The conservative party could be reduced to six grumpy old Etonians in a shed ranting about millennials surrendering to foreigners and Randblade would claim everything was proceeding just as planned.
Printable View
The conservative party could be reduced to six grumpy old Etonians in a shed ranting about millennials surrendering to foreigners and Randblade would claim everything was proceeding just as planned.
I was always more a fan of Warhammer Fantasy Battles and its spin offs like Blood Bowl and Warhammer Quest.Quote:
Originally Posted by Unheard Of
I.e., destroy the very idea of parliamentary supremacy. Is there anything you wouldn't destroy for Brexit?Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
Parliamentary sovereignty would still apply.
Parliamentary sovereignty includes three elements, the Commons is the most important one and can ultimately override the other two, but it is one of three.
If the House of Lords rejects a bill then the Commons overrides it via use of the Parliament Act then that doesn't undermine Parliamentary sovereignty either.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49625431
First hints of the government's response, and it's the most Boris thing ever: Just wing it and sort of waffle on at people and hope they don't notice you have literally no plan and aren't doing the thing you said you'd do
2nd attempt at a snap election failed. That's now Boris's sixth Commons defeat in the space of a week.
He's making Theresa May look like a strong leader with a real ability to deliver by comparison.
That's ridiculous. First rule of politics is to know how to count and Boris hasn't got a majority and knows it. But he's not trying to hide from the voters.Quote:
Originally Posted by Timbuk2
An election is needed to proceed. Then we will know how it's comparable to May.
If he knows he hasn't got the votes, then why did he put the motion forward in the first place? Maybe he can't count?Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
Secondly, who's fault is it he doesn't have a majority, or rather, that he no longer has a majority?
If he wants an election, he needs only submit to the demands of the opposition and can have an election, which is not a lot to ask since the opposition have graciously refined from VONCing his candy ass all over Whitehall. Wouldn't kill him, would it? Just accede to the requirements of Jeremy Corbyn (and also obey the fucking law), and boom: election. Shouldn't be too much to ask.Quote:
An election is needed to proceed. Then we will know how it's comparable to May.
I mean, as I understand it we can't call an election for five weeks now because he prorogued parliament but, again, whose genius idea was that?
The only way to get an election is to have the motion passed and the motion can only be passed if its put forward.Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Glint
Its Theresa May and the rebels fault that he doesn't have an election.
Which demands are that?Quote:
If he wants an election, he needs only submit to the demands of the opposition and can have an election, which is not a lot to ask since the opposition have graciously refined from VONCing his candy ass all over Whitehall. Wouldn't kill him, would it? Just accede to the requirements of Jeremy Corbyn (and also obey the fucking law), and boom: election. Shouldn't be too much to ask.
I mean, as I understand it we can't call an election for five weeks now because he prorogued parliament but, again, whose genius idea was that?
Twitter Link
Good. Pleasant reading through that thread watching them cry and cry that they're getting ignored.
Tragicomic:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics...ial-misconduct
Imagine being the mayor of one of the world's most important cities and still engaging in such petty corruption.
Didn't you get the memo that accusing his Jesterness of a crime is "political"?
It absolutely is yes, glad you can see straight through it ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Abuse of power and inappropriate use of state resources to benefit a friend/mistress is hilarious. Waste of taxpayer funds is only a problem if they're used to keep poor people from dying.
Can anyone find a clip of Johnson telling Marr the Tories don't do deals with other parties?
A mayor going to such lengths to funnel public funds to a friend/mistress who was not even eligible to receive said funds prior to the mayor's intervention... is actually an example of corruption.Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
If that had happened sure I agree.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aimless
While simultaneously opposing the investigation. :bored:
It appears to be what happened, and so an investigation is entirely appropriate. Multiple lines of evidence support a close relationship between Johnson and Arcuri, and Johnson's interventions on the behalf of her company.Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
I don't oppose investigations.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
I do oppose guilty-until-proven-innocent shit-stirring and abuse of power investigating political opponents for perverted party partisan purposes.
Investigate yes, but we have a little principle called innocent until proven guilty in this country. Especially when the investigation has already broken procedure and been abused for party political purposes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aimless
*shrug* It is not in dispute that Johnson did not declare a conflict of interest, and that the mayor's office helped Arcuri's business with money and access.Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
Don't see how this was anything but highly inappropriate. All the facts are already known.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/29/w...er-arcuri.html
Lol, they just don't know how to stop lying :haha:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EFs9Qm5XUAEhHMz?format=jpg
Grifters of a feather:
Quote:
Grant to Boris Johnson’s ex model friend Jennifer Arcuri is frozen
More than half of a £100,000 grant given by the government to a company owned by a friend of Boris Johnson has been frozen.
Jennifer Arcuri, an American, was awarded more than £126,000 of public funds for her companies after she joined Mr Johnson’s campaign to be re-elected mayor of London while she was at university in the capital.
It also emerged last night that Ms Arcuri is being sued over a student loan that part-funded her life in London.
One company was allocated the £100,000 grant to train “ethic hackers” months after it was revealed it had employed a computer expert who was wanted for allegedly stealing data from US government agencies. Matt Warman, the digital minister, told MPs that the unpaid £53,000 of the grant awarded in January to Hacker House would be frozen until a review was finished.
Mr Warman said officials had verified that the company met the rules for the grants to cybersecurity companies to be based in England by checking its address with Companies House and that it had a UK telephone number.
The company’s registered address turned out to be a rented house in Prestbury, Cheshire, where Ms Arcuri and her husband had stayed before moving to California last summer. The address was amended yesterday to an office complex in Fleet Street, central London. Calls to Hacker House’s UK number were answered by a woman who said she was in the United States.
[...]
Mr Warman confirmed that the grant breached a rule that the funding should not account for more than half a company’s revenue. He said officials decided that “other aspects more than outweighed that individual criteria”.
It was reported yesterday that Ms Arcuri had employed Lauri Love, wanted by the US authorities for allegedly stealing government data. Mr Love’s extradition was blocked by the High Court in February last year because of concerns about his mental health.
Ms Arcuri, 34, joined Mr Johnson on three trade missions while he was mayor of London. Mr Johnson, 55, attended four technology forums organised by another of her companies, Innotech Network. The two announced plans for a £100 million investment fund. The mayor’s investment agency, London & Partners, sponsored two Innotech events.
[...]
Tom Watson, the deputy leader of Labour, told MPs it was “very difficult” to see how Hacker House fulfilled the criteria for the grant.
Matthew Hickey, Ms Arcuri’s British husband, wrote on Twitter that he owned Hacker House and his wife “just works there”. Records at Companies House show that Hacker House was registered by Ms Arcuri in July 2015 and she remained its only director and shareholder until Mr Hickey, 36, was appointed a director in August 2016.
It emerged last night that the Massachusetts Educational Financing Authority (MEFA) began legal action in June last year to recover $96,670.77 plus interest from Ms Arcuri. She secured a student loan for $86,021.51 from the group in 2011 to pay for her MBA studies at the London campus of Hult International Business School, which has its headquarters in Massachusetts.
Documents filed by MEFA at Jefferson County circuit court in Kentucky, partially republished by the Daily Mail, show that Ms Arcuri was due to begin repaying the debt in March 2013.
Instead she lobbied investors in Britain to raise the £200,000 required to qualify for an entrepreneur visa that would enable her to stay in Britain for three more years. To date she appears not to have paid off any of her MEFA loan. It was reported that a court summons sent to the Louisville, Kentucky, home of her mother and stepfather last year went unanswered. A second summons issued in April has not yet been answered either.
Quote:
Boris overruled officials to take friend on jet set trade missions
Boris Johnson failed to declare a series of potential conflicts of interest over a close friendship with an American model turned technology entrepreneur during his time as London mayor.
An investigation by The Sunday Times can reveal that the woman, Jennifer Arcuri, was given a total of £126,000 in public money and privileged access to three official overseas trade missions led by Johnson.
Sources have confirmed that Johnson, now 55 and prime minister, was a regular visitor to Arcuri's top-floor flat in Shoreditch, east London.
Arcuri, who was in her late twenties at the time, is claimed to have described him as "one of her best friends".
Evidence obtained by this newspaper shows that in 2013 Arcuri's fledgling business received £10,000 in sponsorship cash from an organisation that Johnson was responsible for as London mayor. He attended numerous events she arranged that promoted her company.
Arcuri was also given preferential treatment when it came to joining overseas trade missions led by Johnson. Her business had not met the eligibility criteria for any of the three Johnson trade missions she attended in the space of just a year.
Initial decisions to turn her down for two of those trips were overturned after intervention by Johnson and his close team in the mayor's office.
One internal email shows how she was given access to a New York trade mission after she discussed the matter with Johnson and he was said to have been happy for her to take part.
As mayor, Johnson was bound by the Greater London Authority's code of conduct "to declare any private interests relating to their public duties and to take steps to resolve any conflicts arising in a way that protects the public interest".
He was also expressly barred from providing any undue benefits to friends.
[...]
In June last year, she relocated back to America, but her latest company still managed to win a £100,000 grant intended for English-based businesses from the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) earlier this year.
The department is now investigating the award of the grant after this newspaper's inquiries discovered that Arcuri's company's regisspeeches tered address — which was used on the grant application form — is a rented house in Cheshire that is no longer connected to her. She now lives in California.
[...]
Arcuri and Johnson were photographed together on many occasions. She heaped praise on Johnson in social media, defended him from attacks on Twitter, took part in his mayoral campaign, and posted photos she had taken of his speeches at party conferences and a charity event.
The two became close friends and Johnson is said to have made "many visits" to her flat. Chandan Daryanani, the owner of the building, claims Arcuri told him that Johnson was a frequent visitor. He said: "He definitely used to come along and they were very close friends she mentioned once he was one of her best friends".
[...]
Stateside they have the pussy-grabber.
Over here we have the thigh-squeezer ...
Misogynistic grubby little men the pair of them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beeb
Stateside you have a disgusting misogynist who boasted on video that he likes to "grab em by the pussy", something he hasn't to my knowledge denied [how could he, it was his words on camera] or apologised for.
This side we have an unsubstantiated report that has come out and been swiftly denied allegedly to have occured over 20 years ago but not mentioned until now despite the #MeToo movement being around for years during which Boris has been high profile and for many public enemy number one that whole time.
If it happened its wrong and unacceptable.
Its interesting how the story has evolved today. When it came out many were saying the other woman who was there and could verify it was Ms Wakefield but then she immediately denied it occured. Every news article seems to mention Ms Wakefield's husband but they don't seem to mention Ms Edwarde's equally if not more famous and just as biased paramour.
Can anybody please explain to me what is the difference between a Tory and a Labour government any longer? The present lot seems to have found the high spin setting on the money presses.
Every Labour government runs out of other people's money to spend. They promise to splash the cash on everything.
The Tories spend properly. The deficit has been brought down and now we can in Cameron's words "share the proceeds of growth" on higher spending/lower taxes.
Lol, these fuckers just can't stop lying, and their uneducated supporters can't stop gulping down the bullshit
Twitter Link
No lie there. Good news.
Criminals in that category are already not eligible for automatic release after half time.Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
The Grauniad must be lying then: https://www.theguardian.com/society/...-england-wales typical Grauniad can't tell the truth, is that what you're saying?Quote:
Originally Posted by Aimless
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Grauniad, emphasis mine
That statistic does not refer to the category "the most serious violent and sexual offenders".
Twitter Link
So you're counting on an anonymous Twitter account over the Grauniad? The Grauniad is #FakeNews is it?Quote:
Originally Posted by Aimless
No, I'm pointing out that the statistic mentioned in the Guardian does not refer to that particular category of criminals. The account in question is the author of one of the best-selling and best-reviewed books in the UK this year, about the justice system; as far as anyone has been able to determine, he or she is a barrister or equivalent. Other prominent legal professionals are in agreement that this announcement is misleading, for the same reason as this writer: practically all criminals in that category receive extended determinate sentences, which, you'll note, is not true of the category of criminals the article refers to.Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
Except the Tweet's authors very second Tweet in that thread confirms that this will apply to some criminals and bemoans the cost of the announcement. If this was fake news and didn't apply to anyone, there would be no cost.
Twitter Link
Arguing the money could be better spent elsewhere is fair enough, that's cause for debate. To claim simultaneously that this is fake and doesn't apply to anyone then claim that its going to cost is a tad illogical don't you think? The very rest of that thread continues that chain of thought bemoaning the cost and calling for alternatives. So the idea that the most serious violent and sexual offenders all receive extended determinate sentences is fake.
You could've just scrolled down a bit.
Twitter Link
Twitter Link
Taking a very narrow view on "the definition of the most serious violent and sexual offenders".
The view taken by judges and prosecutors, who regularly have to apply legal definitions judiciously. In contrast to authoritarian populist politicians who have no regard for truth and honesty.Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
This much is true.Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
With the end of austerity the Tories have put forward a large increase of £13.8bn on public spending. Hospitals, the police, infrastructure and local government the primary beneficiaries of the windfall.
This after Hammond, the last chancellor, held much back in fiscal reserves of what he could have spent in order to cope with the fallout from a no-deal Brexit.
It seems Javid has more confidence Brexit will not bring the significant economic downturn many predict it will.