Should there be a Parliamentary Inquiry into Johnson's handling of covid?

[belton rover]

I suppose it’s a bit like when people on here refuse to answer straightforward questions.

[Bentley Bullet]

I just think it's poor that Keir Starmer can only increase his own popularity by decreasing that of his opponents. I also think that it is strange that someone who was renowned as a liar by anti-Tories is now being trusted by anti-Tories to give truthful evidence.

[BillyStubbsTears]

BB

Once again, I have never ever suggested that Cummings was a renowned liar. I DO think (it's as obvious as it could be) that he brazened out his Durham visit by lying. But I have seen no evidence in years of following his work that he has habitually lied.

And once again, this is not about Cummings's opinions. It is about whether he has hard evidence. Surely you can see the difference between the two things?

As for Starmer, I don't think you understand how politics works. It is the DUTY  of the Opposition to hold the Executive to account. if there is a credible suggestion that the PM has broken Parliamentary rules (let alone, the law), a Leader of the Opposition should be sacked if he/she didn't ask probing questions to try to establish the truth of the matter.

By your take, it was a poor show by the Democrats in 1973 to point out that America had a criminal as President.

[BVB]

I don’t think for one moment that Johnson wouldn’t do exactly the same if the roles were reversed - politicians them all.

Cummings was on the defensive when trying to save his own skin about going to Durham.
In this new situation he is on the defensive about not being the whistleblower - he has no choice but to respond.
On the other hand, he has also gone on the offensive with his allegations against Johnson - why do this and ruin himself if he hasn’t got the evidence to back up his claims?

So that suggests to me that there may be some uncomfortable truths from Cummings for Johnson to deal with.
But that doesn’t mean Cummings told the truth about going to Durham. In fact quite the unconvincing opposite from what I saw and heard at the time.
So for me he lied then, and may be telling the truth now.
“Trust” is irrelevant. The Truth - regardless of your politics - very much is.

[BVB]

Relevant!
Ha ha
Gettin late

[Bentley Bullet]

BB

Once again, I have never ever suggested that Cummings was a renowned liar. I DO think (it's as obvious as it could be) that he brazened out his Durham visit by lying. But I have seen no evidence in years of following his work that he has habitually lied.

And once again, this is not about Cummings's opinions. It is about whether he has hard evidence. Surely you can see the difference between the two things?

As for Starmer, I don't think you understand how politics works. It is the DUTY  of the Opposition to hold the Executive to account. if there is a credible suggestion that the PM has broken Parliamentary rules (let alone, the law), a Leader of the Opposition should be sacked if he/she didn't ask probing questions to try to establish the truth of the matter.

By your take, it was a poor show by the Democrats in 1973 to point out that America had a criminal as President.

BST, I never said that you personally suggested that Cummungs was a renowned liar, but many people do think he is. 

[wilts rover]

BB

Once again, I have never ever suggested that Cummings was a renowned liar. I DO think (it's as obvious as it could be) that he brazened out his Durham visit by lying. But I have seen no evidence in years of following his work that he has habitually lied.

And once again, this is not about Cummings's opinions. It is about whether he has hard evidence. Surely you can see the difference between the two things?

As for Starmer, I don't think you understand how politics works. It is the DUTY  of the Opposition to hold the Executive to account. if there is a credible suggestion that the PM has broken Parliamentary rules (let alone, the law), a Leader of the Opposition should be sacked if he/she didn't ask probing questions to try to establish the truth of the matter.

By your take, it was a poor show by the Democrats in 1973 to point out that America had a criminal as President.

BST, I never said that you personally suggested that Cummungs was a renowned liar, but many people do think he is. 

Many people also think Johnson is a renowned liar. There are websites, youtube compilations and indeed now a book compiling these.

Yet there are still people defending him and critising the motivations of people who accuse him of said lies.

Funny old world.

[wilts rover]

Fascinating nugget in todays papers.

Ed Woodward (Man U chief ex) met Johnson a couple of days before the Super League announcement and got the impression he was in favour of it.

Then after the announcement Johnson spoke out against it.

https://twitter.com/ianbirrell/status/1386219364421091331

Surely this can't be true? I mean has Boris Johnson ever previously put up an argument for both sides of a divisive policy and then backed the side that gained him the most popularity?

[belton rover]

Fascinating nugget in todays papers.

Ed Woodward (Man U chief ex) met Johnson a couple of days before the Super League announcement and got the impression he was in favour of it.

Then after the announcement Johnson spoke out against it.

https://twitter.com/ianbirrell/status/1386219364421091331

Surely this can't be true? I mean has Boris Johnson ever previously put up an argument for both sides of a divisive policy and then backed the side that gained him the most popularity?

‘Sources accept that Johnson may have briefly met’

Can any one come up with a less convincing statement of ‘fact’?

[BillyStubbsTears]

Here's some interesting context to the Cummings-Johnson fight.

https://mobile.twitter.com/carolecadwalla/status/1386218565355950083

tl:dr. There is strong evidence that someone in Cummings's office in Vote Leave committed a serious crime when the Electoral Commission was investigating them. That evidence was given to the relevant investigatory body, which reports to the Home Office.

Nothing was ever done about it.

But if this does become a fight to the death, it's possible that both sides have potentially career-ending material on the other one.

[Sprotyrover]

So Cummings has said Boris asked him if it was possible to have Conservative donors pay for the renovation of 10 Downing Street flat. And Cummings 'advised' him it was not a good idea or even legal! So he did his job properly well done Dominic! Nothing here move on now folks!

[BillyStubbsTears]

Sproty
If there's nothing to see, why on earth is No10 answering in such convoluted language when pressed on the issue?

They've been asked specifically if Johnson was given money by a donor for the flat. They've have not answered that very specific question. They've said he paid for all the renovations that took place this year.

[selby]

  Apparently the Blairs spent hundreds of thousands on the same subject in their tenure, but out of the public purse, expect this to be used and fingers pointed at the relevant time.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Talk Radio been pouring its slime in your ear again Selby, has it?

EVERY PM receives an annual allowance for the upkeep of the No10 flat. It's currently £30k per year. So it's no wonder that the Blair's totted up a large sum given that they were there for ten years.

You may or may not agree that £30k per year is too much. But the point is, that's the law.

Johnson wanted to spend far more than £30k. Reportedly because his missus has expensive tastes. The question is, where did the extra money come from?

[Sprotyrover]

Talk Radio been pouring its slime in your ear again Selby, has it?

EVERY PM receives an annual allowance for the upkeep of the No10 flat. It's currently £30k per year. So it's no wonder that the Blair's totted up a large sum given that they were there for ten years.

You may or may not agree that £30k per year is too much. But the point is, that's the law.

Johnson wanted to spend far more than £30k. Reportedly because his missus has expensive tastes. The question is, where did the extra money come from?

I seem to recall the Blairs spent a Princes Ransom on the Flat as they had to extend it considerably as it was small and pokey, and they had kids, something that previous PM's didn't have,small children, I also seem to recall that nobody raised an eyebrow at the time! If the PM of this country can't have an opulent flat at No 10 what does it say about the country.
It isn't his flat,it's the Prime minister of Great Britain's flat! He can't take any of the fittings when he goes, he has got to leave under the eye of 5/600 Press reporters

[belton rover]

Law breakers or not, it seems that some take the piss with our money, some don't - regardless of party.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/newsopener.com/uk/the-modern-makeovers-of-number-11-downing-street/amp/

It seems Thatcher and Brown have the most credibility and Blair and Johnson the least.

Just because someone may not have broken the law, it doesn’t mean they are not acting disgracefully.

‘I’ve done nothing (legally) wrong’ is a shit excuse.

[SydneyRover]

Talk Radio been pouring its slime in your ear again Selby, has it?

EVERY PM receives an annual allowance for the upkeep of the No10 flat. It's currently £30k per year. So it's no wonder that the Blair's totted up a large sum given that they were there for ten years.

You may or may not agree that £30k per year is too much. But the point is, that's the law.

Johnson wanted to spend far more than £30k. Reportedly because his missus has expensive tastes. The question is, where did the extra money come from?

I seem to recall the Blairs spent a Princes Ransom on the Flat as they had to extend it considerably as it was small and pokey, and they had kids, something that previous PM's didn't have,small children, I also seem to recall that nobody raised an eyebrow at the time! If the PM of this country can't have an opulent flat at No 10 what does it say about the country.
It isn't his flat,it's the Prime minister of Great Britain's flat! He can't take any of the fittings when he goes, he has got to leave under the eye of 5/600 Press reporters

Sprot, the PM lives in the flat above the shop in No11 which is bigger

[BillyStubbsTears]

I see the smoke of battle is already obscuring the issue.

The issue is very, very clear. Has the PM taken a very large donation for his personal benefit?

That's it. Nothing more or less.

If he has, it's a black and white resigning issue, regardless of if it was illegal.

[wilts rover]

BB

Once again, I have never ever suggested that Cummings was a renowned liar. I DO think (it's as obvious as it could be) that he brazened out his Durham visit by lying. But I have seen no evidence in years of following his work that he has habitually lied.

And once again, this is not about Cummings's opinions. It is about whether he has hard evidence. Surely you can see the difference between the two things?

As for Starmer, I don't think you understand how politics works. It is the DUTY  of the Opposition to hold the Executive to account. if there is a credible suggestion that the PM has broken Parliamentary rules (let alone, the law), a Leader of the Opposition should be sacked if he/she didn't ask probing questions to try to establish the truth of the matter.

By your take, it was a poor show by the Democrats in 1973 to point out that America had a criminal as President.

BST, I never said that you personally suggested that Cummungs was a renowned liar, but many people do think he is. 

Many people also think Johnson is a renowned liar. There are websites, youtube compilations and indeed now a book compiling these.

Yet there are still people defending him and critising the motivations of people who accuse him of said lies.

Funny old world.

As I wrote above^

Funny old world...

[Donnywolf]

I see the smoke of battle is already obscuring the issue.

The issue is very, very clear. Has the PM taken a very large donation for his personal benefit?

That's it. Nothing more or less.

If he has, it's a black and white resigning issue, regardless of if it was illegal.

Morals of an alley cat total liar stunt puller etc etc and amazingly would still be elected if there was a GE tomorrow

THAT is the unfortunate reality

"JUST the Poll Tax did for Thatcher" and to me it seems incredible that Johnson sails on serenely whilst being the most incompetent clown that he is

[drfchound]

Here's some interesting context to the Cummings-Johnson fight.

https://mobile.twitter.com/carolecadwalla/status/1386218565355950083

tl:dr. There is strong evidence that someone in Cummings's office in Vote Leave committed a serious crime when the Electoral Commission was investigating them. That evidence was given to the relevant investigatory body, which reports to the Home Office.

Nothing was ever done about it.

But if this does become a fight to the death, it's possible that both sides have potentially career-ending material on the other one.

I think that Cummings becoming a whistle blower has probably ended his career anyway.
Who would feel comfortable employing him in any capacity where he has access to important information within the organisation.

[SydneyRover]

government too busy for an inquiry, working around the clock apparently, hmmmmmmm

[BillyStubbsTears]

Here's some interesting context to the Cummings-Johnson fight.

https://mobile.twitter.com/carolecadwalla/status/1386218565355950083

tl:dr. There is strong evidence that someone in Cummings's office in Vote Leave committed a serious crime when the Electoral Commission was investigating them. That evidence was given to the relevant investigatory body, which reports to the Home Office.

Nothing was ever done about it.

But if this does become a fight to the death, it's possible that both sides have potentially career-ending material on the other one.

I think that Cummings becoming a whistle blower has probably ended his career anyway.
Who would feel comfortable employing him in any capacity where he has access to important information within the organisation.

Hound

1) General point: Whistleblowing is vital in organisations where people at the top are breaking the rules and getting away with it. It is something to be applauded, not condemned.

2) Specific point: We've known for a decade that Cummings shouldn't be anywhere near the top of Govt since his maniac behaviour in the Dept of Education. For Johnson to effectively let Cummings run Govt for 18 months without realising the consequences that would come when Cummings inevitably ended up having to be sacked says everything about his own judgement.

[belton rover]

Of course whistleblowing should be applauded, but it’s naive for anyone to think this would not have a very negative effect on Cummings’ ‘career’. He’s not whistleblowing because people at the top are breaking the rules and getting away with it (if he was, he would have done it whilst he was still working for Johnson). He’s done it because he bears a grudge.

Any employer who thinks someone will turn when they fall out will give a very wide birth.

[Glyn_Wigley]

Talk Radio been pouring its slime in your ear again Selby, has it?

EVERY PM receives an annual allowance for the upkeep of the No10 flat. It's currently £30k per year. So it's no wonder that the Blair's totted up a large sum given that they were there for ten years.

You may or may not agree that £30k per year is too much. But the point is, that's the law.

Johnson wanted to spend far more than £30k. Reportedly because his missus has expensive tastes. The question is, where did the extra money come from?

I seem to recall the Blairs spent a Princes Ransom on the Flat as they had to extend it considerably as it was small and pokey, and they had kids, something that previous PM's didn't have,small children, I also seem to recall that nobody raised an eyebrow at the time! If the PM of this country can't have an opulent flat at No 10 what does it say about the country.
It isn't his flat,it's the Prime minister of Great Britain's flat! He can't take any of the fittings when he goes, he has got to leave under the eye of 5/600 Press reporters

Sprot, the PM lives in the flat above the shop in No11 which is bigger

Blair used the flat above No.11 too, and Brown (while Chancellor) lived in the flat above no.10 for the same reason - the No.11 flat was bigger and Blair had the bigger family.

[Glyn_Wigley]

Back to the subject of Boris's handling of Covid:

https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/uk-denies-report-that-pm-johnson-said-let-bodies-pile-high-2021-04-26/

One odd thing that's becoming apparent now is the tactic of using someone else to make a denial - first Liz Truss and now Ben Wallace - whilst Boris is strangely silent on the matters in hand. I wonder why he hasn't made any of his usually robust denials himself...could it possibly because he doesn't want to be caught red-handed because he knows the truth but doesn't know what evidence there is still to emerge? That's the impression it very strongly gives out.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Of course whistleblowing should be applauded, but it’s naive for anyone to think this would not have a very negative effect on Cummings’ ‘career’. He’s not whistleblowing because people at the top are breaking the rules and getting away with it (if he was, he would have done it whilst he was still working for Johnson). He’s done it because he bears a grudge.

Any employer who thinks someone will turn when they fall out will give a very wide birth.

Agreed. That's why I said "General point" about whistleblowing. Cummings is clearly not whistleblowing. Cummings is doing what Cummings does when someone crosses him. He's trying to destroy them.

He's been known to act like that for at least a decade. Which, as I've been saying for years is one reason why he is utterly unfit to be near levers of power.

The question is, what in God's name was Johnson thinking, taking him on?

[idler]

He was probably thinking that he could get him elected.

[BillyStubbsTears]

He was never going to lose in 2019.

[BillyStubbsTears]

https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/uk-denies-report-that-pm-johnson-said-let-bodies-pile-high-2021-04-26/?taid=6086629c2803a40001e70475&utm_campaign=trueAnthem:+Trending+Content&utm_medium=trueAnthem&utm_source=twitter

Unnamed source telling the Mail Johnson said last Autumn "No more f**king lockdowns. Let the bodies pile up in their thousands".

Unnamed source. And The Mail. So caution.

But, Cummings has been speaking to the Mail, so it's a fair bet he is the source. And there have been rumblings for months that there was a spectacular falling out over the September circuit breaker lockdown, with Cummings demanding it and Johnson refusing.

If Cummings actually has evidence of Johnson saying this, Johnson is finished.