MET POLICE INVESTIGATING NO 10

Chris_Boro said:
So far everything that has happened is in the public domain and according to the MET, never reached the threshold for investigation.

The question is, has Sue Gray or the MET found something we don't know about, something worse than what we know?
Click to expand...
Yeah, the Met have probably found the perfect way of sweeping it under the carpet!
 
Cannot see this is anything but a way of delaying the report and prolonging Johnson’s stay in number 10. D1ck wasn’t interested up until it looked like the Grey report was going to slam Johnson this week.

The whole things stinks of corrupt practice throughout the Met to the Government.
 
As I said on my thread any official
response even a whitewash cover is better than the silence we’ve had as

Its good though as either way they will have to give an answer one way or another. This will be an official response that history can record once this house of card tumbles and tumble it will
 
zorro_mfc said:
As I said on my thread any official
response even a whitewash cover is better than the silence we’ve had as

Its good though as either way they will have to give an answer one way or another. This will be an official response that history can record once this house of card tumbles and tumble it will
Click to expand...
I am not so confident. This Met investigation could take weeks and then eventually exonerate Johnson making the Grey report redundant. Colusion. You bet.
 
"Wait for the Grey Report" they kept trumpeting. We held off even though there was a ton of reasons why Johnson should have walked a few weeks ago. We agreed to wait.

And now we know why. The Grey Report probably now wont see the light of day.
 
"Shouldn't" matter about the findings of the police re: who's responsible for the parties. It's about BloJo being a lieing get. That's still the case whatever the outcome of any enquiry.
 
As odious as this guy and his government are, they have played an absolute blinder here. There's probably enough anecdotal evidence to show rules were broken, but not sufficient to prosecute 'beyond reasonable doubt'. Case Closed.
 
festa5 said:
I think it's utterly transparent and has been the plan for a while. Hence Johnson and the Cabinet trotting out the line "need to wait for the outcome of the inquiry" like broken records.

Police report will find insufficient evidence for a prosecution, the inquiry will find Johnson broke the rules and took the ****. But it'll be caged in far more diplomatic language than that, and it'll take months.

By which point spring will have started and they'll be hoping COVID will be pretty much over (as far as they're concerned, tough luck if you're vulnerable). People won't care as much, his rebels will have run out of steam and Johnson keeps his grubby little grasp on power.
Click to expand...
Exactly this. Perfect storm for the lying blonde bomber, no report till the police investigation is over, police investigation won’t be concluded till early March, all restrictions removed first week in March which will coincide with an announcement that the rise on NI has been frozen and VAT will be removed from fuel bills.
All of which will save the blondes job.
 
One thing is for sure it'll force the Tory rebels into a stick or twist dilemma. I'm hopeful (but doubting) that a number of MPs will now hand letters into the 1922 committee knowing that this could take months, and during that timescale there will no doubt be other scandals that will cause harm to the Tory party. Dominic Cummings alluded to it when he said on Twitter that more and more stuff would be leaked day after day until Johnson is gone.
 
If the conclusion is that parties were held, but there is not enough evidence to prosecute then this does not exonerate Johnson.
Johnson is accused by Labour of lying to Parliament which is a resigning matter.
Therefore being prosecuted is only a bonus.
 
To look at it from another angle however, perhaps Sue Gray has uncovered enough evidence to show that the law was broken and referred it to the Met Police herself? I might have misheard but I'm sure one of the radio news reports suggested that she'd passed initial information over to them and they've now asked for all of her evidence?
 
WeeGord said:
To look at it from another angle however, perhaps Sue Gray has uncovered enough evidence to show that the law was broken and referred it to the Met Police herself? I might have misheard but I'm sure one of the radio news reports suggested that she'd passed initial information over to them and they've now asked for all of her evidence?
Click to expand...
I’d love to share your optimism WG but it’s all too convenient for me, report due and after weeks/months of the Met saying they can’t get involved suddenly they can.
 
Pak_Doo_Ik said:
I’d love to share your optimism WG but it’s all too convenient for me, report due and after weeks/months of the Met saying they can’t get involved suddenly they can.
Click to expand...
I'm pretty cynical myself to be honest but I'm not sure this is really that good for the Tories. If the Met come back and say they've investigated and there's no wrongdoing, nobody will believe it and the knives will still be out for Johnson.

In the meanwhile I'm sure there will be further damaging leaks in the days and weeks ahead and not just in relation to the partied. I've no doubt there are many people with tons of dirt on Johnson and that if this doesn't look as though it'll do to oust him they'll release more damaging stuff and quickly.

The best thing Johnson could have hoped for was a whitewashed Sue Gray report and hope it appeased enough of the rebels for them to pipe down and say they've drawn a line under it. I'm not certain a Met investigation actually helps him at all.
 
Ziggy said:
Peston:

“ BREAKING: Sue Gray will not publish her partygate report while the Met police investigate. So it will not be published this week and probably not for many weeks. This is some kind of reprieve for the prime minister. She will continue her investigation though”
Click to expand...
To paraphrase Kipling, who knew a thing or two about the ways of thieves and charlatans, "Watch the wall my darlings while the gentleman slips by..."
 
Japsi said:
As odious as this guy and his government are, they have played an absolute blinder here. There's probably enough anecdotal evidence to show rules were broken, but not sufficient to prosecute 'beyond reasonable doubt'. Case Closed.
Click to expand...

There wouldn't be any prosecution whatever the findings. The punishment for the sort of rule breaking that happened is a fixed penalty notice.

An inquiry, if done probably, is more politically damaging than what equates to a speeding ticket.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top