Would you recognise Angela Rayner?

[Cirrus]

Have a greasy night, lads.


View: https://twitter.com/danbarker/status/1522619014119366659?t=BXSybO68E86YGCvWduIDig&s=19

The idea of having a ‘greasy night’ with pretty much any politician has just made me bring up a bit of sick in my mouth 😳😱🤮

 

[winjim]

The idea of having a ‘greasy night’ with pretty much any politician has just made me bring up a bit of sick in my mouth 😳😱🤮

I dunno, like I said the co-owner of my LBS and one time pan-continental motorcyclist has just won a council seat so he is quite literally a greasy politician and I have had some very good nights out in his company.

 

[Bromptonaut]

Ah, now I get it, you don't understand how the Government works do you?

I think, with respect, the person not understanding how government works is your self.

Aside from the fact that Ministers, rightly, have no constitutional power to order the police to do things they don't want their fingerprints anywhere near the pressure they nonetheless imply. It's been widely reported (see Chris Mullin's account for one) that the then Home Secretary was all over the Birmingham pub bombing inquiry pressing the police for a result. No papers released 30 years later show that it happened; no records see.

What happens now is that stuff is muttered to the press or to loyal backbenchers. The pressure to reinvestigate is applied by articles, by letters from MPs, particularly the loyal and longstanding. The Chief Constable eventually rolls over as here and as with the Met.

 

[fozy tornip]

The idea of having a ‘greasy night’ with pretty much any politician has just made me bring up a bit of sick in my mouth 😳😱🤮

Stella Greasy?

 

[Cirrus]

Stella Greasy?

Prefer IPA to stella

 

[Deleted member 49]

Prefer IPA to stella

Surely you meant IDS ?

 

[Cirrus]

Surely you meant IDS ?

Lol… no that’s more IBS

 

[Mugshot]

View: https://twitter.com/Comqton/status/1522643063985909764?t=woySDAAmcNSyC-_lRAdeqw&s=19

 

[icowden]

He is toast isn't he?

Yes. Absolutely.

That's why barristers on twitter have leapt to point out that the "beergate memo" actually exonerates Starmer rather than damning him and provides an excellent defence showing that this was planned as part of a political campaign work:

“Seeing that this was a scheduled event as part of the leader of the opposition’s visit to Durham – during a local election campaign, an event focused on him being with a local MP and their staff, and it was in the evening and food was ordered because it was the evening – I don’t really see how it could be a breach of the regulations.

“The regulations allowed for any gathering that was reasonably necessary for work or voluntary activity. And obviously the purpose of that visit overall was for the leader of the opposition to visit the local campaigners and the local MP and that is all on the schedule.
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...-dominic-cummings-nazir-afzal-critical-police
“So the police would have to say, ‘Well we actually disagree with the Labour party’s analysis of what was reasonably necessary for the leader’s trip to Durham’ and I am doubtful that they could really go behind that reasoning,” he said.

View: https://twitter.com/AdamWagner1/status/1522978254142980096?s=20&t=XWS9cAkYgdsugkn7T8UruA


View: https://twitter.com/Otto_English/status/1519675080112066560?s=20&t=rBHehkV5pYn0JiQ4gYQaZQ

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...gate-memo-could-clear-starmer-lawyer-believes

The quiz that has been quoted was over zoom only, and the "memo" is very specific that social distancing must be adhered to at all times.

That's a real smoking gun there Craig.

 

[Craig the cyclist]

That's why barristers on twitter have leapt to point out that the "beergate memo" actually exonerates Starmer rather than damning him and provides an excellent defence showing that this was planned as part of a political campaign work

The problem there though is that Keir Starmer has spent nearly two weeks saying it was an impromptu curry during a work event.

How far in advance do you plan impromptu events, and do you always go to the detail of pre-planning the place where you are going to get the impromptu take away from?

I say again, it isn't the fact he had a curry, it is the lying that will do him......

1. No meal, no beer, nothing to see- ah, well yes there was
2. No Angela Rayner, she wasn't there- ah, yes she was
3. We worked socially distanced- ah, well actually we shared a desk for some of it
4. It was not planned anyway- ah, well maybe it was
5. We worked after it- ah, I went straight back to the hotel
6. We couldn't have got food anywhere else- ah the hotel offered to sort us out
7. Well it's different because the police aren't investigating- ah, yes they are

You can keep posting up your spirited defences, but all of the above is true isn't it? And for clarity, the whole thing wouldn't really matter, but he has spent 5 months saying the PM should resign because he was under investigation, now he is.

Maybe being holier than though isn't such a good idea after all?

 

[icowden]

The problem there though is that Keir Starmer has spent nearly two weeks saying it was an impromptu curry during a work event.
How far in advance do you plan impromptu events, and do you always go to the detail of pre-planning the place where you are going to get the impromptu take away from?
I say again, it isn't the fact he had a curry, it is the lying that will do him......

Yes, that's why Boris has resigned in humiliation. Lying will get you every time.

Oh no... hang on..

It's fine to lie but only if you are a tory.

My mistake.

 

[Craig the cyclist]

Yes, that's why Boris has resigned in humiliation. Lying will get you every time.

Oh no... hang on..

It's fine to lie but only if you are a tory.

My mistake.

No, Boris didn't resign because he didn't see it as a resigning matter. Keir does see it as a resigning matter, so surely he will resign?

You do admit that Keir Starmer lied then?

 

[icowden]

No, Boris didn't resign because he didn't see it as a resigning matter. Keir does see it as a resigning matter, so surely he will resign?
You do admit that Keir Starmer lied then?

I think the Jury is still out on that one. He has admitted that the office made a mistake when they said that Rayner was not present.
If he is shown to have broken the law, then I am sure he will do the honourable thing and resign. Although, I'd hope that he would invite Boris to tender his resignation at the same time.

In the meantime we will have to put up with serial hypocrites like Raab trying to use it to distract attention from the Prime Minister who definitely did lie, multiple times and break his own Covid laws.

And the moral test against which that rule-breaking takes place is not the probity or otherwise of the leader of the opposition. The question for the Prime Minister (to adapt those minatory posters formulated by the Nudge Unit or, as it may be, Crunching Rugby Tackle Unit) is not 'can you look Keir Starmer in the eye?', but 'can you look the thousands of people who stuck to the rules and missed their relatives’ funerals in the eye?'.

That doesn’t change just because Keir Starmer now looks to be in the sin bin too. Every righteous blow that lands on Sir Keir – that he bent both the letter and the spirit of the lockdown rules; that he agitated for harsher lockdowns while dodging their requirements when it suited him; that he lied about it afterwards; that the police are taking an interest in the matter – rebounds twice as hard on the Prime Minister. If the case of Sir Keir is at the looking-a-bit-bang-to-rights stage of the process, the case for No. 10 is at the proven-and-notarised-and-certified-with-a-rubber-stamp stage. If Sir Keir promoted the rules, the Prime Minister wrote them. If Sir Keir had one party, the Prime Minister had eighteen. And so on.

 

[Craig the cyclist]

If he is shown to have broken the law, then I am sure he will do the honourable thing and resign.

On January 31st, being under investigation was a resigning matter for Keir Starmer. Strange how that has changed now he is under investigation.

"Honesty and decency matter. After months of denials the Prime Minister is now under criminal investigations for breaking his own lockdown laws. He needs to do the decent thing and resign." Keir Starmer's tweet.

Maybe not that honourable eh?

 

[icowden]

On January 31st, being under investigation was a resigning matter for Keir Starmer. Strange how that has changed now he is under investigation.
"Honesty and decency matter. After months of denials the Prime Minister is now under criminal investigations for breaking his own lockdown laws. He needs to do the decent thing and resign." Keir Starmer's tweet.
Maybe not that honourable eh?

On July 11th 1804 Alexander Hamilton entered into a duel with Aaron Burr. Alexander Hamilton, an honourable man fired his shot into the air above Burr's head, something he had said he would do prior to the duel. Burr fired his shot, killing Alexander Hamilton.

Just because one man believes in the honourable thing to do, it does not mean that another man will also act with honour. Sometimes despite wanting to do the honourable thing, it is better not to.

That said, Starmer has already said that he will stand down if the Police determine that there was any wrongdoing. Johnson has already been found guilty of lying to Parliament and breaking the law, but he has not stood down. That tells you all you need to know about Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson who will no doubt stand there jeering as a decent man does the decent thing. I'm sure you will be jeering alongside.