Jump to content

UK Politics - Now is the Spring of our Discontent


Which Tyler

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Fragile Bird said:

Shouldn't she be worried about 1) being sued and 2) completely trashing her reputation? Or will UK media outlets say OMG what a ruthless shark let’s hire her?

I doubt she's going to get many more offers to ghost-write autobiographies.

Since they're the beneficiary of it I'm sure the Torygraph would be happy to employ her if her other employers let her go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, kiko said:

Otoh...he's not exactly a 4D chess player, is he?

I think that if anyone s playing 4D chess right now, it might just be Starmer. Perhaps he has hired Sue Gray with the deliberate intent of provoking Johnson's die hard supporters into filling up the political bandwidth with complaints that Johnson was stitched up, and by implication that they think it was perfectly okay for him to party away while the country was in lockdown. That will not play well, and will also drown out whatever Sunak might be trying to say.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, williamjm said:

Since they're the beneficiary of it I'm sure the Torygraph would be happy to employ her if her other employers let her go.

 

Not necessarily. They've got no reason to believe she wouldn't do the same to them if it came down to it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am kinda surprised the Torygraph went with that story. I mean Oakeshott is absolutely wrecking the Tories.

If your English teacher ever told you there's no comparative to the adjective dead, well, Hancock was politically dead before the leaks, now he is even more so, proving your English teachers wrong. He is deader than dead politically. As for Akeshot, hard to see any politician to trust her with anything ever again. Well, maybe somebody with the intellectual capacity of Liz Truss might do so and leak stuff to her, but that's playing with fire, as Oakenshott has proven that she will indeed bite off the proverbial hand that is feeding her (information). But she surely has decided to take a scorched earth approach there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought my opinion of Boris Johnson couldn’t be lower. Then he nominated his father for a knighthood

Quote

As bizarre as it is to be asking those questions at all, the most pressing is, of course: what on earth is Stanley Johnson doing on this list? He stands in the shadow of two accusations (that he denies) of “inappropriate touching”, one from Caroline Nokes, the chair of the women and equalities committee; it is a matter of public record that he hospitalised his wife in a domestic violence incident in the 70s. It’s not a lovely CV; it doesn’t scream: “Honour me, underlings, for my distinguished and upstanding performance.” But surely more salient to the case for words such as “sordid” is the fact that he is Johnson’s father.

Jo Johnson, one brother, has already been handed a peerage, along with friends or allies or tennis chums or whatever the hell you want to call them, Evgeny Lebedev and Zac Goldsmith. You have to feel for Leo, the other brother; when’s he gonna get his beak wet? What terrible feud lies between the two men to warrant his exclusion? When you’re handing out peerages like wedding invitations – your blood relatives plus anyone who might give you a nice present – leaving out any family member seems a little pointed.

To disappear down the rabbit hole of the Johnson family’s internal emotional dynamics would be to accord them too much respect and national importance. One of the many upsides of Boris Johnson’s demise was that we’d no longer have to care which designer Carrie was wearing, or what she thought of badgers; it would be a shame, now, to be sifting through the wreckage of the second chamber’s reputation, looking for clues as to whether this clan will vote en bloc or not. The whole thing is so loudly disreputable that I suspect an ulterior motive: Boris Johnson must suspect that some of his kites will not fly, that the honours committee will be bound by propriety to reject at least some of his harebrained suggestions. He may have included his father as low-hanging fruit for rejection, so that Paul Dacre and Nadine Dorries can slip through.

The alternative is that he really believes that the UK and all its offices are just fiefdoms waiting for their rightful overlords, and what could be righter than all those lords coming from his very own family? Again, this was meant to be our prize when he left office: that we’d no longer have to anticipate or care where his lavish egocentricity would drive him next. Instead, we’re left with our hopes pinned on bashful committees and a limp prime minister, the political equivalent of the Maginot line, to block an army of cronies.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Spockydog said:

What a great advert for his law practice. The knob. 

“… and that, members of the jury, is why my client is guilty.”

*sits down*
Twenty seconds later: “Shit! Not guilty! I meant *not* guilty!”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Derfel Cadarn said:

“… and that, members of the jury, is why my client is guilty.”

*sits down*
Twenty seconds later: “Shit! Not guilty! I meant *not* guilty!”

Lieutenant George defending the flanders pigeon murderer. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Derfel Cadarn said:

Matt Hancock’s lawyer’s self-own on GB ‘News’

Watch to the end. 
https://twitter.com/countbinface/status/1632499303544418304?s=46&t=4b9wsVo4SThPmOtGN0zd6g

Well, I can't cast that stone since I've missed the odd "not" in an email. Fortunately I've not lambasted someone on national TV for doing something I asked them to do because I missed out that vital word.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Suella is fucking vile, this plan is abhorrent, and worse than that it doesn't make any fucking sense.  I'll take abhorrent or stupid, but not both. 

Its not going to achieve what they want it to achieve in the slightest, but it will give all the gammons a massive stiffy so they are wasting millions of pounds to appease them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For the guy who basically said he's the most honest MP in the House, this looks awful.

Refuses to answer the question, and instead tells the journalist to ask Sue Gray. JFC. Just answer the question, man.

I'm guessing his reluctance to engage with what is a pretty tame question means the answer is probably sometime before the Partygate inquiry.

This is slowly turning into a fuckup of monumental proportions. With every passing day, he is exposing himself as just another incompetent, dishonest tosser.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...