Wrong. The Trump administration was in power at the time of the riot. They were attempting to prevent that government being changed for a different one.
Whilst reversing an election result. Trump was a cry-baby megalomaniac trying desperately to hang onto power. It cost some people their lives.
I know it's not edgy enough for many on here, but HIGNFY just gave this story a thorough going over 👍
John Major just gave the government a better, more sustained, reflective and impactful damning on R4 this morning than Starmer has managed so far.
Gammon lobbying for bacon...
John Major just gave the government a better, more sustained, reflective and impactful damning on R4 this morning than Starmer has managed so far.
True. But he also pointed out the obvious about Brexit, which Labour politicians... hell, any politicians... who need to face the voters again are scared stiff to do.
To be brutally honest though, who among us wouldn’t feel the urge to do something stupid if you saw Rees-Mogg in the street with no bodyguards? Same goes for the likes of
Redwood,
He's my MP and knocks on my door each election (local or general). He gets a polite thanks but no thanks and a strange admiration for actually showing up. In 7 years we've had one Labour guy doorstep for the local elections, he was a full on red flag waving, momentum guy. Which is great but TBH he didn't stand a chance and I'm still not sure I wanted him to 🤣
But then that's my doorstep. Not your keyboard so an entirely different scenario ehh?
This is exactly the kind of thing I fear will come out of this …
https://twitter.com/nicktolhurst/status/1456950014874431493?s=21
John Major just gave the government a better, more sustained, reflective and impactful damning on R4 this morning than Starmer has managed so far.
Since he left office, he's actually been a voice of (relative) reason in the Tory party. And I think also the last Tory leader with a "normal" non public school background, so there may be a connection.
This is exactly the kind of thing I fear will come out of this …
More extremists feeling legitimised by reckless politicians. The culture war can escalate very suddenly, which the likes of dazh need to bear in mind.
He’s my MP and knocks on my door each election (local or general)
Your Tory MP canvasses door to door during local elections? I find that absolutely astonishing.
And if that's not astonishing enough he is John Redwood?
And I think also the last Tory leader with a “normal” non public school background, so there may be a connection.
He was also a massive hypocrite, for years shagging a married woman behind his own wife's back and then publicly launching a moral crusade which included moralising on the value of "family".
Plus of course he continued with all the privatisations that Thatcher had been unable to complete due to her premiership being cut short. It's a price which we are currently paying now.
Btw :
He was also a massive hypocrite, for years shagging a married woman behind his own wife’s back and then publicly launching a moral crusade which included moralising on the value of “family”.
I bet Boris thinks he's a legend.
Violence is rarely a deliberate tactic or strategy,
Unless it's striking workers. Tory government's have been dispensing violence to the electorate for decades.
John Major ran away from the circus to join an accountancy firm. Sort of.
He was also a massive hypocrite, for years shagging a married woman behind his own wife’s back and then publicly launching a moral crusade which included moralising on the value of “family”.
Plus of course he continued with all the privatisations that Thatcher had been unable to complete due to her premiership being cut short. It’s a price which we are currently paying now.
Absolutely true, but not really relevant to my post, especially as I'd qualified my comments about "normal" and "relative"
Whilst reversing an election result.
To keep the then current administration in power.
Absolutely true, but not really relevant to my post, especially as I’d qualified my comments about “normal” and “relative”
I wasn't aware that my comments needed to be strictly relevant to your post 😉
I merely expanded on your comment that he is apparently the voice of relative reason in the Tory Party by pointing out that he is also a massive hypocrite.
But if you want me to focus more on what you said I can probably do that. You also said :
And I think also the last Tory leader with a “normal” non public school background, so there may be a connection.
I know you only said "there may be a connection" but I don't see any at all.
The most reactionary, callous, racist, and right-wing Tories, tend to come from working-class/lower middle-class backgrounds having received state education. The Margret Thatchers and Norman Tebbits of this world.
In contrast the more socially liberal least racist Tories with stronger social-democratic leanings tend come from upper-class backgrounds and have been privately educated. The Harold Macmillans and Michael Heselstines of this world.
Obviously I am generalising massively and you will of course find exceptions but class background and education can provide a reasonable expectation of whether a Tory is Thatcherite or more One Nation.
Oohh look peerages again
https://twitter.com/AngelaRayner/status/1457062270924644357?t=xdZ9c0IioieyEjHNy5oizg&s=19
On the subject of which Paterson can never get the peerage he undoubtedly believes is his due. 😂
I thought the cash for peerages was common knowledge. I'm just surprised that it is so cheap.
So "cash-for-honours" is another idea Johnson has pinched from Labour.
Does he have no shame?
Tbh I really don't get why Johnson won't reveal cost of goldsmith free holiday
Its going to come out eventually, he's just tossing another log on his own pyre
Even my brexit loving dad was slagging Johnson off today, which is a first
So “cash-for-honours” is another idea Johnson has pinched from Labour.
It goes back far further.
The most depressing thing is how it is sold so cheaply and only benefits the political parties involved. We should do the job properly and charge a proper amount with the cash going into general taxation.
Its going to come out eventually, he’s just tossing another log on his own pyre
Its been reported as being 25k a week when they rent it out to the general public (general in this case being rather well off).
it goes back far further.
I'm sure it goes way back, possibly back to Roman times.
But in recent history cash-for-honours is very much associated with Labour. A quick google of the term 'cash-for-honours" will reveal that.
Tony Blair is the only British Prime Minister to have ever been questioned by police investigating political corruption. That was a direct result of cash-for-honours.
Ah, yes, Johnson’s blatant corruption, and attempts to shut down scrutiny of him, are Labour’s fault. Of course. That’s a get out of jail card that seems to never expire.
Why do you say it's Labour fault?
Labour never forced Johnson to embrace the idea of cash-for-honours.
Labour are no more responsible for the behaviour of the Tory Party than the Tories are responsible for the behaviour the Labour Party.
I bet Boris thinks he’s a legend
I bet he thinks he’s an amateur
Just because you are 'good' at 'debating', doesn't mean you have anything interesting to say.
I'm almost sure that that goes back to Greek times.
Labour are no more responsible for the behaviour of the Tory Party than the Tories are responsible for the behaviour the Labour Party.
I am no more responsible for saying this says nothing than saying nothing is responsible for me saying nothing.
Tony Blair is the only British Prime Minister to have ever been questioned by police investigating political corruption. That was a direct result of cash-for-honours.
The chances of him being the only one that should be investigated for political corruption are somewhere around zero to **** all.
I’m almost sure that that goes back to Greek times.
Further than that, it’d be as soon as someone was in a position to gain something through political corruption. Which means more or less, as soon as politicians exist.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/25152765?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents?
Doesn’t really matter what system you have in place, humans will fall to corruption every time.
Tony Blair is the only British Prime Minister to have ever been questioned by police investigating political corruption. That was a direct result of cash-for-honours.
That's only due to the London Police being more circumspect around Prime Ministers and chaps doing the right thing when found out in Lloyd George's day.
The chances of him being the only one that should be investigated for political corruption are somewhere around zero to **** all.
Hence my point concerning the obvious lack of uniqueness when it comes to dodgy dealings.
Although in the specific case of cash-for-honours that is very much associated with Labour. In fact it is precisely because it was such a huge issue under Blair that it was impossible for met police to ignore.
Mind you Tony Blair was a master at cash-for-favours, literally within weeks of becoming Prime Minister he was embroiled in the Bernie Ecclestone slesze scandal.
We need to see how things pan out and whether Johnson's premiership matches New Labour's for sleaze.
Tbh I really don’t get why Johnson won’t reveal cost of goldsmith free holiday
Yep, I don’t get it, it’s trivial stuff, like the wallpaper, but the whole going thru Machiavellian manoeuvres to hide it seems insane.
I put it down to a spoilt childish arrogance and contempt of being held to account but it’s definitely a slippery path,changing the system on a whim.
A subtle removing of checks and measures here and there, for the good of the country and all,you know having the power for the goverment to put it right when the court gets it wrong,for the peoples good of course.
Tbh I really don’t get why Johnson won’t reveal cost of goldsmith free holiday
For a normal person embarrassment may be a factor - but clearly not going to be a factor for Johnson.
It’s got to be some sort of game he’s playing after it looks like history repeating itself with his Mustique holiday or his decorating fandango.
Seems odd to be putting yourself thru the same farce again,most people would take an easier course after being burnt a few times before.
We need to see how things pan out and whether Johnson’s premiership matches New Labour’s for sleaze.
easily
Although to be fair to Johnson he is just carrying on the tradition from Cameron. That said overriding the committee to get Cruddas in was pretty special.
However pretty much zero chance there will be another case like the one against Blair since at that time the CPS said it would need clear evidence of an offer which didnt happen then and wont happen here either so no point the police wasting their time launching an investigation. Only way I reckon it could happen is if some existing donor decided to record the conversations.
Michael Heseltine was someone who was widely sniped about as being the kind of fellow who'd "bought his own furniture".
With a bit of luck the government mismanagement of the Paterson issue will be the straw that breaks Alexander's camel. Although quite why Starmer and the Labour party aren't making more of all of this escapes me.
That said overriding the committee to get Cruddas in was pretty special.
Yup, totally agree, and typical of Johnson's contempt for democratic practices.
Tony Blair's special moment imo was when he decided that receiving a million quid was more important than the wider health considerations of the nation.
Tony Blair personally intervened to secure an exemption for formula one from a tobacco advertising ban just hours after meeting the sport's boss, Bernie Ecclestone, according to Whitehall documents.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2008/oct/12/tonyblair-labour
He obviously thought that banning tobacco advertising was really quite important. But not if you give us a million quid.
Tbh I really don’t get why Johnson won’t reveal cost of goldsmith free holiday
Taking a free jolly off one of your rich mates that would cost more than a lot of families annual income isn’t a good luck even for someone as shameless as Johnson
Tbh I really don’t get why Johnson won’t reveal cost of goldsmith free holiday
"Cost" is not the right word (i'm in pedant mode here btw). The cost to Johnson was zero, that is the whole bloomin point. It also cost* [shadowy company apparently beneficially owned by Goldsmith/his family] virtually nothing (probably the cost of cleaning a few red wine stains etc.) to allow Boris to stay there, as they own it. They didn't pay the rent to a third party on his behalf (in which case it would have been a cost to them).
This was the provision of a benefit-in-kind. According to the rules, benefits in kind must be disclosed and the disclosure must include the "value"(paras 7(a) and 9(d)). In the absence of any guidance about calculating the value, that would be interpreted as the market value I imagine. So it wouldn't matter if Goldsmith said "The place wasn't being rented out that week anyway, so it cost* me nothing". If it was a slow part of the season, that would affect the market value of course.
*a benefit foregone, you might call it a "loss of income" is not a cost in strict terms, though often the word is used for that.
Although quite why Starmer and the Labour party aren’t making more of all of this escapes me.
You ought to be used to this now.
Starmer is playing the really really long game.
Except Labour are making use of it
Starmer was on Marr this morning
https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1457317348612968448?t=CoAvdmGSBL_KEb8xlYnNnw&s=19
And focusing on Moggs stupidity too
Tony Blair’s special moment imo was when he decided that receiving a million quid was more important than the wider health considerations of the nation.
Indeed, hardly a shining moment. But then is there an estimate yet on what the chumocray have made out of Covid? I'm guessing it's a bit more than a paltry million quid...
I mean do Tories really want to talk about politicians putting money ahead of public health right now?
So is this really the defence for Shagger and Co? "Look Labour did some naughty stuff two decades ago", Does that mean we should accept this governments current behaviour?
Is that actually what you're saying?
A reminder… Paterson was lining his own pockets, not bringing in funds for his party. I hate the way our political parties are funded, and the influences that funders then get over government policy. But an MP being paid half a million quid, to keep for themselves, to act for companies in parliament or when dealing with government, that’s a whole extra level of “who do our MPs work for?”
So is this really the defence for Shagger and Co? “Look Labour did some naughty stuff two decades ago”, Does that mean we should accept this governments current behaviour?
I want even aware the government had said it, I think only Ernie has