[Politics] Tory meltdown finally arrived [was: incoming]...

[Thunder Bolt]

Smarmer is very competent in drinking beers and eating Currys in lockdown. I have yet to see anything else from him. He is just a born loser Imo and won't get anywhere near leading the country.

Margaret Thatcher said, I always cheer up immensely when an insult is particularly wounding, because if the attack is personal, it means they haven’t got a single political arguments left.

 

[Super Steve Earle]

Couldn't agree more. The press seem to believe personality over substance. They want theatre more than anything else. It's a joke.

If you were having surgery, do you want the best surgeon or the one that is a character.

Clearly many would choose the one who promises to get the job done.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

You've missed the nuance somewhat.

Starmer was calling for Johnson to resign, as evidenced in that tweets amongst other sources, at the point the investigation was announced.

Johnson had not been found guilty at that time. That he subsequently was is irrelevant to my point. Starmer called for Johsnon to resign merely because he was being investigated.

Starmer is being investigated. Why hasn't he resigned?

Johnson had already lied in the Housenof Commons by saying there were no parties, before any investigation as to whether he was there or not. That in itself is a resigning matter. Allegra Stratton wasn’t at any party, just laughing about them going on, but had to resign.

 

[Since1982]

Johnson has already been found guilty by a police investigation and refused to resign, and, in fact, denied he had committed an offence despite the fine. Starmer has already been cleared once by the police but the police are now investigating due to " New Evidence " ..... If Starmer is found to have broken any laws he WILL resign unlike Johnson who will deny,ignore and obfuscate despite being caught.

I believe, and apologies if wrong, that it is new information rather than new evidence - they sound different to me. I’m sure you are right about Starmer, he has more integrity in his little finger than the entire cabinet.

 

[clapham_gull]

I'm genuinely baffled why Starmer hasn't resigned today based solely on how he seems to think these things should work.

Back in January, the mere announcement of an investigation into Johnson et al's lockdown behaviour was enough for Starmer to presume guilty unless proven innocent and called for Johnson to resign...

[tweet]1488176626642923521[/tweet]

So why, on the day police confirmed they are investigating his own behaviour relating to lockdown laws, has he not walked away?

And to reiterate, I've not got a horse in this race. I have no time for Boris Johnson and if I were made to vote for one or the other, then Starmer gets my 'X', but he can't have it both ways.

I think that is mildly disingenuous, but then I've spoken to a few much nearer to the inside. I had a fascinating conversation recently with a parent of someone right in the middle of it and a Tory voter.

It was pretty much an open secret in Westminster that Downing Street was sticking two fingers up to the rules (and continuing it's rampant drinking culture) and Starmer would have been aware too.

It's a shame he may have been guilty of a technical breach, but I wouldn't compare the two.

That's what the Daily Mail does.

The Conservative party know that what was happening in the flat is the worst to come.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

I'm genuinely baffled why Starmer hasn't resigned today based solely on how he seems to think these things should work.

Back in January, the mere announcement of an investigation into Johnson et al's lockdown behaviour was enough for Starmer to presume guilty unless proven innocent and called for Johnson to resign...

[tweet]1488176626642923521[/tweet]

So why, on the day police confirmed they are investigating his own behaviour relating to lockdown laws, has he not walked away?

And to reiterate, I've not got a horse in this race. I have no time for Boris Johnson and if I were made to vote for one or the other, then Starmer gets my 'X', but he can't have it both ways.

Note the difference between investigation and criminal investigation. The latter is done under caution.

 

[Bozza]

Johnson had already lied in the Housenof Commons by saying there were no parties, before any investigation as to whether he was there or not. That in itself is a resigning matter. Allegra Stratton wasn’t at any party, just laughing about them going on, but had to resign.

Irrelevant again.

Starmer was calling for Johnson to resign because he was being investigated by the police in relation to lockdown law breaking.

Starmer is being investigated by the police in relation to lockdown law breaking. Why hasn't be resigned.


(Beyond that, Johnson's lies were not proven to be lies back in January when Starmer waa calling for his resignation, only later on. And, if Starmer should be subsequently found to have broken lockdown laws, he also would have lied to the House, wouldn't he?)

 

[ozzygull]

Where I live, the Wokingham council has been so blue that if you put a broom with a blue rosette as a candidate, they would put a cross next to mr broom on the ballot paper. But to my amazement Shinfield south turned yellow, and the Tories have lost control of the Wokingham Council.

I think this a mixture of local issues due to the amount new housing in the area and people sick of the lying @rses in central government.

 

[Bodian]

You've missed the nuance somewhat.

Starmer was calling for Johnson to resign, as evidenced in that tweet amongst other sources, at the point the investigation was announced.

Johnson had not been found guilty at that time. That he subsequently was is irrelevant to my point. Starmer called for Johsnon to resign merely because he was being investigated.

Starmer is being investigated. Why hasn't he resigned?

Context is all-important. That tweet was after months of blatant lying and changing of stories about multiple incidents by Johnson.

The Starmer incident appears, at present, to be a one-off, and does appear, from the outside, to be a workplace matter. There is no evidence of him lying to Parliament, or even misleading Parliament. Nor did he make the rules himself.

And it's already been investigated and cleared once.

If he is fined, he will almost certainly resign.

 

[Bozza]

Note the difference between investigation and criminal investigation. The latter is done under caution.

"Criminal investigation" were Starmer's words.

The Met, via Dame Cressida Dick, did not use the word criminal:

"As a result, firstly, of the information provided by the Cabinet Office inquiry team, and, secondly, my own officers’ assessment, I can confirm that the Met is now investigating a number of events that took place at Downing Street and Whitehall in the last two years in relation to potential breaches of Covid-19 regulations.”

Not massively dissimilar to what Durham Police had to say today:

“Following the receipt of significant new information over recent days, Durham Constabulary has reviewed that position and now, following the conclusion of the pre-election period, we can confirm that an investigation into potential breaches of Covid-19 regulations relating to this gathering is now being conducted.”

I suspect, technically, both are/were criminal investigations, but I can see people don't like Starmer's hypocrisy exposed in this way so I'll leave you all to it.

 

[knocky1]

Margaret Thatcher said, I always cheer up immensely when an insult is particularly wounding, because if the attack is personal, it means they haven’t got a single political arguments left.

She must have been a very cheerful woman.

 

[drew]

Irrelevant again.

Starmer was calling for Johnson to resign because he was being investigated by the police in relation to lockdown law breaking.

Starmer is being investigated by the police in relation to lockdown law breaking. Why hasn't be resigned.


(Beyond that, Johnson's lies were not proven to be lies back in January when Starmer waa calling for his resignation, only later on. And, if Starmer should be subsequently found to have broken lockdown laws, he also would have lied to the House, wouldn't he?)

I don't recall Starmer calling for Johnson to resign just because he was being investigated. My recollection was that he was challenging Johnson to follow the ministerial code should he be found guilty, which, with the issuing of a PCN, he was.

Edit: I'll add in that the challenge was that he had lied to parliament when he had denied there being any parties! That is in breach of the ministerial code.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Irrelevant again.

Starmer was calling for Johnson to resign because he was being investigated by the police in relation to lockdown law breaking.

Starmer is being investigated by the police in relation to lockdown law breaking. Why hasn't be resigned.


(Beyond that, Johnson's lies were not proven to be lies back in January when Starmer waa calling for his resignation, only later on. And, if Starmer should be subsequently found to have broken lockdown laws, he also would have lied to the House, wouldn't he?)

Boris Johnson’s parties were in lockdown. As such, there is no argument about that, so as soon as it was proved he was there, then he was charged and issued with a fine.

In April 2021, it wasn’t a full lockdown, but tiers with exceptions for campaigning and working together. That is why Sir Keir Starmer was cleared of any wrongdoing.
What is happening now is trial by media, from Tory MPs and the Daily Mail, forcing the police to reopen the investigation.
First of all, they will look at their own investigation to see how they handled it last year. Then they will look at the new information to see if the situation is any different to the exceptions allowed, and then finally they will look at who was present and if they broke any rules.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

"Criminal investigation" were Starmer's words.

The Met, via Dame Cressida Dick, did not use the word criminal:

"As a result, firstly, of the information provided by the Cabinet Office inquiry team, and, secondly, my own officers’ assessment, I can confirm that the Met is now investigating a number of events that took place at Downing Street and Whitehall in the last two years in relation to potential breaches of Covid-19 regulations.”

Not massively dissimilar to what Durham Police had to say today:

“Following the receipt of significant new information over recent days, Durham Constabulary has reviewed that position and now, following the conclusion of the pre-election period, we can confirm that an investigation into potential breaches of Covid-19 regulations relating to this gathering is now being conducted.”

I suspect, technically, both are/were criminal investigations, but I can see people don't like Starmer's hypocrisy exposed in this way so I'll leave you all to it.

Can you not see the difference between investigating a number of events, and investigating potential breaches?
Your own quotes.
Events known to have taken place. Potential mean there might be breaches.

 

[clapham_gull]

Irrelevant again.

Starmer was calling for Johnson to resign because he was being investigated by the police in relation to lockdown law breaking.

Starmer is being investigated by the police in relation to lockdown law breaking. Why hasn't be resigned.

Because (I think) Starmer was in receipt of information that we weren't. From what I've heard (albeit second hand) number 10 was an oasis in the middle of lockdown rules.

They clearly had to continue to run the country, but since they had closed the local drinking and socialising venues they just moved them inside.

My industry in London was like that in the 90s with in-house subsidised bars.

.. mate, they ordered fridges to chill the wine.

Drinking alcohol at work after work was completely normalised. They just continued.

 

[A1X]

Starmer is being investigated. Why hasn't he resigned?

Johnson made the rules and was alleged to have broken them repeatedly and with little regard for the public.

Starmer was found not to have and unless this supposed new evidence is something pretty huge (in which case why haven’t the press, who’ve been desperate to make this happen in their quest to help the PM, splashed it already) the legal consensus is he has no case to answer.

Attempting to draw equivalence is akin to claiming the head of Sussex police’s traffic unit repeatedly doing 200mph on the M23 every Saturday afternoon is just as bad as someone caught doing 32mph in Crawley town centre.

If he is found to have broken the rules and gets fined I have no doubt he will resign. Which will in turn paint Johnson in an even worse light.

I don’t see why Tory MPs and Tory-supporting journalists should get to decide who is and isn’t leader of the Labour Party by dint of bullying and threatening one of the nation’s police forces to do their bidding, but maybe that’s an old-fashioned view.

 

[pb21]

You've missed the nuance somewhat.

Starmer was calling for Johnson to resign, as evidenced in that tweet amongst other sources, at the point the investigation was announced.

Johnson had not been found guilty at that time. That he subsequently was is irrelevant to my point. Starmer called for Johsnon to resign merely because he was being investigated.

Starmer is being investigated. Why hasn't he resigned?

Is Starmer being accused of, or been found to, breaking the Ministerial Code? As I understand it, that is the basis for the call to resign, i.e. misleading/lying. That's the nuance I don't think is being picked up.

If so, he either potentially should, or should resign, the same as for Johnson.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

The Conservatives have lost 482 seats now.

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

Johnson made the rules and was alleged to have broken them repeatedly and with little regard for the public.

This bit is the only thing that matters and why he shouldn’t be in office still, but let’s not forget Labour voted these rules through, voted to give the gov unchecked power and would have kept lock down longer and harder.

 

[Mellotron]

Attempting to draw equivalence is akin to claiming the head of Sussex police’s traffic unit repeatedly doing 200mph on the M23 every Saturday afternoon is just as bad as someone caught doing 32mph in Crawley town centre.

A million times this.

Classic knowingly disingenuous Daily Mail bullshit. Yet idiots will still lap it up and go “see?! They’re all the same!”