The Johnson Government 2019-2022

KUMB's 24-hour rolling news channel. The Forum in which to discuss non sport-related news and current affairs, including politics.

Moderators: Gnome, last.caress, Wilko1304, Rio, bristolhammerfc, the pink palermo, chalks

Post Reply
User avatar
SammyLeeWasOffside
Posts: 21689
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 9:31 am
Has liked: 290 likes
Total likes: 1020 likes

Re: The Johnson Government 2019-2022

Post by SammyLeeWasOffside »

mumbles87 wrote: Mon Mar 27, 2023 8:18 am Exactly, it's two completely different situations

Did he set the limit? No
Did he lie about it? No
Was he treated differently from a member of public? No
Did he accept his actions were wrong? Yes

Like you say it's nothing to do with what Boris did wrong this enquiry, it's if he lied to parliament about it

Last time I checked Burnham wasn't even an MP...

So I'm failing to see the relevance to bojos situation

Is he still a tit for missing the gantry signs? Yes
So now we are at only an MP who set the particular law should resign.

In regards to the police investigation
It's a crime to lie to the police so the absence of follow up charges would suggest he didn't lie to them.
Once fined he accepted it in almost exactly the same wording as Burnham did.


You are right Burnhams has nothing to do with Johnson's I am just interested in the lack of outrage at a fixed penalty notice issued to the person in charge of policing in Manchester.
User avatar
Monkeybubbles
Posts: 13800
Joined: Sun Feb 02, 2014 11:00 am
Location: Rumble, Brighton, Tonight.
Has liked: 485 likes
Total likes: 1954 likes

Re: The Johnson Government 2019-2022

Post by Monkeybubbles »

SammyLeeWasOffside wrote: Mon Mar 27, 2023 8:41 am So now we are at only an MP who set the particular law should resign.

In regards to the police investigation
It's a crime to lie to the police so the absence of follow up charges would suggest he didn't lie to them.
Once fined he accepted it in almost exactly the same wording as Burnham did.


You are right Burnhams has nothing to do with Johnson's I am just interested in the lack of outrage at a fixed penalty notice issued to the person in charge of policing in Manchester.

As someone else pointed out the other day, for someone who claims to not be a Tory you don't half do the hokey cokey to defend them.
User avatar
bubbles1966
Posts: 66966
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2007 10:01 pm
Location: I'm holding onto nothing, and trying to forget the rest
Has liked: 2436 likes
Total likes: 4292 likes

Re: The Johnson Government 2019-2022

Post by bubbles1966 »

DaveWHU1964 wrote: Mon Mar 27, 2023 7:49 am Same old Bubbles.

Anyway, how do you feel that you are you even able to comment on this stuff when a few days back you claimed that you’d paid no attention at the time to what Johnson was saying to parliament about these parties. You can only compare scale if you know about both can’t you? Did you nis-remember? Have his words at the time come flooding back to you.
Au contraire. I know bugger all about his parliamentary comments aside from what I glean on here.

I do recall a lot of people getting really excited a year or so ago about whether some people had shared a cheesy cracker or some such stuff because they kept putting it on the ITV news.

It struck me as an absolute absurdity at the time, and continues to.

It's a mountain made from a molehill, and that molehill that probably shouldn't have existed in the first place; one that only arose from the collective (international, political, scientific, media, public) herding of thought in spring 2020. The public as a whole are increasingly questioning whether lockdowns should have ever existed.
User avatar
mumbles87
Posts: 17676
Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2012 10:35 am
Has liked: 55 likes
Total likes: 935 likes

Re: The Johnson Government 2019-2022

Post by mumbles87 »

SammyLeeWasOffside wrote: Mon Mar 27, 2023 8:41 am So now we are at only an MP who set the particular law should resign.

In regards to the police investigation
It's a crime to lie to the police so the absence of follow up charges would suggest he didn't lie to them.
Once fined he accepted it in almost exactly the same wording as Burnham did.


You are right Burnhams has nothing to do with Johnson's I am just interested in the lack of outrage at a fixed penalty notice issued to the person in charge of policing in Manchester.
If he isn't an MP he can't lie to parliament no?

Sammy your just doing your normal whataboutary

They both did wrong

One accepted the decision and didn't lie about it

The other continues to lie and hires lawyers at our expense to try and save his political career even tho he doesn't need to be an MP he just wants the power. He can make more than enough in his other engagements etc

But you continue to try and deflect from the fact that Boris is up for misleading parliament.
User avatar
the pink palermo
Huge noggin
Posts: 45051
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: The Notorious Gate B @LS
Has liked: 758 likes
Total likes: 2937 likes

Re: The Johnson Government 2019-2022

Post by the pink palermo »

bubbles1966 wrote: Mon Mar 27, 2023 9:05 am It's a mountain made from a molehill, and that molehill that probably shouldn't have existed in the first place; one that only arose from the collective (international, political, scientific, media, public) herding of thought in spring 2020. The public as a whole are increasingly questioning whether lockdowns should have ever existed.
Is that relevant?

The issue surely is he was stood in front of a lectern telling us all to follow the rules for the good of the Nation etc etc

And meanwhile, in his office he was breaking them, wholesale.

Forget legality, it's rank bad leadership, people were burying relatives alone, nobody to comfort them......

He's then, obviously lied to the world about it, as he lies about just about everything else.

The bloke isn't fit to lead.
User avatar
bubbles1966
Posts: 66966
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2007 10:01 pm
Location: I'm holding onto nothing, and trying to forget the rest
Has liked: 2436 likes
Total likes: 4292 likes

Re: The Johnson Government 2019-2022

Post by bubbles1966 »

Is that relevant?
To me, it's pivotal, because everything flows from it.
the pink palermo wrote: Mon Mar 27, 2023 9:12 am Forget legality, it's rank bad leadership, people were burying relatives alone, nobody to comfort them......
In which case, make the case that lockdown rules, or at least some of them, were wrong. There is a direct link between the policy setting, law making and the funerals, there isn't one around these gatherings.

Make the case that some of the rules should never have existed in the format they did and they should been more selective in who and what was sealed off from the world.

Make the case that schools shouldn't have closed.

That the NHS shouldn't have been the be-all and end-all of considerations and played an excessive part in shaping policy.
Last edited by bubbles1966 on Mon Mar 27, 2023 9:40 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
OFT
Posts: 21533
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2005 11:59 pm
Location: Sleepin’ in a bayou on a old rotten cot
Has liked: 2992 likes
Total likes: 1757 likes

Re: The Johnson Government 2019-2022

Post by OFT »

mumbles87 wrote: Mon Mar 27, 2023 9:08 am even tho he doesn't need to be an MP he just wants the power.
That would be a fitting epitaph.

Here Lies(oops) Boris Johnson
He Just Wanted The Power
User avatar
Het-Field
Posts: 10225
Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2006 6:54 pm
Location: Its great to be Irish, but its a miracle to be a Dub
Has liked: 25 likes
Total likes: 322 likes
Contact:

Re: The Johnson Government 2019-2022

Post by Het-Field »

I don't think the Burnham story is much more than a footnote, and the explanation makes sense. A lack of awareness of speed limits is probably a regular occurrence on motorways across the UK, and as soon as it is noted, it is rectified. In Burnham's case, it came after his speeding was identified. Road traffic offences are undoubtedly on the lowest end of the scale in terms of seriousness, and are often the product of 'fat finger errors', and genuine mistakes by the driver. Often, on employment applications forms, when disclosing convictions, they will specifically rule out minor road traffic offences.

At the end of the day, Labour have acted on people like Claudia Webbe, and she is now an independent MP. Fiona Onasanya ended up out of the party, and having her seat recalled. Perhaps its worth noting how the Tories handled Chris Davies after his run in in 2019, and his recall petition. 'Nothing to see here!'
User avatar
the pink palermo
Huge noggin
Posts: 45051
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: The Notorious Gate B @LS
Has liked: 758 likes
Total likes: 2937 likes

Re: The Johnson Government 2019-2022

Post by the pink palermo »

bubbles1966 wrote: Mon Mar 27, 2023 9:29 am In which case, make the case that lockdown rules, or at least some of them, were wrong.
That doesn't matter.

There are all sorts of "rules", "laws" and "guidance" that I believe to be wrong, all of which have been set by other people.

If I break them I face some kind of sanction.

The very idea that whoever has set those criteria , when they break them, shouldn't, is just plain wrong.

Perhaps I'll try it next time I'm nicked for speeding in a load of road works with a 50mph limit at 3am on the M6.

" Your honour, the limit was wrong, there was nobody about, it was the middle of the night, the road was clear, the weather good, a full moon, visibility was 200metres and I was only doing 55mph".

"No matter. That's another 3 points, which takes you to 12, which means a 28 day ban, higher insurance forever, and you can have a £100 fine on top. Oh, and because you have insisted on a court appearance to plead you case, costs of £500 are payable".

The rules at the time were the rules for everybody. He broke them. And has lied, repeatedly, about it.

The games up.
User avatar
OFT
Posts: 21533
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2005 11:59 pm
Location: Sleepin’ in a bayou on a old rotten cot
Has liked: 2992 likes
Total likes: 1757 likes

Re: The Johnson Government 2019-2022

Post by OFT »

the pink palermo wrote: Mon Mar 27, 2023 10:08 am That doesn't matter.

There are all sorts of "rules", "laws" and "guidance" that I believe to be wrong, all of which have been set by other people.

If I break them I face some kind of sanction.

The very idea that whoever has set those criteria , when they break them, shouldn't, is just plain wrong.
...........
:newthumb:
There's the whole issue in just a few words. It needs to be no more complicated than that.
User avatar
bubbles1966
Posts: 66966
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2007 10:01 pm
Location: I'm holding onto nothing, and trying to forget the rest
Has liked: 2436 likes
Total likes: 4292 likes

Re: The Johnson Government 2019-2022

Post by bubbles1966 »

the pink palermo wrote: Mon Mar 27, 2023 10:08 am The games up.
For Boris, yes.

But that doesn't make it any less absurd that it's over this.

At some point, people are going to question the stupidity of those rules. It doesn't exonerate him in any way, but he's not alone in bringing the rules in. Others couldn't wait to lock people up.
Last edited by bubbles1966 on Mon Mar 27, 2023 10:33 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
delbert
Posts: 27172
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2003 11:27 pm
Location: Barking, home of the slowly meandering Prius
Has liked: 698 likes
Total likes: 697 likes

Re: The Johnson Government 2019-2022

Post by delbert »

Het-Field wrote: Mon Mar 27, 2023 10:01 am I don't think the Burnham story is much more than a footnote, and the explanation makes sense. A lack of awareness of speed limits is probably a regular occurrence on motorways across the UK, and as soon as it is noted, it is rectified. In Burnham's case, it came after his speeding was identified. Road traffic offences are undoubtedly on the lowest end of the scale in terms of seriousness, and are often the product of 'fat finger errors', and genuine mistakes by the driver. Often, on employment applications forms, when disclosing convictions, they will specifically rule out minor road traffic offences.

At the end of the day, Labour have acted on people like Claudia Webbe, and she is now an independent MP. Fiona Onasanya ended up out of the party, and having her seat recalled. Perhaps its worth noting how the Tories handled Chris Davies after his run in in 2019, and his recall petition. 'Nothing to see here!'
Whilst correct it should be noted that in the case of Webbe she was removed from the Labour party by the then new leader Sir Kier Starmer. She probably wouldn't have been dropped so quickly otherwise as she still had the backing of tragic grandad and his motley bunch of cranks, freaks and fucknuckles.......
User avatar
the pink palermo
Huge noggin
Posts: 45051
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: The Notorious Gate B @LS
Has liked: 758 likes
Total likes: 2937 likes

Re: The Johnson Government 2019-2022

Post by the pink palermo »

bubbles1966 wrote: Mon Mar 27, 2023 10:31 am For Boris, yes.

But that doesn't make it any less absurd that it's over this.
That's politics for you.

What's telling though is the number of enemies he had in his own party, ultimately that's what has done him.

When he needed to phone a friend, he found they were all out to lunch. Eating out to help get him out so to speak.
Prob
Posts: 2473
Joined: Mon May 14, 2012 9:13 pm
Has liked: 3 likes
Total likes: 192 likes

Re: The Johnson Government 2019-2022

Post by Prob »

So Penny Mordaunt was recently convicted for speeding

Tom Tugendhat has been banned from driving for using his mobile phone

Lord Soames is soon to be banned due to speeding

I am guessing they should all resign as well?
User avatar
the pink palermo
Huge noggin
Posts: 45051
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: The Notorious Gate B @LS
Has liked: 758 likes
Total likes: 2937 likes

Re: The Johnson Government 2019-2022

Post by the pink palermo »

Prob wrote: Mon Mar 27, 2023 11:22 am I am guessing they should all resign as well?
Did Johnson resign for speeding?

Did Johnson resign?
User avatar
Tenbury
Posts: 9264
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2016 3:28 pm
Location: Too near Kidderminster
Has liked: 721 likes
Total likes: 1208 likes

Re: The Johnson Government 2019-2022

Post by Tenbury »

the pink palermo wrote: Mon Mar 27, 2023 11:00 am When he needed to phone a friend, he found they were all out to lunch.
Well Gove certainly was....... (allegedly)...
User avatar
SammyLeeWasOffside
Posts: 21689
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 9:31 am
Has liked: 290 likes
Total likes: 1020 likes

Re: The Johnson Government 2019-2022

Post by SammyLeeWasOffside »

Prob wrote: Mon Mar 27, 2023 11:22 am So Penny Mordaunt was recently convicted for speeding

Tom Tugendhat has been banned from driving for using his mobile phone

Lord Soames is soon to be banned due to speeding

I am guessing they should all resign as well?
No they should lose their jobs. It should be out of their hands.
User avatar
SammyLeeWasOffside
Posts: 21689
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 9:31 am
Has liked: 290 likes
Total likes: 1020 likes

Re: The Johnson Government 2019-2022

Post by SammyLeeWasOffside »

mumbles87 wrote: Mon Mar 27, 2023 9:08 am If he isn't an MP he can't lie to parliament no?

Sammy your just doing your normal whataboutary

They both did wrong

One accepted the decision and didn't lie about it

The other continues to lie and hires lawyers at our expense to try and save his political career even tho he doesn't need to be an MP he just wants the power. He can make more than enough in his other engagements etc

But you continue to try and deflect from the fact that Boris is up for misleading parliament.
How is it whataboutery I'm saying they should both (in fact all 3) have lost their jobs.

You are also conflating 2 different strands of the Johnson thing.

I'm comparing apples with apples Johnson and Burnham broke a law, neither of them lied to the police about it, both were fined and both apologised in an 'it was wrong but ...' kind of way.

I am not discussing the parliament thing at all you are, it's irrelevant in this comparison so quite why you keep trying to deflect using it I don't know.
User avatar
Danny's Dyer Acting
Posts: 8983
Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2009 1:37 pm
Has liked: 642 likes
Total likes: 1853 likes

Re: The Johnson Government 2019-2022

Post by Danny's Dyer Acting »

Prob wrote: Mon Mar 27, 2023 11:22 am So Penny Mordaunt was recently convicted for speeding

Tom Tugendhat has been banned from driving for using his mobile phone

Lord Soames is soon to be banned due to speeding

I am guessing they should all resign as well?
Maybe not resign, that takes away some of the constituents voice. Any failures like the above or Burnham's should see you subject to a recall petition and potential by-election.

I don't think it's much to ask that the people we hand power to are whiter than white.
User avatar
mumbles87
Posts: 17676
Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2012 10:35 am
Has liked: 55 likes
Total likes: 935 likes

Re: The Johnson Government 2019-2022

Post by mumbles87 »

SammyLeeWasOffside wrote: Mon Mar 27, 2023 1:41 pm How is it whataboutery I'm saying they should both (in fact all 3) have lost their jobs.

You are also conflating 2 different strands of the Johnson thing.

I'm comparing apples with apples Johnson and Burnham broke a law, neither of them lied to the police about it, both were fined and both apologised in an 'it was wrong but ...' kind of way.

I am not discussing the parliament thing at all you are, it's irrelevant in this comparison so quite why you keep trying to deflect using it I don't know.
Now your back tracking

You were directly comparing them

Burnham did wrong same as other members of office have done wrong for speeding .. dealt with accordingly

Boris. Different kettle of fish

Nobody in office should or would lose their job for speeding
Post Reply