UK to BoJo: It's time to go! pt 2

Part 1:

I'm getting out of patience, oi!

Boris did covet the top job, didn't he have a plan he wrote in University for getting to be PM. It took him longer than he thought to get there and he is indeed one of the worst suited who've ever had the job.

And he, like Cameron, doesn't care about remain g in the job forever, just enough time to be world famous and make a killing afterwards.

Poor kitty. :-(

How sad for UK.

Has the plonker resigned at last?

Time to GoGo BoJo

Oddly, I do think one could make some kind of argument that Theresa May despite everything is the least disastrous Tory PM of the past 30 years - which tells you A LOT about the Tory party.

R3 - imagine wanting the top job your whole life. Preparing for it for decades...and still being so unbelievably shit at it that people look back on May and Cameron with relative fondness.

And by the same metric, Gordon Brown is the least disastrous PM during that time - no major fuckups, managed to avoid meltdown of the global banking system, and he didn't even get properly defeated in a general election, managing to claw his way back to a hung parliament instead.

Erm...yes he did R10. Brown lost the 2010 election which saw the Tories and Lib Dem coalition.

OK, but the opposition party didn't win a majority is my point - first time that had happened since Feb 1974. You could take that as something of a score draw and moral victory.

Not really R12 - thanks to that we ended up with Brexit and all the other fucking awful Tory policies. They squandered the chance to drag the UK election system into the 21st century using proportional representation. It's been hellish for the last 12 + years.

LOL at Concerned European trying to rewrite history.

I do think he's the worst PM we have ever had. He is completely unsuitable in every conceivable way, but then so are the majority of the British government at this point. It's so fucking depressing that these people SHOULD represent the best of the best, but they are just a bunch of over-privileged incompetents who continually fail upwards due to the extreme corruption, nepotism and cover-ups.

I would like to think that they will all get what they deserve but I know they won't. It's absolutely infuriating.

The only faint glimmer of hope is that the Tories have fucked up so spectacularly, apparently a lot of people who have always voted Tory in the past are now turning against them and claim they will not vote for them again. Only time will tell, I guess.

[quote] apparently a lot of people who have always voted Tory in the past are now turning against them and claim they will not vote for them again.

I wouldn't overestimate the truth of that. It's years until the next GE, and even if Bojo survives this the Tories aren't dumb enough to go into the election with him. They'll do what they always do pin all the blame on him and drop him, and since most of the shift has been to the Lib Dems rather than Labour. Once the election propaganda threatens a Labour+Lib Dem+Celtic Nationalist Coalition those soft centre right English voters are going to jump back.

[quote]Celtic Nationalist Coalition

??? You mean Scottish?

The Tories need the Scottish Nationalists and the Scottish Nationalists need the Tories. They're in a unique eco system where each other's electoral success benefits the others. The Tories benefit from the SNP by saying "The SNP being part of a coalition government would mean people in England and Wales miss out because the SNP only care about Scotland" and the SNP benefit from the Tories by claiming everything failing in Scotland is their fault and only independence can solve it.

And Labour and the Liberal Democrats function in a unique eco system as well. The Liberal Democrats need a strong Labour Party that doesn't scare Tory voters into giving them their protest votes. They have that in Keir Starmer, Rachel Reeves, Yvette Cooper and Wes Streeting. Labour need a credible Liberal Democrat party who Tory voters feel able to give their protest votes to.

Labour and the Liberal Democrats will do well to ramp up the attacks on the sleaze and corruption in the SNP, the obsession with independence over health and education, their dreadful legislative programme - read up on the smoke alarm legislation - and general failure to improve the lives of Scots after 15 years in government.

BORIS HAS THE REPORT!!!!

He'll be appearing in the Commons at 3.30pm.

It's also Jack Dromey's funeral today - a Labour MP and husband of former deputy leader. There was some suspicion he would arrange the Commons speech during the funeral.

He still clearly has no intention of resigning, even though Gray found "failures of leadership and judgment".

Theresa May just asked whether he ignored the rules or just didn't understand them. She seems to be enjoying this.

I can’t believe this turd is still floating in the toilet bowl.

R8, she actually had the better more workable and advantageous Brexit plan but she couldn’t get the votes for it - she did the work.

Then her party approved Boris’ plan which was even more demonstrably worse for the UK. Talk about misogyny.

Here’s why the Met barged in and redacted the report. They’re all in on it together.

WATCH: Theresa May Absolutely Scorches Boris Johnson on Parliament Floor Over Covid Lockdown Parties

CNBC: UK investigation into Downing Street Covid lockdown parties finds ‘failures of leadership’

Boris Johnson says sorry after report slams lockdown parties

This has to be the longest, most drawn out scandal in history. What a disaster. This the PM job, not some bloke off the streets. He seems so desperate hanging on like this. He is practically begging to keep his job that he never took seriously before. Is he broke? Desperate for the government salary?

It’s unsightly to see a grown man of this position driveling to the public.

And after hinting earlier we wouldn't see the full report, Number 10 have now u-turned and promised the full report will be released after the Met investigation is complete. Apparently so many Tory MPs were furious at the idea of them not releasing the full thing that Johnson and his team quickly realised they had no choice. So this one is going to keep going and going.

Plus the news that the Met investigation have been handed over 300 photos as evidence of parties, etc.

When May made her statement today, right after Starmer, I thought this could be Geoffrey Howe dismantling Margaret Thatcher all over again. I think it could have been, but she just held back with her speaking-volumes short question. For now.

I know Starmer is hated by many in these threads but I thought his response today was coldly fierce, as though powered by the strong emotion detractors claim he lacks. Loved how he eyeballed the PM with stony contempt when Johnson just blustered again in time-filling response. Starmer knew his blows had landed.

Johnson likewise just held his line against near-universal verbalised disbelief. He was like a powerfully drugged boxer on the ropes, taking blow after blow. I doubt anyone in the country even half-intelligent believed a word he said.

R29 Plus you got sight of the real Boris Johnson with the Savile comment. The nasty side that he tries so hard to cover up with the 'lovable bumbling fool' act.

Luke Pollard's question about drug taking by the PM's staff was a good one too, opening up an entirely new can of worms.

[quote]Plus you got sight of the real Boris Johnson with the Savile comment.

Ah yes, I forgot that. When Johnson plucked that from his old mental folder of comebacks to Starmer I thought - Where the fuck did that come from, and why? Obvious answer soon enough: desperation. Starmer really rattled Johnson.

[quote]I know Starmer is hated by many in these threads but I thought his response today was coldly fierce, as though powered by the strong emotion detractors claim he lacks. Loved how he eyeballed the PM with stony contempt when Johnson just blustered again in time-filling response. Starmer knew his blows had landed.

My mother texted me after Starmer's speech to say she was almost in tears. He got the tone spot on. As did Ed Davey, the Lib Dem leader, talking about how there is a word for a man or woman who loses their husband or wife but there isn't a word for a parent who loses their child, and how many parents lose their child in the most appalling circumstances. Especially after one of the Downing Street staffers revealed she had proposed a "bereavement bubble" for grieving families, families who had had experienced a miscarriage, neonatal death or stillbirth. The proposal was rejected.

But fucking hell Ian Blackford was an embarrassment. The HoC rules on language is ridiculous and the speaker didn't help but Blackford made it all about him so he say he's "standing up for Scotland". No one ever remembers anything he says because his speeches are so long and tedious but they'll remember him getting thrown out.

[quote]Plus you got sight of the real Boris Johnson with the Savile comment.

The Jimmy Savile conspiracy theory comes from a far right group who are convinced Starmer is part of a paedophile network, despite having taken decisive action on the Asian grooming gangs as DPP when previously there was apathy.

And it was telling Johnson accused Johnson of "prosecuting journalists not Jimmy Savile" - this is still a VERY sore point with Rupert Murdoch and The Sun journalists who were involved in phone hacking. And it is The Sun whose deputy editor is James Slack, BJ's former Director of Communications - it was his leaving party at Downing Street where the suitcase was filled with booze.

We hereby demand that he be replaced by a trans woman of color.

Our boundaries have been stated.

Also The Sun gave all the No.10 parties low coverage until they had to recognise it was a Big Story. Reason being that, as 'Private Eye' has continually reported, The Sun had its own exuberant Christmas party, at which senior staff enjoyed themselves carnally in public.

He won't go. He'll have to be forced out.

Mind you, most of the Tories were sat there without masks on. I know mask wearing isn't required in England now, but considering the government is still 'recommending' people wear masks in crowded indoor spaces, they look a bit hypocritical sat shoulder to shoulder while maskless. While their leader is trying to justify covid rule breaking...

There's no poimt in removing Boris as everyone else in line for the job is as unfit as he is. Liz Truss? Rishi Sunak? Jacob Rees Mogg? Come on. They're all a bunch of amoral, corrupt fucks no better than he is. The appropriate response would be a universal amnesty for everyone charged for lockdown violations, including reimbursing them for all fines paid. But they won't do this because they raided the treasury and are desperate for cash.

Gotta say R29 is right. Starmer did really well today. All snark aside, the Saville riposte was tasteless and desperate.

On the other hand, Blackford was quite right to stick to his guns. Sometimes you have to call a liar a liar. Johnson is destroying a system which relies on the participants still having some tiny, remote and fraagile sense of shame. Yet the Speaker can do nothing except throw out the guy who is telling the truth.

The US system got tested to destruction a year ago, but held up at the point at which Dan Quayle advised Mike Pence he couldn't reject the results from the key contested states. Two unlikelier Heroes of the Republic you couldn't hope to meet, right?

The UK system is being tested to destruction. Can ministers now lie to the House? Does the ministerial code mean anything? Can lawbreakers be lawmakers?

It's down to the Conservative party in parliament now. Are there 54 Mike Pences out there? Or do we now call the UK a failed state?

Boris Johnson Under Criminal Investigation for Lockdown Party in His Own Apartment

The fact it was apparently a party Carrie threw to celebrate forcing Dominic Cummings out is just *chef's kiss*

[quote]And after hinting earlier we wouldn't see the full report, Number 10 have now u-turned and promised the full report will be released after the Met investigation is complete. Apparently so many Tory MPs were furious at the idea of them not releasing the full thing that Johnson and his team quickly realised they had no choice. So this one is going to keep going and going.

This is just another example of BJ's pure arrogance. He was asked AGAIN AND AGAIN in the House Of Commons about this and could have replied with that answer, but he kept waffling and being evasive. Diane Abbott asked the first question, which he evaded, and the a lot of Tories backed up Abbott and asked the question again and wouldn't commit to it.

And then he speaks to Tory MPs behind closed doors and he says of course it will be published in full ASAP.

Why couldn't he say that in Parliament?

R42 Because it wasn't the plan until he realised the troops wouldn't accept it

My god, Nadine has gone full Marjorie Taylor Greene.

Jesus, what a fucking idiot

[quote][R42] Because it wasn't the plan until he realised the troops wouldn't accept it

But he should have some awareness that his MPs wouldn't accept him not publishing the report in full so anticipated the requests and answered accordingly.

Refusing to answer the questions from Diane Abbott and Mark Harper and others, only to agree to their requests later just makes him look shifty and weak. Which is what he is of course.

[quote] Ed Davey, the Lib Dem leader, talking about how there is a word for a man or woman who loses their husband or wife but there isn't a word for a parent who loses their child

Bitch stole my line!

Nadine Dorries was drunk on C4 news tonight. She's either devastated he's finally leaving or celebrating. Or maybe it's just Monday?

[quote]But he should have some awareness

This is Boris Johnson we're talking about. The guy who blamed his staff for letting him down over this, rather than taking any blame himself. The guy who, according to Dominic Cummings, said "‘I’m the fucking king around here and I’m going to do what I want". The guy whose staff had to put chairs in the doorway to block him from coming into the office when he had Covid.

If he had awareness he would've come clean about all this months ago.

R48 Sky News too

[quote] The US system got tested to destruction a year ago, but held up at the point at which Dan Quayle advised Mike Pence he couldn't reject the results from the key contested states. Two unlikelier Heroes of the Republic you couldn't hope to meet, right?

Spot on, ConcernedEuropean!

Have you lived in The States?

I’m American (by birth), and have lived in the UK and several Commonwealth countries, but do not feel qualified to proffer opinions on these countries’ political issues.

But I am always heartened to see those from outside places who have their finger on the pulse of other places.

In its way Johnson's evasion about publishing Gray's report in full was the most shocking thing about his afternoon performance.

After weeks and weeks of saying, We need to wait for the report - he genuinely thought he could now get away with saying in effect, Not necessarily, time and again.

Yes I know who we're talking about here; but the sheer effrontery, live in front of the world's eyes, speaks surely of the sort of psychological disconnect we saw too often in Trump.

I've never lived in the States no, but I have family in the US and have enjoyed several extended visits.

And I have a subscription to the New York Times and like to keep up to date ;)

Leadership contender Liz Truss has tested positive for Covid and will be isolating at home for however long is necessary. She was sat two down from BJ in the House Of Commons, without a mask on.

People are already comparing this to John Major's dental surgery which was conveniently timed for him to disappear during Thatcher's downfall.

[quote]Nadine Dorries was drunk on C4 news tonight. She's either devastated he's finally leaving or celebrating. Or maybe it's just Monday?

Wow, just wow.

When you realise Nadine Dorries is a Julia Davis character it all makes sense.

[quote] I have a subscription to the New York Times and like to keep up to date ;)

This is pure comedy.

He’s going to handcuff himself the radiator at 10 downing.

R52 is making a different point than the one he thinks he is.

r33.Someone needs to tell that shit Boris that it was W.Yorkshire police at Saville's flat inRoundhay having parties, not Starmer.

R59 You think he doesn't know already?

Truly pathetic hearing ministers defend him, yet unwilling to repeat what he said when they aren't protected by parliamentary privilege. Every interview he gives from now on, he should be challenged to repeat the claim.

Sir Keir Starmer is very photogenic and, most at DL will be pleased to know, recently circumcised.

Ladies and gentlemen of The Datalounge, Sir Keir Starmer, KCB, QC

Keir has great hair.

Keir is bae. His Jewife got him cut; he said it was painful but worth it once the stiches came out.

Boreeee is in ze Oukainae

Vlad so scared

R58 If you're upset that I sometimes write posts about the US without ever having lived there, might I humbly suggest that your best recourse would be to hurl yourself into the sea?

It would also be an excellent opportunity for you to finally leave Oklahoma.

While all of you are still fussing over the details of last year's Christmas party, the hardworking public servants are making it easier for you to be a transvestite property-owner

[quote] If you’ve changed your gender use application form CNG if you have any of the following documents: 1. a gender recognition certificate, 2. a new birth certificate, 3. a letter from a UK-based medical practitioner (such as a doctor) confirming you’ve changed gender. Send the completed form and one of the documents to the address on the form. If you’re sending a gender recognition certificate, write ‘Private and confidential’ on the envelope.

Now Andrew Marr is no longer a BBC journalist (he was past it, let's be honest) he's let rip on Johnson in The New Statesman.

It's scathing. and very effective.

[quote[ Now Andrew Marr is no longer a BBC journalist

Now did he go or was he pushed?

I've heard about BBC Radio veteran of some quiz show who recently got the push because the BBC boffins were insisting he had BAME and Disabled guests on his show.

The guests were expected to be witty as well as BAME and Disabled. But the presenter of the show was wondering how their 'disablement' was expected to be apparent through the medium of radio.

Datalounge, where every thread starts off as a trans thread or finishes up there.

[quote]Now did he go or was he pushed?

He retired.

He has struggled with his physical health post stroke and some of his more recent interviews have been quite poor in quality.

Sophie Raworth has been a poor stand in. Emma Barnett does a fantastic job interviewing but can go in a bit too hard. Nick Robinson can be devastatingly effective with his quietness.

[quote]But the presenter of the show was wondering how their 'disablement' was expected to be apparent through the medium of radio.

In which case it's right if they sacked him for having such a stupid view. It's not about just being seen with disabled people, FFS

Differ from my fellow DLers about Marr. I miss him on Sunday morning, and wasn't conscious of any falling away. I marvelled at him moving from one heavy hitter in health, to another in diplomacy, to the big political figure at the end: on top of his brief all the time and asking important uncomfortable questions, live. All the force of the programme has gone, it's pallid now, by no means a must-watch.

Yeah, okay Andrew, fuck off back to the Staggers

[quote] Big blow for Boris Johnson. No 10 policy chief Munira Mirza, at his side since City Hall, quits over Jimmy Savile slur: “This was not the usual cut & thrust of politics; it was an inappropriate & partisan reference to a horrendous case of child sex abuse.”

And now Downing Street Head of Communications, Jack Doyle, has also resigned, although he denies it has anything to do with Mirza's departure.

The ship is sinking.

I think Doyle was implicated in organising some of the early parties reported on - he had little Friday evening award ceremonies to award good work from his Comms team (ironic considering how little any of these people understood about how the public would react to what they were doing).

I guess he's found out he gets majorly burned in the full and unexpurgated Sue Gray.

Principal Private Secretary Martin Reynolds and Chief of Staff Dan Rosenfield have also resigned.

Wow. This is escalating rather quickly.

Hahahahaha, this is getting more hilarious by the day.

The Tory loyalists have been told to tweet supportive things about the PM and the results are frequently hilarious.

There's clearly a coordinated campaign going on.

Sajid Javid and Nadhim Zahawi will be the two to watch. They're clever enough not to get sucked up into all this shite.

R79 They had to know they were going to be scapegoated over Partygate. But the fact they didn't quit sooner suggests they were okay with it initially. But now Boris is sinking even lower, they seem to have decided to abandon him early.

Also - the story in the Telegraph about Carrie's party on the night Cummings confirmed he was going, with her playing The Winner Takes It All - god that just sounds so naff. It's the kind of thing Olly from The Thick Of It would do. And given I doubt Team Carrie are leaking, that must mean she was absolutely blasting it so loud that the staff could hear downstairs.

That Carrie is quite a bitch, isn't she?

Carrie sounds like an entitled fuck

Meanwhile in Scotland, the Scottish Government announced that they would take forward their Covid health protection measures by increasing ventilation in schools by CUTTING THE BOTTOM OFF DOORS which was quickly condemned by the fire service.

When asked why schools couldn't use DOOR STOPS to keep the doors ajar when classrooms are in use, the government spokesman couldn't answer.

WHY ARE PEOPLE SO FUCKING INCOMPETENT!

This comeuppance is quite a long time in coming.

He's not at all bad-looking in R87's photo.

He looks a scaring lot like Donald Trump when he was young.

[quote] a scaring lot

What does that mean, R89?

No, there is no resemblance.

The obvious, r90. Is your thinking so concrete and obtuse that overt physical resemblance is the only matter to catch your very modern attention span?

He doesn't resemble Donald Trump in any way, shape or form, now or then, R91, overt physical resemblance or otherwise.

Bojo the Clown has his own very personally cultivated level of grotesquerie.

Boris is obliged to wear the mop hair because of his large nose.

But English whiners will whine regardless of who's in power because the country is full of whining welfare recipients who whine instead of work.

You seem unable to tolerate even the smallest amount of criticism concerning two egregiously stupid look-alikes with clown-begging appearances and equally vacuous objectives. I.e. look at ME. And if you can spare some time, LOOK HARDER at fundraisers.

R92 Why not? Both are contemptible, grotesque men who are vaccuumly self-serving with crazy attention-getting coifs... The parallels keep on giving.

He’s got hours left in his PM.

R94 There's a difference between observation and obsession.

Ugh, will I have to get out of bed for this?

[quote][R94] There's a difference between observation and obsession.

Tell us more! And, while you're drinking recovery is up to it, tell us about your appearances on Magnificent Obsession series on Public Radio International via WBEZ

For gods sake. How many more hits can this guy take?

Rishi Sunak seized his moment to knife the PM yesterday at his Chancellor's briefing. The big resignation was perfectly timed for journalists to ask Sunak for comment live on TV.

Re: Savile, Sunak said, 'To be honest, I wouldn't have said that.' Nicely weighted, because nobody sane would have done, and his pointless remark did Johnson no favours at all. Crass unforced error.

Do all you one hundred haters in this thread so. far want Rishi Sunak to be the new PM?

Or will you find some chink in him so you can hate on him as well?

One of the guests on Question Time yesterday made the observation that the public weren't that familiar with Keir Starmer before the Savile slur, but now with the coverage of Johnson's slur there are Tories lining up to defend him and his public service as DPP.

Johnson's decision to smear Starmer has been a catastrophic strategic error.

Especially since Starmer has a very special availability for his Jewish wife.

So weird how anti-semites try to control both ends of a business communication.

I have no idea what the post at R103 is meant to mean.

[quote]One of the guests on Question Time yesterday made the observation that the public weren't that familiar with Keir Starmer before the Savile slur, but now with the coverage of Johnson's slur there are Tories lining up to defend him and his public service as DPP. Johnson's decision to smear Starmer has been a catastrophic strategic error.

And an observation I forgot to add, victims of child sexual abuse have publicly condemned Johnson but Labour MPs haven't (from what I've seen) thrown Boris Johnson's "spaffed against a wall" comments back at him.

Because they don't need, and that's the worst thing for Johnson.

The Tories used an attack line in the 2017 election that Jeremy Corbyn wouldn't defend Britain or keep the country safe. They didn't need to raise it again because when there was a chemical weapons attack in Salisbury in 2018 Corbyn's instinctive response was to call for a sample of the Novichok nerve agent to be given to Russia so they could say whether it was theirs, for his spokesman to question the security services because of Iraq and for his media outriders to push conspiracy theories that Israel was behind it, because of course it would be The Jews.

The Tories didn't need to bring up national security again because the public had made their minds up.

Starmer has so much ammunition now he needs only to be careful to use it wisely. Unlike Johnson he seems far too clever to overplay his hand.

Perfect example at PMQs this week. After a typical blustering evasive Johnson response, Starmer said, 'The Prime Minister will need to give better answers than that when he's questioned by The Police.' Bliss! Cut to the PM looking gutted, as well he might.

Perhaps Sir Kier can offer to be his lawyer when he is interviewed under caution?

[quote]And an observation I forgot to add, victims of child sexual abuse have publicly condemned Johnson but Labour MPs haven't (from what I've seen) thrown Boris Johnson's "spaffed against a wall" comments back at him.

Labour hasn't sided with victims of child sexual abuse?!!!!

Why the fuck hasn't this been ridden into a post-Corbyn majority?

"Carrie sounds like an entitled fuck"

That's why calling her Carrie Antoinette is an insult to Marie Antoinette, who was structurally isolated from perceiving public opinion, but by all accounts was a warmhearted individual who tried, in her limited way, to keep her head down (no pun intended) and do her duty.

Fifth resignation in twenty-four hours;

Boris allegedly quoted Rafiki in a pep talk to staff... doesn't seem implausible, given that he's referenced Peppa Pig in speeches. Anyway, The Lion King of course ends with Scar being eaten by the hyenas, his own henchmen.

This feels like a 10 part series that's flagging on episode 7.

I want the season finale where BJ is stood outside Downing Street waffling through his last speech. Carrie stood next to him, baby in one hand, the other hand rocking the pushchair with the other kid in back and forward, mascara rolling down her eyes as she sobs silently.

I want an official photo of BJ resigning over Skype without having to see HRH Queen in person and Dominic Raab being sworn in as PM until a new leader of the Tory Party is elected.

It's getting boring now.

Further to R112: an interview outside his agreeable London house with Dominic Cummings for his reaction to this long-awaited turn of events.

Then soon, pictures of such expensive furnishings as can be removed from the No.10 flat being loaded into a vast van, destination unknown.

Fuck that, I want him clinging to power and dragging the Tories down in the next election. Which I do expect him to call when he thinks 53 letters have been handed in.

Labour have to play a really tricky balancing act right now to keep him where he is. Don't want a repeat of 1992 where the electorate decide a new leader deserves a chance.

We've finally moved on to episode 8.

THE OFFIICAL DOWNING STREET PHOTOGRAPHER (one of them, I think there are 3) WAS AT ONE OF THE PARTIES AND WAS TAKING PHOTOS OF PEOPLE DRINKING AND HE TOOK A PHOTO OF THE PRIME MINISTER HOLDING A PINT OF BEER.

THE POLICE NOW HAVE THE PHOTO OF THE PRIME MINISTER HOLDING THE PINT OF BEER DURING A PARTY HELD UNDER LOCKDOWN.

....

Another MP has called for him to go - Nick Gibb is a long standing education minister.

DRIP DRIP DRIP

The best/worst part of this is that the media reported Bojo was nearing ventilator status around mid 2020. Prince's Charles and William were also ill around the same time.

And yet he's so cavalier with his own staff that he needed barriers between his study and the staff at10 Downing so he wouldn't infect them during his virulence.

I've been keeping up via these threads because Bojo is a welcome distraction from the impending implosion of democratic principles and the rule of law in the U.S.

A Can of Beer!

Shocking!

An indictable offence!

According to UK journalist Twitter, 5 BoJo loyalists have submitted letters as a safety mechanism. Apparenlty when Graham Brady hits the magic number he's meant to phone around everyone to check they don't want to withdraw, and then crucially they'll be forewarned..

What geniuses these people are.

r101 No chance. He's going to be lynched for the cost of living and tax rises coming in the next budget.

[quote] He's going to be lynched for the cost of living and tax rises coming in the next budget.

Everyone in parliament needs to take a pay cut.

R121 Don't you think that might be motivating him to try and move up into a bigger job.... rather soon?

I have a theory that Nadine Dorries is pledging loyalty but doing everything she can to undermine Boris Johnson so he resigns sooner rather than later so she can stand for leadership.

There is no other way to explain her media performances. Other than alcoholism.

Pushback against Sunak today. Cabinet Minister quoted saying, 'He who wields the knife never wins the crown.' Sunak might just regret not resisting the temptation to distance publicly from Johnson on Savile. It's all in the timing! He seems to have shown his hand too soon. Rishi Too-Sunak.

Nadine is nothing without Boris, she fully supports him. She will be out on her ear once he's gone.

Voters get the government they deserve.

[quote]Voters get the government they deserve.

Except of course for the people who didn't vote for the government.

R127 I would only partially agree. There are over 600 MPs in the UK and communities vote either for the one they know or the one they favour. Only members of the party (anyone can join) vote for the leader.

R119 People around the world do not seem to realise that the really big issue is not the nature of the parties or the hypocrisy - although that is fuelling most of the voter anger - but the fact that bojo the clown has knowingly misled parliament and maybe interviewed under caution for a criminal offence (however minor). Pathological lying may be fine in the USA but you can't do it in the house of commons and certainly not where a police investigation is involved.

R119 is right. People stuck to the rules. They didn't have friends around for their birthdays, or intimate soirees to celebrate birthdays or anniversaries, let alone someone leaving their job.

And when a small number of people DID break the rules, they were fined.

A pensioner fined for meeting friends OUTSIDE when he went to his allotment.

As Theresa May pointed out so effectively, either Boris Johnson didn't understand the Covid laws he introduced, or he didn't think they applied to him.

[quote]Cabinet Minister quoted saying, 'He who wields the knife never wins the crown.'

Well ....

[quote]the really big issue is not the nature of the parties or the hypocrisy - although that is fuelling most of the voter anger - but the fact that bojo the clown has knowingly misled parliament and maybe interviewed under caution for a criminal offence...

Indivisible really. He knowingly misled Parliament because he knew very well the hypocrisy he'd enabled and how justifiably badly it would land among law-abiding and bereaved voters.

Like so many desperate alphas, he wanted to have his (birthday) cake and also to eat it. He told himself he could get away with it all yet again - after all, here he is still is (just about) as PM. It's worked for him, right up to the top job.

But as Starmer sharply said on Monday (to paraphrase), 'We all knew who we were getting, and where it was likely to lead. And here finally we are.' That clear sense of the great chancer, drinking in his own last-chance saloon.

R132, mate, you know what happened to your crown after you got killed?

Yes, Henry, you proved that cabinet minster wrong all over again!

Johnson is certainly getting high-quality defenders.

A couple of Scottish MPs actually think Rosie Holt is a real MP.

When you've seen the calibre of cretin in their own party it's hard to see how they could be fooled so easily.

And the repulsive Dan Wootton tried to defend Nadine Dorries by claiming people ridiculed her because she's working class. Ha!

R124 the other candidates in her constituency must be horrifying as she is batshit crazy.

Great article in the Times, reveals Carrie thinks it'd be better if he goes, he's been exploring money-making opportunities in America, his dad moaning about his son's money issues, Rees-Mogg suggested the Savile comment, an MP offered to withdraw his letter in exchange for a knighthood and more

Can't find a working Archive link, so linking to a copy and paste of the article on Reddit

[quote]One No 10 official said: “People are saying to each other: ‘Why can’t he just go?’ I’m at the point where I just wish it was over, so I can get on with the rest of my life.”

[quote] Rees-Mogg suggested the Savile comment

I wouldn't be shocked if this were true.

[quote]Rees-Mogg suggested the Savile comment

Boris had no need to take this crass advice, but follow his fellow old-Etonian he did. It's almost as if Rees-Mogg wanted to get his devoted boss into deeper trouble. What a crew.

Rees-Moog wants to be PM himself, that's no secret. If BoJo did use that Savile comment after Rees-Moog, of all people, had advised him to use it, BoJo is even dumber than I think he is.

Again, it doesn't matter how many people resign or how many MPs express dismay - if they can't fucking even get 54 letters in and then 180 to vote against him, Bojo likely will be staying. He doesn't want to leave over something like this.

Lol, Lord Ashcroft wrote a biography of Carrie Johnson (already a bit weird) and there's some good stuff in it:

-claims that Carrie would use Bojo's phone and people would recognise it because her writing style is different and because he would contradict what she would text people

-claims that Bojo's campaign team would book her taxis and tell the drivers to take the longest route possible to try to avoid her interfering in meetings

-claims that she spent the whole 6 months as an advisor to Javid trying to get a free tax-payer funded £538 gold-coloured iPad.

-claims that she got Bojo to get rid of a talented young SPAD because she was 'too attractive and intelligent'.

[quote] he's been exploring money-making opportunities in America

Excuse me, we have enough to deal with already!

The article doesn't mention money-making opportunities in America though. In fact it says: "allies say he is determined to cling on. “He’s making very clear that they’ll have to send a Panzer division to get him out of there,” said one senior adviser."

I'd think that Carrie wanting him to quit would make it more likely BUT she wants him to quit to focus on their children and I doubt he wants to do that. If the gossip is true that he makes excuses to not go to the flat to spend time with her, he's probably sick of her and won't want to spend more time with her.

He probably already has a new sidepiece.

[quote] He doesn't want to leave over something like this.

Why the fuck would his party care what he wants for himself and his own ego? Are they better off electorally with him or without him?

Could Johnson call a snap election to put this behind him?

R149 That would be crazy when the Tories have a big majority already but are doing shit in the polls. They would 100% lose a lot of MPs. No way will MPs vote for an election. The public don't want another one either.

R19 [quote] Theresa May just asked whether he ignored the rules or just didn't understand them. She seems to be enjoying this.

As she should. They (the backbenchers and frontbenchers in her own party) treated this woman appallingly when she was in office. She had a very difficult task to carry out, at a crucial time for the country and they sabotaged her at every turn. Among them were Rees-Mogg and Boris and now that they have been revealed to be the useless dirtbags that they actually are they've got their comeuppance.

Prime Minister Mark Darcy

R146, I don't know where you get the idea that Carrie " wants him to quit to look after the children"?

To the contrary, Carrie is a career woman, who before getting her claws into BoJo, had a job as a PR manager to the Tory party. And even now, works as a Communications Director to some animal conservation charity. She is power hungry and my guess is that she is the one keeping him in office.

R153 Because that's what the media is reporting.. e.g.

[quote]"Three different sources say that Carrie Johnson has grown weary of the pressure on her, their children and her husband, and has privately voiced the view that it might be preferable if he were to throw in the towel. One who knows the couple and the prime minister’s inner circle well said: “She was saying she had had enough a couple of weeks ago. She was telling friends the pressure on her was too much and she’d be happier if he left.” A friend of Carrie added: “She just wants to focus on her children.”

[quote]Lol, Lord Ashcroft wrote a biography of Carrie Johnson (already a bit weird) and there's some good stuff in it

Lord Ashcroft is a vindictive man - he was responsible for the David Cameron pig's head story after Cameron refused to give Ashcroft a cabinet job.

As for Carrie, some of the attacks on her are pure misogyny and are there to emasculate Boris Johnson. The idea that Boris Johnson was a better man when he had the mother of his 4 children Marina Wheeler QC as his wife, the woman he cheated on frequently, and is now a worse man because of Carrie's influence is really quite vile.

Carrie is the most political spouse in history and is clearly leaking thing to the press via her gay friend Henry Newman, who is occasionally quite attractive. She doesn't merit pity (stuck in the flat with 2 young kids OMG poor love) and she doesn't deserve blame for manipulating a man who can't zip up his mickey.

Boris Johnson can take responsibility for his own failings.

R154, 'the media' is also reporting this:

[quote] And those who know her say she is determined to keep Johnson in Downing Street, despite the scandals over No 10 parties – some of which she attended – and the funding of No 11 flat refurbishment, which was her project with celebrity designer Lulu Lytle.

Supposedly Johnson was planning to dump Rees Mogg in a new year reshuffle, as he's so shit at his actual govt job. I bet that all seems so long ago now.

R146 Yes it does, right there in the penultimate paragraph. Guess that was too far for you to read

[quote]If his big reset does not work, Johnson is understood to have been exploring opportunities in the United States, which would allow him to make $250,000 per speech when he leaves office. His father, Stanley, was recently overheard in the Beefsteak Club, a gentlemen’s dining club in central London, bemoaning at some length his son’s money worries.

R156 And that same article says:

[quote]Friends say she is “tremendously fun and entertaining”, with definitive views of her own. They describe her as sending volleys of WhatsApp messages one evening, falling out the next day and then being back in touch as if nothing had happened after that. Another person who knows her from Warwick university days as a theatre and art history student says she has always been the “very definition of capricious”.

Who in the US would pay ten cents to hear this cunt say anything?

The Trumpies want Trump and everyone else would either hate him or walk all over him (once they figured out who he is).

Boris has cancelled a trip to Australia to focus on staying on as PM, and he must be serious if Carrie's bestie Henry Newman has been banished from Downing Street back to work with Gove.

[quote]However, critics of Johnson’s leadership said they thought the number of letters of no confidence in the prime minister was now not far off the 54 necessary to trigger a ballot on his premiership. “It’s really hard to know, but I’m pretty sure the numbers are in the 40s, so it’s only a small surge that could take it over the line,” said one former cabinet minister. “Having said that, he may well survive the vote itself. There are people doing that calculation, saying they’ll hold off until they think he’ll lose.”

If Carrie Antoinette doesn’t like the fire, she should get out of the kitchen. I don’t recall seeing her name on the ballot at the last election. If the rumours about her texting from the PM’s phone as him is true, that is outrageous!

Also, I’m naturally biased against her due to my innate hatred for cocker spaniel ear-style hair extensions. I should maybe feel a bit sorry for her as she’s had Bojo sweatily rutting away on top of her at least twice!

[quote]I should maybe feel a bit sorry for her as she’s had Bojo sweatily rutting away on top of her at least twice!

Sympathy undeserved! The world knew Boris's storied MO, but still she wanted that A-List inside-track cock, and got it. The Heat-Kitchen equation was part of the deal. If she really thinks Boris will ever settle down to domestic quietude, I hope her contacts book includes a good divorce lawyer.

She doesn't deserve any pity, she's known to be a power-hungry fame whore.

Gotta agree with above posters, the Mail even quoted people saying that Carrie constantly asked people about the state of his marriage and then when Marina Wheeler said she had had enough and wanted a divorce when she discovered his affair with Carrie, supposedly Boris was stunned because he only considered a fling and that's why he 'settled' for Carrie. I find that account of events to be pretty credible actually.

Henry Newman is getting a lot of media attention.

R167 Newman is openly gay, in a relationship with a barrister. He is also pro-trans rights which has caused conflict with some others in government.

Who is the boyfriend? They've been together a long time

His biography doesn't make him sound like a typical right wing Brexiteer

[quote]"For the last ten years, my partner and I have lived in Hampstead. We love it. I’m from something of a mixed family: one grandmother was an Istanbul-born Greek, the other a German Jew who fled the Nazis eventually training as a doctor at the Royal Free.

[quote]I’m passionate about protecting our local area and its unique heritage. I’m a keen runner and want to fight pollution and tackle gridlocked roads, such as Fitzjohn’s Avenue and Arkwright Road.

[quote]I’ve been a persistent campaigner to restore weekly bin collections and address the rise in littering and fly-tipping. And as a victim of a moped snatching myself, I know how much we need more police.

[quote]I’m the director of a think tank, and I previously worked in the Civil Service on government efficiency and prison reform. Before that, I taught politics and history at various universities. I hope to bring some of that experience and passion for reform to Camden Council."

R169 being a Brexiteer is about not wanting to be ruled by Germany for a lot of people.. just saying. For some people, the EU is the latest way for Germany to rule over Europe, this time by stealth. It is actually the main reason why I personally voted for Brexit. I wanted our politicians to have democratic accountability instead of merely blaming/deferring to 'the EU' (nobody here can vote for Merkel or other German politicians even though they have huge and unfair control over the EU).

R170 I agree there's lots of reasons for wanting to leave the European Union. I voted to Remain because of what I saw as benefits and a safety first approach. The EU is unaccountable and anti democratic in many ways but the benefits of the single market outweigh that for me,

Britain was in a great position - we were part of the EU but over the years we had negotiated a lot of opt outs.

What is surprising about Henry Newman's support for the deal that Britain has now - it's damaging to the UK to be in the current situation. Not least in Northern Ireland.

And the idea that Germany is trying to rule by stealth is bullshit.

R171 How is it bullshit when we've seen for many years that Germany/Merkel consistently had the most power, the last say over what the EU officially chose to do?

So this is Henry Newman's boyfriend.

What a dynamic couple.

R172 data please. I think you'll find the UK had just as much power as Germany and now has absolutely none and for what end? Are you enjoying all the 'democratic accountability' you've gained while no longer having a seat at the EU table? The Conservative party don't seem particularly accountable to me.

R174 Germany always had more power over what the EU decided because they paid in the most money. And no, I would not think it good or fair if the UK had that - I think that if the EU was truly a democratic union, that small countries would have just as much say. But they don't in reality. They go along with it for now because they get money out of it.

[quote]For some people, the EU is the latest way for Germany to rule over Europe, this time by stealth. It is actually the main reason why I personally voted for Brexit.

So - if we accept your premise - you thought the way to stop Germany ruling over Europe was to remove the UK as a counterbalance and give Germany free reign? That kind of galaxy brain thinking certainly explains the second half of your post.

[quote]I think that if the EU was truly a democratic union, that small countries would have just as much say

So you think the votes of people in smaller countries should be worth more than the votes of those in larger countries? And you think that'd be truly democratic, do you?

I meant rein, of course

So Starmer had to be protected by police from a group of anti-vaxxer protestors some of whom were chanting about Savile and holding a noose - Johnson has taken us further down the Trump path

Horrible scenes of Keir Starmer and David Lammy being screamed at by a bunch of protesters attending a Piers Corbyn rally - a mixture of anti vaxxers, Covid deniers, Julian Assange supporters and general cranks screaming at Starmer about Jimmy Savile and calling him a traitor,

The Met Police have a really bad culture but I was rooting for the officer who threatened to punch one of the protesters who went for his female colleague.

This is farcical. If this doesn't make Boris apologise for his Savile comment, nothing will.

Boris apologizing for anything happening to Starmer? Dream on, mate. Boris wouldn't know how to behave like a decent person even if his life depended on it.

I can't hear the bit about Savile, just Assange. This mob would have been hounding Starmer regardless.

Weasel words from Johnson

[quote]The behaviour directed at the Leader of the Opposition tonight is absolutely disgraceful. All forms of harassment of our elected representatives are completely unacceptable. I thank the police for responding swiftly.

R182, here's a clip of the protesters shouting about Savile:

One protestor, r184.

At least two mentioned Savile, R185.

R185 You can clearly hear at least a man and a woman mention Savile, so you're obviously posting in bad faith

Sorry r187, I can't clearly hear the woman and, no, I'm not posting in bad faith. And, wow, two protesters - scandalous. This episode with Starmer is being hugely inflated, and he would have been heckled anyway.

The police wouldn't have reacted the way they did he was just being "heckled". Another bad faith response, fuck off.

Somebody tell the "hugely inflated" troll that Boris himself decried the incident (R183).

"No one was yelling about Savile!"

Actually, someone was.

"Just the one person, though lol who cares nbd."

It appears to be two people. (I listened to the vid, it IS at least 2 people)

"Just two? lol who cares they would have been heckling anyway."

You, R188, are a massive twat. Now do as R189 encourages and fuck off.

Oh fuck off yourself r191. It's an inflated incident. And, wow, at least two people shouting "Savile". The way it's being reported you'd think there were dozens and dozens of them. This mob was organised by Piers Corbyn anyway, the brother of Starmer's predecessor as Labour leader, Jeremy Corbyn.

R192, hi Boris! :-*

Fail, r193.

^ Go shag your fugly wife, Boris.

Has ugly Anscher found this thread yet and made it all about Israel because Corbyn has been mentioned? I’m about to run a search … and see!

Possible sighting at r105 but no one seems to have taken the bait so he fucked off

[quote]My behaviour directed at the Leader of the Opposition last week was absolutely disgraceful. All forms of harassment of our elected representatives are completely unacceptable. I thank the police for responding swiftly.

Fixed. Johnson is unfit to hold the office of Prime Minister. I hope the police respond as quickly with their investigation into Johnson's failure of leadership at No.10, outlined by Sue Gray.

[quote]Has ugly Anscher found this thread yet and made it all about Israel because Corbyn has been mentioned? I’m about to run a search … and see! Possible sighting at [R105] but no one seems to have taken the bait so he fucked off

I've no idea who Anscher is.

Are you denying some of Corbyn's media outriders blamed Israel for the Salisbury poisoning? There were also Corbyn supporters obsessed with the idea that it was a false flag attack and Salisbury was chosen because it's so close to the Porton Down military laboratory.

While Keir Starmer and David Lammy were heckled after leaving a defence briefing on Ukraine while Corbyn is hosting an online rally to "Stop NATO Expansion", which is Putin's motives for the imminent invasion of Ukraine.

But Corbyn!!!1! . . .

Seriously, cut it, BoJo. Your Savile remark was despicable -- pretty much like you as a person and as a politican are.

[quote]But Corbyn!!!1! . . . Seriously, cut it, BoJo. Your Savile remark was despicable -- pretty much like you as a person and as a politican are.

Do you know that Piers Corbyn is leading the protests that targeted Starmer and Lammy yesterday? He's previously "protested" clinical staff leaving a hospital, and he's "protested" outside and inside vaccination centres.

As many commentators have observed, the "protesters" aren't; repeating what Boris Johnson is alleging, Boris Johnson is repeating a conspiracy theory that started with the protestors, which comes from the far right, and has also been peddled by the far left supporters of Corbyn's more famous brother.

Piers Corbyn is a cunt. And so is Boris Johnson. Simple as that.

Some many cunts. Must be something in the tea.

But seriously, what makes y’all think any number of the successors would have been better than BoJo?

[quote]But seriously, what makes y’all think any number of the successors would have been better than BoJo?

The alternative to Boris Johnson was Jeremy Corbyn, a lifelong hardcore Brexiteer who couldn't admit to being a lifelong hardcore Brexiteer, a man who supports authoritarian regimes and was obsessed with Jews, a man whose response to any issue was "nationalise it".

It's not surprising lifelong Labour voters turned to the Conservatives for the first time, however much of a clown Johnson is.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Andrew Pierce is a repulsive gobshite.

The John Warboys case was a strange one - not least because Boris Johnson's wife Carrie was one of his victims. The decision was made NOT to prosecute further cases because of the distress caused to the victims and because Warboys had been sentenced to a public protection order which is the equivalent of a life sentence. The decision of the parole board to release him after 10 years made further prosecutions necessary.

On the Ian Tomlinson case - The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) decided not to charge Harwood, because the disagreement between the first and later pathologists meant they could not show a causal link between the death and alleged assault.[7] That position changed in 2011; after the verdict of unlawful killing, the CPS charged Harwood with manslaughter.[8] He was acquitted in 2012

The airport bomb twitter case became a highly contentious issue and remains polarising as to what you can joke about. I'm still undecided.

As for this "Then there was Starmer's bizarre decision in 2013, on advice from his senior legal adviser, not to pursue a male primary school teacher in Wales who had sent explicit sexual material to a 'confused' 16-year-old boy who later committed suicide."

The 16 year old boy (who had fathered a child) was using hook up apps to meet older men, and lied about age signing up for it. The teacher wasn't HIS teacher and the age of consent is 16 so Starmer was right that there was no criminal case to answer. The teacher was eventually disciplined by his professional body which is separate from a criminal prosecution.

That Starmer, as the head of CPS,, failed to assess the seriousness of the Savile case, points to a severe lack of leadership.

A more astute leader would have detected the potential urgency of a case involving such a high profile personality, and would have devoted his utmost attention to follow through the case, and not just delegate the case to a subordinate.

That he completely failed to do that reflects really poorly on his ability to sense crisis and danger ahead of time.

Therefore it will be extremely unwise to entrust the care of a *country* to a man so lacking in foresight, and the ability to nib any problems before they proceed to an irreversible extent.

Parole boards are stupid. They should be made to look at why the person was convicted in the first place. At present they don't have to do that, so they can easily be fooled by the person in front of them, and many psychopaths are manipulative.

[quote]That Starmer, as the head of CPS,, failed to assess the seriousness of the Savile case, points to a severe lack of leadership.

[quote]That he completely failed to do that reflects really poorly on his ability to sense crisis and danger ahead of time.

Similarly Johnson's early failure to take Covid too seriously for weeks and weeks despite clear evidence of mortal danger from abroad is adjudged to have cost hundreds of lives. It wasn't only his party house at No.10 where he failed to provide responsible leadership.

It’s really really difficult to find a leader anywhere who has foresight and vision isn’t it

Snap poll from Savanta ComRes:

69% say PM responsible for LOTO being harassed

54% 2019 Con also say this

68% say he should publicly apologise to Starmer

68% say he should withdraw comments

[quote]That Starmer, as the head of CPS,, failed to assess the seriousness of the Savile case, points to a severe lack of leadership. A more astute leader would have detected the potential urgency of a case involving such a high profile personality, and would have devoted his utmost attention to follow through the case, and not just delegate the case to a subordinate. That he completely failed to do that reflects really poorly on his ability to sense crisis and danger ahead of time. Therefore it will be extremely unwise to entrust the care of a *country* to a man so lacking in foresight, and the ability to nib any problems before they proceed to an irreversible extent.

And do you know what happened to Starmer's successor when other high profile celebrities were accused of historic sexual offences? She was accused of a witch hunt by Savile's fellow DJ Paul Gambaccini who was interviewed as part of Operation Yewtree. He ended up suing the CPS.

No one have credit to the CPS for prosecuting and getting convictions for Stuart Hall, Rolf Harris and Fred Talbot. but they did criticise the CPS for prosecuting Ken Barlow from Corrie, over multiple sexual assaults he had allegedly committed in the 60s.

[quote]69% say PM responsible for LOTO being harassed

Notable that The Telegraph and The Sun today thought that the aggressive harassing of the LOTO - which led all radio and TV broadcasts - wasn't thought front page news, unlike other responsible newspapers. Seems like they misjudged the public to protect their boy. He's back in the fold, for now.

PMQs tomorrow should be a humdinger. It's the hottest ticket in town at present. How I hope Sir Kier forensically rips Johnson apart. Again, he has all too much material to work with. He'd be a saint not to remark of Johnson's bluster that it'll be sure to appeal again to his special supporters, who gather just outside the House of Commons.

"Sir" Keir isn't able forensically to rip Johnson apart. That would involve going into detail, having facts at his fingertips and being specific. All Starmer knows is generic slogans. Which is why, despite everything, the Tories will still win the next general election.

[quote]PMQs tomorrow should be a humdinger. It's the hottest ticket in town at present. How I hope Sir Kier forensically rips Johnson apart. Again, he has all too much material to work with. He'd be a saint not to remark of Johnson's bluster that it'll be sure to appeal again to his special supporters, who gather just outside the House of Commons.

Starmer's perceived blandness and lack of charisma is the perfect anecdote to Johnson and his buffoonery. The more the public see of the quiet and serious man who can convey the nation's anger the more they are repulsed by Johnson. And the more the Tories cheer and faw faw faw the more despised they become as a party.

Starmer's uselessness will not win Labour the election. Johnson will soon be dumped and the Tories will have a new leader, against whom Starmer and Labour will appear even more useless.

Seriously, like when are Labour going to develop some actual policies? The only policies they've ever stated are a windfall tax on energy companies, without explaining how that will work, gender self-id, and erasing the word "woman" in the NHS.

The Times is reporting that Johnson's people are saying that he will not resign even if he is fined by the police for breaching COVID rules.

The letter writers appear to be holding off for some kind of decisive moment but I think everyone knows that he broke the COVID rules (no idea why the police need months to determine that - pathetic) so I am sceptical that even if he gets fined that it would change that much.

There is an official working in the Treasury called Tim Leunig. who is credited with coming up with the Furlough scheme.

Back in the 2000s when the Tories were in opposition Leunig wrote a paper on the difficulties in resolving regional disparities. It was controversial at the time and the reporting of it was highly politicised but he made some good points about how much improvement small amounts of funding will delivery when you spread it very thinly.

Despite the report being 14 years old it's been dragged up again to try and discredit Rishi Sunak. Leunig has no right to reply but lots of civil service types were out defending him last night saying his report had been mispresented years ago and was unfair to do it again.

Now who would want to discredit Sunak? Hard to think.

The Mirror's story included a rant from Dan Carden, the alcoholic gay MP from Liverpool who was accused of singing "hey Jews" to the tune of "Hey Jude" and is one of the main beneficiaries from the corrupt practices overseen by The Godfather Len McCluskey. Liverpool is a cesspit of corruption and the police are involved.

Johnson's mini-reshuffle flexes the power he still of course wields while he shamelessly clings on. This has been combined with talk about a further - implicitly deeper - reshuffle in the summer, to reboot for the pre-election period.

And thus ambitious MPs at all levels will make their calculations of calibrated support, and of letters of no confidence to send or unsend. The dead man walking could yet survive, pending what more Cummings chooses to share, and when.

R220 That is why it's so hard to unseat a sitting PM, because I believe that about one third of Tory MPs owe their ministerial jobs to him. Even Theresa May who was totally useless (she couldn't resolve Brexit one way or the other, it was just limbo) won a confidence vote.

"PMQs tomorrow should be a humdinger. It's the hottest ticket in town at present. How I hope Sir Kier forensically rips Johnson apart." - Yet again, the useless Starmer gave Bozo the chance to shine at PMQs.

That was Boris shining, was it?

Considering the mess he's in, r223 the fact that Bozo pulled off a relatively ok performance and Starmer achieved nothing, then, yeah, shined could be applied to Bozo. Do you think Starmer ripped Johnson apart?

I love how the bad faith poster constantly has to backtrack with his bullshit when called on it. Apparently "relatively okay" (if you say so) is now a "shining" performance.

[quote]Yet again, the useless Starmer gave Bozo the chance to shine at PMQs.

Do you honestly find Boris Johnson's appearance at PMQs appealing?

Keir Starmer asked questions about the economy, fuel prices and how people will pay their bills. The loan shark reference to Rishi Sunak was excellent. Johnson just waffled and shouted and waved his arms around. He just can't answer questions and today he ended up ranting about the vaccine programme.

I've been watching PMQs since my teens. The quality of the leader of the opposition at PMQs has ranged from excellent - Smith, Blair, Hague, Howard and Starmer (4 barristers, 3 of them QCs, and Blair would have been a QC if he hadn't become an MP at the age of 30) - to middling - Cameron- to appalling - Corbyn, Duncan Smith and Miliband.

In that time Blair and Cameron did well answering PMQs and Major, Brown and May held their own with dignity. Boris Johnson seems to think he's still facing someone as piss poor as Corbyn. Starmer regularly humiliates him.

I found this video of Blair vs Howard from 2004ish. Blair defending 7 years of Labour government, Michael Howard had been in the Tory cabinet for 7 years of government.

But r226, we were told that Starmer was going to pull Bozo apart. All useless Starmer did was give Bozo yet another opportunity to put on a show. Apparently any questioning of the great Starmer is "bad faith". Yes, it's quite obvious that Labour has put a lot of work into coming up with a moniker for Sunak because they're worried that he will succeed Bozo as prime minister, so they've devised a superficial slogan for him, which will wear out quickly.

At some point, however, we are going to need to hear Labour's own policies on the economy, fuel prices and how people will pay their bills.

[quote] All useless Starmer did was give Bozo yet another opportunity to put on a show. Apparently any questioning of the great Starmer is "bad faith".

I get that you don't like Keir Starmer - unsure if you don't like him because you're a Tory or an embittered Corbynite - but do you honestly think Boris Johnson came across well at PMQs?

[quote] useless Starmer

Please come up with something new, that "useless Starmer" thing is getting boring . . .

[quote]Apparently any questioning of the great Starmer is "bad faith"

No, what's bad faith is describing Johnson's performance today as shining, and then immediately admitting you didn't actually mean shining. You just make stuff up with no care for what words actually mean - rather like Johnson.

Johnson always looks like he's on meth at PMQs.

[quote]Yet again, the useless Starmer gave Bozo the chance to shine at PMQs.

Starmer is so useless that Johnson recently had to reach for that base Savile smear. A really desperate bit of Trumpian whataboutism, which only showed how deep Starmer had hit home. A remark deprecated by The Speaker, The Chancellor, The Health Secretary, and his Chief Policy Aide, who resigned. Hardly evidence of Johnson 'shining.'

But, r232, that's just Bozo and the kind of thing he says. It's a normal thing for him to say, it's not an act of desperation. Of course those in the Tory party who are ambitious will denounce it.

In any case, Bozo's current troubles are entirely of his own making. They are nothing to do with an effective opposition that looks like a government in waiting. Britain does not have that and so the Tories will win the next general election.

[quote]But, r232, that's just Bozo and the kind of thing he says. It's a normal thing for him to say, it's not an act of desperation. Of course those in the Tory party who are ambitious will denounce it. In any case, Bozo's current troubles are entirely of his own making. They are nothing to do with an effective opposition that looks like a government in waiting. Britain does not have that and so the Tories will win the next general election.

Parroting a far right conspiracy theory about the Leader Of The Opposition is "a normal thing for the Prime Minister to say".

And only ambitious people, rather than decent people, will denounce it?

Can I ask you again - are you pro Johnson, anti Starmer or both? It's almost impossible to differentiate between the far right and far left.

[quote]Labour has put a lot of work into coming up with a moniker for Sunak because they're worried that he will succeed Bozo as prime minister, so they've devised a superficial slogan for him

As Johnson continually calls Starmer 'Captain Hindsight', a would-be slur which has never caught on, yet the PM repeats like an unfunny uncle with early dementia.

The Tories branding Keir Starmer "Captain Hindsight" isn't a would be slur - it's a valid point on his response to multiple issues. It's not an especially effective one but it's not a slur.

The Tories are also within their rights to bring up Starmer's support for Corbyn to become PM, how he called Corbyn his friend when he was running to replace him as leader, and then how he ditched him as soon as the EHRC report came out and Corbyn refused to apologise. The last two points are also used by the far left to attack Starmer.

But making accusations that Starmer protected paedophiles is a fucking disgrace.

I'm an alienated Labour voter, r234. I also believe Labour will lose the next general election. Even if they do somehow manage to win, they will have a troubled government which will lose easily to the Tories again in the general election after that and we'll have another 15 years of Tory rule.

Do I actually have to be pro- or anti-? Can't I just have a preference? (In this case, a preference for neither).

You also have to remember that Starmer and Labour's current poll lead is due solely to the implosion of Boris Johnson, not because of Labour's own appeal. In the past two years - which have also been very difficult years for the government - there have been numerous occasions where Bozo was being completely mad and Starmer and Labour could have pulled ahead, but they never did. Labour are basically only ahead in the polls right now because Dominic Cummings has chosen to get revenge on Johnson with this drip-drip of Partygate photo leaks.

As an example of how Labour can't get it together, Labour's conference at the end of last year - which was meant to project Starmer as a prime minister in waiting and a supposed raft of centrist Labour policies - benefitted them in no way at all, even though conferences usually give a party a bump. Starmer was a boring fart and no single coherent policy was presented - even though Starmer supposedly presented Labour's new programme.

Replace Johnson with the presentable and articulate Sunak and Labour will be in real trouble. "Loan shark Sunak" won't cut it, especially because people know that the economy is going to be tight after Covid and we need to pay back what was borrowed (regardless of whether you agree with that assessment or not, that is how many will see it). Labour need to present their own economic policy, but are completely incapable of doing so.

So, yes, the subject of this thread is correct - the UK is telling BoJo that it's time to go - but they're not telling the Tories that it's time for them to go.

R238 cries into his pillow wanting Jeremy back.

R238 your summary is correct that any switch to Labour is a rejection of the current Tory leadership more than any appeal Labour provides. Labour have had multiple opportunities since Brexit to be in power, and they just don’t have the trust of centre electorate. I like Keir Starmer well enough, but he hasn’t vanquished Momentum, and as long as they have any influence, I don’t see Labour making any lasting traction. They’ll be in and out.

[quote]Labour have had multiple opportunities since Brexit to be in power

This doesn't make ANY sense?

The theme of the 2019 election was GET BREXIT DONE. What are these "multiple opportunities to be in power" of which you speak?

[quote]but he hasn’t vanquished Momentum,

Jeremy Corbyn is gone and won't be standing in the next election as a Labour MP. Unite are threatening to cut their ties with Labour, something Starmer would relish. Momentum can barely get 100 likes for their tweets these days and they're losing their influence in Labour.

It's happening slowly but surely.

Not at all, r239. I'm more of a centrist who wants Labour to have credible policies. Trying to sound "upright" and "respectable" doesn't achieve that and nor does it mean that the influence of Corbyn has been vanquished from the party. I just don't think Labour understand (or care about) people's daily realities - they're certainly not putting forward any policies to deal with them. Which is why I believe that the Tories will win the next general election.

"It's happening slowly but surely" - And this attitude is why Labour almost never win general elections.

@241 there have been two general elections since Brexit. Multiple means more than one last I checked. If the public was as pro-Labour and pro-Remain as much as Labour professed, shouldn’t they have won?

As long as Angela Rayner sits behind Keir, it’s only going to seen as an extension of Jeremy Corbyn. Keir may be more centrist but not much of the leadership.

I agree with the Centre wins the power, and Labour chooses to wilfully ignorant when it comes to this. I come into daily contact with ‘Islington Bubble’ types as well as many small business owners and independent tradespeople. They exist in completely different worldviews.

Yeah, it's not the people you come into contact with who are in a bubble.

[quote] But, [R232], that's just Bozo and the kind of thing he says. It's a normal thing for him to say, it's not an act of desperation.

Really?

And you think that's ok?

Wow.

Just wow.

No wonder the UK is in the desperate state it is these days.

“If the public was as pro-Labour and pro-Remain as much as Labour professed, shouldn’t they have won?”

Is that how it works across the pond? Is the political make-up always reflected by the votes or so some people not vote over there because they are busy working and raising a family.

Or votes split to other parties, because of the FPTP voting system.

[quote]@241 there have been two general elections since Brexit.

You mean 2 elections since the 2016 referendum?

Labour = Remain was never a thing. Jeremy Corbyn was a lifelong Brexiteer who hated the EU and everything it stood for. Labour did better in the 2017 election because no one thought they had a chance of winning and they became the protest vote, despite no one thinking Corbyn was a credible leader.

By 2019 Corbyn's pro Russia response to Salisbury attack and his obsession with Jews was a matter of public record. And his Brexit stance which was, if I remember, he would negotiate a new Brexit deal, then his government would campaign to reject the deal and stay in the EU while Corbyn remained neutral had a huge hole in it - who would lead the campaign for the public to support Jeremy Corbyn's deal?

Starmer's approach is now that we're out of the EU, we have to make it work, and that will mean closer alliances with the EU to solve the NI problem, which will mean a customs union of sorts and a hotchpotch of single market access where freedom of movement is not a thing.

CRESSIDA DICK HAS RESIGNED.

Good. She was so useless. I'm not holding my breath for someone better to be appointed though. Sigh.

[quote]Yeah, it's not the people you come into contact with who are in a bubble.

This is such a typical - and typically useless - response to the other poster, though. I've noticed this split in leftie circles building and hardening over the past few years, the "I loathe Brexit and the Tories but Labour has been fucking woeful for a long time now" vs "it's all everyone else's fault, excuses, excuses, Labour is fine as they are you just need to believe harder and also you probably secretly love Boris" camps. I am firmly, with the other poster, in the former.

The fact that Labour has been unable to present a viable alternative to the absolute fuckery of Brexit and the Cons over the past few years is a disgrace, but the fact that there are so many IN the Lavour party who seem weirdly unaware of how shit they continue to be is extremely frustrating. Of all the times the UK needed a credible, strong voice coming from the left...

USELESS!!!11!!

... seriously, it's getting annoying. Try another word for a change.

Keir Starmer is giving me Neil Kinnock vibes from a history perspective (if you believe that history repeats itself). In other words he's here to drag Labour back to somewhat sanity from the far leftist idiocy that the general public will never vote for.

After Nadine Dorries's best efforts to become the UK's most famous human car crash of a politician, Diane Abbott is BACK BABY, drunk tweeting to defend her beloved Jeremy.

In efforts to trash Keir Starmer's stance on Ukraine she accused him of supporting the Iraq War when he was a notable critic of it and wrote articles opposing it on legal ground.

I forgot to watch Jeremy & Diane's online Stop The War meeting where they discuss Evil NATO's plans to force Russia into invading Ukraine and creating a humanitarian disaster.

The part of the Labour party that goes on anti-NATO rants and sincerely answers "no" when asked if they would, under any circumstance, use nukes, is one reason they're difficult to take seriously. They REALLY need to root that faction out.

R250 If you think that poster's concerns were real, you're an idiot, proven by the fact you have to make up a strawman

Truss making a fool of herself

[quote]Lavrov said, "Do you recognize Russia's sovereignty over Rostov and Voronezh oblasts?". Truss said the UK would "never" do so – before the ambassador told her they're not in Ukraine

Yes, that's cringe but christ, it does highlight the bad will between them. Lavrov, if he was genuinely interested in diplomacy wouldn't be trying to trick her into saying something stupid - I am sure that Lavrov doesn't know half the provinces in the UK. And Truss also straight away assumed ill intention.

If only those in the South had listened when we repeatedly said that Corbyn was a vote loser. Labour voters are against the EEC/EU because it is a capitalist entity. This is why the "gang of 4" split the party and went off to be the Dems. Tories took us into the EEC ( much against the wishes of the French). People waited decades until Cameron tried to pull a fast one by giving us a referendum. It's done under a tory government, but leaving the EU is a labour policy and always has been. Corbyn is a posh boy and he never gave a shit about the deprived areas of the UK, he is stuck in student politics and his support of Palestine, to the extent that he helped to blur the lines between government of Israel and regular people who are jewish.

Starmer might just get voters back. I live where we have a decent ( and he is jewish) Labour MP. Speaking to people generally though, the percieved takeover of the party by the London Elite has really screwed us.

Starmer is DOA.

Labour is still obsessed with trannies, alienating voters.

r260, well that is what I mean. Get voters back by giving us hope really. That is what the Tory liars did at the elections when Cameron won and when Boris won. They lied and said they would invest in the North. They have done fuck all, now Boris is in crisis he is back to promising us the world. I wish people didn't fall for it but they do.

Tories were horribly anti semitic against Ed Milliband.

[quote]Keir Starmer is giving me Neil Kinnock vibes

[quote]In other words he's here to drag Labour back to somewhat sanity from the far leftist idiocy

Starmer's professional intelligence is at a useful remove from Kinnock's earnest windbaggery. (Thatcher was lucky to face such a second-rate LOTO.)

Yes Kinnock made that unforgettable speech denouncing Liverpool Militants, and all they represented; but he also likely threw away a strong general election chance by behaving foolishly at a huge pre-election rally - in a way Starmer never could or would.

Like him or not Starmer's bearing and CV has a much better chance of winning wavering Middle England voters than Kinnock and certainly Corbyn could ever have managed.

[quote]Truss making a fool of herself

[quote]Yes, that's cringe but christ, it does highlight the bad will between them. Lavrov, if he was genuinely interested in diplomacy wouldn't be trying to trick her into saying something stupid - I am sure that Lavrov doesn't know half the provinces in the UK. And Truss also straight away assumed ill intention.

So many UK journalists and general UK Government critics were parroting Kremlin lines yesterday to attack Truss. It didn't occur to them that Lavrov would he hostile and derogatory towards anyone who representing the UK. So many pro Europeans willing to overlook Russia launching a chemical attack in Britain 4 years ago which left a woman dead and multiple people in hospital with a medical condition they will never cover from.

LIZ TRUSS TRIED TO CHANNEL THATCHER IN MOSCOW BUT LAVROV CLAPPED BACK - SLAY QUEEN LAVROV!!!

The Russians are genuinely interested in diplomacy r257 (this whole Ukraine thing is about them trying to get the US and Europeans around the negotiating table) and they've never said anything comparable to other visiting westerners. Truss wasn't interested in diplomacy. She just wanted to go to Russia and grandstand for a domestic UK audience and she clearly has very little grasp of the issues she was pontificating about. Why should the Russians take her seriously? In any case, the Russians don't care about the UK and don't think we have any influence or leverage in either the Ukraine issue or European security. They will talk seriously only with the US, France and Germany, maybe some EU and Nato officials.

The UK already made a fool of itself with the fabricated "intelligence revelations", which even the Ukrainians think are nonsense.

R265 You must be employed by the Russian troll factory in St Petersburg. No-one really believes that the Russians are genuinely interested in diplomacy. All they do is troll everyone.

"@Billbrowder

The worse the chemistry, the better. It means that Britain’s tough talk on sanctioning oligarchs is having an impact. I’d be disappointed if the meeting between @trussliz and Lavrov had gone well."

R266, anyone with a brain can see that the Russians' only interest is to get the US, EU Europeans and Nato around various negotiating tables to agree on the indivisibility of security principle in Europe and to arrange an agreement with Ukraine that gives them a certain advantage over the country. They have absolutely no interest in invading Ukraine, which would benefit them in no way. Even the Ukrainians are unconvinced that there will be an invasion, as can be seen in their disagreements with the US and their requests to the US to tone down the war rhetoric because it's damaging their country.

Regardless of all that, it's quite clear that the UK is irrelevant in all this and Truss is an embarrassment who simply exemplifies a certain kind of arrogant mindset that has led to a negative image of the UK around the world.

Here's an alternative perspective for you r266, from someone who actually knows about the region:

[quote]Therefore, the amassing of troops along the Russia-Ukraine border is not targeting Kyiv, but the West. Moscow wants to force Western countries to finally sit down for negotiations on issues of European security. And this strategy seems to be working. Since 1991, this is the first time the West has engaged seriously with Russia to discuss European security.

R268, R269 Hope the St Pete's cubicle pays you well. I can assure that not many people believe Russia's bullshit. All they do is troll and spread disinformation.

Oh dear for you, r270, here's the UK Defence Secretary, Ben Wallace, telling a press conference today, after his meeting with his Russian counterpart, Sergei Shoigu, that Shoigu assured him that Russia was not going to invade. Wallace even acknowledges Russia's concerns about Nato and supports the French-German initiative to resolve the situation between Ukraine and Russia. Poor Wallace also had to mop up the mess Truss left behind by expressing how grateful he is to Shoigu.

[quote]Defence secretary had 'constructive and frank discussion' with Russian counterpart

[quote]Speaking from the British embassy in Moscow, Defence Secretary Ben Wallace says he is "grateful" his counterpart Sergei Shoigu had agreed to meet.

[quote]The pair had a "constructive and frank discussion" and had discussed Russia's draft treaty that was offered up to NATO, he says.

[quote]They also had agreed on the importance of the Minsk agreement being implemented.

[quote]Mr Wallace says he was given "assurances" by the minister that Russia would not invade Ukraine.

[quote]He says the pair had also discussed other subjects such as terrorism and "confidence-building" to address "perceptions that NATO is more than defensive".

Just so you know, if someone has a different opinion from you and expresses it, that doesn't mean they're "spreading misinformation". And you must be 5 years old if you think "more people agree with me than with you so I'm right and you're not!" is an argument.

Whenever I complain about Priti Patel being awful I will remind myself what the alternative is.

[quote] and to arrange an agreement with Ukraine that gives them a certain advantage over the country

Aha.

In other news, Wilfrid Johnson overhead screaming to his nanny:

No Dadda Party! No Dadda Party!

I'm a Liberal I am.

Didn’t Ukraine give up it’s nuclear weapons in exchange to be left alone?

Why isn’t that discussed? They keep getting tricked. Enough is enough.

Why are the traitors in the labour not putting the blame where it belongs? Are they on the take?

This stinks to high heaven.

Ukraine didn't have nuclear weapons, r276, the Soviet Union did. Ukraine is not a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council, so cannot have nuclear weapons.

And the west will give them that, r273, because of the Russian population in the border areas with Russia. It will be something like "the central government of Ukraine will consult with all the autonomous regions of the country prior to submitting an application for EU or Nato membership". This is why Ukraine is better off without those areas that have a mostly Russian population, they should just let Russia have them otherwise they will never escape Russia's grip. I know Ukrainians who agree with that.

That was exactly the argument that led to the violent ethnic cleansing of 18 million Germans from what is now Poland, Russia and the Czech Republic after WWII, r279 -- ithe difference is that Russia hasn't been defeated and won't permit that to happen to the Russians in eastern Ukraine.

I thought R279 was advocating Ukraine's ceding its Russian-majority areas to Russia, not "cleansing" the Russians from them.

R278 When did Israel, India, Pakistan and North Korea become permanent members of the Security Council then?

And after the fall of the Soviet Union, Ukraine did indeed have a huge stockpile of nuclear weapons.

R257 Thing is he wasn't trying to trick her. Truss was banging out about how Russia doesn't have a right to bring so many troops so close to the border. Lavrov countered that Russia had the right to move troops wherever it wanted to within Russia - and it was then that he sarcastically asked if Truss's objections meant she didn't recognise sovereignty over Roston and Voronezh. She just blundered into it.

R264 Repeating the facts isn't "parroting Kremlin lines". Truss herself admitted she made a mistake. But the fact you need to resort to such a stupid comment to defend her shows how fucking useless she is.

[quote]...the continued eastward expansion of NATO...

What the fuck is Diane Abbott talking about? This wing of the Labour party has spent the last 5+ years smacking me in the face, farting in my general direction and yelling ARE YOU SURE?! ARE YOU? HUH?!? every time I swear I'll never vote Tory. Which I won't. But goddamn.

I am referring to the video at R272.

Ukraine Gave Up a Giant Nuclear Arsenal 30 Years Ago. Today There Are Regrets.

Ukraine had a deal.

They are going to keep getting tricked over and over into conceding their democracy.

I hope they fight like hell.

"@GeoffRBennett·2hNEWS:

The U.S. believes Putin has decided to invade Ukraine and communicated those plans to the Russian military, three officials tell @nickschifrin. Two admin officials say they expect the invasion to begin next week—echoing what Secretary of State Blinken has said."

[quote][R264] Repeating the facts isn't "parroting Kremlin lines". Truss herself admitted she made a mistake. But the fact you need to resort to such a stupid comment to defend her shows how fucking useless she is.

Many British journalists and commentators, all anti Brexit and anti Conservative, were spinning the Kremlin lines about the meeting, repeating briefings made my Kremlin controlled media on how badly it went, in particular the comment about talking to a deaf/mute person, how poor relations were between the UK and Russia BECAUSE OF LIZ TRUSS.

I get that she's dreadful, there are 100 MPs I'd rather have there instead of her, but 1. Russia would have been hostile to any woman who turned up, be it the grotesque pantomime dame Emily Thornberry or the more serious minded Lisa Nandy. 2. The journalists pushing the line about diplomatic relations at an all time low were apportioning blame to Liz Truss, not the fact that Russia launched a chemical weapon attack in the UK 4 years ago which resulted in the death of a woman called Dawn Sturgess.

Anyway, now the dust has settled a little, there's analysis that one of the reasons Russia were so hostile to Truss was because of the enhanced sanctions introduced today. The UK government has been to slow to implement controls on dirty Russian money in London. The only positive of that is that if/when the UK act, Russia will be hit bigly.

Netherlands, Japan, South Korea and several other countries are advising their citizens to leave Ukraine immediately. Something is definitely up.

Was it ever established if Katrin Quinol was indeed a proud black trans woman of colour? That was the rumour when I was at school, but people also thought Bea Arthur was really a man.

He will do it the second the olympics closes.

Agreed, R292, he's waiting for the Winter Olympics to end. After that - boom.

[quote]Many British journalists and commentators, all anti Brexit and anti Conservative, were spinning the Kremlin lines about the meeting, repeating briefings made my Kremlin controlled media on how badly it went, in particular the comment about talking to a deaf/mute person, how poor relations were between the UK and Russia BECAUSE OF LIZ TRUSS.

They were reporting what was said at the press conference. I know you Tories think anything but praise for everything Tories do is some kind of propaganda, but they were reporting facts, not Kremlin lines.

[quote]The journalists pushing the line about diplomatic relations at an all time low were apportioning blame to Liz Truss, not the fact that Russia launched a chemical weapon attack in the UK 4 years ago which resulted in the death of a woman called Dawn Sturgess.

Your own points contradict themselves. The Salisbury poisonings were four years ago, and yet it's only recently that diplomatic relations have collapsed. And Truss as foreign sec is the only thing that's changed.

R294 Bullshit, you don't get to blame this on Truss. Putin is a menace and has been pushing the boundaries for years.

R295 Yes, I do, given her entire job is diplomacy, and she was more concerned about looking like Thatcher than being on top of her brief. The fact that Putin is a menace is exactly the reason she should've focussed on the briefings and less on picking out a hat. And the fact this has been happening over years, again, does that eradicate the fact that the worst levels have been reached under Truss. Under Johnson our country is being looked at as a joke, it's not helped when amateur hour reigns in diplomatic meetings.

They should just let Ben Wallace take the lead on it.

[quote] Carrie Johnson: puppet master of Downing Street – or easy target?

R156 You have to distrust a newspaper which gives us a question as its headline.

Responsible newspapers provides facts.

While irresponsible gossip-mongers (like Datalounge) and propagandists (like The Guardian) provide speculation.

R296 No diplomacy can stop Putin. He just keeps doing it. And if you mean the kind of diplomacy that virtually hands control of Ukraine over to him, that misses the point.

R298 Ah look, yet another strawman you've made up

R297 What a stupid thing to say

Shouldn’t the people WITH ALL THE TANKS LINED UP TO START A WAR be blamed for this?

Now we are blaming the press secretary for the military buildup? That’s quite a stretch.

R299 It's not a strawman. Look at all of the ugly shit he's been doing for years, from internet trolling designed to divide and destabilise other countries to blatant poisonings on foreign soil, to invading Georgia, annexing Crimea..

R301 Quite a smooth-brained response right there. Russia is always looking for reasons to dismiss diplomacy, and Truss handed them exactly what they wanted.

R302 Don't play innocent, the strawman is suggesting I support Russia invading Ukraine just because I don't share your views about Truss. Pathetic.

R303 You're such a moron. Putin is showing you exactly what and who he is and you really think Liz Truss or anyone else can stop him? No, his actions say everything. Including all those tanks at the border. He has invaded twice before - Georgia and Crimea - he'll do it again.

R300 What is 'stupid' about R297

What in particular?

R304 Jesus Christ, you're actually addicted to strawmen aren't you? Where did I say Truss could stop Putin? Nowhere. You're just making up yet more shit.

What I did say is Truss behaved incompetently and played right into Russian hands. Someone upthread said correctly Russians use diplomacy to troll - and all Truss managed to do was help them out with that by basically handing them a meme, and a reason to dismiss calls for further talks. She saw this as a photo op to look like Thatcher and didn't give a single shit about what could come as a result of her meeting.

R305 Everything. It's perfectly possible to provide the facts and then leave the interpretation up to the reader. What you're admitting is you're too simple to handle the thinking for yourself, so need someone to tell you what to think.

There are two sides people can take in the Russia Ukraine crisis

1. Stand with Ukraine and its allies

2. Stand with Putin and blame NATO, Liz Truss, Joe Biden, Hunter Biden whoever for provoking him into invading another country.

Weird fact - did you know that Russia previously invaded Georgia and Crimea during an Olympics?

Russian diplomats have been leaving Ukraine too now. If this is a bluff, it's a very elaborate one.

We are getting the politicians we deserve.

Israel, India, Pakistan and North Korea are not meant to have nuclear weapons, r282, it's a violation of international law. Are you suggesting that Ukraine should have kept violated international law and kept the Soviet Union's nuclear weapons, and that Nato/the US/Europe should have accepted this? And how would that have led to a reduction in warheads, which is what the US and Russia were aiming to achieve at the time.

[quote]Meanwhile, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy slammed the latest US claims that the Kremlin is planning an invasion as soon as early next week, saying that they are "causing panic and not helping".

[quote]"Currently, the best friend of our enemies is panic in our country. And all this information only causes panic and does not help us," Zelenskyy said during a trip to the provinces.

[Quote]A review of the government’s official account on the photo-sharing platform Flickr reveals that since the day she took up the post, more than 700 pictures have been uploaded featuring Truss – an average of more than four-and-a-half a day, or about one photograph for every five hours in the job.

This is embarrassing. Is she a failed/frustrated model? Those cheekbones.

A politician using social media to promote themselves? How déclassé!

The thing that sucks about too many UK politicians lately - Cameron to Boris to Truss to Sunak - is that they all just want to be PM for the sake of being PM. Not because they actually have good ideas or genuinely want to improve the country for people.

R310 I'm suggesting you should do research and not just pretend things are true when they aren't.

R307 What utter stupidity. It's perfectly possible to think Truss is a fucking idiot and made an embarrassment out of herself without supporting Putin, you fool.

BoJo needs to pull a Hail Mary and save the Ukraine from impending doom. That will rally the troops.

This is his ticket out of this mess.

[quote]BoJo needs to pull a Hail Mary

[quote]This is his ticket out of this mess

I just wish the first image that came to mind on reading the above wasn't a bull in a china shop.

[quote] [R307] What utter stupidity. It's perfectly possible to think Truss is a fucking idiot and made an embarrassment out of herself without supporting Putin, you fool.

Yes, that’s possible. It’s also possible, as some people are doing, to try and shift blame for Russia’s actions to Truss or Johnson when their mind has been made up to invade.

And it’s not just Ukraine they’re coming for.

Is he going or not?

R321 It's less likely now because the longer the letter writers hold off, the more the heat about this simmers down. When/if he gets fined for being at the parties it will be like 'Captain Obvious, everyone knows that already' - I don't see how it will meaningfully change much. A bad set of council elections, maybe, but usually they are bad for the sitting government.

Boris doesn't have sufficient shame to resign. IMO the best hope is for another new and stupid scandal about something else to tip things for the Tory party (180 is needed to vote him out, quite a high bar).

R320 Nobody's doing that though, that's just bullshit made up by people trying to defend Truss. Again, it's perfectly possible to think Truss is a low point in British diplomacy (a hell of a feat given Johnson's time as FS) and blame Putin for war-mongering.

R323 Jesus, you're so harsh. Lavrov caught her out and she made a stupid mistake. If Russia was genuine they would have understood. They are not genuine though.

R324 Oh yes, so harsh to expect a foreign secretary to have a basic grasp of the geography of the area she's talking about when representing this country on the eve of war.

But hey she had more important things to do, like picking out a hat.

love to think of R325 being dropped as foreign sec and expected to know all the intricacies of every country fairly straight away. He is a fucktard who likes to think that he'd have done better but he probably wouldn't, especially against hostiles like Russia who want to purposefully catch you out.

R326 Except they aren't intricacies. The two oblasts Lavrov mentioned are the ones where Russia is staging troops. That should be a detail that a FS, going to meet her Russian counterpart over that very issue, should know.

And again, he wasn't trying to catch her out. He was being sarcastic and Truss was too fucking stupid to realise.

The tolerance of Tories for staggering incompetence is clearly limitless.

R327 You are a piece of total shit. We all know it. And no, I do not believe that YOU would have done much better.

R328 Oh look, another strawman from you. I never said I would do better, did I? That's yet another thing you've made up in your ridiculous little head.

And yes, only total shit's expect ministers to do their jobs competently. That's certainly a sane and logical viewpoint.

R329 We still all know that you're a piece of shit.

Skwawkbox got all upset over a photo they claimed proved Starmer was bringing back the New Labour branding. It had to be pointed out to them that it was actually a set built for the next season of The Crown. They backtracked with a 'you could believe it' response

[quote]Update: some have suggested this may be a set for a new series of The Crown. Starmer is of course still a Blair tribute act, making it all too easy to believe the new branding would be as above, but apologies for the honest error.

Skwawkbox are so embarrassing.

[quote][R320] Nobody's doing that though, that's just bullshit made up by people trying to defend Truss.

There are lots of people blaming Boris Johnson and Liz Truss's lack of competence for what is going to happen in Ukraine. If you refuse to acknowledge it then so be it.

The Corbynites are going mental today.

There's a story that Corbyn won't be allowed to stand in Islington North as he's currently suspended from the parliamentary Labour Party because of his comments after the EHRC report which he refused to apologise for.

These are some of the absolute cranks

[quote]Just about to tweet a prediction as to what Labour will do in Islington North and decided - in case I have got it wrong, because I don't want to give them any ideas - I will screenshot it instead and save it for posterity. Time stamp was 16.25 today.

[quote]It's pretty clear that the Labour right are going to run another fake election campaign at GE, manufacturing a showdown with Jam Man & "Momentum thugs" in Islington North in order to finally purge the Labour party of all democracy and remnants of socialism. Worse than Tories.

[quote]Keir Starmer showing support for Jeremy Corbyn in Islington North. By having a late night showing of Schindler's List at the ODEON Islington, followed with a talk by Jonathan Freedland and Margaret Hodge to the background music of Springtime for Hitler.

[quote]Maybe we need a crowdfund for the re-election of Jeremy Corbyn in Islington North? Mr Corbyn’s campaign funds might be capped by the Electoral Commission but that doesn’t stop us clubbing together to fund a guerrilla campaign run independently of Mr Corbyn’s.

Absolutely fucking mental people.

[quote]love to think of [R325] being dropped as foreign sec and expected to know all the intricacies of every country fairly straight away.

If it means anything, I'm an American and I knew Rostov is in Russia. You know, the birthplace of Gorky, Pushkin, Chekov and prominent Soviet dissedent and political prisoner Alexander Solzhenitsyn.

Nope, theoretically, well-read people should be in positions like Foreign Secretary. It's the same, typical erosion of standards that accompanies right wing governance the world over. Case in point -- the average Trump cabinet secretary typified by Betsy De Vos and Rick Perry. She, the phenomenally stupid Education Secretary, who worked doggedly to erode educational standards. He, the equally stupid Energy Secretary who had once proposed to eliminate the Dept of Energy, despite not knowing its primary function (protecting or nuclear stockpile), thinking it was a lobbying entity for the oil and natural gas industries to get favorable treatment during foreign negotiations.

Competence and preparation should be the hallmarks of a foreign visit on the eve of war, not photo ops.

It's really not expecting too much for a Foreign Secretary to be more on top of her brief. It's a major department of state with alpha minds in depth in support. There's no way Truss's role model Thatcher would have gone into such negotiations - with the Russians, mind you - without being totally prepared. It's pathetic when ambition and photo opportunities aren't backed up with enough intelligence. Truss isn't ready for prime time.

^protecting OUR nuclear stockpile at r335

Did Truss get into Oxford on her own merits or did Tory party membership zap her brain?

R333 Link to them then. Fuck off with the Trumpy "lots of people are saying". Prove it.

R334 Doubling down on the anti-semitism and proposing breaking electoral law. And they wonder why people didn't want to vote for them.

I do wonder what would happen if these people ever actually met the working class they claim to love.

Cringe at the stupid American at R335 who equates Truss with Trump, Betsy de Vos and co. Don't get a job as a diplomat will ya luv? The irony!

The real cringe is the poster who thinks Truss is competent.

What is Britain doing about the 9 million Britishers suffering with Loneliness?

R343 PR bollocks, same with 'levelling up', making housing affordable ('Help to Buy' only made it more expensive) and so many other promises that are really only about fooling voters who are too busy or not interested enough to pay close attention.

I think the old branding was “new Labour new Britain.”

[quote]The real cringe is the poster who thinks Truss is competent.

There isn't a single comment in this thread from anyone who thinks Truss is competent.

What I have seen is people making the case that Truss's lack of competence is largely irrelevant for what Russia is planning to do in Ukraine and by default Europe.

The most skilled well briefed diplomat would be treated the same by Lavrov because that is who Lavrov is.

[quote]What I have seen is people making the case that Truss's lack of competence is largely irrelevant for what Russia is planning to do in Ukraine and by default Europe.

Well that's a supremely idiotic case. It's not like Truss is only foreign secretary when dealing with Lavrov. The idiot is representing our country all over the world. And do you really think other countries didn't hear about her idiocy?

The utter farce of watching you people try to defend her. From 'attacking Truss is taking the Kremlin line' to 'you're a shit for expecting competence in ministers' to 'people are saying she could've stopped this' (still no links to these people saying that, I notice) to now 'it doesn't matter because it was Lavrov'. What's going to be next?

[quote]The most skilled well briefed diplomat would be treated the same by Lavrov because that is who Lavrov is.

Except a skilled and well-briefed diplomat wouldn't have gifted Lavrov such a stunning blunder.

What research is that, r315? According to international law only the five permanent members of the UN Security Council are permitted to have nuclear weapons, namely the US, Russia, France, China and the UK. Otherwise, it would be perfectly legitimate for Iran to have nuclear weapons, if every other country was allowed to.

R315 needs to do some research into the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons:

Under Article I of the NPT, nuclear-weapon states pledge not to transfer nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices to any recipient or in any way assist, encourage or induce any non-nuclear-weapon state in the manufacture or acquisition of a nuclear weapon.

Under Article II of the NPT, non-nuclear-weapon states pledge not to acquire or exercise control over nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices and not to seek or receive assistance in the manufacture of such devices.

Under Article III of the Treaty, non-nuclear-weapon states pledge to accept IAEA safeguards to verify that their nuclear activities serve only peaceful purposes.[11]

Five states are recognized by NPT as nuclear weapon states (NWS): China (signed 1992), France (1992), the Soviet Union (1968; obligations and rights now assumed by the Russian Federation), the United Kingdom (1968), and the United States (1968), which also happen to be the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council.

These five NWS agree not to transfer "nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices" and "not in any way to assist, encourage, or induce" a non-nuclear weapon state (NNWS) to acquire nuclear weapons (Article I). NNWS parties to the NPT agree not to "receive", "manufacture", or "acquire" nuclear weapons or to "seek or receive any assistance in the manufacture of nuclear weapons" (Article II). NNWS parties also agree to accept safeguards by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to verify that they are not diverting nuclear energy from peaceful uses to nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices (Article III).

She read PPE, r338. It's well-known that Tories with a PPE from Oxford are some of the world's most stupid people, because they think they are so fucking clever and therefore don't bother to think.

R348/R349 You do understand the differences between signing a voluntary treaty and international law, right? Seriously, this is why you need to do your research.

I have to say, from the U.S., it seems like the UK is coming out strong for sanctions.

What is the viewpoint from across the pond?

There's a LOT of dirty Russian oligarch money swirling around London and the UK establishment (political and otherwise) in general. Sanctions need to happen, yes, but those oligarchs also need spanking and something tells me Boris won't be too keen on that.

[quote] dirty Russian oligarch money swirling around London

R353, are you Nicola Sturgeon? Those are almost the exact words she used in her speech to the Scottish Parliament today.

Are they, R354? I am not Nicola Sturgeon and have not seen any news about any statements from her today. I'm off to google but if you're right I will be a little freaked out.

Her exact words were "the swirl of dirty Russian money in the city of London." But she pronounced it "the swiddle ..." (starting around 00:41).

Well, I'm glad that the right wing of the PLP have finally caught up to the idea that the Tories should return all the dirty oligarch money they were given, including from former ministers in Putin's government.

No doubt the super patriotic British Bulldog Conservative party which has in no way whatsoever been bought and sold by the Russians over the last decade will any moment now be announcing really tough new targeted sanctions at Russia's leadership and all their money in London. I'm sure it's all just getting finalised.

LMAO

This guy is playing 4-Dimensional chess…or he’s covered in Teflon. This morning I woke up to breathless coverage of his brave visit to Ukraine, where he walked the streets of Kyiv with Zelensky. As silly as I find the man, I think it’s hilarious how he manages get out of any and every mess unscathed.

My bet that he wouldn't leave in 2022 is looking better and better. I genuinely think I'm more likely to lose it if he dies rather than is ousted. People freak out but ultimately nobody else in the Tory party has his kind of connection with voters and election-winning personality. Have you seen how popular he is with Ukrainians? Even Johnson-opposing journalists say that every day Ukrainians thank Boris for his support and the weapons he gave them - that's the kind of optimism and bonhomie that resonates with the general public even as intellectuals don't like him (and I'll be clear here, I don't really either, and I've never voted Tory).

It's been hilarious watching the FBPEs melt down over Zelensky and Boris wandering around Kyiv, and meeting the woman with the rooster jugs.

The people obsessed with Brexit just can't understand that Ukrainians are grateful for the UK's support, are grateful for the weapons and training the British armed forces gave the Ukrainian army over the last few years, they are grateful for the sanctions the UK put in place against Abramovich and co and are grateful for the financial and medical aid.

People can't understand that while Ukraine wants to join the European Union for the financial and political solidarity, they don't view Britain's help through that prism.

People can't understand that a man who has consistently cheated on his wives would wine and dine Russian oligarchs and party with them and invite them to play tennis etc, and then turn their back on them in their hour of need.

And people can't understand that Boris Johnson is capable of doing the right thing at the right time.

R360 I'll agree, I have really, really liked that he did the right thing from day one in terms of Ukraine. Look at the response of the Germans in comparison which is so shameful.

Also, the Times reported that Sunak opposed helping the Ukrainians because Sunak thought that the Russians would win and that we'll end up doing a deal with them.

That's just an example of why Rishi Sunak will never be an election-winning asset. Plus that he's awkward, Ed Miliband-like.

R362, the Sunak pile-on has been delicious, although a little unexpected. When people were predicting BoJo’s pending doom, they usually threw out Sunak’s name as a likely successor.

This weekend Sunak has moved out of his Downing Street apartment and there’s a good chance he’ll end up resigning by the end of the month.

I didn't think Sunak was reluctant to help Ukraine, he was reluctant to spend billions investing in energy sources outside of Russia, specifically nuclear energy in Britain, because he thought Putin would win the war and Britain would have to work with him.

Which isn't that different from many European countries.

Meanwhile some in the Labour Party are more interested in Palestine and women with dicks.

So that's Rishi Sunak's political OVER. What a flameout.

Johnson all but took credit for taking out Sunak.

Amid suggestions that Sunak is the subject of a hostile briefing campaign, the prime minister said any briefings against the chancellor "certainly aren't coming from us at No 10."

"Heaven knows where they are coming from," Johnson added.

R366 sorry but how do you get there from that quote?

R364 You are totally missing the point aren't you? The point was that Sunak (and any other countries doing the same) are on the WRONG moral side here. They are the ones that history will judge negatively.

[quote][R364] You are totally missing the point aren't you? The point was that Sunak (and any other countries doing the same) are on the WRONG moral side here. They are the ones that history will judge negatively.

No I wasn't missing the point. Your statement was factually wrong. You said "Also, the Times reported that Sunak opposed helping the Ukrainians because Sunak thought that the Russians would win and that we'll end up doing a deal with them."

Sunak was not opposed to helping Ukrainians. He was opposed to a massive investment in UK nuclear power stations. The two couldn't be more different.

R369 Did you even read the quote from The Times properly? It said that Sunak doesn't want investment in Uk nuclear stations because he thinks that the Russians will win and we'll then be able to make a deal with Putin for cheaper energy than what the investment in nuclear would cost.

you wrote "Also, the Times reported that Sunak opposed helping the Ukrainians"

Where does it say Sunak opposed helping the Ukrainians. It says he is opposed to building nuclear power stations because he thinks Putin will win.

R371 Sunak thinks we should be dependent on Russian gas/oil. That's the equivalent of appeasing the Nazis during WWII. Have no doubt about it, Putin is 100% the child of Stalin and Putin. Just look at how totalitarian Russia is now, plus what he's doing to Ukraine.

*Sorry, Stalin and Hitler, I meant to say. Freudian slip.

Do you guys realise that Europe is sending one billion Euros to Putin every single day? Dr Illarionov, economic adviser 2 Putin: "if there was a real embargo on oil and gas exports from Russia...probably within a month or two, Russian military operations in Ukraine, will be stopped".

Those amounts dwarf what we are sending Ukraine in financial and military aid. That's why getting off Russian gas and oil is so crucial.

[quote]Do you guys realise that Europe is sending one billion Euros to Putin every single day? Dr Illarionov, economic adviser 2 Putin: "if there was a real embargo on oil and gas exports from Russia...probably within a month or two, Russian military operations in Ukraine, will be stopped".

Many of the anti Boris tweets were pointing out that Ursula von der Leyen had already visited, so Boris was second choice.

It makes total sense that Ukraine would invite Ursula von der Leyen first when she has more influence over European money going to Putin. She can't influence individual countries and their reliance on Russian energy but she does have influence.

Whereas with Boris it was a genuine thanks for the weapons and aid, which if you remember had to be flown around German airspace.

R375 Absolutely. Russia is like a petrol pump with nukes. If Germany in particular agreed to cut off buying Russian gas, Putin would be really fucked. His country is very underdeveloped outside of a couple of cities and has a smaller economy than Texas. He is very dependent on Europe buying his gas and oil.

[quote][R371] Sunak thinks we should be dependent on Russian gas/oil. That's the equivalent of appeasing the Nazis during WWII. Have no doubt about it, Putin is 100% the child of Stalin and Putin. Just look at how totalitarian Russia is now, plus what he's doing to Ukraine.

Sunak's approach is totally wrong but no different from the attitude the UK, the European Union and the United States take with China, currently perpetrating a genocide against the Uyghur people and starving their citizens under a Covid lockdown.

They take a balanced approach to a genocidal nation where there is a huge amount of trade at stake.

The future for the UK is a mix of wind power and nuclear but Caroline Lucas of the Green Party was on tv this morning dismissing nuclear power.

BoJo & Sunak are both being fined for lockdown breaches.

LOL I updated the wrong thread.

AND CARRIE TOO.

I don't think Boris will resign. They'll have to drag him out of there kicking and screaming.

Well that's Sunak fucked as a successor even more. His odds have dropped a lot and there are 5 people ahead of him now. (Truss the front-runner but she isn't popular with everyone... the party is struggling to find a clear successor which imo is key to whether they get rid of Boris or not. They need a clear election-winning successor.)

Ugh they are all a bunch of gutter rats. Truss, Sunak, Gove, Johnson, etc. Bottom of the barrel who wouldn’t last for a second in a job outside the Tory party.

R380 I think so too - if you paid close attention he has declined to say that he would resign if he got fined. People already know that he broke the rules. I think he's going to stay for now because quitting now and over something like that would be a bad look for his 'legacy'. So it's the Tory party that has to oust him.

Here's another key metric to look for: Tory MPs care about what Tory voters and members think more than everyone else because that's where they get their support from:

"Opinium snap poll:

> 58% think the PM should resign over the police fines, compared to 32% who think he should stay in the job.

> BUT, Conservative voters disagree. Just 27% think he should resign, compared to 64% who think he should stay in the job."

Labour MP Claudia Webbe, recently found guilty in a criminal court of threatening to throw acid in the face of a woman she was convinced was having an affair with her husband, is complaining there haven't been resignations.

Webbe has been expelled from the Labour Party, they have called for her to resign her seat, but until her appeal is heard the recall petition cannot be started.

I'm sure Labour are quite happy there haven't been any resignations. With the cost of living crisis the "rules don't apply to them" message will never be stronger.

R385 Unfortunately I don't really agree. I see Sunak as having the appeal and charisma of an Ed Miliband when actually tested against public opinion.

Boris however? Boris is a very different thing. Boris has a real talent for winning elections and buoying people with his optimism. If there were an election between Keir Starmer and Boris Johnson, I would instinctively want to bet on Boris. Starmer is a very decent person but I think that the Tories would have to be *really* unpopular for Boris to lose against Starmer.

LOL. I half seriously think the UK is developing into a failed state at this point. Johnson broke the rules that he set for everyone else to follow (a hugely difficult thing to do in many cases) , got caught, is laughing in everyone's face and just refusing to quit, and the pathetic cowards won't sack him! He stood up in parliament and denied there were parties, lied and lied and lied and insisted black is white and the sun rises in the west, and there the Tory MPs are clutching opinion polls and wondering about the local elections rather than face the inevitable: he is totally unfit for the job.

If he isn't removed via a vote of no-confidence, the Westminster system has collapsed.

There are sea sponges with more spine than the collective parliamentary Tory party. It's pitiful.

[quote]Tory MPs are clutching opinion polls

You're naive if you don't think that this is the case basically everywhere else in Europe.

[quote]If he isn't removed via a vote of no-confidence, the Westminster system has collapsed.

No, it won't have collapsed and the UK isn't near 'failed state' status either. You sound so stupid with hyperbole like that.

Well, here's the thing. In a parliamentary system, parliament is sovereign. That's why the PM must retain confidence of parliament, or his government collapses. That's why the PM and ministers must regularly attend parliament to be questioned. Neither of these things happen in Presidential systems. It's also why there is an absolute prohibition for ministers on lying to parliament. Yet it is quite clear that Johnson repeatedly lied in parliament about parties, and refused the opportunity to correct the record when given it, removing any possibility of simple human error.

The ministerial code says he must resign. The system is predicated on the expectation that any minister would resign in those circumstances. But, he won't, and it looks like his party won't kick him out. So, the system has collapsed.

I wouldn't say that there's 'absolute prohibition' since the ministerial code isn't law.

[quote] In a parliamentary system, parliament is sovereign.

In a constitutional monarchy, the sovereign is sovereign.

No indeed, and famously, the UK doesn't have a written constitution, but the system is supposed to rest on a set of conventions which describe how it works: the monarch must give royal assent to bills, the PM must have the confidence of parliament, the House of Lords should not block a law which featured in an election-winning manifesto, and so on. And yes, technically the monarch is sovereign, but that is obviously a nice little fiction, since conventionally she is supposed to take whomever parliament sends her.

Well, the argument from Johnson, Sunak, and their supporters, is that to mislead involves intent, and both say they honestly believed at the time that the event they have been fined for, a supposedly impromptu gathering for Johnson’s birthday on 19 June 2020 in the cabinet room, had been within the rules. This appears to have convinced enough Conservative MPs for them to be safe.

And there's nobody who can look into whether they breached the ministerial code. The ministerial code is officially overseen by Christopher Geidt, the adviser on ministerial interests. He can only investigate alleged breaches of the code if requested by Johnson, although the plan is for this to change.

Surely this has to be judged by looking at the attendees. The birthday gathering was attended (and apparently organised) by Carrie Johnson, who also got fined, and interior designer Lulu Lytle, neither of whom work in Downing St. So it can't have been a work meeting to which someone brought cake: certainly that defence has been rejected by Plod.

Furthermore, he was asked in parliament about multiple parties on different dates, and lied about all of them, including events for which there is photographic evidence. This might not be the last fine he gets from the police either.

R395 Yeah, but ultimately it's for parliament / Tory MPs to decide if he goes or not. The ministerial code is still a code of 'principles' to follow. And if Tory MPs think that Johnson is the best they have to offer voters i.e. he'll still get the most support from voters, he'll be staying. I guess that's how our democracy works.

No, it's not how it is SUPPOSED to work. Its weakness is that it rests on the individuals concerned having the degree of moral integrity needed to accept that their position is untenable. That's why I say the system has collapsed, because the assumptions on which it rested have not withstood contact with Boris Johnson.

Going forward, is an acceptable defence to the charge of lying to parliament going to be that you didn't understand what plain English words mean?

R394 maybe that could be true if there was a single event... but there were several.

R398 I don't buy it either but that's their story. I do think that there's a good point to be made in that the ministerial code should be made law, and have someone other than the PM ordering inquiries into whether someone has broken it or not.

At least one minister has a backbone.

Well. Good for him.

Saw this MoS polling by DeltaPoll and thought it worth posting. Big if the electorate now thinks that Labour is better for the economy and that Starmer would be a better PM than Johnson. The downside is that the next general election is likely to be in 2024 though but I can imagine the public being fed up with the cost of living and inflation and wanting a change.

Voting Intention:

LAB: 43% (+3)

CON: 32% (-2)

Best for British economy:

LAB: 42%

CON: 34%

Best Prime Minister:

Starmer: 41%

Johnson: 34%

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Guardian analysis..

The short of it seems to be that nothing will happen until after the local elections. But that if the local elections are bad for the Tories (and they probably will be), the plotters will use that as their chance to pull the trigger.

But it is still a huge problem for them that there is no obvious successor and that the war in Ukraine may still be going on then. Remember that even if enough people get the letters to Brady, there will still be a vote of all MPs.

It seems clear that Johnson has no intention of resigning and wants to stay.

You Putinistas are so desperate to bring down Ukraine's primary ally but we are onto you

R409, I agree that Boris Johnson has shown great leadership on Ukraine, a rare moment of clarity and competence for him.

But Boris Johnson is not alone in his support for Ukraine and economic and military support for them. The entire cabinet take the same stance, Keir Starmer takes the same stance, and is getting criticised by the Russia apologist cranks for saying support of NATO is an essential component of supporting Labour, or words to that effect.

If Boris Johnson was to resign then likely leadership candidates Liz Truss, Ben Wallace, Tom Tugendhat and Jeremy Hunt don't waver at all from Boris Johnson's policy on Ukraine.

This idea that Boris Johnson MUST remain as Prime Minister because of Ukraine is silly. The UK is supporting Ukraine, the UK is not at war with Russia. The Tories are just using it as a prop and photo ops (BoJo’s visit to Ukraine last week).

R407 The Ukraine war is a major and very serious event. It would be petty and a huge distraction for the Tories to hold a leadership contest (that would probably take a couple of months) while it's going on. The PM is on top of the briefings, is in regular contact with Zelenskyy, and is popular in Ukraine too.

R407 he’s on top of his briefings?! Pull the other one. It’s not a good enough reason to not get rid of him and your facile argument won’t convince me otherwise. I’m pretty sure most Ukrainians have more important things on their mind right now than the lying Prime Minister of the UK.

The only thing Boris is on top of is the latest blonde piece of totty he’s boinking instead of doing his job. Why change the habits of a lifetime?

r408 If the Tories managed to kick Chamberlain out with the German army in the Netherlands and Norway they can certainly manage it when the Russians are in Donbas.

It’s rare that I would agree with uber Brexiteer and evangelical Christian Steve Baker but in this case I can make an exception.

R411 Bad comparison since Bojo has never been an appeaser of Putin. On the contrary, he's called it right from the start. Believed the intel that the Russians would attack and supplied the Ukrainians with weapons early on.

If Boris is so squeaky clean in regards to his history with Russia why is his administration still refusing to release the report on their investigation into it?

R414 What report is that? Either way it's clear that he personally isn't under Putin's thumb or fooled by Putin.

Is the investigation by the Commons committee likely to lead to anything?

R416 If you mean the one about whether Boris lied about the parties, imho no because ultimately there is no law that he *has* to resign if he is found to have broken the code. The PM is still the one in charge and he doesn't want to resign while Tory MPs have no obvious successor who would do better. I've just read a couple articles (Bloomberg, Politico) saying that both sides now think that he will be leading the Tories into the next election so they're shifting to operating under that assumption. Anyway, I'm not convinced that any other Tory MP would be much better - they all suck, so it's best to work on actually beating them in a general election.

The Bloomberg article I mentioned..

I love how some Tories are briefing the media that Sue Gray's report is so bad that Boris will be forced to resign over it.

I'LL BELIEVE IT WHEN I SEE IT. They are so full of bloat but don't act. All of these press briefings aren't going to pressurise Boris into resigning - he has no intention of resigning. So how about those idiot MPs actually DO it and remove him which they do have the power to? I'll be impressed if they do. My assumption all along has been that the probability is that they're too weak/cowardly to. No spine.

Big part of why Bojo is just about holding on... so far:

"@RichardJSpencer

I went to the street in the Ukraine that's being renamed Boris Johnson Street. The residents got me drunk and told me how much they loved him. I have to say they had never heard of Partygate but seemed to think it was a good idea."

A new crunch time for Bojo if the letter writers are to strike.

Tories on track to lose 200-300 seats in the council elections. They've taken 3 London councils.

On the flip side, John Curtice says that Labour don't look on track to win a general election because they're struggling in Red Wall seats.

Letter writers, it's up to you...

I meant to write 'Labour has taken 3 London councils'.

Edging closer now. Not sure what it will take though. In the past almost any of these scandals would have brought down a Prime Minister. The MPs blaming their colleagues for complaining about Neil Parish (the MP who resigned therefore triggering one of the by-elections) watching pornography in the commons is a particularly venal touch.

“Parish shouldn’t have resigned. He should have just gone away with his wife for a few weeks and then come back to the job. I don’t know why the girls had to speak out like that.”

Another suggested the witnesses would “feel like a turd in the swimming pool”.

Perhaps… keep your porn watching to private places. Anyone else would be arrested!

He's a sniveling little shit and I hope when he does resign he calls a snap election out of spite. I'm not a big Starmer fan but he is much better than what the Tories have to offer.

He officially has 1 year's reprieve after winning the confidence vote so they'll have to change the 1922 committee rules. But are they even sure that they have the numbers to win a second confidence vote? And they still don't seem to have an obvious successor. Hunt nakedly wants the position but many call him 'Theresa May in a suit'.

I think they're in the situation where the thought is "anyone is better than Boris" this does mean the likes of C...Hunt and coked up Gove stand a chance of being the next prime minister.

R426 I wouldn't actually agree with that. Boris is a great confidence (con) man. Given inflation, the crappy economy, that people are tired of the Tories who have been in power for a long time, the next election isn't going to be good for the Tories either way. Yet I'm 99% sure that Hunt would lose the Tories more seats than Boris would. People are usually self-interested but if the Tories want to stick to principles they would take Hunt. If they want to minimise losses, I would go for Boris even after the whole Partygate thing. Hunt has no appeal, he's at least as boring with no ideas as Keir, and people will probably be wanting a change in party.

Hunt is pretty much guaranteed to lose his own seat to the Lib Dems, as are a range of senior Tories, Dominic Raab at their head - he only has a majority of a little of 2,000 is is basically a dead man walking at the moment. This is why he will never resign from the cabinet and lose his ministerial salary. Boris is pretty likely to lose his seat also, this time to Labour - political analysts talk about leaders usually having an advantage in these situations, but I'm not at all sure this will work for him. All Labour have to do is pick a decent opponent (i.e not the Muslim, career student activist Corbynite they fielded last time).

R428 How do you feel about Angela Rayner. I like her and think she is smart and talented.

I like Angela. She just kicked the crap out of Raab at deputies PMQ today. I'd have no issue with her succeeding Starmer eventually.

I like Rayner a lot too but I have heard that Rayner doesn't poll well with focus groups so that gives me pause in electoral terms. Something about her isn't appealing to the average voter.

R431 I think you are probably right. Keir Starmer is unfortunately just not cutting through and I’m not sure she can either. I honestly think it’s a class issue in that too many people won’t vote for someone with a working class accent no matter what.

Angela thinks lesbians can have penises, so, no thanks.

Hate to say it but Labour need another Blair/Campbell type situation again.

Indeed, r434. Just who is Starmer's strategist? Where is his team? What are Labour's overarching messages for the public, aside from the Tories are crap? Exactly how does Labour develop policies? Does Labour even have any policies, beyond gender self-id?

R435 Starmer's strategist is Mandelson

Wow, dramatic news today. Tommorow's PMQ should be very entertaining.

"Jeremy Hunt would lose the final round of a Tory leadership contest against all of his main potential challengers, a new poll of the Conservative grassroots has suggested.

A ConservativeHome survey asked grassroots members who they would vote for in a variety of potential final two combinations - but Mr Hunt finished as the runner-up against every hypothetical challenger.

For example, in a contest with Liz Truss, Mr Hunt got 24 per cent of the vote, while the Foreign Secretary was backed by 59 per cent of respondents.

It was a similar story against Rishi Sunak - 55 per cent to 20 per cent - and against Penny Mordaunt - 63 per cent to 18 per cent. Against Ben Wallace, Mr Hunt got just 14 per cent of the vote compared to the Defence Secretary’s 72 per cent."

Keir Starmer to Boris Johnson at PMQs today: “The first case of the sinking ship fleeing the rat."

Javid's speech was a clear sign that he's after Boris's job.

It seems Michael Gove and Liam Fox are currently holding an intervention with Boris.

Sky News reports that even Priti Patel has told BJ to go.

BWAHAHAHAHAHA AHAHAHAHAHAHA AHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHA AHAHA AAHAHAHA AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA AHAHAHA HAHA HA.

But anyway. There is no way he can possibly suffer enough.