the opportunities to do so, and that the sufficiency of the evidence was not reviewed by the CPS.