![]() |
Re: Partygate & Beergate discussion
Quote:
|
Re: Partygate & Beergate discussion
Quote:
|
Re: Partygate & Beergate discussion
Quote:
Quote:
|
Re: Partygate & Beergate discussion
Plenty of news outlets have used the phrases “if fined” and “if found to have broken the law” interchangeably, especially in their headlines. It I is very unlikely Starmer has distinguished these as two distinct alternative outcomes and I can’t find any written evidence that he has done so.
|
Re: Partygate & Beergate discussion
He hasn't. He made it clear that he is saying the fine is what decides if he has broken the law.
I also don't think it's likely the police will outright say he broke the law but they won't fine him. I think in the result they don't fine him any wording will stop short of saying he broke the law and instead say he broke 'guidance' or he 'may' have broken the law. Starmer didn't change position here and i think the press knows that but it's an angle to keep the story going a bit. |
Re: Partygate & Beergate discussion
Quote:
There is a piece of subtlety that I haven't yet seen picked up by the press. Starmer was adamant (like Boris) that it was a work event; however, buy saying he'll resign if fined, shows that he really shouldn't have been so adamant. In other words the usual slimy politician at least to a degree. |
Re: Partygate & Beergate discussion
Quote:
When you're working long hours away from home then work does blend into food. You and your colleagues might break for pizza or whatever whilst still semi-working. To me that's work but would I have been fined in that scenario? If so, then so should he. |
Re: Partygate & Beergate discussion
Quote:
|
Re: Partygate & Beergate discussion
Quote:
Quote:
For reference here is his full statement: There was lots of it being discussed that Starmer was using the “Dominic Cummings, get out jail free card.” That Durham wouldn’t retrospectively issue a lockdown fine, given they didn’t with DC. ---------- Post added at 16:54 ---------- Previous post was at 16:07 ---------- I think what’s sparked this Express story about Keir supposedly changing his position, he’s been on Loose Women, he’s apparently said on there today: Quote:
Quote:
|
Re: Partygate & Beergate discussion
Yeah that's what I said. He isn't separating the concept of breaking the law from a FPN
|
Re: Partygate & Beergate discussion
Quote:
|
Re: Partygate & Beergate discussion
There is industrial scale whataboutery going on here. The important decision is if the current Government, led by Boris Johnson, is fit to govern this country given the corrupt, dishonest, immoral and criminal behaviour they have demonstrated on an almost daily basis.
Who replaces them, whether they in turn are fit for office, is orthogonal to the decision whether this Government is fit for office. The right wing trope of "well, they are like that so where is the problem?" is childish at best. We should aim to have a Government that is fit for office, trustworthy and has integrity & honesty (within the bounds of conventional politics). This current Executive has shown itself to have none of these qualities and consequently, their supporters, ones who you might call "decent" Tories are deserting them in droves. |
Re: Partygate & Beergate discussion
Quote:
|
Re: Partygate & Beergate discussion
Quote:
And how does Starmer's qualities determine how the Tories are fit for office? As I said, industrial scale whataboutery ... |
Re: Partygate & Beergate discussion
Not sure how it can be whataboutery when the thread topic involves johnson, starmer and others..... :shrug:
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:32. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
All Posts and Content are © Cable Forum