Stop voting for fucking Tories

[I like neeps]

Mendaciousness, pure and simple.

Earlier this week, Liz Truss stated to the HoC that there was a majority in NI against the protocol. That's less than a couple of weeks after elections to the NI assembly in which 60% of the candidates returned were in favour of the protocol.

The lying is just so brazen, and the press doesn't appear to even attempt to keep them honest.

This is a massive failure of the democratic process.

As long as the govt don't run the press I don't think it's a failure in the democratic process... The problem is the press run the govt - not a problem I think was considered when everyone in the British state bent over for Murdoch et al.

Quite smart though, the press have the BBC and Labour absolutely terrified to even mention Brexit.

[Brazil]

Powerful speech IMO

Having been in London all week and hearing stories at meetings of what is happening in government, the bit about decisions being made on self preservation is particularly relevant.

I’ve heard that Truss is deliberately withholding funds to overseas development projects that have already been signed off as she thinks a leadership bid is in the offing and doesn’t want to be seen funding them

I spoke with a Tory MP who has been working tirelessly for years with Africa in various positions who has just had his latest role stripped, and hasn’t been replaced, because he refused to vote with Boris.

I spoke with some Kenyan officials who had been pestered to bring over a senior Ministerial delegation a couple of weeks back so the government could announce a new trade deal, but the day of the announcement No10 saw an opportunity to put out something they thought was more helpful and instead announced the defunding of major development projects in Kenya and left the Ministers high and dry and embarrassed and they left early. This has seriously dented bilateral cooperation.

There is a lot of anger out there from a lot of different people

You met Nancy as well did you? It's pretty shabby if they were treated like that, they'd put a huge amount into that mission so to be fucked over due to internal Tory feuds isn't going to help our international reputation.

Still, I'm not sure what anyone expects from this lot. Anyone with any brains has been purged, and the Cabinet is selected on a basis of how little they challenge Johnson. There was never any unifying vision of government beyond "get brexit done" which was vacuous to begin with, and we've ended up in a situation where decisions are made on the hoof to deflect daily crises, all this at a time when we're suffering the dual impacts of Brexit and COVID, and the complications of the Ukraine war. We have the worst possible government at the worst possible time, and it looks like there's a long hot summer in prospect.

[Rhubarb & Custard]

I didn't know Truss was doing the because of a leadership run soon to be upon us. I thought this was our alternative to China's Belt & Road projects, something along the lines of Don't Spare the Belt.

Some many think the new version is being appallingly managed, but in fairness the cabinet has been expunged of anyone with a brain, and lacking in humanity, but as Jacob would assure we'd only spare the belt if we hated children, that we're now seeking to chasten those with ambition shows we care for them.

[Tichtheid]

Mendaciousness, pure and simple.

Earlier this week, Liz Truss stated to the HoC that there was a majority in NI against the protocol. That's less than a couple of weeks after elections to the NI assembly in which 60% of the candidates returned were in favour of the protocol.

The lying is just so brazen, and the press doesn't appear to even attempt to keep them honest.

This is a massive failure of the democratic process.

As long as the govt don't run the press I don't think it's a failure in the democratic process... The problem is the press run the govt - not a problem I think was considered when everyone in the British state bent over for Murdoch et al.

Quite smart though, the press have the BBC and Labour absolutely terrified to even mention Brexit.

The media doesn't report on politics, it seeks to influence it, what you call "smart" is very much a failure of the democratic process. The electorate should be well informed but it really isn't. This is the job of the media and they are failing, badly.

They offer opposing views for the sake of "balance" when there really isn't a credible bit of evidence for that opposing view, see climate change.

[Paddington Bear]

The media employ political correspondents who are basically gossip merchants for nerds. This means most of them have no clue about policy or anything particularly serious, but can talk very engagingly about who's 'on manoeuvres', who is a rising star in the party, who will be the next PM etc. So their coverage of anything serious suffers as a result.

[I like neeps]

This is a massive failure of the democratic process.

As long as the govt don't run the press I don't think it's a failure in the democratic process... The problem is the press run the govt - not a problem I think was considered when everyone in the British state bent over for Murdoch et al.

Quite smart though, the press have the BBC and Labour absolutely terrified to even mention Brexit.

The media doesn't report on politics, it seeks to influence it, what you call "smart" is very much a failure of the democratic process. The electorate should be well informed but it really isn't. This is the job of the media and they are failing, badly.

They offer opposing views for the sake of "balance" when there really isn't a credible bit of evidence for that opposing view, see climate change.

No, the democratic process requires a free media which we technically have. The job of media outlets isn't cold factual truth to power reporting - it's all a business afterall. The job of the BBC is neutrality and the BBC failed. But, the media always tries to influence politics no matter who owns it. The Guardian, Mirror etc exposed partygate just as much as the Sun has ran with beergate. The billionaire class just happens to be more successful at it.

Are the media too powerful? All billionaires are too powerful.

[Tichtheid]

As long as the govt don't run the press I don't think it's a failure in the democratic process... The problem is the press run the govt - not a problem I think was considered when everyone in the British state bent over for Murdoch et al.

Quite smart though, the press have the BBC and Labour absolutely terrified to even mention Brexit.

The media doesn't report on politics, it seeks to influence it, what you call "smart" is very much a failure of the democratic process. The electorate should be well informed but it really isn't. This is the job of the media and they are failing, badly.

They offer opposing views for the sake of "balance" when there really isn't a credible bit of evidence for that opposing view, see climate change.

No, the democratic process requires a free media which we technically have. The job of media outlets isn't cold factual truth to power reporting - it's all a business afterall. The job of the BBC is neutrality and the BBC failed. But, the media always tries to influence politics no matter who owns it. The Guardian, Mirror etc exposed partygate just as much as the Sun has ran with beergate. The billionaire class just happens to be more successful at it.

Are the media too powerful? All billionaires are too powerful.

You say "the press have the BBC and Labour absolutely terrified to even mention Brexit."

Where does the fear come from?

If the press is so powerful that it has HM Opposition and the country's major broadcaster of news too scared to talk about one of the major political events that has happened in this country since the last world war, then I'd say the electorate is not being informed in a neutral or satisfactory fashion.

You may deny that a well informed electorate is essential to the democratic process, but frankly that is just plain wrong.

[fishfoodie]

As long as the govt don't run the press I don't think it's a failure in the democratic process... The problem is the press run the govt - not a problem I think was considered when everyone in the British state bent over for Murdoch et al.

Quite smart though, the press have the BBC and Labour absolutely terrified to even mention Brexit.

The media doesn't report on politics, it seeks to influence it, what you call "smart" is very much a failure of the democratic process. The electorate should be well informed but it really isn't. This is the job of the media and they are failing, badly.

They offer opposing views for the sake of "balance" when there really isn't a credible bit of evidence for that opposing view, see climate change.

No, the democratic process requires a free media which we technically have. The job of media outlets isn't cold factual truth to power reporting - it's all a business afterall. The job of the BBC is neutrality and the BBC failed. But, the media always tries to influence politics no matter who owns it. The Guardian, Mirror etc exposed partygate just as much as the Sun has ran with beergate. The billionaire class just happens to be more successful at it.

Are the media too powerful? All billionaires are too powerful.

Other Countries have controls to stop individuals getting too much control over the media, that owners don't have undue influence over the Editorial line, & that the owners should be, "fit & proper". As it stands in the UK, there are more controls over who owns a pub, or a Division 2 football side, than there are over who owns a TV network, or Newspaper Empire.

The only way to fix this is cross-Party support, but that's never going to happen, so now a handful of billionaires, who contribute nothing to the UK, control your Political parties.

[I like neeps]

The media doesn't report on politics, it seeks to influence it, what you call "smart" is very much a failure of the democratic process. The electorate should be well informed but it really isn't. This is the job of the media and they are failing, badly.

They offer opposing views for the sake of "balance" when there really isn't a credible bit of evidence for that opposing view, see climate change.

No, the democratic process requires a free media which we technically have. The job of media outlets isn't cold factual truth to power reporting - it's all a business afterall. The job of the BBC is neutrality and the BBC failed. But, the media always tries to influence politics no matter who owns it. The Guardian, Mirror etc exposed partygate just as much as the Sun has ran with beergate. The billionaire class just happens to be more successful at it.

Are the media too powerful? All billionaires are too powerful.

You say "the press have the BBC and Labour absolutely terrified to even mention Brexit."

Where does the fear come from?

If the press is so powerful that it has HM Opposition and the country's major broadcaster of news too scared to talk about one of the major political events that has happened in this country since the last world war, then I'd say the electorate is not being informed in a neutral or satisfactory fashion.

You may deny that a well informed electorate is essential to the democratic process, but frankly that is just plain wrong.

I don't deny that. A well informed electorate is different from a free press however. We have a free press. Hungary is probably the best example of a quote unquote democratic nation without a free press.

The job of the press in a democracy isn't to be neutral or even satisfactory however. It's to be without political influence. And largely it is! Boris Johnson doesn't influence the press, they influence him. I hate the billionaire owned right wing press we have as much as anyone. But it is technically a free press.

[Slick]

Powerful speech IMO

Having been in London all week and hearing stories at meetings of what is happening in government, the bit about decisions being made on self preservation is particularly relevant.

I’ve heard that Truss is deliberately withholding funds to overseas development projects that have already been signed off as she thinks a leadership bid is in the offing and doesn’t want to be seen funding them

I spoke with a Tory MP who has been working tirelessly for years with Africa in various positions who has just had his latest role stripped, and hasn’t been replaced, because he refused to vote with Boris.

I spoke with some Kenyan officials who had been pestered to bring over a senior Ministerial delegation a couple of weeks back so the government could announce a new trade deal, but the day of the announcement No10 saw an opportunity to put out something they thought was more helpful and instead announced the defunding of major development projects in Kenya and left the Ministers high and dry and embarrassed and they left early. This has seriously dented bilateral cooperation.

There is a lot of anger out there from a lot of different people

You met Nancy as well did you? It's pretty shabby if they were treated like that, they'd put a huge amount into that mission so to be fucked over due to internal Tory feuds isn't going to help our international reputation.

Still, I'm not sure what anyone expects from this lot. Anyone with any brains has been purged, and the Cabinet is selected on a basis of how little they challenge Johnson. There was never any unifying vision of government beyond "get brexit done" which was vacuous to begin with, and we've ended up in a situation where decisions are made on the hoof to deflect daily crises, all this at a time when we're suffering the dual impacts of Brexit and COVID, and the complications of the Ukraine war. We have the worst possible government at the worst possible time, and it looks like there's a long hot summer in prospect.

Nancy K? The PS?

[C69]

Who is the MP for Romford that likes bulldogs?

[Brazil]

Nancy K? The PS?

Yep, that's her. We had a short meeting about all things maritime as it's a key area for them. Shame the government fucked them over.

[JM2K6]

Powerful speech IMO

Having been in London all week and hearing stories at meetings of what is happening in government, the bit about decisions being made on self preservation is particularly relevant.

I’ve heard that Truss is deliberately withholding funds to overseas development projects that have already been signed off as she thinks a leadership bid is in the offing and doesn’t want to be seen funding them

I spoke with a Tory MP who has been working tirelessly for years with Africa in various positions who has just had his latest role stripped, and hasn’t been replaced, because he refused to vote with Boris.

I spoke with some Kenyan officials who had been pestered to bring over a senior Ministerial delegation a couple of weeks back so the government could announce a new trade deal, but the day of the announcement No10 saw an opportunity to put out something they thought was more helpful and instead announced the defunding of major development projects in Kenya and left the Ministers high and dry and embarrassed and they left early. This has seriously dented bilateral cooperation.

There is a lot of anger out there from a lot of different people

v interesting, thank you. And a timely reminder to me that while I am ideologically opposed to many of the beliefs & policies of the traditional Tory MP, there's still a massive gap between people who are just trying to do their job the best they can for the benefit of other people (as they see it) vs the rapacious bunch of venal, vacuous, power-hungry charlatans that make up the bulk of the populist Tory govt.

[Slick]

Nancy K? The PS?

Yep, that's her. We had a short meeting about all things maritime as it's a key area for them. Shame the government fucked them over.

She was meant to be with me in Scotland next week until they couldn’t get their visas in time .

[mos_eisely_]

She really is thick as shit

[Rinkals]

[shaggy]

Maybe politics is different from the real world but whenever I am leading an investigation I regularly check in with the party that commissioned the investigation to make sure I am meeting the terms of reference.

This is not something that is unexpected within industry so why should politics be any different?

[Uncle fester]

According to the Guardian, “the alleged sexual offences for which a Conservative MP has been arrested include one connected to someone aged under 18”.

Oh and the police have been investigating the allegations since January 2020, so have probably already collected a fair amount of evidence against the bastard.

As I saw someone saying on twitter; doesn't it make you wonder if Cressida Dick being finally removed, shook up the Met, when it came to policing inside Westminster, & particularly sex crimes, where the Met looked particularly delinquent ?

...............and it turns out the victim was male!

Saw that coming a mile off.

[Rinkals]

Maybe politics is different from the real world but whenever I am leading an investigation I regularly check in with the party that commissioned the investigation to make sure I am meeting the terms of reference.

This is not something that is unexpected within industry so why should politics be any different?

Well, this is supposed to be an 'independent' investigation.

If your terms of reference were to make sure that no wrong doing was uncovered, then your claim might be valid.

[shaggy]

Maybe politics is different from the real world but whenever I am leading an investigation I regularly check in with the party that commissioned the investigation to make sure I am meeting the terms of reference.

This is not something that is unexpected within industry so why should politics be any different?

Well, this is supposed to be an 'independent' investigation.

If your terms of reference were to make sure that no wrong doing was uncovered, then your claim might be valid.

Terms of reference don’t define the outcome, they are there to make sure a process is followed. The investigation can also be independent even when within a single organisation.

Do you really believe that the ToR was written to find no wrong-doing?

[petej]

Maybe politics is different from the real world but whenever I am leading an investigation I regularly check in with the party that commissioned the investigation to make sure I am meeting the terms of reference.

This is not something that is unexpected within industry so why should politics be any different?

Well, this is supposed to be an 'independent' investigation.

If your terms of reference were to make sure that no wrong doing was uncovered, then your claim might be valid.

Terms of reference don’t define the outcome, they are there to make sure a process is followed. The investigation can also be independent even when within a single organisation.

Do you really believe that the ToR was written to find no wrong-doing?

Not disagreeing but so much of this requires most people involved being decent and having integrity. Johnson is not a decent individual and holds the most senior position.

[fishfoodie]

Maybe politics is different from the real world but whenever I am leading an investigation I regularly check in with the party that commissioned the investigation to make sure I am meeting the terms of reference.

This is not something that is unexpected within industry so why should politics be any different?

How about if the instigator of the investigation, then turns out to have been more guilty than most, & asks you to not publish some damaging content ?

Like for instance, pictures that any reasonable person would conclude were of a party, & so telling the Parliament there were no parties was obviously a lie.

The Bumblecunt knows that while the report is just words, he can try to keep the cork in the bottle; but if the papers have pictures of him leading a conga line, while necking a bottle of wine, or equivalent, it's untenable to keep maintaining he never knew it was a party.

[Rinkals]

Maybe politics is different from the real world but whenever I am leading an investigation I regularly check in with the party that commissioned the investigation to make sure I am meeting the terms of reference.

This is not something that is unexpected within industry so why should politics be any different?

Well, this is supposed to be an 'independent' investigation.

If your terms of reference were to make sure that no wrong doing was uncovered, then your claim might be valid.

Terms of reference don’t define the outcome, they are there to make sure a process is followed. The investigation can also be independent even when within a single organisation.

Do you really believe that the ToR was written to find no wrong-doing?

Of course not. You were the one that suggested that the reason for the meeting was probably to discuss the ToR.

Boris Johnson is one of the accused, so his meeting with the author of the report prior to its being published casts the suspicion that he wants to influence the published results.

You are perfectly at liberty to believe that Boris has acted with only the purest of intentions, but I'm inclined to differ.

[SaintK]

I wonder if the UK will follow Canada's lead on this one?

Canada has put sanctions on Alexander Lebedev, the former KGB agent who little more than a decade ago bought the Evening Standard and the Independent.
The Russian billionaire was named in a fresh wave of sanctions against Vladimir Putin’s regime announced on Friday that also included a ban on the import of Russian vodka, diamonds and caviar, according to the Globe and Mail.
Lebedev, whose links to the British prime minister, Boris Johnson, are well documented, has not been subjected to sanctions by the UK.

https://www.theguardian.com/media/202 ... ne-report

[shaggy]

Well, this is supposed to be an 'independent' investigation.

If your terms of reference were to make sure that no wrong doing was uncovered, then your claim might be valid.

Terms of reference don’t define the outcome, they are there to make sure a process is followed. The investigation can also be independent even when within a single organisation.

Do you really believe that the ToR was written to find no wrong-doing?

Of course not. You were the one that suggested that the reason for the meeting was probably to discuss the ToR.

Boris Johnson is one of the accused, so his meeting with the author of the report prior to its being published casts the suspicion that he wants to influence the published results.

You are perfectly at liberty to believe that Boris has acted with only the purest of intentions, but I'm inclined to differ.

Actually, I don’t give a shit whether Boris has acted with integrity or not, I am only interested in why the process was questioned as being corrupt.

Any investigator worth their salt would not be swayed by an individual and should always use the process and ToR to keep honest.

[ASMO]

Well, this is supposed to be an 'independent' investigation.

If your terms of reference were to make sure that no wrong doing was uncovered, then your claim might be valid.

Terms of reference don’t define the outcome, they are there to make sure a process is followed. The investigation can also be independent even when within a single organisation.

Do you really believe that the ToR was written to find no wrong-doing?

Of course not. You were the one that suggested that the reason for the meeting was probably to discuss the ToR.

Boris Johnson is one of the accused, so his meeting with the author of the report prior to its being published casts the suspicion that he wants to influence the published results.

You are perfectly at liberty to believe that Boris has acted with only the purest of intentions, but I'm inclined to differ.

Anyone (not just a politician) with an iota of moral integrity would realise this is, and will be seen as a conflict of interest and recuse themselves, unfortunately we are talking about Boris who has none.

[shaggy]

Terms of reference don’t define the outcome, they are there to make sure a process is followed. The investigation can also be independent even when within a single organisation.

Do you really believe that the ToR was written to find no wrong-doing?

Of course not. You were the one that suggested that the reason for the meeting was probably to discuss the ToR.

Boris Johnson is one of the accused, so his meeting with the author of the report prior to its being published casts the suspicion that he wants to influence the published results.

You are perfectly at liberty to believe that Boris has acted with only the purest of intentions, but I'm inclined to differ.

Anyone (not just a politician) with an iota of moral integrity would realise this is, and will be seen as a conflict of interest and recuse themselves, unfortunately we are talking about Boris who has none.

So I take it from that of have no morals then

[petej]

I wonder if the UK will follow Canada's lead on this one?

Canada has put sanctions on Alexander Lebedev, the former KGB agent who little more than a decade ago bought the Evening Standard and the Independent.
The Russian billionaire was named in a fresh wave of sanctions against Vladimir Putin’s regime announced on Friday that also included a ban on the import of Russian vodka, diamonds and caviar, according to the Globe and Mail.
Lebedev, whose links to the British prime minister, Boris Johnson, are well documented, has not been subjected to sanctions by the UK.

https://www.theguardian.com/media/202 ... ne-report

Hopefully the Americans and EU do the same. It would be very difficult for Johnson not to follow suit and makes the elevation of lebedev to lord look like very dodgy decision.

[fishfoodie]

More lies.

Boris Johnson and Sue Gray have clashed over a controversial “secret meeting” between the pair, just days before her report into the Partygate scandal.

The senior civil servant’s team are furious about a No 10 claim that she initiated the get-together and that it focused on whether some of 300 photos of the lockdown parties should be included in her report.

A spokesperson for the Gray inquiry rejected both suggestions and denied the meeting was for her “to clarify her intentions” for publication, once the police investigation concluded.

The extraordinary briefing war will increase pressure on Downing Street to explain why the meeting was held at all, about an inquiry it calls “completely independent”.
...

No 10 has suggested the meeting – around one month ago – discussed whether the photos, handed over to the Met probe should be included in Ms Gray’s report.

This is rejected by the Gray team, which is astonished that Downing Street has sought to give the impression that she initiated the talks, The Independent understands.

Mr Johnson has said he wants as much information disclosed as possible, but No 10 has said “data protection” requirements might require some to be held back.

The issue of releasing the photos is said to be “a live question” – but they are likely to be demanded by the Commons inquiry into whether the prime minister lied to MPs regardless.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/p ... ments-area

[C69]

More lies.

Boris Johnson and Sue Gray have clashed over a controversial “secret meeting” between the pair, just days before her report into the Partygate scandal.

The senior civil servant’s team are furious about a No 10 claim that she initiated the get-together and that it focused on whether some of 300 photos of the lockdown parties should be included in her report.

A spokesperson for the Gray inquiry rejected both suggestions and denied the meeting was for her “to clarify her intentions” for publication, once the police investigation concluded.

The extraordinary briefing war will increase pressure on Downing Street to explain why the meeting was held at all, about an inquiry it calls “completely independent”.
...

No 10 has suggested the meeting – around one month ago – discussed whether the photos, handed over to the Met probe should be included in Ms Gray’s report.

This is rejected by the Gray team, which is astonished that Downing Street has sought to give the impression that she initiated the talks, The Independent understands.

Mr Johnson has said he wants as much information disclosed as possible, but No 10 has said “data protection” requirements might require some to be held back.

The issue of releasing the photos is said to be “a live question” – but they are likely to be demanded by the Commons inquiry into whether the prime minister lied to MPs regardless.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/p ... ments-area

And people will still vote for a dog with a blue rosette on and claim they are no bigots or racists or liars or rapists or paedo Tory MPs these days.

[tabascoboy]

Boris selects his escape goat

The Observer reports that the head of the civil service, Simon Case, is expected to "carry the can" once Sue Gray publishes her full report on lockdown gatherings in Downing Street in the coming days. Several sources tell the paper that Mr Case will face particular blame for "allowing a drinking culture to develop in which rule-breaking parties became commonplace". It says the criticism is expected to be so severe he'll have to resign or be sacked by Mr Johnson to prove Number 10 "has learned lessons".

meanwhile

[tabascoboy]

I'm assuming this is in regard to the revelations of the past week. If the evidence of using date-rape drugs is solid this bloke needs to be put away for a long time.

[C69]

I'm assuming this is in regard to the revelations of the past week. If the evidence of using date-rape drugs is solid this bloke needs to be put away for a long time.

Wouldn't be surprised if this was another Tory MP tbh.
Fecking hell the fallout of this could be massive espevially if it is found that the Whips knew.

[fishfoodie]

I'm assuming this is in regard to the revelations of the past week. If the evidence of using date-rape drugs is solid this bloke needs to be put away for a long time.

Wouldn't be surprised if this was another Tory MP tbh.
Fecking hell the fallout of this could be massive espevially if it is found that the Whips knew.

and again, more questions to ask the Met about why it's taking so long to either prosecute, or exonerate these MPs !

If it turns out this creep offended, after the Whips & Met had been told, there should be heads rolling in all directions.

[C69]

That sounds far fetched to be honest

Er

[tabascoboy]

I'm assuming this is in regard to the revelations of the past week. If the evidence of using date-rape drugs is solid this bloke needs to be put away for a long time.

Wouldn't be surprised if this was another Tory MP tbh.
Fecking hell the fallout of this could be massive espevially if it is found that the Whips knew.

Rumour mill doesn't give any names (possibility of libel too strong probably) but the thinking seems to be it's a separate and new case

[C69]

That sounds far fetched to be honest

Er

I think that's unfair. MP's drugging each other seems parallel universe stuff. I get politics attracts weirdos, look at you and Seft, but that seems too much altogether

Tory MPs live in a parallel universe today another was defending a convicted paedo rapist.
They are somewhat deluded it's like the court of Caligula atm.

[fishfoodie]

Er

I think that's unfair. MP's drugging each other seems parallel universe stuff. I get politics attracts weirdos, look at you and Seft, but that seems too much altogether

Tory MPs live in a parallel universe today another was defending a convicted paedo rapist.
They are somewhat deluded it's like the court of Caligula atm.

and it's not like this is the first time we've had people having their drinks spiked in Westminster !

https://archive.ph/c9KZi

[dpedin]

In the 'I'm happy to go on TV and sell my soul for the Blonde Bumblecunt' competition this must be the leading contender now?

https://news.sky.com/story/partygate-no ... i-12618735

[Slick]

That sounds far fetched to be honest

It does really