Page 4 of 29 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 120 of 852

Thread: The Clown Circus

  1. #91
    I don't think he's a genius.
    Rumours heard from a little black bird
    The edges of the prophacy, the pieces I have learned
    Said the daughter of the reaper has been searching for the keeper
    And I fear she'll let me burn

  2. #92
    I sleep better at night thinking the Vote Leave campaign was orchestrated by a genius. Don't ruin it for me.

  3. #93
    Dominic Cummings is a genius like this forum is a genius.
    "One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."

  4. #94
    Oh God, you're making it worse. Please stop!

  5. #95
    Quote Originally Posted by Aimless View Post
    No LewkBlade, the statement from Durham police, though it is confusingly worded, shows that the police considers the trip to the castle, as it has been described, as an action that was in violation of lockdown rules. This is apparent from the statement if you regarded it as a whole rather than piecemeal in your usual birdbrained manner, and I believe others hold the same view:

    Yeah right, axe-grinding partisan lawyer claims something makes it true now does it?

    The fact is the Police said "might". That's what matters not what someone pushing an agenda thinks and it is innocent until proven guilty anyway.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    ℬeing upset is understandable, but be upset at yourself for poor planning, not at the world by acting like a spoiled bitch during an interview.

  6. #96
    Quote Originally Posted by gogobongopop View Post
    I sleep better at night thinking the Vote Leave campaign was orchestrated by a genius. Don't ruin it for me.
    It was voted for by them too. Its a genius thing to do.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    ℬeing upset is understandable, but be upset at yourself for poor planning, not at the world by acting like a spoiled bitch during an interview.

  7. #97
    I hope so; but given you're all geniuses you've done a pretty awful job at explaining how the benefits of leaving outweigh the cost.

  8. #98
    Quote Originally Posted by RandBlade View Post
    Yeah right, axe-grinding partisan lawyer claims something makes it true now does it?

    The fact is the Police said "might". That's what matters not what someone pushing an agenda thinks and it is innocent until proven guilty anyway.
    I recommend you read the statement in its entirety, RandKowski.
    "One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."

  9. #99
    Quote Originally Posted by Aimless View Post
    I recommend you read the statement in its entirety, RandKowski.
    I have, have you? You're so prepared to piss all over innocent until proven guilty for what?
    Durham Constabulary press statement
    28/05/2020
    ​On 27 March 2020, Dominic Cummings drove to Durham to self-isolate in a property owned by his father.

    Durham Constabulary does not consider that by locating himself at his father’s premises, Mr Cummings committed an offence contrary to regulation 6 of the Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (England) Regulations 2020. (We are concerned here with breaches of the Regulations, not the general Government guidance to “stay at home”.)

    On 12 April 2020, Mr Cummings drove approximately 26 miles from his father’s property to Barnard Castle with his wife and son. He stated on 25 May 2020 that the purpose of this drive was to test his resilience to drive to London the following day, including whether his eyesight was sufficiently recovered, his period of self-isolation having ended.

    Durham Constabulary have examined the circumstances surrounding the journey to Barnard Castle (including ANPR, witness evidence and a review of Mr Cummings’ press conference on 25 May 2020) and have concluded that there might have been a minor breach of the Regulations that would have warranted police intervention. Durham Constabulary view this as minor because there was no apparent breach of social distancing.

    Had a Durham Constabulary police officer stopped Mr Cummings driving to or from Barnard Castle, the officer would have spoken to him, and, having established the facts, likely advised Mr Cummings to return to the address in Durham, providing advice on the dangers of travelling during the pandemic crisis. Had this advice been accepted by Mr Cummings, no enforcement action would have been taken.

    In line with Durham Constabulary’s general approach throughout the pandemic, there is no intention to take retrospective action in respect of the Barnard Castle incident since this would amount to treating Mr Cummings differently from other members of the public. Durham Constabulary has not taken retrospective action against any other person.

    By way of further context, Durham Constabulary has followed Government guidance on management of alleged breaches of the regulations with the emphasis on the NPCC and College of Policing 4Es: Engage, Explain and Encourage before Enforcement.

    Finally, commentary in the media has suggested that Mr Cummings was in Durham on 19 April 2020. Mr Cummings denies this and Durham Constabulary have seen insufficient evidence to support this allegation.

    Therefore Durham Constabulary will take no further action in this matter and has informed Mr Cummings of this decision.
    Nothing there says guilty.

    The only clown circus here is the witch hunt to try to get Cummings primarily by people who self-profess to hate him because of Brexit.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    ℬeing upset is understandable, but be upset at yourself for poor planning, not at the world by acting like a spoiled bitch during an interview.

  10. #100
    Quote Originally Posted by RandBlade View Post
    I have, have you? You're so prepared to piss all over innocent until proven guilty for what?
    Nothing there says guilty.
    It is not up to the police to determine guilt. It is however within their authority to enforce the law, which, in this case, based on what they know, would have authorized a police officer to intervene. Which is what they say here:

    Had a Durham Constabulary police officer stopped Mr Cummings driving to or from Barnard Castle, the officer would have spoken to him, and, having established the facts, likely advised Mr Cummings to return to the address in Durham, providing advice on the dangers of travelling during the pandemic crisis. Had this advice been accepted by Mr Cummings, no enforcement action would have been taken.
    This quote makes it clear that the Durham police view the trip, as it has been described to them, as a violation of lockdown rules, that would have led them to advise Cummings to go home. The final sentence directly implies that, had Cummings not heeded such advice, Durham police believes it would have been appropriate to take enforcement action, presumably in the form of a fine. Like I've told you many times before, you really should try to read things carefully.
    "One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."

  11. #101
    Quote Originally Posted by Aimless View Post
    It is not up to the police to determine guilt. It is however within their authority to enforce the law, which, in this case, based on what they know, would have authorized a police officer to intervene. Which is what they say here:



    This quote makes it clear that the Durham police view the trip, as it has been described to them, as a violation of lockdown rules, that would have led them to advise Cummings to go home. The final sentence directly implies that, had Cummings not heeded such advice, Durham police believes it would have been appropriate to take enforcement action, presumably in the form of a fine. Like I've told you many times before, you really should try to read things carefully.
    Maybe having Trump for president has desensitized me, but is this really worthy of this level of commotion and uproar? A day trip that might have, under some circumstances, been a ticket-able offense for something that likely put no one else in any real danger? I am scratching my head at why this is even news, much less a controversy deserving international attention.

  12. #102
    Quote Originally Posted by Aimless View Post
    It is not up to the police to determine guilt. It is however within their authority to enforce the law, which, in this case, based on what they know, would have authorized a police officer to intervene. Which is what they say here:



    This quote makes it clear that the Durham police view the trip, as it has been described to them, as a violation of lockdown rules, that would have led them to advise Cummings to go home. The final sentence directly implies that, had Cummings not heeded such advice, Durham police believes it would have been appropriate to take enforcement action, presumably in the form of a fine. Like I've told you many times before, you really should try to read things carefully.
    The only certain thing following would is they would have spoken to him to ascertain the facts, which they haven't done.

    Depending upon the facts which have not been ascertained they may or may not (likely may) have considered it a breach of the rules.

    The final sentence says that if the ascertained evidence (not received) had led to them judging the trip was not permitted (not done but likely) and if he didn't need the advice (didn't happen) then there could have been a fine. Big whoop. If on top of if on top of if.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    ℬeing upset is understandable, but be upset at yourself for poor planning, not at the world by acting like a spoiled bitch during an interview.

  13. #103
    Quote Originally Posted by Enoch the Red View Post
    Maybe having Trump for president has desensitized me, but is this really worthy of this level of commotion and uproar? A day trip that might have, under some circumstances, been a ticket-able offense for something that likely put no one else in any real danger? I am scratching my head at why this is even news, much less a controversy deserving international attention.
    Because Cummings led the Vote Leave campaign so is hated by vindictive and petulant individuals who have a grudge over losing the referendum and are now out to try and get him for something that could have potentially if you compound ifs have been a ticket. Wow. Gogo has ranted about Cummings in the past here so has seen red and blown this up insanely.

    Many Labour MPs and Councillors have been caught doing the same thing or worse including the Welsh governments health minister and nobody gives a fuck about it for them.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    ℬeing upset is understandable, but be upset at yourself for poor planning, not at the world by acting like a spoiled bitch during an interview.

  14. #104
    I suppose I am envious of any government where this would be viewed as a major scandal.

  15. #105
    Quote Originally Posted by Enoch the Red View Post
    I suppose I am envious of any government where this would be viewed as a major scandal.
    ah, for the good ole days of tan suits and fancy mustard
    "In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."

  16. #106
    Quote Originally Posted by RandBlade View Post
    Because Cummings led the Vote Leave campaign so is hated by vindictive and petulant individuals who have a grudge over losing the referendum and are now out to try and get him for something that could have potentially if you compound ifs have been a ticket. Wow. Gogo has ranted about Cummings in the past here so has seen red and blown this up insanely.
    I genuinely had no idea Cummings was an orchestrator of Vote Leave. Indeed I had not heard of him before this furore.

    So my desire for him to step down has absolutely nothing to do with Brexit.

    My desire for him to step down is based entirely on the fact that the government cannot issue clear rules to the public, and then have its own leaders directly flout those clear rules. One rule for us and one rule for everybody else will not wash. Particularly when exposed to be flouting those rules, the excuses are pathetic lies which wouldn't fool a nine-year old.

    Douglas Moray, who resigned from government because of this, put this point across much more articulately than I.



    Let me repeat:
    I have constituents who didn't get to say goodbye to loved ones; families who could not mourn together; people who didn't visit sick relatives because they followed the guidance of the government. I cannot in good faith tell that they were all wrong and one senior advisor to the government was right.

    Cummings's position is untenable.
    Quote Originally Posted by Steely Glint View Post
    It's actually the original French billion, which is bi-million, which is a million to the power of 2. We adopted the word, and then they changed it, presumably as revenge for Crecy and Agincourt, and then the treasonous Americans adopted the new French usage and spread it all over the world. And now we have to use it.

    And that's Why I'm Voting Leave.

  17. #107
    Quote Originally Posted by Enoch the Red View Post
    I suppose I am envious of any government where this would be viewed as a major scandal.
    Though I take your point, I'm not happy excusing wrong because a measure of the scale of wrong is comparatively low.
    Quote Originally Posted by Steely Glint View Post
    It's actually the original French billion, which is bi-million, which is a million to the power of 2. We adopted the word, and then they changed it, presumably as revenge for Crecy and Agincourt, and then the treasonous Americans adopted the new French usage and spread it all over the world. And now we have to use it.

    And that's Why I'm Voting Leave.

  18. #108
    Quote Originally Posted by Timbuk2 View Post
    Though I take your point, I'm not happy excusing wrong because a measure of the scale of wrong is comparatively low.
    So the axe for any official who is caught speeding? I think there is value to holding public servants to a high standard, but this seems excessive. Are we really saying that a properly socially distanced family outing with people he was already quarantined with is the standard we want to use for what constitutes wrong doing? That seems like madness to me.

  19. #109
    Quote Originally Posted by Enoch the Red View Post
    So the axe for any official who is caught speeding? I think there is value to holding public servants to a high standard, but this seems excessive. Are we really saying that a properly socially distanced family outing with people he was already quarantined with is the standard we want to use for what constitutes wrong doing? That seems like madness to me.

    1) as a government paid employee speeding can be used to fire me. My driving record is used in my 6 month reviews, even though I don't drive as part of my job.

    2) the issue isn't one family doing it, but what happens when you don't enforce the rules when one family decides to ignore them. ie, the Florida beaches when the state tried to find a "please don't spring break" middle ground before being forced to close them.
    "In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."

  20. #110
    Senior Member Flixy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    6,435
    Quote Originally Posted by Enoch the Red View Post
    So the axe for any official who is caught speeding? I think there is value to holding public servants to a high standard, but this seems excessive. Are we really saying that a properly socially distanced family outing with people he was already quarantined with is the standard we want to use for what constitutes wrong doing? That seems like madness to me.

    I have constituents who didn't get to say goodbye to loved ones; families who could not mourn together; people who didn't visit sick relatives because they followed the guidance of the government. I cannot in good faith tell that they were all wrong and one senior advisor to the government was right.


    Perhaps if he had apologized, he could get away with it. But asking the entire population to make sacrifices, then not doing it yourself, is not a great move for someone in a position like him.

    Side note: other officials did get the axe for similar offenses. And people got fines for similar things.
    Keep on keepin' the beat alive!

  21. #111
    Quote Originally Posted by Enoch the Red View Post
    So the axe for any official who is caught speeding? I think there is value to holding public servants to a high standard, but this seems excessive. Are we really saying that a properly socially distanced family outing with people he was already quarantined with is the standard we want to use for what constitutes wrong doing? That seems like madness to me.
    At the time, the rules were that you were only allowed out of the house for essential trips (shopping, medical reasons) and for 1 period of exercise a day to which you could not drive to (this was later changed to, you can drive but the amount of time you spend driving has to be shorter than the time you spend exercising). The Barnard Castle trip was not that.

    At the time this was happening we'd already lost one Scottish government adviser (Catherine Calderwood). who breached the rules simply by travelling isolated in her own car to be isolated in her second home and had to resign, and then in early May another scientific adviser Neil Ferguson had to resign because his girlfriend came over twice.

    Weirdly, there was no circling of the wagons to defend these two because they were only 'minor breaches'. It seems that when the government spending a lot of effort on messaging and so on to make sure people follow these quiet tough rules, you can have officials disregarding them without consequence, because it would undermine the government's whole strategy.

    Unless, of course, you're a rich Tory and buddies with the PM, in which case the rules clearly shouldn't apply to you and it is entirely unreasonable of the media to expect them to.

    Really, it's disgusting that people think the rules apply to Important Tories.
    Rumours heard from a little black bird
    The edges of the prophacy, the pieces I have learned
    Said the daughter of the reaper has been searching for the keeper
    And I fear she'll let me burn

  22. #112


    Brewdog brewed a beer called Barnard Castle Eye Test before the last weekend. It has now completely sold out and they're having to brew more.
    Quote Originally Posted by Steely Glint View Post
    It's actually the original French billion, which is bi-million, which is a million to the power of 2. We adopted the word, and then they changed it, presumably as revenge for Crecy and Agincourt, and then the treasonous Americans adopted the new French usage and spread it all over the world. And now we have to use it.

    And that's Why I'm Voting Leave.

  23. #113
    Quote Originally Posted by Timbuk2 View Post
    I genuinely had no idea Cummings was an orchestrator of Vote Leave. Indeed I had not heard of him before this furore.

    So my desire for him to step down has absolutely nothing to do with Brexit.

    My desire for him to step down is based entirely on the fact that the government cannot issue clear rules to the public, and then have its own leaders directly flout those clear rules. One rule for us and one rule for everybody else will not wash. Particularly when exposed to be flouting those rules, the excuses are pathetic lies which wouldn't fool a nine-year old.

    Douglas Moray, who resigned from government because of this, put this point across much more articulately than I.



    Let me repeat:
    I have constituents who didn't get to say goodbye to loved ones; families who could not mourn together; people who didn't visit sick relatives because they followed the guidance of the government. I cannot in good faith tell that they were all wrong and one senior advisor to the government was right.

    Cummings's position is untenable.
    Cummings is one of those people too. He didn't visit his uncle who died during this and missed his funeral too. He isolated with his household and missed saying goodbye to a relative just like others.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    ℬeing upset is understandable, but be upset at yourself for poor planning, not at the world by acting like a spoiled bitch during an interview.

  24. #114
    Quote Originally Posted by Steely Glint View Post
    At the time, the rules were that you were only allowed out of the house for essential trips (shopping, medical reasons) and for 1 period of exercise a day to which you could not drive to (this was later changed to, you can drive but the amount of time you spend driving has to be shorter than the time you spend exercising). The Barnard Castle trip was not that.

    At the time this was happening we'd already lost one Scottish government adviser (Catherine Calderwood). who breached the rules simply by travelling isolated in her own car to be isolated in her second home and had to resign, and then in early May another scientific adviser Neil Ferguson had to resign because his girlfriend came over twice.

    Weirdly, there was no circling of the wagons to defend these two because they were only 'minor breaches'. It seems that when the government spending a lot of effort on messaging and so on to make sure people follow these quiet tough rules, you can have officials disregarding them without consequence, because it would undermine the government's whole strategy.

    Unless, of course, you're a rich Tory and buddies with the PM, in which case the rules clearly shouldn't apply to you and it is entirely unreasonable of the media to expect them to.

    Really, it's disgusting that people think the rules apply to Important Tories.
    I don't have a dog in this fight so I find it equally ridiculous that Calderwood and Ferguson resigned. I don't begrudge those who made the decision for themselves and their family not to visit loved ones who were sick or who passed away, just as I wouldn't not begrudge those who would go to be with them. That is a calculation each person and family must make based on any number of variables and factors, and I am woefully unqualified to be second guessing those decisions.

    I certainly wouldn't ask for the resignation of a cabinet member who went to be with a sick parent or relative.
    Last edited by Enoch the Red; 05-29-2020 at 04:25 PM.

  25. #115
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Amsterdam/Istanbul
    Posts
    12,313
    Quote Originally Posted by Enoch the Red View Post
    I don't have a dog in this fight so I find it equally ridiculous that Calderwood and Ferguson resigned. I don't begrudge the decisions of those who made the decision for themselves and their family not to visit loved ones who were sick or who passed away, just as I wouldn't not begrudge the decisions of those who would go to be with them. That is a calculation each person and family must make based on any number of variables and factors, and I am woefully unqualified to be second guessing those decisions.
    Well, that is the thing. The way the rules were policed the authorities gave people a strong impression that everybody should unswe no circumstances follow his own judgement. Joe sixpack could got told off by the police for sitting in his own front garden. Yet mr Cummings, who isn't just advising the PM, but actively involved in drawing up the rules locking up everybody else, got all freedom to interpret the same rules to allow him to drive accross half the country. A lot of people who were told by the police to move from their garden into the house, are very angry now. Many them are Conservative voters.
    Congratulations America

  26. #116
    Quote Originally Posted by Hazir View Post
    Well, that is the thing. The way the rules were policed the authorities gave people a strong impression that everybody should unswe no circumstances follow his own judgement. Joe sixpack could got told off by the police for sitting in his own front garden. Yet mr Cummings, who isn't just advising the PM, but actively involved in drawing up the rules locking up everybody else, got all freedom to interpret the same rules to allow him to drive accross half the country. A lot of people who were told by the police to move from their garden into the house, are very angry now. Many them are Conservative voters.
    Was Mr. Cummings told by the police to not behave in a certain way and then used his position to undermine them?

    Also, if that's an accurate description of the rules and their enforcement, I think that is also ridiculous.

  27. #117

  28. #118
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Amsterdam/Istanbul
    Posts
    12,313
    Quote Originally Posted by Enoch the Red View Post
    Was Mr. Cummings told by the police to not behave in a certain way and then used his position to undermine them?

    Also, if that's an accurate description of the rules and their enforcement, I think that is also ridiculous.
    Mr Cummings escaped police controls, so his behaviour while being admonished can not be known. The Durham police say, had they seen him and inquired after his reasons for a second trip (the so-called eye testing trip) they would have instructed him to go back home.

    I agree with you that enforcement was ridiculous, however, that was the enforcement people had to live with. Enforcement that totally ignored the reasons for the rules (i.e. social distancing) targeted people who walked their dog miles away from the next human being. One has to wonder how that threathened the NHS. So again; people who were forced to believe the rules meant 'stay inside your home' learned that the rulemaker got the right to interpret (which they didn't get) and to interpret it in a way that he was allowed to drive 260 miles.

    Prince Charles, who did something similar (while rules were not nearly as strict) was heavily criticized.

    an example of the the said enforcement https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DyGuYJUR8dQ



    But let me ask you a question. How would you feel if someone told you, as an explanation for a 60 mile road trip, that he had to do it because he needed to test his eyesight. That wouldn't offend you?
    Congratulations America

  29. #119
    With his kid and the car.

    On his wife's birthday.

    When his wife can drive.

  30. #120
    Quote Originally Posted by Hazir View Post
    Mr Cummings escaped police controls, so his behaviour while being admonished can not be known. The Durham police say, had they seen him and inquired after his reasons for a second trip (the so-called eye testing trip) they would have instructed him to go back home.
    So remind me again why we should be up in arms about something that likely wouldn't have even amounted to a slap on the wrist? I am guessing police regularly have this same interaction with people every day.

    I agree with you that enforcement was ridiculous, however, that was the enforcement people had to live with. Enforcement that totally ignored the reasons for the rules (i.e. social distancing) targeted people who walked their dog miles away from the next human being. One has to wonder how that threathened the NHS. So again; people who were forced to believe the rules meant 'stay inside your home' learned that the rulemaker got the right to interpret (which they didn't get) and to interpret it in a way that he was allowed to drive 260 miles.
    I'm also guessing, (being unfamiliar with Durham) that the implementation of this ridiculous policy in, say London, is likely very different than how it would have been implemented in Durham because the environment, rates of infection, number of police, population density, etc... would be very different. This is why a one size fits all policy is counter productive.

    However, from what you are telling me, people who were asked to go back home, (the dog walker example) did in fact interpret the rules differently, and probably in much the same was as the so-called rule maker.

    But let me ask you a question. How would you feel if someone told you, as an explanation for a 60 mile road trip, that he had to do it because he needed to test his eyesight. That wouldn't offend you?
    Oh, it's total bull. I don't doubt that for a second - but "Politician lies to cover own ass," especially when what is being "covered up" is a family outing that by all accounts put no one in any risk at all, is hardly man biting dog material. Again I am struggling to see how this is worthy of international attention, and I can't help but wish this was the type of scandal that US citizens had to deal with in our political reality.
    Last edited by Enoch the Red; 05-29-2020 at 05:31 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •