Do you think Mary Wakefield's also having an uncomfortable time at work?

[Inoneminute]

If you're going to write "true life" pieces about your family, don't they need to be true or at least not deliberately intended to mislead?

Absolutely. And deservedly so.

Sincerely hope so.

Doubt it. People like them float about in a bubble of entitlement.
It won't occur to her to bother.

Boris Johnson was sacked for lying in his articles. Not that someone with the wealth and privilege Johnson or Wakefield have would give a shit but it would be nice if there was some consequence.

I would hope imagine so.

The Spectator published a piece yesterday saying that Cummings needed to be fired.

www.spectator.co.uk/article/why-dominic-cummings-must-go

Can you imagine being a work colleague

Youd be all ‘oh how dreadful for you’ and sympathetic when she detailed just how awful it was when they got ill

Then 😡 when you realised she’d been fibbing

She’ll never be able to take a sickie again

She's not 'at work' though. Even in normal times, she probably writes her articles at home and sends them in. She's probably had a very uncomfortable conversation (or perhaps a series of conversations as the story unfolded) with her boss though.

I would hope so. I certainly don't want a noted liar on thought for the day again.

Andrew Neil seems very quiet at the moment.

even in normal times, she probably writes her articles at home and sends them in

Work colleagues, friends Whoever really

She probably lives in a twat bubble and so socialises with other twats who won't find their twattish behaviour twattish. So no - so says another twat !

Fair point vera 😀

Don’t know but she went to Bishop Auckland for her birthday.

Undoubtedly. I wouldn't be surprised if she got fired for the more disingenuous aspects of that article.

I agree Vera. Who the fuck would be friends with them.

I'm waiting to hear that she's been sacked or has resigned. She's got no credibility anymore either

I don’t know, the Spectator often stands behind its journalists and doesn’t appear to give a lot of fucks, but I do wonder if this has pissed any of them off. Particularly if she wrote the piece knowing all this would come out at some point.

I'm guessing she can't have told her colleague where she'd been, otherwise they wouldn't have published that article. It would certainly piss me off if a colleague had used the publication I work for to spread lies to save her husband's skin.

The Spectator isn’t some commie rag, so I think she’ll be just fine.

They'll be an absolute laughing stock if the don't take action.

Undoubtedly. I wouldn't be surprised if she got fired for the more disingenuous aspects of that article.

Of course she won't - he's still the most powerful man in the country, she's married to him. They won't fire her

She’ll probably get a soft boot. Sacked but allowed to earn. Decent living from freelancing for them plus others

The Spectator isn’t some commie rag, so I think she’ll be just fine

What? Can you elaborate?

I hope so but I'm not holding my breath. Hard to imagine anyone's ever going to take her seriously as a journalist now though. Not that anyone did before.

I went and read the article, mostly to see if she also said she didn't have the cough and fever, because those are the only symptoms where people were asked to isolate. She didn't. She didn't mention going to Durham, nor their boy being ill, so it's omission rather than conflict with DC's version and the Spectator will let that go, or give her freelance work instead. From both their versions, it sounds more like she and the boy had the horrible viral tonsillitis that was going around London at the time, with the aches and vomiting, while DC had covid. I wonder if they've thought to buy antibody tests.