Part 7.5

[jgw1]

AIBU to still be enjoying falls?

@AuldAlliance

In Johnson's case, flaw is understating it a little. Yawning chasm of ignominy, perhaps.

Surely you understand that partygate is just a tiny blemish on his otherwise immaculate reputation?

It occurs to me that for many, if our PM is a lying shit, then it's OK for them to be lying shits also, which is why he is still popular.

@Peregrina

It occurs to me that for many, if our PM is a lying shit, then it's OK for them to be lying shits also, which is why he is still popular.

Agree. And if he gets away with it it sets a scary precedence for the future.

I saw the Labour Party broadcast last night after the news. I was pleasantly surprised as they had clear policy and were more clear and focussed than I've heard them be before.

If they get this right it could be the ideal opportunity for them to pounce. Especially if they can catch the attention of all those who've turned voting age during covid and watch how this shit show had handled many things like their education whilst shutting down their social lives and o arguing themselves.

I still don't think Teflon Johnson will go down unless made to. (Eg resign). But I do think he could (and arguable currently is) helm a sinking ship.

I was pleased to see that at last the LibDems and Labour have agreed an informal alliance to not challenge each other in seats where one has little hope and the other is a contender. This must have been happening informally already.

A sobering read, and one that highlights the dangers of stuffing Cabinet with fools.
twitter.com/AndrewPRLevi/status/1494407691950870528?s=20&t=6---mmB2eJ3njVXr925OqA

Putin, Xi, Orban, Bolsonaro, Johnson, lovely company.

What a farce this is
www.itv.com/news/2022-02-18/no10-staff-allowed-to-view-partygate-notes-on-them-before-responding-to-police

Ain’t it just? Just when you think their taking us for idiots has reached its zenith, they take it to new heights.

Absolutely ridiculous…
So they will just minimise the bits that Sue Gray knows about, and not disclose/deny anything else.
Indefensible.

Maybe but it also means that their answers have to marry up with what SG has found out.... which we might actually see, though i don't think we ever will see the full fat version.

Don't see it making much difference because the MET isn't going to fine BJ and in affect bring down a sitting PM - even if his party found a backbone and got rid of him - he won't resign of his own free will.

So he'll still be PM at the next GE.

I kind of hope he is because he won’t be able to repeat his 2019 performance.

I am still gobsmacked at how much effort is going into the lies and minimisation just to hang on to a job he does not particularly enjoy. Johnson could have resigned and signed up to three lucrative directorships and the after dinner circuit by now.

On the plus side, he is doing a bloody good job of tarring the rest of the Conservatives with the same brush.

Quite remarkable isn't it, going from 'we didn't do anything wrong' to needing lawyers to find loopholes.

The leaders not lawyers comment hasn't aged well

@CryingAtTheDiscotheque

Absolutely ridiculous… So they will just minimise the bits that Sue Gray knows about, and not disclose/deny anything else. Indefensible.

Is it actually in practice significantly different than pre-interview disclosure if one is being interviewed in a police station?

The reason given for holding back the SG report was that it might “prejudice” the police investigations. SG is now saying it’s fine to share evidence in order to protect interviewees from giving “inconsistent” answers.

There is an ongoing discussion on twitter about whether this is in any way equivalent to disclosing police files prior to interview under caution, but it’s hard to understand the reason being put forward by Sue Gray!

The hi viz just isn’t cutting it any more… www.independent.co.uk/climate-change/news/boris-johnson-photoshoot-raf-plane-b2018309.html

JRM was donning the hi viz and hard hat instead.

I have seen the discussions re the SG evidence, corruption was mentioned a lot.

[quote CryingAtTheDiscotheque]The hi viz just isn’t cutting it any more… www.independent.co.uk/climate-change/news/boris-johnson-photoshoot-raf-plane-b2018309.html[/quote]
From that article:

Mr Johnson added: “Some of the planes here today are going to be used very shortly over the border in Belarus...

Is the RAF flying missions over Belarus?

[quote CryingAtTheDiscotheque]The hi viz just isn’t cutting it any more… www.independent.co.uk/climate-change/news/boris-johnson-photoshoot-raf-plane-b2018309.html[/quote]
Ah yes from the man who said he didn’t do gesture politics.

Ah yes from the man who said he didn’t do gesture politics.

Oh, Keir hasn't been drinking beers again has he?

When is the deadline for the questionnaires, I wonder?

It was last night at 10pm according to BBC News:
Johnson returns lockdown party questionnaire to police www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-60440746

Interview with Johnson on BBC this morning

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-60450444

But Mr Johnson was pressed on the subject by Sophie Raworth in an interview for BBC One's Sunday Morning Programme. She asked whether he understood why so many people found his on-the-record explanations - including that he believed he was only attending work events - "implausible".

Mr Johnson said: "There is literally not a bean I can tell you about that."

@cakeorwine

Interview with Johnson on BBC this morning

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-60450444

But Mr Johnson was pressed on the subject by Sophie Raworth in an interview for BBC One's Sunday Morning Programme. She asked whether he understood why so many people found his on-the-record explanations - including that he believed he was only attending work events - "implausible".

Mr Johnson said: "There is literally not a bean I can tell you about that."

Presumably there isn't anything he can tell us about the parties, because he still doesn't know if he was at them or not or whether he was just their to work as the entertainer.

In case anyone has forgotten we have a Prime Minister who thought it acceptable to have a birthday party while denying that opportunity to millions of children.