Page 304 of 330

Re: Boris Johnson

Posted: Wed Sep 18, 2019 7:19 pm
by Tubby Isaacs
Yep, extremely poor.

Re: Boris Johnson

Posted: Wed Sep 18, 2019 8:58 pm
by satnav
We now appear have arrived at a situation where MPs can't question the PM because parliament has been suspended and most journalists won't question the PM proper because their editors are cheerleaders for the PM so the only people who can hold Boris to account are members of the public and the Supreme court.

Re: Boris Johnson

Posted: Wed Sep 18, 2019 9:07 pm
by davidjay
satnav wrote:
Wed Sep 18, 2019 8:58 pm
We now appear have arrived at a situation where MPs can't question the PM because parliament has been suspended and most journalists won't question the PM proper because their editors are cheerleaders for the PM so the only people who can hold Boris to account are members of the public and the Supreme court.
And the parents of sick children can't question him without their private lives being trawled through and accused of using their sick children to score political points.

Re: Boris Johnson

Posted: Thu Sep 19, 2019 5:42 am
by KevS
I couldn't care less if the chap was involved in any political party from the Greens to Brexit. He was a worried father frantic with concern and needed to vent.

In that sort of situation, a person isn't going to be overly concerned with optics and how it may look to the outside world. He didn't expect to see the Prime Minister sauntering down the ward. He didn't expect the BBC Political Editor to point everyone to his Twitter profile so that the morons of the world can hurl abuse at him.

Worth pointing out now that it now seems that if you get rescued by the RNLI after showing your passport and have to be taken to hospital, your family will have to declare their political affiliations before treatment is offered.

Re: Boris Johnson

Posted: Thu Sep 19, 2019 6:28 am
by Andy McDandy
davidjay wrote:
Wed Sep 18, 2019 9:07 pm
satnav wrote:
Wed Sep 18, 2019 8:58 pm
We now appear have arrived at a situation where MPs can't question the PM because parliament has been suspended and most journalists won't question the PM proper because their editors are cheerleaders for the PM so the only people who can hold Boris to account are members of the public and the Supreme court.
And the parents of sick children can't question him without their private lives being trawled through and accused of using their sick children to score political points.
And the irony of this happening right after *that* Guardian editorial. Not when our side does it, again.

Re: Boris Johnson

Posted: Sat Sep 21, 2019 5:15 am
by AOB
Wouldn't it be good if newspapers had an imposed propagation for a period if they stepped out of line. But we could expect another Mailesque "Enemies of the People" front page if that was ever made law. Speaking of which, where was their "Enemy of the People" headline when this cunt prorogued Parliament?

Ironically, I expect it will make a return if the propagation verdict doesn't go their way.

Re: Boris Johnson

Posted: Sat Sep 21, 2019 10:20 am
by Andy McDandy
Not if our side are doing it. Basic law of politics.

Re: Boris Johnson

Posted: Sun Sep 22, 2019 10:55 am
by Snowflake
Supreme court poised to rule against Boris Johnson, say legal experts
Framing of verdict on prorogation of parliament may set off ‘constitutional eruption of volcanic proportions’


https://www.theguardian.com/law/2019/se ... rorogation

Fuck! if this is correct, didn't see it coming and honestly thought they would rule in favour of Johnson rather than risk the fallout. Hold on to your hats.

Re: Boris Johnson

Posted: Sun Sep 22, 2019 11:01 am
by Andy McDandy
I appreciate your anticipation, but I remember all too well the Hutton enquiry. Day after day if revelations, and a sense that no way could Blair and Campbell hang on. Then it was released and they were exonerated and the BBC crucified.

Re: Boris Johnson

Posted: Sun Sep 22, 2019 3:04 pm
by Tubby Isaacs
Seems very odd so many are anticipating the result of the court case. Does that usually happen?

Re: Boris Johnson

Posted: Sun Sep 22, 2019 4:38 pm
by Bones McCoy
Tubby Isaacs wrote:
Sun Sep 22, 2019 3:04 pm
Seems very odd so many are anticipating the result of the court case. Does that usually happen?
I've seen a lot of "What would happen next if ..", which seems to be perfectly sensible journalism.

Re: Boris Johnson

Posted: Sun Sep 22, 2019 4:43 pm
by Malcolm Armsteen
Tubby Isaacs wrote:
Sun Sep 22, 2019 3:04 pm
Seems very odd so many are anticipating the result of the court case. Does that usually happen?
I think whenever the 'constitution' is under judicial scrutiny a lot of people get interested.

Re: Boris Johnson

Posted: Sun Sep 22, 2019 4:45 pm
by Bones McCoy
London mayor, conflict of interest, "close friend".

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... fer-arcuri

Re: Boris Johnson

Posted: Sun Sep 22, 2019 4:46 pm
by Kreuzberger
Crucially, it is not sub judice either.

(Edit; the Supreme Court hearing, that is. Not whether Johnson was porking on the public purse.)

Re: Boris Johnson

Posted: Sun Sep 22, 2019 4:48 pm
by Tubby Isaacs
I suppose so. Just seems like counting chickens to me.