View Single Post
Old 30-05-2023, 12:43   #59
GrimUpNorth
cf.mega poster
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Up North - Where It's Grim
Age: 58
Posts: 2,492
GrimUpNorth has a nice shiny starGrimUpNorth has a nice shiny star
GrimUpNorth has a nice shiny starGrimUpNorth has a nice shiny starGrimUpNorth has a nice shiny starGrimUpNorth has a nice shiny starGrimUpNorth has a nice shiny starGrimUpNorth has a nice shiny starGrimUpNorth has a nice shiny starGrimUpNorth has a nice shiny star
Re: BoJo referred to police by the Cabinet Office. Partygate II?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh View Post
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/4...97dcd51b4fb028



https://covid19.public-inquiry.uk/wp...ry-Notice-.pdf




Apparently, after stating that documents and correspondence are "unambiguously irrelevant", they also state they don’t have the documents and correspondence they refer to - how do they know they are "unambiguously irrelevant", then?

Also, Baroness Hallett requires a signed statement verified by oath to back up the claim that the Cabinet Office does not have copies of Boris Johnson’s WhatsApps or diaries - and a detailed chronology setting out if it had copies and any correspondence with Johnson about it.

About to get very interesting….
So what they're saying is WhatsApps, texts, emails etc that were not directly related to Covid are irrelevant so should remain private, while they feel it's OK to expect a rape victim to allow the police etc to trawl through their entire digital life to check if they were asking to be raped? Shocking, absolutely shocking and anyone who supports this lot should be ashamed.
GrimUpNorth is offline   Reply With Quote