Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson

16465676970135

Comments

  • chrisstileschrisstiles Shipmate
    edited May 2020
    Enoch wrote: »
    This backtracking doesn't change the simple fact that this is a wicked and indefensible charge. It's morally wicked irrespective of whether a person works in the NHS or somewhere else.

    It was introduced as part of the 2014 Immigration Bill (which also strengthened the provisions under which members of the Windrush generation would be deported). 6 Labour MPs broke ranks to vote 'no' to the bill rather than abstain -- it's relatively easy to guess the names of three of them.
  • Actually only 5 Labour MPs voted against, the other was acting as Teller.
  • Another senior figure in the so-called government should soon be resigning, after driving 264 to stay with his parents, against the stay at home order in effect at the time, and while showing covid symptoms shortly after Boris Johnson was admitted to hospital and thus should have been self-isolating. A resignation that will cause great rejoicing.
  • EutychusEutychus Shipmate
    edited May 2020
    But what would he be resigning from? That's the whole problem with him, isn't it? If he resigned from whatever position he's in now, they'd just create another one for him or hire him as a consultant or something. It's not like the political act of resignation from elected office.
  • EnochEnoch Shipmate
    As he's paid by the state not the Conservative Party, that makes him a civil servant. It's merely that as a political adviser some of the rules about objectivity don't apply to him in quite the same way as to the rest. Other civil servants have done the honourable thing when they've been caught. So have other members of SAGE.

    I'm not holding my breath though.
  • PigletPiglet All Saints Host, Circus Host
    If he's a civil servant he ought to be bound by the same rules as Dr. Calderwood in Scotland was, but I'd be prepared to bet that he won't be.
  • Penny SPenny S Shipmate
    edited May 2020
    What bothers me about the PM's failure to keep his trousers on is the number of women who find him attractive enough for this to matter.

    The Today programme was trying to defend Cummings by asking their interviewee again and again what they would have done if the parents were both badly sick with covid and they had a four year old who needed care. If I feel sick, I don't even want to drive to Waitrose.
  • SarasaSarasa Shipmate
    edited May 2020
    My go to news site of choice is The Guardian, but to get a bit of balance I looked at The Daily Mail to see what they thought on the Dominic Cummings breaking lock down story. They quote a 'friend' of his saying of course he won't resign as it's a Guardian fake news story. I'm slightly alarmed that Trump's definition of 'fake news' is gaining ground in the UK. That's if it's true of course and not just the Mail stirring things.
  • If all the adults in a household are so sick that they can't even get out of bed then clearly there needs to be some exception to self-isolation to allow for young children to be cared for. Which would have to be someone living locally taking the children, and that household now self-isolating as well. All adults in a household being sick but able to get up and fix meals and be aware of what the children are doing is a normal part of parenthood (it'll usually be some Child Vectored Lurgy that the little darlings brought back from school).

    Being able to drive, much less a 4-5h drive, indicates that neither of those levels of symptoms applied. If you can drive at all you're able to adequately care for a child for a couple of days.

  • BoogieBoogie Shipmate
    If they had broken down or had an accident they would have put the emergency services at risk.

    He’s lost whatever credibility he had - apart from with the type of Tory who simply doesn’t care about such things.
  • EnochEnoch Shipmate
    "of course he won't resign"
    but that's not why.

    1. There's one rule for friends of the Prime Minister and another for the rest of us.
    2. This is a convenient way of making sure we don't all forget that, and
    3. These are people with no concept of honour or integrity.

    I'm still not holding my breath.
  • Boogie wrote: »
    If they had broken down or had an accident they would have put the emergency services at risk.

    He’s lost whatever credibility he had - apart from with the type of Tory who simply doesn’t care about such things.
    Even without breaking down he risked infecting others at whatever service station he stopped at, those drivers carrying essential goods around the country and the service station staff all of whom are taking a risk of infection to keep essential services running. He risked infecting his parents who would (by definition) be significantly older and more vulnerable. He risked starting a new cluster of infection in Durham, or when the symptoms cleared without significant impact (possibly suggesting he wasn't infected) he risked contracting the virus in Durham and starting a new cluster in London when he got back home.

    There is no defence for the recklessness of his actions. It's not as though he'd have been unaware of the risks and the scientific basis for why those actions were risky - he sat in on enough SAGE meetings, if he didn't know then that means he was only there to tell SAGE members what to do but not to listen to what they were saying.
  • Apparently, the source telling journos that the Cummings story is fake news, is Cummings himself.

    That Kuensberg is quoting 'a source' is unsurprising but depressing.
  • alienfromzogalienfromzog Shipmate
    edited May 2020
    This thread now runs to 67 pages. I'd be interested to know on how many of those 67, Johnson is compared to Trump. I suspect it's quite high. Whilst, Johnson is in many ways not as bad as Trump, there are some important parallels. And with the Cummings story and the Jennifer Arcuri one, we see how fundamentally corrupt Johnson's administration really.

    For those who might not know, here's a summary of the Arcuri story. She is an American IT-consultant who was based in London when Johnson was Mayor. According to the official Mayoral diary, Johnson spent several afternoons at her home. Moreover, she received a government grant for her business and was taken on official trade missions with the mayoral office. There is evidence that Arcuri was not entitled to either of these on the basis of merit and that her relationship with Mr Johnson led to special treatment.

    Because, as London Mayor, Johnson was effectively in charge of the Metropolitan Police, this matter was investigated by The Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) to see if there was evidence of the criminal offence of Misconduct in Public Office.

    This week, the IOPC published their finding that there was insufficient evidence to merit Mr Johnson facing charges.

    The official statement from No. 10 was that the investigation was a 'waste of time' and the accusations were 'politically motivated.'

    I have three points to make here:

    1. Whilst the then-mayor's behaviour may not have been criminal, that does not mean there was no wrong-doing. Indeed, a general principle here is that in such a powerful public office, these things must be very transparent such that there is not even an apperance of impropriatry. There is ample evidence that Arcuri may have benefitted from her personal relationship with Johnson (whatever the nature of that relationship). At the very least, Johnson has been entirely careless about the potential for a conflict of interest. There are on-going investigations to this matter. The investigation also found that people working in the mayoral office were influenced by a belief that Arcuri and Johnson were very close in their decision making.

    I have no interest in whether Johnson had a sexual relationship or not. I do believe that the private lives of public figures are not a matter of public interest where they have no connection to their public role. However, clearly the fact that Arcuri benefitted from a professional relationship with the mayoral office at the same time as having some sort of personal relationship with the mayor is a matter of public interest and pertinent to the matter.

    However, there is no credible doubt that this is grounds for resignation from public office. Many ministers have resigned for a lot less.

    2. The IOPC report found that key-evidence was missing. With various electronic records being deleted - against the Greater London Authority guideline on this point. Obviously that doesn't prove anything but it is concerning.

    3. The biggest for me was the statement that the investigation was based on politically-motivated accusations. This is straight out of the Tump play-book. The way it works is this; I can do whatever I want and if anyone calls me on my misdeads they are being political... thus it turns any ligitimate criticism or question into one of political disagreement rather than an argument of fact vs lies. There is no possible rational argument that there isn't a prima facie case to answer here that warrants investigation. The fact that charges haven't been brought does not change this simple face. You see how profoundly corrupt this is? It is a licence for Johnson and his cohort to do whatever they want because anyone who calls them on it is simply 'playing politics'

    The same applies to Cummings - with the 'fake news' and other anonymously-briefed defences. The point is that people do not accuse Cummings of wrong-doing because they dislike him. We dislike him because of his continued wrongdoing.

    So Mr Prime Minister, I would be very grateful if off you can fuck as soon as humanly possible. You are destroying my country.

    AFZ
  • The thing about the Arcuri scandal, is not that Johnson has been pinned down doing anything wrong, but that it's evident from the report that his underlings and aides simply assumed that their boss would be angry with them if they didn't break the rules in her favour, and so were corrupted.

    That right there is the root of the evil. Not that Johnson isn't a corrupt, venal, vainglorious trumpet, but that he makes everyone else in his orbit one too.
  • EnochEnoch Shipmate
    edited May 2020
    @alienfromzog on your three points,

    1. There's definitely, as you say, "evidence that Arcuri was not entitled to either of these on the basis of merit and that her relationship with Mr Johnson led to special treatment". Whatever Mr Johnson's claque-clique may say, the findings of the IOPC are best described not as that the investigation was a 'waste of time' and the accusations were 'politically motivated,' but 'this stinks but there wasn't enough evidence as to what really happened to be able to prosecute him with any confidence of success'. They also gave a clear nod to concluding that he still has questions to answer over the local government code of conduct which doesn't necessarily involve criminality in the strict legal and prosecution sense.

    2. As you say, as they have been deleted, that doesn't prove anything. It does, though, raise the strong suspicion that that is why they had been deleted.

    3. That is a very good point. Once a person is in public office, what they do is automatically political. That's unavoidable. It also means that whether they are honest or dishonest, competent or incompetent, good or bad - all questions that everybody should and is entitled to ask - is a political question. So as a defence, 'if anyone calls me out on my misdeeds they are being political' is a non-starter. This should be stated every time, until people become bored with it, and even beyond. Neither Trump nor Mr Johnson's claque-clique argue that people praising them are 'just being political'.


    Incidentally, @Doc Tor, I know there's a convention that when reporting briefings journalists are supposed to say 'a source' rather than naming the messenger. It's a convention with which I profoundly disagree. Where there is a messenger, his or her credibility and status are relevant to evaluating the credibility and status of the message. Even as a convention, though, I don't think there's any justification for maintaining it extends to protect a person from being named when they are answering questions about themself, a story that relates to them personally, rather than giving some sort of a briefing about government policy.


  • Doc Tor wrote: »
    Apparently, the source telling journos that the Cummings story is fake news, is Cummings himself.

    That Kuensberg is quoting 'a source' is unsurprising but depressing.

    The problem here is that Kuenssberg was quoting 'a source' in direct reply to another journalist -- essentially providing a rebuttal service for the government.

    In terms of Today carrying water for the government, the current narrative for what Cummings did directly contradicts the account provided to the Spectator by his own wife a few weeks ago.
  • Kuensberg really annoys me because she is - or rather can be - a good journalist. It's obvious that she's made a Faustian pact with various government sources which gives her access in return for following the spin the sources want to put out. This happens a lot in political journalism obviously and it's not a great thing but I think it's understandable when it's a Daily Telegraph, as everbody knows they're sympathetic to the Tories. However, it's unforgivable when it's the BBC, especially the senior political correspondent. Being so effectively biased and officially unbiased is a dangerous combination. I've no doubt that Laura as a person receives some significant unpleasantness on social media but a couple of years ago she was very quick to hype up a threat from some Labour supporters. I don't know how serious that actually was and I am not condoning such thuggery at all but she used it to shutdown any criticism of her reporting. Whether deliberately or not, that's a really bad thing in a BBC journalist. She may not actually like the government at all, who knows? But she is a very effective conduit for communicating the message that the governing clique want to get out there.

    One of the reasons we are in such a mess, both sides of the Atlantic, clearly is this kind of journalistic failure.

    AFZ
  • Some further thoughts on Cummings (I know, I must be really sick to be thinking about him) and I've reached a conclusion that I find undeniable. He was well enough to drive for 4 to 5 hours, yet felt he was too ill to be able to look after his child without the help of mum and dad.

    The undeniable conclusion is: He's a southern pansy.
  • Oi! I resemble that remark!
    :wink:

    I can't understand his need to drive, though. Surely, Dread Cthulhu can transcend time and space, and be wherever He wants in the twinkling of His Evil Eye?
    :confused:
  • Some further thoughts on Cummings (I know, I must be really sick to be thinking about him) and I've reached a conclusion that I find undeniable. He was well enough to drive for 4 to 5 hours, yet felt he was too ill to be able to look after his child without the help of mum and dad.

    The undeniable conclusion is: He's a southern pansy.

    Not really. Southern pansies can't go north of the Watford gap without coming out in a rash.

    Conversely, where I come from the vast Northern wastelands begin at Winchester. Anything beyond, is definitely North.*

    AFZ

    *I appreciate this is a slightly lopsided view of the world.**
    **I don't care.
  • Oh, I think an argument could be made that he was very rash
  • Some further thoughts on Cummings (I know, I must be really sick to be thinking about him) and I've reached a conclusion that I find undeniable. He was well enough to drive for 4 to 5 hours, yet felt he was too ill to be able to look after his child without the help of mum and dad.

    The undeniable conclusion is: He's a southern pansy.

    Not really. Southern pansies can't go north of the Watford gap without coming out in a rash.

    Conversely, where I come from the vast Northern wastelands begin at Winchester. Anything beyond, is definitely North.*

    AFZ

    *I appreciate this is a slightly lopsided view of the world.**
    **I don't care.

    I grew up thinking the North began somewhere around Birmingham. From my current vantage, anything below Stirling is The South.
  • Laura Kuensberg getting a hammering on social media, as she is quoting sources, defending Cummings, who some think is Cummings himself. Quite a funny joke, that she could have baby-sat for the Cummings.
  • I grew up thinking myself as a true midlander, right on the border between North and South (within a mile or so of the most northerly station on the London Underground, Watford Met). Then it got shifted to somewhere around Birmingham (Watford Gap, being a service station near the M1/M6 junction - a fair drive west to get to B'ham but you don't go much more north).

    Now I'm back on the border between North and South. A border I'd say does pass through Stirling.
  • Hardly surprising that all the Government Gobshites are lining up to support DC.

    O if only the whole boiling of them could be consigned to the place where they belong...the Cesspit of History.
  • Hardly surprising that all the Government Gobshites are lining up to support DC.
    .

    Defending the indefensible becomes a way of signalling loyalty.

    The alternative would also involve admitting that the rules aren’t clear.
  • Some further thoughts on Cummings (I know, I must be really sick to be thinking about him) and I've reached a conclusion that I find undeniable. He was well enough to drive for 4 to 5 hours, yet felt he was too ill to be able to look after his child without the help of mum and dad.

    Plus if he was driving for 4-5 hours (and back) he would presumably have stopped en route ? A case for the lesser spotted contact tracer perhaps ?
  • We often made the journey from just north of Durham to just south of Reading (and back, obviously). Neither of my children when aged 5 would have made it past Wetherby without needing the loo. Indeed, there were times when we had to pull into Washington services. And we can pretty much see them from our house.
  • jay_emmjay_emm Shipmate
    I grew up thinking myself as a true midlander, right on
    It depends on if you have an explicit midlands, if you've already divided Scotland and Wales off.
    If your doing it by population or distance or area.
    I'd say in many ways Dorset-Cornwall should count as extending 'Southward', which is back to nearer London.
    __
    On the DC front, they must have known about this during at least some of their statements on other cases, which makes it explicit hypocrisy on their part (I know things suddenly seem 'different' when it's you).
  • EnochEnoch Shipmate
    Cummings has said today he wasn't breaking the rules, 'it's all about doing the right things, not about what you guys think'. It's quite significant that nobody involved has tried to deny that this happened, that the person seen in Durham was a case of mistaken identity or any of the other claims often trotted out on these occasions.

    Would someone, whether Mr or Mrs Cummings, who was suffering from Covid 19, have been a person who should have been driving 270 with responsibility for at least one small child passenger?

    Giving Mrs Cummings' the benefit of the doubt that her account of his illness is truthful (see @chrisstiles's post above), did this 270 mile drive take place in the 24 hours before he felt weird or after he'd developed the high fever, spasms and twitching legs. According to her account, she was already ill anyway. Which one was driving and were either of them fit to do so?

  • jay_emmjay_emm Shipmate
    For comparision: BBC Political Editor 6th of April
    What on earth was she thinking? This was either grossly naive, achingly foolish or staggeringly arrogant. And either way the chief medical officer had to go.
  • His wife wrote an article in the Spectator on their experiences, and of course, amateur and professional sleuths will be pouring over it. I haven't read it, but I wonder if she mentions Durham? Something is rotten in the state of Denmark.
  • Another senior figure in the so-called government should soon be resigning, after driving 264 to stay with his parents, against the stay at home order in effect at the time, and while showing covid symptoms shortly after Boris Johnson was admitted to hospital and thus should have been self-isolating. A resignation that will cause great rejoicing.

    I'm no defender of Cummings but I don't see what else he and his wife could have done. She was ill, he was getting more unwell, the whole of the UK was being told to keep to themselves and they had a 4 year old that needed to be looked after. Where they went there was someone to look after the child and a separate place for him and his wife to be isolated.

    What else to do? Take themselves off to hospital and call in Social Services? Emergency placements are hard enough to find at the best of times, never mind when the country is in the midst of a pandemic and you're trying to find somewhere for a child who might be infected with coronavirus.

    Did he break the rules? Yes, of course. But in this instance there wasn't an alternative. Definitely not a resignation issue.
  • His wife wrote an article in the Spectator on their experiences, and of course, amateur and professional sleuths will be pouring over it. I haven't read it, but I wonder if she mentions Durham? Something is rotten in the state of Denmark.

    She does not, she gives the distinct impression that he was overcome by the illness almost straight away and that they spent all their time in London.

    He will survive because Johnson can't manage without him and a large percentage of the population demonstrate the attitude above, in that they simultaneously protest that they've never voted for the Conservatives but will come out as simps for them at every opportunity.
  • Yes, I thought he would survive. The Tory press will surely go easy on him.
  • Doc TorDoc Tor Admin
    edited May 2020
    I'm no defender of Cummings but I don't see what else he and his wife could have done.

    "I'm no defender of Cummings, but here I am, defending him."

    If you don't think that millionaire-in-cash-terms Spectator columnist Mrs Cummings and Prime Minister's number one adviser Mr Cummings couldn't have got one of their London-living friends to look after their one 4 (or 5 year old, depending on the reports) child for a few days, then I've got a garden bridge to sell you.

    Also, everything else about the story coming from No10 is bollocks. Someone spotted DC at his parents' house, in his parents' garden, with his child. The police were called and spoke to him. Anything about sisters or separate houses is an invention.

    Neither of them were ill enough to go to hospital. No one was incapable of looking after the kid. You know as well as I do you can be pretty much at death's door and still manage to care for a school-age child, even it means staggering from bed to slap some beans on some toast and then retreating to the sofa for a Thomas-the-Tank-Engine-a-thon.

    There were a thousand things they could have done instead of coming to my neck of the woods where the incidence of the virus was, at the time, very low. Now it's persistently high. I wonder how that happened?
  • PendragonPendragon Shipmate
    edited May 2020
    Another senior figure in the so-called government should soon be resigning, after driving 264 to stay with his parents, against the stay at home order in effect at the time, and while showing covid symptoms shortly after Boris Johnson was admitted to hospital and thus should have been self-isolating. A resignation that will cause great rejoicing.

    I'm no defender of Cummings but I don't see what else he and his wife could have done. She was ill, he was getting more unwell, the whole of the UK was being told to keep to themselves and they had a 4 year old that needed to be looked after. Where they went there was someone to look after the child and a separate place for him and his wife to be isolated.

    Did he break the rules? Yes, of course. But in this instance there wasn't an alternative. Definitely not a resignation issue.
    What pretty much every other family with Covid-19 has done: stay at home, however small that space is, find something for the child to do, even if it's a LOT of TV, and whoever is feeling less grotty at the time does the bare minimum to make sure everyone eats something, even if it's very beige or pasta and a jar of sauce, off clean plates and has clean underwear.

    If they had both ended up in hospital, social services would have helped find somewhere for the child, probably a less-vulnerable relative who could self isolate as a start, but travelling and putting the grandparents and their community at risk goes against everything we have been told to do by the government he is a part of.

    I can sort of understand the PM going to Chequers on discharge, as Downing Street is in the odd position of being both his home and the office for a lot of people in a very small space, so it was probably safer for the staff, even if he was probably no longer infectious, but Cummings travelled mid-contagious period.
  • Fuck.

    [Tongue very firmly in cheek]
    Is this the most upsetting thing about Covid-19? The people I find myself agreeing with!!!!
    [/tongue very firmly in cheek]

    However, apart from feeling like I need a shower, it is noteworthy nonetheless.

    Many of you will know that Piers (I fake front pages and love Trump) Morgan has been brilliant and righteously challenging the government's mismanagement of Covid-19.

    Then on the Cummins story I find Julia hate-filled-Brewer on the side of the angels and Tim Montgomerie is talking sense...

    Weird. Very weird.

    AFZ
  • jay_emmjay_emm Shipmate
    Did he break the rules? Yes, of course. But in this instance there wasn't an alternative. Definitely not a resignation issue.
    Ok I'll say you've convinced me, it's the responsibility of the person who made the rules that put Cummins the rule breaker in that position. Step forward Cummins the rule maker.
  • A Plague on all their houses!
    :rage:

    O wait...
  • Did he break the rules? Yes, of course. But in this instance there wasn't an alternative. Definitely not a resignation issue.

    It's a pity that a large number of MPs, including the fucking Attorney General apparently didn't understand the rules they were legislating into being.
  • BoogieBoogie Shipmate
    An alternative - look after your own child.

    Novel idea isn’t it?
  • Boogie wrote: »
    An alternative - look after your own child.

    Novel idea isn’t it?

    Rather plebeian.
  • The Cummings story seems to produce a slipperiness about the rules. Thus, my mother is ill, and I want to see her, but I am told about the rules. But look, I love my mother, and I think it's vital that I see her, I don't want her to die alone. Why doesn't my stance triumph over the rules?
  • Furtive GanderFurtive Gander Shipmate
    edited May 2020
    The Cummings story seems to produce a slipperiness about the rules. Thus, my mother is ill, and I want to see her, but I am told about the rules. But look, I love my mother, and I think it's vital that I see her, I don't want her to die alone. Why doesn't my stance triumph over the rules?

    If you're a top Tory (or close political advisor) you're safe, forget it, you're fine.

    If you're an independent scientific advisor, you're out of luck. Sorry.

  • The Cummings story seems to produce a slipperiness about the rules. Thus, my mother is ill, and I want to see her, but I am told about the rules. But look, I love my mother, and I think it's vital that I see her, I don't want her to die alone. Why doesn't my stance triumph over the rules?

    It is not as if other families haven't faced similar privations and worse during this period:

    "A statement on the page said Ismail died "without any family members close by due to the highly infectious nature of Covid-19"."
  • DooneDoone Shipmate
    Another senior figure in the so-called government should soon be resigning, after driving 264 to stay with his parents, against the stay at home order in effect at the time, and while showing covid symptoms shortly after Boris Johnson was admitted to hospital and thus should have been self-isolating. A resignation that will cause great rejoicing.

    I'm no defender of Cummings but I don't see what else he and his wife could have done. She was ill, he was getting more unwell, the whole of the UK was being told to keep to themselves and they had a 4 year old that needed to be looked after. Where they went there was someone to look after the child and a separate place for him and his wife to be isolated.

    What else to do? Take themselves off to hospital and call in Social Services? Emergency placements are hard enough to find at the best of times, never mind when the country is in the midst of a pandemic and you're trying to find somewhere for a child who might be infected with coronavirus.

    Did he break the rules? Yes, of course. But in this instance there wasn't an alternative. Definitely not a resignation issue.

    Sorry, but words fail me! No I’m not sorry! He’s another lying, self entitled brat who thinks he’s above the law and everyone else. Absolute nonsense about his child needing to be taken care of, in a worse case scenario one of his non-vulnerable relatives could have come to them with permission on compassionate grounds. I have had the deaths of 3 friends in the past 4 weeks, the families just had to cope, with none of the wealth or privileges of such as Cummings. I am incandescent with rage about this! He should not only resign, but also apologise and hang his head in shame!
  • Apparently, it's now coming out he did the journey twice, and went out for a nice walk in Barnard Castle too.

    Fucking muppet.
  • Doc Tor wrote: »
    Apparently, it's now coming out he did the journey twice, and went out for a nice walk in Barnard Castle too.

    Fucking muppet.

    And yet the tory bot army is still all over social media randomLY SHOUTing about how POLiticAL everyone is being.
Sign In or Register to comment.