AIBU to think that the Met Police have "Saved" Boris Johnson?

[SueGray54321]

Just at the very moment when the Sue Gray report on Partygate was about to be released, the police suddenly decided to investigate partying at Downing Street themselves. This was after months of saying they don't investigate historic breaches of lockdown rules. Can't help thinking that they were persuaded to do this to stop the Sue Gray report being released.

The Met then proceed to spend months investigating Partygate offences, thus taking the heat out of the original fury about revelations about lockdown breaches. No doubt this was entirely their intention.

The sum total of the police investigation was one £50 fine for the Prime Minister, for one of the more minor breaches of lockdown rules. Begs the question why he was not fined for any of the other events he attended?

It just smacks of a stitch up, doesn't it?

You don't like your children hearing the things Johnson has said but you would vote for him?

The issue isn’t whether drinks were alcoholic or not, it’s about breaking covid law. Sunak was guilty of that, it’s far from ridiculous.

Rishi Sunak was fined £50 - David Lammy was fined £5,000 by the Information Commissioner's Office (2016) - that didn't stop Keir Starmer appointing David Lammy Shadow Secretary of State for Justice, Shadow Lord Chancellor and Shadow Foreign Secretary;

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-35772202

@Clavinova Congratulations on finding a new one.

@Clavinova Can you help me with something, because you do seem to be very knowledgeable about the workings of the government?

I am bothered by the reports that Boris Johnson has been arranging meetings. I was under the impression that is principle work was watering the pot plants and as entertainment at parties. Has being a diary secretary always been part of his role, or is it a recent addition?

DuncinToffee
You don't like your children hearing the things Johnson has said but you would vote for him?

I don't like my younger ds hearing one particular description Johnson published in an article in 1998, you are correct. As far as I am aware he hasn't used it since. Personally I am not offended by his other comments although some people are. I would forgive Angela Rayner if she made her comment over 20 years ago.

You don't live in Ashton do you clav so no big moral decision not to vote for Rayner.
I think the fact that you are an apologist for Johnson and the tories no matter what they do says more about you than anything. Blind obedience is generally a bad thing.

Still no clue.
Is she having affair with Zak Goldsmith?

I love how Rayner comes up out of nowhwere. Because, like all tory stooge tactics, the aim is to get any thread about johnson to turn into a debate about Labour. "They're all as bad as each other, blah blah blah"

@Clavinova May I say I am really surprised that you would not vote for Raynor, you have consistently come across on here as one of the most persuasive voices in favour of voting for anyone but the Tories.

I'm utterly disgusted and more than a little worried.

Our Government is morally reprehensible and corrupt.

SleeplessInEngland
I love how Rayner comes up out of nowhere

She didn't come out of nowhere - she has been mentioned by at least two posters before me in the last hour:

I’ve only ever voted Labour or Lib Dem, but I’m not the sort that throws around insults like ‘Tory Scum’ or is steadfastly partisan.

The difference here is that if Starmer is fined, he will step aside, as will Rayner...

The whole Rayner calling the Tory cabinet "scum" was a non story to distract from Conservative MP, James Gray having to apologise for suggesting sending a bomb to Anneliese Dodds.

Angela Rayner was right, they are scum.🤷‍♀️

@Clavinova Would you be willing to accept that the Tory MP who was sentenced today is scum?

Odessafile
Blind obedience is generally a bad thing

As in 'lifelong Labour voter' for example? I see that description quite a lot.

Sweepstake on whether the Sun or Mail will even include the pictures on their front page tomorrow (or mention them at all on any page). I'm leaning towards yes for the Sun, no for the Mail.

@Clavinova do you really believe Johnson is a prime minister who deserves respect? Hoe much more does he have to do before you can accept that he is a dishonest charlatan?

@Clavinova Boris' blind obedience to lying everytime he opens his mouth is certainly a bad thing.

Lifelong liar.

Literally no-one thinks boris is honest. His supporters' aim, for whatever perverse reason, is to convince others that all politicians are awful, so better the devil you know.

Is that the one who assaulted the 15 year old boy?
And didn't one of the others try to defend him?
I guess this trying to defend the child sex assault came shortly after Johnson whiping his party to change the rules after some Tory had been convicted with something else so could say he was just following Johnson's lead.
Is another one under investigation for rape as well?
I can't remember the names of any of these people.

@Clavinova if scum is not a word you would use to describe someone, what would you call an MP who watches porn in parliament?

Literally no-one thinks boris is honest

Clavinova does 😀

jgw1
Would you be willing to accept that the Tory MP who was sentenced today is scum?

It's not a word I use myself, but I put him in the same category as the former Labour peer jailed for five and a half years for similar offences in February this year;
www.thetimes.co.uk/article/former-labour-peer-nazir-ahmed-guilty-of-attempted-rape-and-sexual-assault-2f9nfpx6h
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-60260113

I doubt it. The only defence I’ve seen them make of him is “but whaddabout Labour??”

if scum is not a word you would use to describe someone, what would you call an MP who watches porn in parliament?

Foolish.

I’m sure Clavinova and others will continue with their whataboutery.

Conservative MPs and staff were not the only people to break covid rules and, indeed, other politicians of other parties have broken other laws on occasion.

For me, Partygate is different for two reasons.

First is the frequency of rule breaking. I do imagine that most people, including politicians, breached Covid rules from time to time - perhaps knowingly, perhaps inadvertently. In either case, as long as someone was, for the most part, complying with the rules then I think an apology for an occasional slip goes a long way.

I do not believe that what we can see of Number 10 can be painted as occasional-slips - there were so many incidents (and have been so many fines) that it can only reasonably be explained by a culture of rule-breaking and contempt for (their own) laws (to the extent they applied to themselves).

Secondly, as is often the case, the coverup is worse than the crime. If Johnson had held his hands up from day one and admitted his failings, then we may well have largely moved on by now. Accountability does, to some extent, offset errors (even egregious ones). Instead, he lied, and (in all likelihood) repeatedly lied to parliament and the public. One of the most important aspects of the role of Prime Minister is to uphold faith in the rule of law. If Johnson survives this then (absent a shocking and hitherto unforeseen explanation) I think we can dismiss one of the previously most-important concepts of our democracy as being functionally dead.