The All Things Political Topic - A politician needs the ability to foretell what is going to happen tomorrow, next week, next month, and next year. And to have the ability afterwards to explain why it didn’t happen

[Gorth]

1 hour ago, BruceVC said:

1) What exactly are you critical about, is about the parties that were held in Downing Street or the allegation that he lied?

2) So would you be fine if he had admitted " yes we had parties in Downing Street " ?

1) Both. Either is reason for me enough to want him sacked (an allegation is only an allegation until it's proven)

From The Guardian... "He (former aide Dominic Cummings) said he personally told Reynolds (Boris' private secretary) that the invitation broke the rules and claimed Reynolds replied: “So long as it’s socially distanced I think it’s OK, I’ll check with the PM if he’s happy for it to go ahead.” Cummings said in his blogpost: “Not only me but other eyewitnesses who discussed this at the time would swear under oath this is what happened.”

We're not talking about one party... once could be an 'oops, that was a mistake'. "No 10 staff had hoped that the inquiry, which is examining more than 15 separate allegations of illegal gatherings in Downing Street, would conclude this week. Because of the constant drip of new parties and developments, officials believe it may now report next week."

I.e. we're talking about a serial offender.

2) If he had fessed up, taken his hat (and responsibility for his actions) and resigned, the world would probably just remember him as a bad human being with human weaknesses (pride, arrogance, conceit etc.). Lying, once you get to a certain scale to cover up your shortcomings, means he'll also be remembered as a bad Prime Minister.

But, let the English voters sort their own mess out. They collectively lie in the proverbial bed of their own making.

[BruceVC]

14 minutes ago, Gorth said:

1) Both. Either is reason for me enough to want him sacked (an allegation is only an allegation until it's proven)

From The Guardian... "He (former aide Dominic Cummings) said he personally told Reynolds (Boris' private secretary) that the invitation broke the rules and claimed Reynolds replied: “So long as it’s socially distanced I think it’s OK, I’ll check with the PM if he’s happy for it to go ahead.” Cummings said in his blogpost: “Not only me but other eyewitnesses who discussed this at the time would swear under oath this is what happened.”

We're not talking about one party... once could be an 'oops, that was a mistake'. "No 10 staff had hoped that the inquiry, which is examining more than 15 separate allegations of illegal gatherings in Downing Street, would conclude this week. Because of the constant drip of new parties and developments, officials believe it may now report next week."

I.e. we're talking about a serial offender.

2) If he had fessed up, taken his hat (and responsibility for his actions) and resigned, the world would probably just remember him as a bad human being with human weaknesses (pride, arrogance, conceit etc.). Lying, once you get to a certain scale to cover up your shortcomings, means he'll also be remembered as a bad Prime Minister.

But, let the English voters sort their own mess out. They collectively lie in the proverbial bed of their own making.

Okay I see your concerns, do you have the  link that confirms Johnson admitted to lying?

Because that seems an important part of your criticism towards him? Here is a link that summarizes my view on this that he didnt lie which is fundamental to any views we may have of  him 

https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/boris-johnson-didnt-lie-about-partygate-he-was-just-given-wrong-information-jacob-rees-mogg-claims-3640105

But it appears you are convinced he did lie so I just want to review your source of information?

 

Edited June 8, 2022 by BruceVC

[Elerond]

3 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

Okay I see your concerns, do you have the  link that confirms Johnson admitted to lying?

Because that seems an important part of your criticism towards him? Here is a link that summarizes my view on this that he didnt lie which is fundamental to any views we may have of  him 

https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/boris-johnson-didnt-lie-about-partygate-he-was-just-given-wrong-information-jacob-rees-mogg-claims-3640105

But it appears you are convinced he did lie so I just want to review your source of information?

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/may/23/partygate-photos-boris-johnson-dominic-cummings-lockdown-breaches-sue-gray-report

[BruceVC]

19 minutes ago, Elerond said:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/may/23/partygate-photos-boris-johnson-dominic-cummings-lockdown-breaches-sue-gray-report

Where in that link does it  say Johnson admitted to lying?

No one  is disputing if parties were held, the question I am asking is when did Johnson admit he lied? Because the criticism is that he lied and he has maintained he didnt lie 

An allegation of lying is not the same as lying and he was fined for breaching of Covid regulations, not lying 

https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/boris-johnson-lockdown-party-partygate-1.6416773

 

Edited June 8, 2022 by BruceVC

[Elerond]

1 hour ago, BruceVC said:

Where in that link does it  say Johnson admitted to lying?

No one  is disputing if parties were held, the question I am asking is when did Johnson admit he lied? Because the criticism is that he lied and he has maintained he didnt lie 

An allegation of lying is not the same as lying and he was fined for breaching of Covid regulations, not lying 

https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/boris-johnson-lockdown-party-partygate-1.6416773

 

People don't lie if they don't admit doing so and there is no other ways to prove that person lied?

"he was fined for breaching of Covid regulations, not lying "

There is no fines for lying for parliament so I am not sure what your point is, especially when lies are about other parties he participated but were not fined even though other people who participated same events were fined

but also:

"Johnson has previously insisted repeatedly that “the guidelines were followed at all times” in Downing Street, before being forced to apologise for the first time in January after it emerged he had attended a “bring your own booze” event in the No 10 garden.

Johnson was asked in December last year by the MP Catherine West: “Can the prime minister tell the house whether there was a party in Downing Street on 13 November.” Johnson replied at the time: “Mr Speaker, no. But I’m sure that whatever happened, the guidance was followed and the rules were followed at all times.”"

But maybe claiming not doing something multiple times and then apologizing doing the thing isn't admission of lying

Edited June 8, 2022 by Elerond

[BruceVC]

22 minutes ago, Elerond said:

People don't lie if they don't admit doing so and there is no other ways to prove that person lied?

"he was fined for breaching of Covid regulations, not lying "

There is no fines for lying for parliament so I am not sure what your point is, especially when lies are about other parties he participated but were not fined even though other people who participated same events were fined

but also:

"Johnson has previously insisted repeatedly that “the guidelines were followed at all times” in Downing Street, before being forced to apologise for the first time in January after it emerged he had attended a “bring your own booze” event in the No 10 garden.

Johnson was asked in December last year by the MP Catherine West: “Can the prime minister tell the house whether there was a party in Downing Street on 13 November.” Johnson replied at the time: “Mr Speaker, no. But I’m sure that whatever happened, the guidance was followed and the rules were followed at all times.”"

But maybe claiming not doing something multiple times and then apologizing doing the thing isn't admission of lying

I have explained this before, Johnson didnt consider the event you quoting as a party on the 13 November. So he didnt lie. He was wrong about what transpired and he was given misinformation as the link I posted clarifies

And he apologized from the quote below, https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/boris-johnson-lockdown-party-partygate-1.6416773

""I understand the anger that many will feel that I, myself, fell short when it came to observing the very rules which the government I lead had introduced to protect the public. And I accept in all sincerity that people had the right to expect better," Johnson said late Tuesday. "And now I feel an even greater sense of obligation to deliver on the priorities of the British people."

Thats why it is possible he can apologize for breaking Covid rules and its not the same thing as him admitting he lied 

And my point has been same from the beginning, their is a  media accusation that he lied. He didnt lie as I keep explaining 

[majestic]

"Your honor, I did not lie when I said I did not steal the car, at the time I did not know that cars aren't public properties. I thought it was locked by accident."

 

[Gorth]

2 hours ago, BruceVC said:

Okay I see your concerns, do you have the  link that confirms Johnson admitted to lying?

He never did it himself. It took all the first hand witnesses summoned by the inquiry to build a case against him (and found him guilty of lying). But then, what would you expect from a PM  that would lie to the Queens face, to get democracy suspended for 5 weeks before a Brexit vote

 

[Elerond]

19 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

I have explained this before, Johnson didnt consider the event you quoting as a party on the 13 November. So he didnt lie. He was wrong about what transpired and he was given misinformation as the link I posted clarifies

And he apologized from the quote below, https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/boris-johnson-lockdown-party-partygate-1.6416773

""I understand the anger that many will feel that I, myself, fell short when it came to observing the very rules which the government I lead had introduced to protect the public. And I accept in all sincerity that people had the right to expect better," Johnson said late Tuesday. "And now I feel an even greater sense of obligation to deliver on the priorities of the British people."

Thats why it is possible he can apologize for breaking Covid rules and its not the same thing as him admitting he lied 

And my point has been same from the beginning, their is a  media accusation that he lied. He didnt lie as I keep explaining 

But rules he admitted to broke are ones that he previously insisted that he didn't break.

In case he actually does not know what rules he himself applied for people and what kind event he run in his own house, then people should trust him being prime minister even less than case he lied about the event and breaking rules he himself imposed for people.

I mean it isn't great defense to say that I didn't lie I just didn't understand what was happening around me, when you are the prime minister and person who lead creating of the rules you broke. 

[BruceVC]

Okay thanks for all the views, I think I have said everything I can say about Partygate 

I hope I have changed peoples mind if they believed Johnson lied and it not then we can agree to disagree 

 

[Gorth]

I was slightly wrong about one minor detail... it wasn't *all* paid by the tax payers, as one party invitation was "bring your own booze" (per written testimony by witnesses). Still, I'm sure they can get tax and duty free booze somehow in their jobs

 

[Elerond]

30 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

Okay thanks for all the views, I think I have said everything I can say about Partygate 

I hope I have changed peoples mind if they believed Johnson lied and it not then we can agree to disagree 

 

Question should Kay Burley be paid 6 month salary because she was suspended for 6 months for participating in party that broke covid rules?

https://www.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/health/coronavirus/kay-burley-how-did-sky-news-presenter-break-covid-rules-her-birthday-party-and-will-she-be-back-her-show-3061229

As we now know that such rule breaking was not big deal, as members of government were allowed to do so

[BruceVC]

42 minutes ago, Elerond said:

Question should Kay Burley be paid 6 month salary because she was suspended for 6 months for participating in party that broke covid rules?

https://www.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/health/coronavirus/kay-burley-how-did-sky-news-presenter-break-covid-rules-her-birthday-party-and-will-she-be-back-her-show-3061229

As we now know that such rule breaking was not big deal, as members of government were allowed to do so

Thats a good question and I am familiar with the whole Kay Burley story because I watch Sky News and I like her 

In my opinion she was unfairly treated, she should have publicly apologized and agreed to never do it again. And if she did it again then she should have been fired. But during the lockdowns everyone should be allowed to make 1 mistake 

But as you are aware Sky News is a private sector company and not Public sector company so Sky News is not funded by tax payers money. I would leave it up to the Sky News board to decide these things because we dont want any  government to start interfering in how private sector companies pay their staff and how much  money they earn because its not governments business or money 

 

[Pidesco]

I'm not sure I agree with all of this but it sure is compelling.

 

 

 

 

[Elerond]

1 hour ago, BruceVC said:

Thats a good question and I am familiar with the whole Kay Burley story because I watch Sky News and I like her 

In my opinion she was unfairly treated, she should have publicly apologized and agreed to never do it again. And if she did it again then she should have been fired. But during the lockdowns everyone should be allowed to make 1 mistake 

But as you are aware Sky News is a private sector company and not Public sector company so Sky News is not funded by tax payers money. I would leave it up to the Sky News board to decide these things because we dont want any  government to start interfering in how private sector companies pay their staff and how much  money they earn because its not governments business or money 

 

Or 12 

Considering that whole thing was caused by government interfering how people can act... But at least people in private sector are hold in higher standard than prime minister 

[Gfted1]

Why do you guys keep regurgitating that line? He was punished as would any other person.

[Hurlshort]

https://www.foxnews.com/sports/rays-nick-anderson-explains-differing-beliefs-teammates-pride-night-logo

This is an entirely not surprising story, but one that still depresses me. You can dress it up as nicely as you want, but stances like these ignore the reality of the world. Gay people are discriminated against. Wearing the patch is a stance against discrimination. Refusing to wear the patch is such a strange stance to take for me. I mean, best case scenario is you are just indifferent about discrimination. Are they going to refuse to use pink bats as well?

[BruceVC]

2 minutes ago, Hurlsnot said:

https://www.foxnews.com/sports/rays-nick-anderson-explains-differing-beliefs-teammates-pride-night-logo

This is an entirely not surprising story, but one that still depresses me. You can dress it up as nicely as you want, but stances like these ignore the reality of the world. Gay people are discriminated against. Wearing the patch is a stance against discrimination. Refusing to wear the patch is such a strange stance to take for me. I mean, best case scenario is you are just indifferent about discrimination. Are they going to refuse to use pink bats as well?

You know I support the rights of LGBT and they are the most persecuted minority group overall in most countries. You wont  find the death penalty for being black or being a women anywhere but their are countries in Africa and the ME  where being  gay is a criminal offense 

But we shouldnt force anyone to wear things that support any minority unless they want to, my view is the same as bending the knee in sports. Allow people to bend the knee if they want and we shouldnt make assumptions around those that dont want to 

So I do agree with you about the reality of homophobia but you can unintentionally make things worse for LGBT if you try to force or use guilt to get people to wear LGBT symbols 

[Elerond]

1 hour ago, Gfted1 said:

Why do you guys keep regurgitating that line? He was punished as would any other person.

It depends how you look at it.

He was fined only once where his subordinates were fined 8 times. Even though there were pictures that he participated in multiple of the events which participants police fined. 

1 hour ago, BruceVC said:

But we shouldnt force anyone to wear things that support any minority unless they want to, my view is the same as bending the knee in sports. Allow people to bend the knee if they want and we shouldnt make assumptions around those that dont want to 

So I do agree with you about the reality of homophobia but you can unintentionally make things worse for LGBT if you try to force or use guilt to get people to wear LGBT symbols 

So you support that employees can refuse using uniform/logos/ads/etc which their employer ask them to wear?

I didn't know that you were such avid worker rights advocate and socialist

[BruceVC]

16 minutes ago, Elerond said:

I

So you support that employees can refuse using uniform/logos/ads/etc which their employer ask them to wear?

I didn't know that you were such avid worker rights advocate and socialist

"avid worker rights advocate and socialist " 

Just for the record, I support workers rights because they part of labor laws and in most Democracies this is the  law of the land. I dont support violent and criminal protests and I dont support  unreasonable demands by workers that then lead to unnecessary and often protracted protests 

But if you work for a company and that company has a logo or uniform and the dress code says you must wear the uniform then you definitely must do what the company expects or you must resign 

 

 

 

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2022/06/08/supreme-court-rules-against-man-who-sued-federal-customs-police-use-force-bivins-smugglers-inn/7393307001/

Nothing says freedom like making lawsuits against federal agents almost impossible.

[Malcador]

I'd have gone with "We practice selective annihilation of mayors and government officials, for example, to create a vacuum, then we fill that vacuum" for the thread title.

[Raithe]

For a certain level of interest and amusement:

Telegraph - Matthew McConaughey for President? He's achieved what no American politician has in decades

[Malcador]

 

 

[Gorth]

Can anyone really understand what communist China has against democracy? It works well for Taiwan...

 

Or even "Western Style" democracies like the UK and Australia...

 

Representing your voters... indeed!

 

South Africa too... just for Bruce

 

 

I think democracies have more fun than totalitarian countries

 

Edit: There are better Australian Parliament MMA videos on Youtube, but they were age restricted