Thread: Updated: Boris resigns as party leader
View Single Post
Old 06-04-2022, 13:35   #1438
OLD BOY
Rise above the players
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Wokingham
Services: 2 V6 with 360 software, ITVX, 4+, Prime, Netflix, Apple+, Disney+, Paramount+, Discovery+
Posts: 15,085
OLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronze
OLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronze
Re: All those No.10 lockdown parties
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 View Post
Old Boy, disappointingly, you're still doing precisely what Chris outlined earlier - trying to be on both sides of the barrier.

You can either try and defend Johnson (as you have done above above) or you can say wait until the Sue Gray report. You can't do both.

And if you're taking the approach of waiting upon due process, calling the fact that Starmer was cleared of any wrong doing an excuse shows that you won't respect due process if the outcome doesn't confirm to your pre-judgments anyway.

It comes across to me that you're not genuinely signed up to this wait until the Sue Gray report philosophy. You're just using it to try and bat away criticism of the No 10 parties.
Andrew, in your mind he is guilty and you say that without having all the facts yet. I am simply presenting the alternative scenario, which you don’t seem to want to contemplate.

I’m not saying that scenario is correct, because I don’t know any more than you do, but my main message is to wait until we have all the facts. I find it amazing that such a straight forward concept as that is so hard to grasp. It’s surely what you’d say if you were accused of something you didn’t do.

I really do think that you want to argue rather than discuss. You may be right sometimes, but not all the time, much like everyone else.

---------- Post added at 13:35 ---------- Previous post was at 13:31 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 View Post
It's not about rules infringement, it's about the break-down in trust between government and the governed. That's pretty fundamental.
Yes, as a result of the big deal Starmer has been making out of all this. Who do you think people will trust if the end result shows that Boris was not complicit?

All of your arguments are based on your fixed belief that Boris is guilty. Even though you don’t have all the facts. Incredible.

---------- Post added at 13:35 ---------- Previous post was at 13:35 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by tweetiepooh View Post
One can defend a person who has not been found guilty by saying wait for the outcome of an investigation. That would not be trying to be on both sides of a barrier.
You can also state information in support of the defendant where the outcome is still unknown/unpublished.
There are far bigger things to sort out at the moment and for our government and parliament to focus on than some infringement of a rule about parties. If found to have broken the rules then they get fined like anyone else, if the country thinks something further is required it will say so in the next ballot.
Well said, tweetie.
__________________
Forumbox.co.uk
OLD BOY is offline