TomandJerry
Well-known member
- Oct 1, 2013
- 12,323
- Thread starter
- #17,201
The DUP and ERG have rejected Sunaks deal on the NI issue.
The civil war will rumble on!
The civil war will rumble on!
The DUP and ERG have rejected Sunaks deal on the NI issue.
The civil war will rumble on!
Ridiculous sabotage from the ERGAt this rate, Labour will be shaping the new agreement after the next general election. The ERG have been foolish here, their time of influence is, I very much suspect, drawing to a close.
Ignorance is no defence of the law.I misled you, but I did it in good faith. For once, Boris is telling the truth.
In his mind, "in good faith" will mean "honesty or sincerity of intention".
Effectively, he is saying "I misled you, and that was my honest and sincere intention".
I agree the bill will pass anyway and about the ERG's ongoing idiocy, but what boil will replacing Johnson's 'Northern Ireland Protocol' with May's 'Northern Ireland backstop', now rebranded Sunak's 'Windsor Framework' lance exactly ?I am absolutely sick to death of the ERG and their ‘influence’ on British politics. If Sunak had anything about him he would impose a three line whip and anyone who voted against the bill loses the whip. The bill would still pass with Labour support and finally they could lance the boil. He won’t though.
Is this not about the parliamentary code of conduct rather than the law?Ignorance is no defence of the law.
Mistake or ignorance of law. Ignorance or mistake of law is no defence to a criminal charge; mens rea does not involve knowledge on the part of a defendant that his acts or omissions were against the law and constituted a crime1.
Is that before or after he has been ploughed into The Clamp's ditch?Is this not about the parliamentary code of conduct rather than the law?
He's trying to say he didn't intentionally mislead the House, even though the investigation suggests that what he said was wrong.
Any sane person would look at the circumstances and decide that he knew enough AT THE TIME to know that the parties were against the rules and therefore he deliberately misled the House with his statements about them, but he has spent a sh|t-tonne of taxpayer's money on Lord Pannick to try and wheedle out on a technicality again.
Someone just needs to put the scruffy c**t in the bin, then in the sea, then on a slowboat to Rwanda
He's saying nobody told him it was wrong, or that is the way I have read it.Is this not about the parliamentary code of conduct rather than the law?
He's trying to say he didn't intentionally mislead the House, even though the investigation suggests that what he said was wrong.
Any sane person would look at the circumstances and decide that he knew enough AT THE TIME to know that the parties were against the rules and therefore he deliberately misled the House with his statements about them, but he has spent a sh|t-tonne of taxpayer's money on Lord Pannick to try and wheedle out on a technicality again.
Someone just needs to put the scruffy c**t in the bin, then in the sea, then on a slowboat to Rwanda
Before, I'm sure even The Clamp wouldn't want him bought back from Rwanda just for thatIs that before or after he has been ploughed into The Clamp's ditch?
I think he's saying that he had never had any f***ing idea what he was doing, even though he was telling everyone else what to do and not do, and nobody told him that he shouldn't blatantly lie about everything. He may have a caseHe's saying nobody told him it was wrong, or that is the way I have read it.
A lot of people use 'They're all the same' when they've made a crap decision and don't want to admit it. By claiming 'They're all the same' it somehow justifies their crap decision, a bit like saying 'All Chinese food is crap' because they chose a crap Chinese restaurant.Ridiculous sabotage from the ERG
However Labour will bring with them their own equivalent with the Socialist Campaign Group within their parliamentary party
And so it goes and so it goes
There are also people who consider any kind of comparison between governments to be whataboutery, thereby removing any option for comparison, as suits their narrative.A lot of people use 'They're all the same' when they've made a crap decision and don't want to admit it. By claiming 'They're all the same' it somehow justifies their crap decision, a bit like saying 'All Chinese food is crap' because they chose a crap Chinese restaurant.
But I'm sure that isn't the case here
Is Suella Braverman still in the ERG?