Just been watching BJ lying under oath.

That probably rises to the level of purjury though I haven't watched it yet. Watching Everton v Newcastle so will watch this later.
 
Trug said:
The lying scumbag should be in jail
https://twitter.com/x/status/1732730632126480463
Click to expand...
I feel a little bit sorry for him.
I've been in meetings in which people have said things that in the context of meeting are fine in establishing the red lines of the discussion but if you stripped them of context and had a KC read them back to you in a legal scenario you wouldn't be painted in a very good light.
That being said, I don't think it should be the chair making those comments or arguing for an extreme course of action.
 
newusername said:
I feel a little bit sorry for him.
I've been in meetings in which people have said things that in the context of meeting are fine in establishing the red lines of the discussion but if you stripped them of context and had a KC read them back to you in a legal scenario you wouldn't be painted in a very good light.
That being said, I don't think it should be the chair making those comments or arguing for an extreme course of action.
Click to expand...
He is directly responsible for 10's of thousands of deaths. You might want to save your sympathy for those whose lives were cut short.
 
Laughing said:
He is directly responsible for 10's of thousands of deaths. You might want to save your sympathy for those whose lives were cut short.
Click to expand...
Indirectly surely? He wasn't Shipman style taking out the old & vulnerable, he was in meetings saying 'should we let it rip?' & ultimately the govt didn't let it rip, just too late for some.
 
newusername said:
Indirectly surely? He wasn't Shipman style taking out the old & vulnerable, he was in meetings saying 'should we let it rip?' & ultimately the govt didn't let it rip, just too late for some.
Click to expand...
So consciously sending covid positive pensioners back to care homes is not a directly responsible?

He was the primary decision maker, to use your analogy if the **** hits the fan at a business because of bad decisions, who ultimately bares that direct responsibility? The owners! the people at the top because they are the ones making the big decisions.

He ignored advice, and is now claiming he was not aware or was just challenging the narrative when it is clear that is not the case. The man should be in prison.
 
newusername said:
Indirectly surely? He wasn't Shipman style taking out the old & vulnerable, he was in meetings saying 'should we let it rip?' & ultimately the govt didn't let it rip, just too late for some.
Click to expand...
He didn't just say it once though did he? He said it on several occasions, described Long COVID as "bolllocks" and opined that the high death rate in Wales was due to the "singing and obesity".

What a scumbag
 
JonnyHistory said:
So consciously sending covid positive pensioners back to care homes is not a directly responsible?

He was the primary decision maker, to use your analogy if the **** hits the fan at a business because of bad decisions, who ultimately bares that direct responsibility? The owners! the people at the top because they are the ones making the big decisions.

He ignored advice, and is now claiming he was not aware or was just challenging the narrative when it is clear that is not the case. The man should be in prison.
Click to expand...
It is a tough decision, if they'd left well old people in hospital 'blocking beds' and there was no room for the critically ill who were dying in hospital car parks, we'd be having an inquiry questioning that decision.

They got it wrong & people died, the inquiry is to find out the reasons why and learn the lessons so it doesn't happen again.

Muttley said:
He didn't just say it once though did he? He said it on several occasions, described Long COVID as "bolllocks" and opined that the high death rate in Wales was due to the "singing and obesity".

What a scumbag
Click to expand...
I did say "meetings". It does appear as though he was spectacularly unsuited to the level of detail, analysis and clear thinking required to pick our way through Covid in the best possible way. That’s our political system though, we don’t pick our leader and even if we did, we don’t know what crisis they are going to be dealing with or how they’ll cope.
 
newusername said:
Indirectly surely? He wasn't Shipman style taking out the old & vulnerable, he was in meetings saying 'should we let it rip?' & ultimately the govt didn't let it rip, just too late for some.
Click to expand...
No directly. His decisions caused deaths that otherwise would not have happened.

It's a bit like saying Hitler was indirectly responsible for the death of Jews in camps.

The care homes debacle alone killed 10's of thousands. The late lock downs. No circuit breaker, dodgy ppe contracts. These all directly killed people and he was pm.
 
newusername said:
It is a tough decision, if they'd left well old people in hospital 'blocking beds' and there was no room for the critically ill who were dying in hospital car parks, we'd be having an inquiry questioning that decision.

They got it wrong & people died, the inquiry is to find out the reasons why and learn the lessons so it doesn't happen again.


I did say "meetings". It does appear as though he was spectacularly unsuited to the level of detail, analysis and clear thinking required to pick our way through Covid in the best possible way. That’s our political system though, we don’t pick our leader and even if we did, we don’t know what crisis they are going to be dealing with or how they’ll cope.
Click to expand...
I don't think the decision had to be either/or. Why not use nightingale hospitals as temporary accommodation, as an example of an alternative.

Volunteers from younger families could have cared for elderly patients until they tested all clear. They could have been paid to offset furlough.

That's 2 examples I thought of in 2 minutes.
 
Just watched that clip @Trug and for me that doesn't rise to perjury. Of course it cuts off part way through the conversation. However perjury can't be prosecuted on heresay. The nca would need an email or message from johnson saying exactly those words, rather than someone documenting that he said those words.

It's a fine distinction, I know.
 
Politics aside, you only have to see how he treats people in his personal life to see he is a monster. I knew when I took the time to watch him trash the NHS in a back bench speech years ago, his phone call to arrange psychical violence against a journalist that he is just the billionaires mouthpiece. It was astonishing seeing millions of working class clowns boot lick him via FB on his election victory. I knew then the human DNA obviously has a subservient element to it.
 
Laughing said:
Just watched that clip @Trug and for me that doesn't rise to perjury. Of course it cuts off part way through the conversation. However perjury can't be prosecuted on heresay. The nca would need an email or message from johnson saying exactly those words, rather than someone documenting that he said those words.
Click to expand...

He said words to that effect on national TV on This Morning 🤷‍♂️
 
sherlock1969 said:
He said words to that effect on national TV on This Morning 🤷‍♂️
Click to expand...
Can't comment on that Sherlock as I didn't see the clip.

I am not suggesting he isn't lying, to be clear. I am suggesting that his lying isn't, necessarily, easily proven. It's the classic case of "words matter".

On balance, I would rather see the government and it's ministers prosecuted for manslaughter or corruption or racism to incite violence. Take yer pick really.
 
newusername said:
It is a tough decision, if they'd left well old people in hospital 'blocking beds' and there was no room for the critically ill who were dying in hospital car parks, we'd be having an inquiry questioning that decision.

They got it wrong & people died, the inquiry is to find out the reasons why and learn the lessons so it doesn't happen again.


I did say "meetings". It does appear as though he was spectacularly unsuited to the level of detail, analysis and clear thinking required to pick our way through Covid in the best possible way. That’s our political system though, we don’t pick our leader and even if we did, we don’t know what crisis they are going to be dealing with or how they’ll cope.
Click to expand...
In the case of Johnson we knew exactly what type of Prime Minister we were going to get, one incapable of dealing with detail, strategy and analysis, it was clearly in the public domain that he doesn't do that kind of thing, he was elected on the non-specific, notional broad sweep of choose your own Brexit and despite the chaos and calamity that was his legacy in every other role he'd previously had.

The frightening thing is despite every shred of evidence that shows his unsuitability, incompetence and inability to lead anything, never mind a country, there are still plenty, Stockholm Syndrome, perhaps, who would welcome him back with open arms as PM.

That incomprehensible popularity shows that as a country many people are just not politically engaged enough, and that many of those within Parliament would rather harm the country if it meant their own personal progress was assured.

Johnson was the wrong man to lead the country at any time but a crisis like Covid starkly emphasised just why he was so unsuitable, he set himself up as knowing better than the experts during Brexit and that electoral success gave him a misplaced bravado that ultimately and tragically created the mismanaged Covid response
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top