To point out that the PM tried to give his mistress £100k public sector job

[BadAtMaths2]

No not that one. Carrie when they were having an affair and he was foreign secretary. Wanted to appoint her yo £100k job she wasn't qualified for and without declaring an interest. Story was in The Tumes but has disappeared. Super injunction??

Oh, and if the queen doesn't die soon, PM Johnson is going to take us into war with Russia.

Buckle up kids, we're in for a bumpy ride.😱

I've never mentioned his school report.

Do you think it's OK for a government minister to push for his mistress to get a lucrative job in his department? Particularly after he's funnelled a government contract towards another mistress?

I find it hilarious that anything criticising the Conservatives has the same posters going "But wahhh, Labour, have a Daily Mail link."

I don't vote for either of them and I am in England. It's not compulsory you know.

Tory dependence on Russian money has been the biggest shame they've yet to address, and Boris' probable personal indebtedness to them is surely a national.security issue ...when he was Foreign Secretary he was excluded from certain information because of concerns about his behaviour . How shameful that this charlatan now rides on the coat tail of a real leader to boost his image and detract from the stench back home .

I agree.
Johnson supporters don't even give a shit about the peace in NI or Russian money and influence.

Johnson supporters don't even give a shit about the peace in NI or Russian money and influence

Nothing is more important than the fact that they never have been, are not and never will be wrong.

Fragile egos that can’t cope with the notion they may not know everything absolutely.

Richard Feynman, Nobel Prize Winner for quantum electrodynamics — 'I'm smart enough to know that I'm dumb.'

I find it weird. I can imagine conservative voters on here wanting to back the party to the hilt. It's tribal, it's ingrained, no one swaps allegiance easily

But I really don't get that not one of them will knock BJ or query his huge list of awful actions, the lying, the sleaze, the breaking of ministerial code, prorogation, lying to HoC. And much much more. Him personally. Not the party

If any of them said....I still support Tories 100% but I do now believe Johnson is not the right leader of the party....I would have far more respect for them, and I would take more note of their posts.

The Conservative MPs are happy till he starts losing by-elections.

^This and that he supported Brexit, a well known aim of Putin... weaken europe, cause division... Johnson helped Putin achieve this.

The cult of Johnson, law breaking and lying is perfectly acceptable and it is all someone else's fault.

I think some of Boris Johnson's 'bright ideas' such as the garden bridge etc are diversion tactics. While his critics are focused on these they are not looking at his lazy work ethic, corruption and promoting mistresses. The man is an absolute sleezebag.

The Tories want the electorate to think all politicians are the same corrupt, morally bankrupt individuals promoting a race to the bottom. This is just the tip of the iceberg.

While we are all focussed on this they are gradually reducing our long term rights which are a cornerstone of democracy, such as reducing rights to protest and forthcoming legislation to prevent the rights to judicial review of Government policy. Then there will be the watering down of human rights legislation. They don't want scrutiny of their policies and deeds, for example the prorogation of Parliament. This undermines democracy itself and we all stand to lose, despite what is written in the Daily Mail.

To add to MistressGate, take a look at this new video expose from Led By Donkeys on Twitter this morning:
Tonight the V&A museum is hosting the Conservatives’ lavish summer fundraising party. It shouldn’t be happening.
twitter.com/ByDonkeys/status/1538813667306782720?t=s3fR1shaVFCg6W6jBiaghw&s=19

WaitroseWoman Worth watching that video. And I need to add that Ben Elliott, fundraiser for the Tories, and on the V&A board... is Camilla's (Charles & Camilla, that Camilla) nephew.

Adam Bienkov

BREAKING: Boris Johnson's spokesman repeatedly refuses to deny to me on-the-record that the Prime Minister attempted to get Carrie a job as his chief of staff while he was Foreign Secretary.

"I don't comment on what the Prime Minister did before he was Prime Minister," he says.

Boris Johnson's spokesman does point to denials made by others, including Carrie Johnson, but won't repeat them himself.

This. He’s damaging the Tory party so badly you’d expect them to be even angrier than the rest of us, yet still they defend him. It’s like Stockholm syndrome.

"Boris Johnson's spokesman does point to denials made by others, including Carrie Johnson, but won't repeat them himself."

I haven't seen any denials. Walters has said he spoke to all those involved for 2 days prior to the story being printed and nobody denied it.

It’s like Stockholm syndrome

I draw more parallels with cults, which is depressing. This isn’t misguided trust at this point, it’s a complete way of life.

Independent

Downing Street has confirmed that members of Boris Johnson’s team intervened following the publication of a story about his wife Carrie in The Times, but denied that the prime minister himself contacted the paper to complain.

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-carriegate-times-story-b2105025.html

Well he wouldn't do the dirty work himself would he! There is no way Downing Street told The Times to pull the story without getting Johnson's agreement.

But that nasty BBC is so biased. If only they would play fair and only report exactly what they’re told to.

shifty load of mf’s

What's the difference? And so obviously him. And should 'his team' be suppressing news anyway?

What makes me laugh is, trying to suppress it has really really given it traction

David Allen Green blog regarding the Times article. He has experience in this area and sets out what may have happened behind the scenes before concluding that the story was pulled for non-legal, non journalistic reasons.

davidallengreen.com/2022/06/the-removal-of-the-johnson-chief-of-staff-story-a-media-lawyers-perspective/

You can see why the PM doesn't feel it necessary to employ an ethics advisor.

Theyve just mentioned this on the evening news and the fact it disappeared from the papers.

Only thing that slightly surprising about this is that No. 10 not denying intervention. What does that say?