A 50 page dossier from the bloke who didn't want stuff on more than two sides of A4 should be interesting. Although there's nothing wrong with that kind of restriction if used between people who know what they're talking about and people who can tell when they need to get a bit more deeply into a subject.
I generally support Labour but B liar got us into an unnecessary war. Ukraine unfortunately is a just war. Bonko and his bum chums will say and do anything to avoid being guilty
Reports that Rwanda might be back on after talks with ECHR judges. Not used to this 'discussion' thing any more, it's weird. Almost like talking about things leads to resolutions rather than flopping a policy onto the table and saying take it or leave it. It'll never catch on.
They’ve probably given billions to the company that failed the track and trace , so it ‘ll be reported that it didn’t work
Dont get me wrong mate, I am part of the 99%. He is beyond redemption. Even if he is found to have not misled parliament public opinion wont change and more likely harden if he comes out all guns blazing, which sounds like is his approach.
I am half way through a series of programmes from radio 4 about the Iraq war. Covers the decisions in the build up and the aftermath. Interviews with Blair, MI6 and MI5, some cabinet ministers. Very interesting listen, although grim.
Like Trump, he seems to have genuinely broken some people's brains. Long gone, no realistic prospect of a return, but they simply cannot move on, having to replay the same arguments over and over in the hope it might magically be different this time. You'd think he was still PM today judging by the references to him in this thread every day.
He's broken them alright. It's close to an obsession. One poster even blames the poor guy for the death of his Mother. Weird.
It's the best puppet show in town, everyone will want to watch him squirm ... ... except the man-crush brigade of course. It was the lead story on every news channel this morning but, of course, no one is supposed to be interested unless their brains are broken
An interesting couple of days in prospect. Of course, how these two are treated will dictate how other politicians are treated going forwards, so I don't really expect a full resolution of any kind. It'll be the illusion of accountability rather than any real form of it.
Johnson 'defence dossier' published Boris Johnson's evidence to the Privileges Committee has been published. You can read it here. https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/119498/default/ In his submission Boris Johnson accepts the Commons was misled by his statements that the rules and guidance had been followed completely at No 10. However, he says his statements were made "in good faith and on the basis of what I honestly knew and believed at the time". "I did not intentionally or recklessly mislead the House on 1st December 2021, 8th December 2021, or on any other date. I would never have dreamed of doing so," he adds.
Hardline Tory MPs reject Sunak’s Northern Ireland Brexit plan https://www.theguardian.com/politic...reland-brexit-plan?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other Trouble ahead of a vote on one part of the plan, the so-called statutory instrument, will take place in the Commons on Wednesday.
Replying to Saff "However, he says his statements were made "in good faith and on the basis of what I honestly knew and believed at the time"." The Holy Trinity of words he knows, faith, honesty and belief .... ... but not the meaning behind any of them. His fifty page dossier was probably written by the same bloke who knocks his books out.
I've not followed much of this since he got the boot but there's 3 things that need to be questioned: 1) Is his defence essentially "I didn't understand the rules created by my own government"? 2) Whilst I don't buy point 1, even if it was a legitimate argument, does he have an answer for why he stonewalled parliament by refusing to be transparent? If he genuinely thought he'd done nothing wrong, why didn't he just explain what the events were rather than refuse to even acknowledge that they took place? 3) His "defence" indicates that he now knows better, yet he and his allies are still talking about a stitch up in the Sue Gray report. Either he now knows better or he's still refusing to take responsibility. Which one is it?
Maybe he would have been better off taking a degree in English at Oxford, instead of Ancient Greek Mythology or whatever he "studied", so he could better understand the English language. It appears to me the only language he does understand is bullshit and lies
