UK politics

Awful. Glad she's been suspended. Hope she resigns.

Cummings would have got less coverage if a.) they didn't try to deny it at the beginning and b.) he didn't lie to us in that ridiculous rose garden charade.

Edit: c.) his wife didn't write a Spectator article about the whole experience and failing to mention any of his account.

Edit: d.) claiming he predicted the virus in his blog, only to have someone show he'd edited that blog this year.

Edit: e.) he wasn't a criminal in the first place.

Edit: f.) Idiots didn't camp outside his house hurling abuse at him.

Edit g.) The PM did what he should have done and fired him.

h) He pissed off upto 48% of the country and the bulk of the establishment four years ago before the epidemic began.

Absolutely. Don't forget all those people who didn't vote. I can't image breaking electoral law and proroguing parliament illegally went down well with them either.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gogobongopop

Absolutely. Don't forget all those people who didn't vote. I can't image breaking electoral law and proroguing parliament illegally went down well with them either.

---

I can't imaging they could care less about it.

Of course you can't, because you don't mind being lied to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandBlade

This is far, far worse than Cummings but will no doubt get a fraction of the coverage.

Twitter Link

---

Yep, although I'd say the biggest problem I had with Cummings is the crappy excuses. If he had said sorry it wouldn't have been as big of a story either.

But yeah, MPs have a role as an example and it's, I think, more important that they follow the rules in cases like this.

By the way, I didn't think Cummings should have been fired (not for that at least), but the denials and excuses is what ticked me off.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gogobongopop

Of course you can't, because you don't mind being lied to.

---

People who don't vote don't care about minutiae like Parliament being prorogued.

Other people might, but not non-voters.

Can you give any evidence that people who do not vote specifically care so much about the timing of the proroguation of Parliament?

Nope.

Can you provide evidence that all Brexit voters supported his bullshit? Which is certainly what you implied.

Nope. Just opinions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gogobongopop

Nope.

Can you provide evidence that all Brexit voters supported his bullshit? Which is certainly what you implied.

Nope. Just opinions.

---

You are hardly impartial. You were happy to write that you "despise" Cummings long before any of this. Your judgement is clouded.

http://theworldforgotten.com/showthr...ngs#post210546

BTW in case you missed it, Vote Leave 'breaking the law' as you claimed was all a figment of Carole Codswallop's fervent imagination. The Courts cleared them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandBlade

This is far, far worse than Cummings but will no doubt get a fraction of the coverage.

Twitter Link

---

From a stupidity point of view, this is pretty appalling.

She did not lie though, she did not try to cover it up, she did not make up fantastical excuses. She owned up to her stupid mistake.

And that is why Cummings is worse, and why he got far more press coverage, and why he deserved to get far more press coverage.

You see, it's this thing called taking responsibility for your actions, however stupid they may be. That a politician at the top of the ruling party is incapable of that most basic and most necessary of ethics, indeed one which is taught to and understood by five year olds, is why Cummings is a miserable lying little prick.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandBlade

You are hardly impartial. You were happy to write that you "despise" Cummings long before any of this. Your judgement is clouded.

http://theworldforgotten.com/showthr...ngs#post210546

BTW in case you missed it, Vote Leave 'breaking the law' as you claimed was all a figment of Carole Codswallop's fervent imagination. The Courts cleared them.

---

I don't claim to be impartial. I despise the man because I despise liars.

Are you genuinely claiming to be impartial in all this?

You've basically claimed that all Pro Brexit voters support him. You challenge me to provide evidence of my claim, yet you can't do it yourself.

And your judgement is clouded because Johnson and Cummings represent Brexit. And if they stink, Brexit stinks.

I'd forgotten they had appealed. Thanks for the reminder.

He's still a miserable lying little prick, and the sooner he and that useless shit Johnson are gone the better.

Of course I'm not claiming to be impartial nor did I claim that "all Pro Brexit voters support him" - that claim came from you not me.

I said 48% disliked him due to Brexit, that doesn't imply anything about the other 52%.

It really doesn't get us anywhere when you try and score a point by claiming someone is impartial, when you're exactly the same. Odd.

So what's your impartial opinion on how the 52pc feel about Cummings?

I don't think the 52% cared that much either way about Cummings prior to this news story this year, whereas much of the most fervent supporters of the 48% like you hated him and had him as a bogeyman before any of this broke.

So earlier you asked me for evidence about a claim like that. Have you any evidence to support your impartial thoughts?

I don't claim to be impartial. I'm just saying you're not either. We're both partisans.

That's a no then.

Twitter Link

Boston Consulting Group = the Chris Graylings of consulting. The exorbitant fees are less concerning than their involvement in extremely costly and humiliating cock-ups. Can't decide whether it's just embarrassing or actually suspicious that the govt. turned to these scammers.

Twitter Link

This man is an utter dingus, and the only thing he seems to have learned from the UK's devastatingly costly pandemic cock-ups is that it's personally advantageous to deflect blame for one's own failures. You can either give me cover for the mess I made, or let me continue to fuck up—it's called leadership.

Twitter Link

:haha: Everything is spin with these useless chancers :haha:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aimless

Twitter Link

:haha: Everything is spin with these useless chancers :haha:

---

:bulb:

It's not quite there yet, but it's sinking close to Trump levels of narcissm.

If that already counts as a compliment..

Twitter Link

If I could say one thing to the Tory party, it would simply be this:

eat shit

I hope for the other nations of the UK that they will manage to get their independence from the UK.

Twitter Link

Should be investigated. If true, clear conflict of interest—making Johnson's suspicious string-pulling look blatantly corrupt.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aimless

Twitter Link

Boston Consulting Group = the Chris Graylings of consulting. The exorbitant fees are less concerning than their involvement in extremely costly and humiliating cock-ups. Can't decide whether it's just embarrassing or actually suspicious that the govt. turned to these scammers.

---

More on this:

Twitter Link

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aimless

Twitter Link

Should be investigated. If true, clear conflict of interest—making Johnson's suspicious string-pulling look blatantly corrupt.

---

Keep muckraking. It's already been investigated but that won't stop you throwing shit at the wall to see if anything sticks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandBlade

Keep muckraking. It's already been investigated but that won't stop you throwing shit at the wall to see if anything sticks.

---

Can you provide the details of how the investigation was conducted, what it found, and how the findings relate to an admission from one of the subjects? Because it kinda sounds like you're presenting a Trumpian "total exoneration!!!" argument similar to how the Mueller report was misrepresented by your Trumpian counterparts on the other side of the Atlantic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandBlade

Keep muckraking. It's already been investigated but that won't stop you throwing shit at the wall to see if anything sticks.

---

Wasn't that investigation based on the premise that they didn't have an affair?

Surely one party now admitting otherwise changes things significantly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gogobongopop

Wasn't that investigation based on the premise that they didn't have an affair?

---

The investigator believed there was reason to suspect they were having an intimate/sexual relationship. He concluded that there was insufficient evidence of Johnson using his influence directly to favor Arcuri, and that there was therefore not enough to justify recommending a criminal investigation. He made special note of the difficulty of investigating these events given that almost no relevant communications were retrievable (happened a long time ago, and neither official records nor private communications had been adequately preserved). He referred the matter back to the GLA, leaving the issue of breach of the Code of Conduct open—but explicitly acknowledging that what little was known might be sufficient to constitute a breach. Of particular relevance:

Quote:

---

The evidence supports that Mr Johnson arranged directly with Ms Arcuri to attend lnnotech events as a favour to her, and not at the recommendation of his staff, who were surprised and/or unhappy about him doing so. Mr Johnson must have known Ms Arcuri had a pecuniary
interest in lnnotech, as he had attended its events and it is reasonable to infer he knew she received sponsorship from L&P (since it was advertised at those events). It is also reasonable to infer that he knew Ms Arcuri had been accepted by the GLA for the Malaysia trade mission, since he was present with her, and that he must have been aware that she attended events at the New York and Tel Aviv trade missions at which he was also present

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gogobongopop

Wasn't that investigation based on the premise that they didn't have an affair?

Surely one party now admitting otherwise changes things significantly.

---

No.

Twitter Link

The photos of the boxes for kids that are circulating are even worse. What a fucking waste of money.

Indeed. I saw one example yesterday that totaled £5.22 for a £30 allowance.

The amounts people are getting seems to wildly differ, which perhaps isn't a surprise since this is organised by local Councils not central government. Some people are saying they've received very little, while others are replying to say they have received a lot - probably different Councils.

Plus there's no guarantee the Council is actually spending £30 on the box. They're simply obliged to provide food, there's no source or citation I've seen saying how much they've spent, it almost certainly isn't £30 at that amount. Hard to know without more information about which Council is providing what box and how much they're spending on it.

Difficult to blame councils for goods and services provided under no-bid govt. tenders.

I believe different Councils are using different vendors. Different Councils are certainly getting very different results.

Seems like the Tweet that went viral that gogo is referring to about £5.22 costing £30 is fake news. Supposedly came from Chartswell according to the Tweeter and supposedly cost £30 according to her, but no evidence for that and lots of people saying otherwise.

Then it turns out if you go to Chartswell's own website then at list price (no negotiations) this is what they provide:
https://www.chartwellscanhelp.com/


2 Week Food Hamper - costing £23

2 x 200g Block of cheese
14 x Portions of fresh fruit: 6 x apples, 4 x easy peel oranges and 4 x bananas
16 x Portions of vegetables: cucumber, carrots, baking potatoes, sweet potatoes, lettuce, tomato
1kg x Wholemeal penne pasta
4 x Chopped tomato tins
2 x Tuna chunks in brine
1 x Loaf of bread
9 x Healthy snacks

Rather different to the shabby £5 image, and costing £23 not £30.

That's not too bad for £23. Probably how much a Sainsbury's shop for those items would cost.

Might cost you a bit less if you went to Tesco or Aldi

And a bit more if you went to Waitrose or M&S :o

Fake news is bad, mmm'k.

I guess it's difficult to prove. Just because a website says what -should- happen doesn't mean that's what -will- happen.

Then again, looking at the original poster, she says she's "left wing", so you know what those trouble makers are like.

But looking at Marcus "problem for Boris" Rashford's timeline, there seems to be a lot of stark examples. Again, could be dangerous left wingers, or, like, Antifa, trying to implement socialism through the back door.

At least they're getting something though. That's good, and it's not money that parents can blow on drugs and brothels. As we do in the UK.

Shrug.

There are lots of examples, but who knows who provided them and how. This isn't centrally contracted it is down to local schools. A lot of these photos look like some amateur bungling something together - and only spending a couple of pounds per head.

This supposedly came from Chartwells but then Chartwells actual hamper is completely different and they have replied to say that doesn't meet their specification and could they get details on which school it was so they can investigate - but no public response to that.

Heck if you wanted to spend £30 per head then Morrisons provide this, including free delivery.
https://us.v-cdn.net/5020679/uploads...kmthhdl2n1.png