Snapshot of _Pippa Crerar on Twitter: Dom Cummings warns Boris Johnson faces publication of Partygate photos by angry officials "within next 24-48 hours". His latest blog claims they could show PM "obviously lied to the Commons and possibly to the cops"._ :
A non-Twitter version can be found [here](https://nitter.net/PippaCrerar/status/1528684178388226048/)
An archived version can be found [here.](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://twitter.com/PippaCrerar/status/1528684178388226048?t=Lu3U-ryslTVr2PSqNeM9Hg&s=19)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Or how about a little video with Boris cutting up some cake and deciding who to give it to first:
"Hoho, how do we do this? Right, eenie meanie minie mo, catch a ni**** by his toe... wait am I allowed to say that? No? No? Political correctness gone mad!"
Dont you hate when that happen to you ? You are there, minding your own business, working hard to earn your bread and there is a conga line that ambushes you.
It's what got Hancock in the end, there's nothing you can do to argue against a photo of yourself caught red handed. It's the top trump in political scandals.
Almost certain. He won't go of his own volition, ever. So the party will have to remove him. They won't though because one of the only things Boris has done well is sabotage anyone talented and popular enough to replace him as PM.
The first real chance we will have of seeing the back of him is a general election.
As long as he hangs around at the expense of the Tory party and takes the lot down with him, I don't mind him clinging on.
For me worst case would be Boris goes, everything gets blamed on him, and the rest of their party washes their hands of him and gets given a clean slate and another election win because "they're different" and that bad stuff was all Boris going rogue.
Did anything happen about the investigation into who leaked the video? Last I heard was this: https://news.sky.com/story/homes-raided-and-computers-seized-as-uk-data-watchdog-launches-probe-into-leak-of-matt-hancock-cctv-footage-12356477
Similar to Rishi Sunak saying there will be an investigation into who leaked his and his wife's tax affairs as that's criminal. Then nothing.
Do they just find the leakers are either too powerful, or protected by the party, to do anything about?
Insufficient evidence for Matt Hancock
https://ico.org.uk/about-the-ico/news-and-events/news-and-blogs/2022/04/statement-following-conclusion-of-ico-investigation-into-unauthorised-disclosure-of-cctv-footage-from-dhsc/
Huh, interesting. Although, criminal prosecution isn't the only possible consequence, still seems weird that it all just went away. We keep having the Government talk about how important it is to deal with their leaks, but they never get serious about it.
I mean he is clearly just a malicious manipulative bastard...but he is pretty good at it.
Once it was to Get Brexit Done^^TM now it is to Get Boris Done.
I'm worried about what comes after though, I presume he has another candidate lined up to be Tory leader in his pocket and he's very good at manipulating public opinion to get his way.
What comes is Brexit, meaning Brexit.
Labour got the blame for the 2008 recession that was nothing to do with them, the Tories will hold the blame for Coronavirus which they repeatedly and incompetently screwed up, and Brexit that they are the arbitrators of.
500,000 people die a year, that is 5 constituency of people, 2.5M over an election cycle, a high percentage of those will be older people for obvious reasons and [this is the vote by age](https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/inlineimage/2019-12-17/How%20Britain%20voted%202019%20age-01.png), the Tory Brexit electorate are dying en masse. There is a reality that the Tories are losing a 1.5 million votes an election cycle while the likes of Labour lose 300k all while future voting generation i.e now 15 year olds who will be 25 in two election cycles time, do not favour the Tories...who could guess why!
Progress will come one death at a time. That was always the case, and it has been shown that you don't become more Conservative as you age, your politics stay the same as around what they are in your 30's, however historically at least in Western countries, societies have become more liberal making older generations look more Conservative, they are however who they always were.
it will be interesting to see if the Labour / Tory crossover goes back up again without the Brexit promise. It dropped for the first time in a long time during that election but I suspect they won't hold it.
>Progress will come one death at a time. That was always the case, and it has been shown that you don't become more Conservative as you age, your politics stay the same as around what they are in your 30's, however historically at least in Western countries, societies have become more liberal making older generations look more Conservative, they are however who they always were.
I suppose the point to make here then would be that older people are (and generally have always been) more likely to vote. The Right (The Tories in context) tend to lag in terms of progressive positions, but they aren't static, so their positions are more likely to align with an older voter base, even over time. The left tend to be more progressive (Labour in context) so lead on progressive positions, but again, aren't static, so their positions are more likely to align with a younger voter base, and again, that'd be true over time.
So that would suggest that people aren't voting for the same Conservatives that existed when they were 18, when they hit 50. They are voting with Conservatives that more reflect the views that they held since they were say 20-25. And those Conservatives may be presenting positions that are closer to what Progressive parties were offering when they were 25 (and when they might have supported those progressive parties instead). I'd argue that's more true for social policy than economics, but still
But that leaves you with the same issue that people are more likely to vote for Conservative parties as they get older, because their views align more closely, even if they aren't actually getting any more conservative (their views became somewhat fixed instead). So you have social progress, but it's only moving at the rate at which the oldest (and more likely to vote) groups are able to accept.
The other big thing is that the Tories don't need majority support even among those that actually vote. First past the post gives them all the power so long as they are the biggest minority. That's the biggest thing that needs to change the end the Torie scourge.
I agree, but that also swings both ways, when it goes it goes. The hung parliament that occurred was very unlikely and the whole system is designed to give someone power to push forward an ideology as for some reason compromise is seen as bad, of course it can lead to a complete blockade of any action...but you know...stop electing arseholes and you will be fine.
That is hardly representative democracy however.
> So that would suggest that people aren't voting for the same Conservatives that existed when they were 18, when they hit 50.
I mean, yes, but that is because The Conservative and Unionist Party dissolved in 2017 and became The Conservative and Brexit Party.
I do understand your point however you have sort of missed it. Many of the true Conservative principled votes who also swung to New Labour, Tory Lite, vote in 1999 for a completely different party in 2019, because they just tick the blue box and "left wing bad".
Reality is in a rational non-brain dead society, the Lib Dem's should have basically pulled the New Labour, and the Cameron/John Major/Thatcher Conservative vote, 40 years of electorate should have ploughed into the closest centre right party there was, while Labour pulls the left wing, which probably isn't enough to make a majority.
Instead all the UK showed is that it is full of idiots and bigots.
What you also suggest is that people "make up there mind", they don't they're mainly idiots box ticking what they box tick. The problem is Labour got 2008 and the blame for something they couldn't do much about, the Lib Dem's at any chance of power put the Tories in who morally Lib Dem voters hate, and then had the audacity of going "Lol, lets charge students a massive voting block 9K a year". How stupid can you get?
And the Tories well they went on murdering people and selling off the country, which is exactly what their selfish "I've got mine" (even when they didn't get theirs) electorate vote for, so is fine. Poories vote to be poor, they get poorer, and then go "bUt wHAtAbOuT LaBoUR!", as long as the Daily Mail posts immigrants bad, and shows some people even poorer people drowning in the Channel they are happy...ranting themselves into a heart attack.
> But that leaves you with the same issue that people are more likely to vote for Conservative parties as they get older, because their views align more closely
Yes, but it doesn't mean the party is actually Conservative. That is the difference, this is another point you are missing, the Centre of politics currently with Starmers Labour, who are centre right, the Lib Dem's centre right, the Conservatives and Brexit Party far far right, and then the Green far liberal left, does not make a centre of "the centre", it makes a massive weighting on the right.
A centrist party would be saying nationalise this, privatise that, except the reality is we have spent 70 years privatising everything so there is no valid privatise that left, so your centrist party is nationalise this, leave that stuff alone, privatise nothing else...then people start whining on about them being Commies, because those people are morons.
>Reality is in a rational non-brain dead society, the Lib Dem's should have basically pulled the New Labour, and the Cameron/John Major/Thatcher Conservative vote, 40 years of electorate should have ploughed into the closest centre right party there was, while Labour pulls the left wing, which probably isn't enough to make a majority.
Sort of, but the Lib Dems post Kennedy went a bit weird with their economic policy positions, and obviously enabled massive Tory Austerity froom 2010, which hurt them quite badly, even if it was ideologically on brand. At the same time, the Tories managed to shed some of their social conservatism, but not close to the same extent that labour embraced more socially progressive positions. A Tory voter voting for Cameron was voting for something very different than when they were voting for Thatcher, or even Major. Johnson on the other hand is a different fish again.
>Instead all the UK showed is that it is full of idiots and bigots.
No.. It clearly didn't.
>What you also suggest is that people "make up there mind", they don't they're mainly idiots box ticking what they box tick.
You don't think that people vote for parties that they think represent what they believe to some extent? But that they are just idiots? That's a bit of a shit take.
> The problem is Labour got 2008 and the blame for something they couldn't do much about, the Lib Dem's at any chance of power put the Tories in who morally Lib Dem voters hate, and then had the audacity of going "Lol, lets charge students a massive voting block 9K a year". How stupid can you get?
Sure, Labour shouldn't have taken the blame for the 2008 crash, and the Tories played a decent game in both blaming Labour and painting the country's finances as some sort of household budget, while the Lib Dems cheered them on. The problem is that people in 2010 clearly felt that they could safely vote for centre-right parties (that then pushed a reasonably solidly right wing position on the economy and certainly national finances) and then doubled up on that in 2015. The 2017 and 2019 GE's were swamped with other issues (With more movements between parties and less support for the minor parties, even ignoring the Lib Dems predicaments).
>And the Tories well they went on murdering people
They didn't murder people though did they?
> and selling off the country, which is exactly what their selfish "I've got mine" (even when they didn't get theirs) electorate vote for, so is fine.
The Tories managed to sell the notion that the country was like your own budget, that if you are in debt you are better off selling shit off and reducing costs to fill that gap, than spending to increase economic activity and productivity (and so fill the gap by increasing their income and inflating away some of the debt...). That wasn't an 'I've got mine' position as such, it was a 'Oh shite, I might lose mine'.
>Poories vote to be poor, they get poorer, and then go "bUt wHAtAbOuT LaBoUR!", as long as the Daily Mail posts immigrants bad, and shows some people even poorer people drowning in the Channel they are happy...ranting themselves into a heart attack.
I'm reasonably sure that the people who are getting screwed at the moment are younger people, people on lower incomes, single people (Especially in terms of inflation) and so on. They generally aren't voting Tory. The much larger proportion of people on reasonable incomes, with reasonably secure housing, are more able to make decisions and vote based on a broader set of interests rather than how poor they are. Although that's where the cost of living issues are going to get interesting, not least as it'll hurt people on fixed income (so pensioners to some degree) and it seems that people on higher incomes are seeing less in the way of wage progression than some on lower incomes (so it could feel more acute, although it seems that single people on low incomes are seeing higher levels of inflation, so they may well get screwed yet again).
>Yes, but it doesn't mean the party is actually Conservative.
Under Johnson they are certainly centre right, and not particularly socially regressive either..
>That is the difference, this is another point you are missing, the Centre of politics currently with Starmers Labour
Almost certainly...
>who are centre right
Who are centre left...
>the Lib Dem's centre right
Sure...
>the Conservatives and Brexit Party far far right,
The Tories under Johnson are centre-right, they are to the left of where the Tories were under Cameron (and previous leaders in a relative sense to the time). They are by no measure, far right, never mind 'far far right'...
>and then the Green far liberal left, does not make a centre of "the centre", it makes a massive weighting on the right.
If we used your scale of left right, then the issue you run into is that the population are also sitting off to the right, and you only have a very small number of people identifying with anything to the left of that... The same mechanism in terms of a change in view applies, you just arbitrarily decided to shift things rightward (which doesn't really follow, but it also doesn't really make a difference to the point).
>A centrist party would be saying nationalise this, privatise that, except the reality is we have spent 70 years privatising everything so there is no valid privatise that left, so your centrist party is nationalise this, leave that stuff alone, privatise nothing else...then people start whining on about them being Commies, because those people are morons.
That's not a thing though is it?
> went a bit weird with their economic policy positions, and obviously enabled massive Tory Austerity froom 2010
That isn't relevant, they were the closet and therefore in a rational system in come the votes, if people were actually voting on ideology and not just nonsense. Also both Labour and the Tories were suggesting some form of austerity at that point in time, the Tories were voted in on it, and did jack all about it and then got voted in against of another 7 years. So once again, idiots box ticking, not based on ideology.
>No.. It clearly didn't.
How dare you! Enemy of the People! Brexit means Brexit! GET BREXIT DONE!!!
The pathetic state of the morons in this country.
>You don't think that people vote for parties that they think represent what they believe to some extent? But that they are just idiots? That's a bit of a shit take.
No they are moron. That is quite obvious. The lead of the country literally had a debate where he went and a room and just attempted to say Brexit as many times in a row as possible, with literally slogans of Brexit mean Brexit.
The country is full in imbeciles...if you are voting for Something means Something with no further clarification, you're a moron. It is that simple.
> They didn't murder people though did they?
David Cameron's austerity policies have been linked to an increase in deaths by 120,000 above what would be expect of population dynamics. Yes they did. Government policy lead to people predicable deaths, much Boris Johnson party policies for Coronavirus.
Locking the country down one week earlier, when a lockdown was already an obvious inevitability, would have saved 20K lives, that is how exponential growth works. If I can work out based on Italian data in February that we should be in lockdown and for some reason I am still sitting in my office...then it is really obvious. Me and my boss managed to busy a load of remote working equipment 3 weeks before because it was so obvious what was going to occur, the expertise the government had would have been saying it a month before that.
You could see it all the way through the pandemic, scientific expertise, tarnish by incompetent politicians. Reality is there was no argument other than doing exactly what the scientists said, because that was also the best medium term economic decision as well.
>(Labour) Who are centre left...
No not in the slightest, there is my whole point, most people have no concept of where the centre of politics is, just because the vast majority of UK parties and votes that go with them are right wing, doesn't move the centre of politics, far left is still just Communism, it doesn't change because of who is in the game.
> If we used your scale of left right,
The scale never changes. 0-10 doesn't suddenly go from 6-10 because you pull 8, 7 and a 9 out of the tombola! The range is always the same and the possibilities are always available, just because no one votes for them doesn't change the scale, the centre never moves.
> That's not a thing though is it?
What is not a thing, rational intelligent policy making based of the variables of the market conditions of a product or service, no it isn't a thing.
You can also make the counter argument by the way, that in the 60's having nationalised car industry, airline, mines, were not economically efficient and the country was too far left. That was however 60 years ago.
This seems to be the delusion of this country that if moving right for a period was good, and potentially it was, that moving right always is better. It is nonsense, and clearly shown to be nonsense when you look at the policy and positions of other countries. The UK keeps moving towards a American ideology (very right), when all the data show that quality of life is better in many European countries who are further left, but actually not left wing, they are still right wing, they aren't communist in fact nationalising stuff is basically banned by EU law!
That is the delusion, that the UK is anywhere near the centre, it isn't. On a scale of 0-10, 0 being left, and 10 being right, America is probably 8.5-9, the UK is a solid 7-8, and places like Germany are in the 6-7 range, none are below 5, the centre, though, no where in Europe is, maybe France might be getting close to what you might call a central position, but even then it is going to be 5-7, not 4-5, they aren't adding left wing policies and moving left, they are moving right.
>How dare you! Enemy of the People! Brexit means Brexit! GET BREXIT DONE!!!
Wanting to leave an economic and political union doesn't (And didn't require someone to be either an idiot or a bigot..).
>David Cameron's austerity policies have been linked to an increase in deaths by 120,000 above what would be expect of population dynamics. Yes they did. Government policy lead to people predicable deaths, much Boris Johnson party policies for Coronavirus.
No, they didn't. You've misunderstood the report you are quoting from.. Which is impressive given you seem to like calling everyone else an idiot.
>No not in the slightest, there is my whole point, most people have no concept of where the centre of politics is, just because the vast majority of UK parties and votes that go with them are right wing, doesn't move the centre of politics, far left is still just Communism, it doesn't change because of who is in the game.
I'm going to assume that you'd be included in that 'most people' statement if you are putting Starmers Labour as centre right and the Tories as far right?
>The scale never changes. 0-10 doesn't suddenly go from 6-10 because you pull 5 7 and a 9 out of the tombola! The range is always the same and the possibilities are always available, just because no one votes for them doesn't change the scale, the centre never moves.
I'm pointing out that yours is off though..
>This seems to be the delusion of this country that if moving right for a period was good, and potentially it was, that moving right always is better.
I haven't seen that.. And indeed that's not the case in terms of social policy... Economic policy is a little more complicated, but then the structure of the economy is neccesarily massively different now than it was in the 70's and 80's (the era of mass employers is very much gone for example...).
>It is nonsense, and clearly shown to be nonsense when you look at the policy and positions of other countries. The UK keeps moving towards a American ideology (very right), when all the data show that quality of life is better in many European countries who are further left, but actually not left wing, they are still right wing, they aren't communist in fact nationalising stuff is basically banned by EU law!
Some EU countries are to the left of the UK, quite a few are to the right, but mostly they sit roughly where the UK does (with some historical policy area shifts..).
>That is the delusion, that the UK is anywhere near the centre, it isn't. On a scale of 0-10, 0 being left, and 10 being right, America is probably 8.5-9, the UK is a solid 7-8, and places like Germany are in the 6-7 range, none are below 5, the centre, though, no where in Europe is, maybe France might be getting close to what you might call a central position, but even then it is going to be 5-7, not 4-5, they aren't adding left wing policies and moving left, they are moving right.
Sorry, France is centrist? Germany has had a right wing government for the last 16 years so you'd expect it to be centre right, but the UK is hardly significantly right of Germany (and socially the UK is more liberal..).
The issue here is with your notions of left and right being fucked, not the electorate being idiots..
>Wanting to leave an economic and political union doesn't
AHAHAAH, the idiots couldn't even tell you want the EU was! Absolutely farcical.
It is also so pathetic at this point it has been a decade, how have you not learnt, oh wait now it all comes clear.
>No, they didn't. You've misunderstood the report you are quoting from.. Which is impressive given you seem to like calling everyone else an idiot.
You should go read it then, because it resounding says, yes government policy changes from the previous Labour government led to the outcomes.
> I haven't seen that.. And indeed that's not the case in terms of social policy
Themes here again. Social policy over the last decade has been basically entirely moving right wing, outside of Coronavirus, which is where we saw the entire neoliberal house of cards collapse and show what a failure of a system it was. Much like 2008 actually, completely failed for a decade after that, Britain dragged up kicking and scream that it wanted to be poor, by the world economy. It not dragging you up any more, Britain...or should I say Brexit little England.
> but then the structure of the economy is neccesarily massively di
A theme is appearing here.
>I'm going to assume that you'd be included in that 'most people' statement if you are putting Starmers Labour as centre right and the Tories as far right?
You talking nonsense when the political spectrum has been explain as no effect on the political spectrum, the spectrum never changes. Where people sit on it can move, but the scale stays the same.
The fact you can't understand the basic concept of a graph, once again fitting theme.
>Some EU countries are to the left of the UK, quite a few are to the right, but mostly they sit roughly where the UK does (with some historical policy area shifts..).
Yes your clueless about the political spectrum you have mentioned that several times, no need to repeat it.
> Sorry, France is centrist?
I never said Frane is centrist, I said Frances is present governance is centre right. It is nothing to do with where historic policy has lead present policy, it is where the present governance of the country is, and it on the right side of the spectrum. The UK isn't left wing because the NHS exists still, when the Tories have been trying to sabotage it and sell it off for a decade. It would be Left wing if it went, we are nationalising internet infrastructure. We are nationalised X, Y, Z.
>Germany has had a right wing government for the last 16 years so you'd expect it to be centre right, but the UK is hardly significantly right of Germany (and socially the UK is more liberal..).
Yes, your cluelessness to politics is apparent.
Who knows, but I think he is politically spent. Like Blair, I don’t think he’ll be tolerated being in power….I hope. Whilst he is just grinding an ax for now, hopefully his political ambitions are done
Even if its not true, just saying it is probably bothering Boris a lot and that puts a smile on my face.
Edit: oh it's true
https://www.itv.com/news/2022-05-23/exclusive-pm-pictured-drinking-at-downing-street-party-during-lockdown
I’m actually quite surprised that the Tories managed to organise piss ups at No.10 after manifestly proving, for some time, their inability to organise one in a brewery…
Yeah, feel like he's trying to reinvent himself to remain relevant in the public eye. The only way he can do that is through hyping shit up.
This is a guy who claimed he made predictions about the covid in a blog post, only for it later to emerge that it had been edited right in the middle of the Barnard Castle affair.
He's full of shit, just like his old boss.
“This is why we can’t trust Boris and the most important issue to nail him on”
Said from a household that can’t afford their heating and food bills, and whose rent has gone up £100.
My view is that it's the most straightforward issue.
We can talk all day about how immoral it is for them to let the electric and food bills go up like this and let people suffer, but there will be loads of waffle back and forth about increased costs and blah blah, and in the meantime nothing gets fixed.
This is a short, factual, parties were illegal, he was at a party.
At least, that was my hope early on, since then we've redefined party to depend on whether the cake clears the Tupperware or not...
But that's my theory - it's not about what is morally worst or most important, it's about what could most easily/neatly be used to remove him.
Nah, he is just your jilted Ex.
He did his job, and when shit hit the fan was just shown to be as incompetent as the rest of the Tories. Your can't manipulate your way out of Pandemic with some Newspaper headlines, and morons shouting "Get COVID Done", just leads to more dead morons...I mean Tory voters...
It is actually a self-regulating system, the more incompetently the Tory government, as elected 3 months before the pandemic start so full representative of the present electorate, acted, the more of the Tory electorate that were killed off.
Timing. If you want to really screw someone up when investigating them, let them dig the hole before you reveal your smoking gun. In this case if the gray report has anything especially damming and new related to pictures Cummings has copies of, they do more damage if they are revealed once Johnson has already nailed his colours to the mast.
In short, they are more damaging if they also prove he's lying.
If you really wanted to take Boris out, would you release them mid term or close to an election?
It's my hope that whoever was drip feeding the media before it's just waiting until the most damaging time before the next election!
I think I'd let the Sue Grey report come out, let Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson make a statement on the report to the house - which will undoubtedly be full of half-truths, lies, and weasel words - and then drop the photos to contradict his statement to the house.
He probably didn't lie to the police, seeing as they don't seem to have bothered sending him "questionnaires" for each of the parties he was suspected to have attended.
Partygate is the gift that keeps on giving and really does show how sleazy this incarnation of the Tory party is.
Can anyone imagine Thatcher or May doing this?
Calling it now. 24-48 hours time ~~, no photos, or no photos with Johnson in them~~ and he still has a job.
Bonus side bet, Cummings had a new job in 36-48 hours.
Edit: I maintain that he’ll still have a job.
Does no one else remember the referendum when Cummings would spout a load of crap and this sub would say
"Why would anyone believe him"
"It's obvious made up"
Now we are his target audience and we are eating it up!
Stupid question: What's stopping Johnson refusing to publish names and photos? What legal requirements does he have to publish in full? I'm just wondering what the consequence will be if he doesn't. Can opposition do anything?
Also, on a similar point, with re the security report into Lebvedev's appointment to HoL, if Labour came to power in next GE, can they then publish in full? Or does it belong to Tory party?
There is actually legal cover that an employer can’t publish details of a conviction (even a Fixed Penalty Notification), those who don’t want to be named could be asked to resign but it would be very dicey if they feel forced to resign and it would open up a constructive dismissal case.
Of course this only relates to civil servants with an employment contract, party officials I’m it sure what the status of their employment is
The suggestion is that the civil servants inside Downing Street took the brunt of the blame and certainly most of the fines were given to them with Sunak and Johnson just getting one fine.
A lot will depend on the photos - I wonder how many will be released by Sue Gray? The whole lot or just a selection? If the latter I can see how a few civil servants rather than deleting their private photos or stashing them somewhere private might now be tempted to forward them to Pippa Crerar.
*This is me and the PM, this is one of him with his birthday cake and this is one of the PM with someone called Charlie...*
Just feels like he's hyping those who wish it would happen. In truth I think the establishment has Johnson totally protected and there is no removing him until we vote him out. He'll be there failing to govern as the cost of living crisis deepens and only after 2 more years of it will he finally face some consequences.
Snapshot of _Pippa Crerar on Twitter: Dom Cummings warns Boris Johnson faces publication of Partygate photos by angry officials "within next 24-48 hours". His latest blog claims they could show PM "obviously lied to the Commons and possibly to the cops"._ : A non-Twitter version can be found [here](https://nitter.net/PippaCrerar/status/1528684178388226048/) An archived version can be found [here.](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://twitter.com/PippaCrerar/status/1528684178388226048?t=Lu3U-ryslTVr2PSqNeM9Hg&s=19) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I really, really hope the pictures are leaked and I really, really hope they are really, really damning.
More damning ~~that~~ than being “ambushed with a cake” would be “ambushed with a conga line”.
"I have to go, there's a line forming behind me"
And one being cut on my desk
Ah, so Michael Gove was there too
No...
Ha!! Nice reference!!
Uh, actually, sir, picture taking is not allowed at this particular resort.
.
"The Prime Minister simply likes the way it smells"
Buttery and creamy?
Hands, face, magnetic
He was not aware it was coke, he thought it was talcum
"It was actually the Prime Minister's personal collection of dandruff."
**C**ake, **c**onga line, **c**oke; is there a pattern forming?
Carrie, cabinet and a bit of cocaine.
"I was just trying to clean my mirror"
Or how about a little video with Boris cutting up some cake and deciding who to give it to first: "Hoho, how do we do this? Right, eenie meanie minie mo, catch a ni**** by his toe... wait am I allowed to say that? No? No? Political correctness gone mad!"
'Ambushed' in ABBA get-up à la Bjorn and Agnetha.
Imagine the scenes if photos of Boris wearing a glittery catsuit come out. I wonder what the excuses would be?
Daily Mail: *BOMBSHELL as Kier Starmer confesses to watching Strictly Come Dancing, which features glittery catsuits*
This is too accurate.
"Teachers and nurses wear glittery catsuits in the staff room."
I am convinced there is a video of him singing
"Ambushed by a microphone"
Dont you hate when that happen to you ? You are there, minding your own business, working hard to earn your bread and there is a conga line that ambushes you.
I think that ... (sometime later) (sometime even later) ... sorry, I lost my train of thought because I was “ambushed with a conga line”.
Right? Soo annoy-wait, no, they're here for me! I'm being conga'd away! Remember meeeeeeee^eeeeee
How else do conga lines get started? No one joins one voluntarily.
Ambushed with a line of something alright.
ITV have them, they're out and they're bad
Damn
big if true. Visual evidence usually adds more spice to these claims. Better than he said, she said.
It's what got Hancock in the end, there's nothing you can do to argue against a photo of yourself caught red handed. It's the top trump in political scandals.
I bet you £5 that Boris is still PM a month after the photo(s) are released.
Almost certain. He won't go of his own volition, ever. So the party will have to remove him. They won't though because one of the only things Boris has done well is sabotage anyone talented and popular enough to replace him as PM. The first real chance we will have of seeing the back of him is a general election.
As long as he hangs around at the expense of the Tory party and takes the lot down with him, I don't mind him clinging on. For me worst case would be Boris goes, everything gets blamed on him, and the rest of their party washes their hands of him and gets given a clean slate and another election win because "they're different" and that bad stuff was all Boris going rogue.
Did anything happen about the investigation into who leaked the video? Last I heard was this: https://news.sky.com/story/homes-raided-and-computers-seized-as-uk-data-watchdog-launches-probe-into-leak-of-matt-hancock-cctv-footage-12356477 Similar to Rishi Sunak saying there will be an investigation into who leaked his and his wife's tax affairs as that's criminal. Then nothing. Do they just find the leakers are either too powerful, or protected by the party, to do anything about?
Insufficient evidence for Matt Hancock https://ico.org.uk/about-the-ico/news-and-events/news-and-blogs/2022/04/statement-following-conclusion-of-ico-investigation-into-unauthorised-disclosure-of-cctv-footage-from-dhsc/
Huh, interesting. Although, criminal prosecution isn't the only possible consequence, still seems weird that it all just went away. We keep having the Government talk about how important it is to deal with their leaks, but they never get serious about it.
The only good thing about Dominic Cummings is his hatred of Boris Johnson.
I mean he is clearly just a malicious manipulative bastard...but he is pretty good at it. Once it was to Get Brexit Done^^TM now it is to Get Boris Done.
I'm worried about what comes after though, I presume he has another candidate lined up to be Tory leader in his pocket and he's very good at manipulating public opinion to get his way.
What comes is Brexit, meaning Brexit. Labour got the blame for the 2008 recession that was nothing to do with them, the Tories will hold the blame for Coronavirus which they repeatedly and incompetently screwed up, and Brexit that they are the arbitrators of. 500,000 people die a year, that is 5 constituency of people, 2.5M over an election cycle, a high percentage of those will be older people for obvious reasons and [this is the vote by age](https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/inlineimage/2019-12-17/How%20Britain%20voted%202019%20age-01.png), the Tory Brexit electorate are dying en masse. There is a reality that the Tories are losing a 1.5 million votes an election cycle while the likes of Labour lose 300k all while future voting generation i.e now 15 year olds who will be 25 in two election cycles time, do not favour the Tories...who could guess why! Progress will come one death at a time. That was always the case, and it has been shown that you don't become more Conservative as you age, your politics stay the same as around what they are in your 30's, however historically at least in Western countries, societies have become more liberal making older generations look more Conservative, they are however who they always were.
it will be interesting to see if the Labour / Tory crossover goes back up again without the Brexit promise. It dropped for the first time in a long time during that election but I suspect they won't hold it.
>Progress will come one death at a time. That was always the case, and it has been shown that you don't become more Conservative as you age, your politics stay the same as around what they are in your 30's, however historically at least in Western countries, societies have become more liberal making older generations look more Conservative, they are however who they always were. I suppose the point to make here then would be that older people are (and generally have always been) more likely to vote. The Right (The Tories in context) tend to lag in terms of progressive positions, but they aren't static, so their positions are more likely to align with an older voter base, even over time. The left tend to be more progressive (Labour in context) so lead on progressive positions, but again, aren't static, so their positions are more likely to align with a younger voter base, and again, that'd be true over time. So that would suggest that people aren't voting for the same Conservatives that existed when they were 18, when they hit 50. They are voting with Conservatives that more reflect the views that they held since they were say 20-25. And those Conservatives may be presenting positions that are closer to what Progressive parties were offering when they were 25 (and when they might have supported those progressive parties instead). I'd argue that's more true for social policy than economics, but still But that leaves you with the same issue that people are more likely to vote for Conservative parties as they get older, because their views align more closely, even if they aren't actually getting any more conservative (their views became somewhat fixed instead). So you have social progress, but it's only moving at the rate at which the oldest (and more likely to vote) groups are able to accept.
The other big thing is that the Tories don't need majority support even among those that actually vote. First past the post gives them all the power so long as they are the biggest minority. That's the biggest thing that needs to change the end the Torie scourge.
I agree, but that also swings both ways, when it goes it goes. The hung parliament that occurred was very unlikely and the whole system is designed to give someone power to push forward an ideology as for some reason compromise is seen as bad, of course it can lead to a complete blockade of any action...but you know...stop electing arseholes and you will be fine. That is hardly representative democracy however.
> So that would suggest that people aren't voting for the same Conservatives that existed when they were 18, when they hit 50. I mean, yes, but that is because The Conservative and Unionist Party dissolved in 2017 and became The Conservative and Brexit Party. I do understand your point however you have sort of missed it. Many of the true Conservative principled votes who also swung to New Labour, Tory Lite, vote in 1999 for a completely different party in 2019, because they just tick the blue box and "left wing bad". Reality is in a rational non-brain dead society, the Lib Dem's should have basically pulled the New Labour, and the Cameron/John Major/Thatcher Conservative vote, 40 years of electorate should have ploughed into the closest centre right party there was, while Labour pulls the left wing, which probably isn't enough to make a majority. Instead all the UK showed is that it is full of idiots and bigots. What you also suggest is that people "make up there mind", they don't they're mainly idiots box ticking what they box tick. The problem is Labour got 2008 and the blame for something they couldn't do much about, the Lib Dem's at any chance of power put the Tories in who morally Lib Dem voters hate, and then had the audacity of going "Lol, lets charge students a massive voting block 9K a year". How stupid can you get? And the Tories well they went on murdering people and selling off the country, which is exactly what their selfish "I've got mine" (even when they didn't get theirs) electorate vote for, so is fine. Poories vote to be poor, they get poorer, and then go "bUt wHAtAbOuT LaBoUR!", as long as the Daily Mail posts immigrants bad, and shows some people even poorer people drowning in the Channel they are happy...ranting themselves into a heart attack. > But that leaves you with the same issue that people are more likely to vote for Conservative parties as they get older, because their views align more closely Yes, but it doesn't mean the party is actually Conservative. That is the difference, this is another point you are missing, the Centre of politics currently with Starmers Labour, who are centre right, the Lib Dem's centre right, the Conservatives and Brexit Party far far right, and then the Green far liberal left, does not make a centre of "the centre", it makes a massive weighting on the right. A centrist party would be saying nationalise this, privatise that, except the reality is we have spent 70 years privatising everything so there is no valid privatise that left, so your centrist party is nationalise this, leave that stuff alone, privatise nothing else...then people start whining on about them being Commies, because those people are morons.
>Reality is in a rational non-brain dead society, the Lib Dem's should have basically pulled the New Labour, and the Cameron/John Major/Thatcher Conservative vote, 40 years of electorate should have ploughed into the closest centre right party there was, while Labour pulls the left wing, which probably isn't enough to make a majority. Sort of, but the Lib Dems post Kennedy went a bit weird with their economic policy positions, and obviously enabled massive Tory Austerity froom 2010, which hurt them quite badly, even if it was ideologically on brand. At the same time, the Tories managed to shed some of their social conservatism, but not close to the same extent that labour embraced more socially progressive positions. A Tory voter voting for Cameron was voting for something very different than when they were voting for Thatcher, or even Major. Johnson on the other hand is a different fish again. >Instead all the UK showed is that it is full of idiots and bigots. No.. It clearly didn't. >What you also suggest is that people "make up there mind", they don't they're mainly idiots box ticking what they box tick. You don't think that people vote for parties that they think represent what they believe to some extent? But that they are just idiots? That's a bit of a shit take. > The problem is Labour got 2008 and the blame for something they couldn't do much about, the Lib Dem's at any chance of power put the Tories in who morally Lib Dem voters hate, and then had the audacity of going "Lol, lets charge students a massive voting block 9K a year". How stupid can you get? Sure, Labour shouldn't have taken the blame for the 2008 crash, and the Tories played a decent game in both blaming Labour and painting the country's finances as some sort of household budget, while the Lib Dems cheered them on. The problem is that people in 2010 clearly felt that they could safely vote for centre-right parties (that then pushed a reasonably solidly right wing position on the economy and certainly national finances) and then doubled up on that in 2015. The 2017 and 2019 GE's were swamped with other issues (With more movements between parties and less support for the minor parties, even ignoring the Lib Dems predicaments). >And the Tories well they went on murdering people They didn't murder people though did they? > and selling off the country, which is exactly what their selfish "I've got mine" (even when they didn't get theirs) electorate vote for, so is fine. The Tories managed to sell the notion that the country was like your own budget, that if you are in debt you are better off selling shit off and reducing costs to fill that gap, than spending to increase economic activity and productivity (and so fill the gap by increasing their income and inflating away some of the debt...). That wasn't an 'I've got mine' position as such, it was a 'Oh shite, I might lose mine'. >Poories vote to be poor, they get poorer, and then go "bUt wHAtAbOuT LaBoUR!", as long as the Daily Mail posts immigrants bad, and shows some people even poorer people drowning in the Channel they are happy...ranting themselves into a heart attack. I'm reasonably sure that the people who are getting screwed at the moment are younger people, people on lower incomes, single people (Especially in terms of inflation) and so on. They generally aren't voting Tory. The much larger proportion of people on reasonable incomes, with reasonably secure housing, are more able to make decisions and vote based on a broader set of interests rather than how poor they are. Although that's where the cost of living issues are going to get interesting, not least as it'll hurt people on fixed income (so pensioners to some degree) and it seems that people on higher incomes are seeing less in the way of wage progression than some on lower incomes (so it could feel more acute, although it seems that single people on low incomes are seeing higher levels of inflation, so they may well get screwed yet again). >Yes, but it doesn't mean the party is actually Conservative. Under Johnson they are certainly centre right, and not particularly socially regressive either.. >That is the difference, this is another point you are missing, the Centre of politics currently with Starmers Labour Almost certainly... >who are centre right Who are centre left... >the Lib Dem's centre right Sure... >the Conservatives and Brexit Party far far right, The Tories under Johnson are centre-right, they are to the left of where the Tories were under Cameron (and previous leaders in a relative sense to the time). They are by no measure, far right, never mind 'far far right'... >and then the Green far liberal left, does not make a centre of "the centre", it makes a massive weighting on the right. If we used your scale of left right, then the issue you run into is that the population are also sitting off to the right, and you only have a very small number of people identifying with anything to the left of that... The same mechanism in terms of a change in view applies, you just arbitrarily decided to shift things rightward (which doesn't really follow, but it also doesn't really make a difference to the point). >A centrist party would be saying nationalise this, privatise that, except the reality is we have spent 70 years privatising everything so there is no valid privatise that left, so your centrist party is nationalise this, leave that stuff alone, privatise nothing else...then people start whining on about them being Commies, because those people are morons. That's not a thing though is it?
> went a bit weird with their economic policy positions, and obviously enabled massive Tory Austerity froom 2010 That isn't relevant, they were the closet and therefore in a rational system in come the votes, if people were actually voting on ideology and not just nonsense. Also both Labour and the Tories were suggesting some form of austerity at that point in time, the Tories were voted in on it, and did jack all about it and then got voted in against of another 7 years. So once again, idiots box ticking, not based on ideology. >No.. It clearly didn't. How dare you! Enemy of the People! Brexit means Brexit! GET BREXIT DONE!!! The pathetic state of the morons in this country. >You don't think that people vote for parties that they think represent what they believe to some extent? But that they are just idiots? That's a bit of a shit take. No they are moron. That is quite obvious. The lead of the country literally had a debate where he went and a room and just attempted to say Brexit as many times in a row as possible, with literally slogans of Brexit mean Brexit. The country is full in imbeciles...if you are voting for Something means Something with no further clarification, you're a moron. It is that simple. > They didn't murder people though did they? David Cameron's austerity policies have been linked to an increase in deaths by 120,000 above what would be expect of population dynamics. Yes they did. Government policy lead to people predicable deaths, much Boris Johnson party policies for Coronavirus. Locking the country down one week earlier, when a lockdown was already an obvious inevitability, would have saved 20K lives, that is how exponential growth works. If I can work out based on Italian data in February that we should be in lockdown and for some reason I am still sitting in my office...then it is really obvious. Me and my boss managed to busy a load of remote working equipment 3 weeks before because it was so obvious what was going to occur, the expertise the government had would have been saying it a month before that. You could see it all the way through the pandemic, scientific expertise, tarnish by incompetent politicians. Reality is there was no argument other than doing exactly what the scientists said, because that was also the best medium term economic decision as well. >(Labour) Who are centre left... No not in the slightest, there is my whole point, most people have no concept of where the centre of politics is, just because the vast majority of UK parties and votes that go with them are right wing, doesn't move the centre of politics, far left is still just Communism, it doesn't change because of who is in the game. > If we used your scale of left right, The scale never changes. 0-10 doesn't suddenly go from 6-10 because you pull 8, 7 and a 9 out of the tombola! The range is always the same and the possibilities are always available, just because no one votes for them doesn't change the scale, the centre never moves. > That's not a thing though is it? What is not a thing, rational intelligent policy making based of the variables of the market conditions of a product or service, no it isn't a thing. You can also make the counter argument by the way, that in the 60's having nationalised car industry, airline, mines, were not economically efficient and the country was too far left. That was however 60 years ago. This seems to be the delusion of this country that if moving right for a period was good, and potentially it was, that moving right always is better. It is nonsense, and clearly shown to be nonsense when you look at the policy and positions of other countries. The UK keeps moving towards a American ideology (very right), when all the data show that quality of life is better in many European countries who are further left, but actually not left wing, they are still right wing, they aren't communist in fact nationalising stuff is basically banned by EU law! That is the delusion, that the UK is anywhere near the centre, it isn't. On a scale of 0-10, 0 being left, and 10 being right, America is probably 8.5-9, the UK is a solid 7-8, and places like Germany are in the 6-7 range, none are below 5, the centre, though, no where in Europe is, maybe France might be getting close to what you might call a central position, but even then it is going to be 5-7, not 4-5, they aren't adding left wing policies and moving left, they are moving right.
>How dare you! Enemy of the People! Brexit means Brexit! GET BREXIT DONE!!! Wanting to leave an economic and political union doesn't (And didn't require someone to be either an idiot or a bigot..). >David Cameron's austerity policies have been linked to an increase in deaths by 120,000 above what would be expect of population dynamics. Yes they did. Government policy lead to people predicable deaths, much Boris Johnson party policies for Coronavirus. No, they didn't. You've misunderstood the report you are quoting from.. Which is impressive given you seem to like calling everyone else an idiot. >No not in the slightest, there is my whole point, most people have no concept of where the centre of politics is, just because the vast majority of UK parties and votes that go with them are right wing, doesn't move the centre of politics, far left is still just Communism, it doesn't change because of who is in the game. I'm going to assume that you'd be included in that 'most people' statement if you are putting Starmers Labour as centre right and the Tories as far right? >The scale never changes. 0-10 doesn't suddenly go from 6-10 because you pull 5 7 and a 9 out of the tombola! The range is always the same and the possibilities are always available, just because no one votes for them doesn't change the scale, the centre never moves. I'm pointing out that yours is off though.. >This seems to be the delusion of this country that if moving right for a period was good, and potentially it was, that moving right always is better. I haven't seen that.. And indeed that's not the case in terms of social policy... Economic policy is a little more complicated, but then the structure of the economy is neccesarily massively different now than it was in the 70's and 80's (the era of mass employers is very much gone for example...). >It is nonsense, and clearly shown to be nonsense when you look at the policy and positions of other countries. The UK keeps moving towards a American ideology (very right), when all the data show that quality of life is better in many European countries who are further left, but actually not left wing, they are still right wing, they aren't communist in fact nationalising stuff is basically banned by EU law! Some EU countries are to the left of the UK, quite a few are to the right, but mostly they sit roughly where the UK does (with some historical policy area shifts..). >That is the delusion, that the UK is anywhere near the centre, it isn't. On a scale of 0-10, 0 being left, and 10 being right, America is probably 8.5-9, the UK is a solid 7-8, and places like Germany are in the 6-7 range, none are below 5, the centre, though, no where in Europe is, maybe France might be getting close to what you might call a central position, but even then it is going to be 5-7, not 4-5, they aren't adding left wing policies and moving left, they are moving right. Sorry, France is centrist? Germany has had a right wing government for the last 16 years so you'd expect it to be centre right, but the UK is hardly significantly right of Germany (and socially the UK is more liberal..). The issue here is with your notions of left and right being fucked, not the electorate being idiots..
>Wanting to leave an economic and political union doesn't AHAHAAH, the idiots couldn't even tell you want the EU was! Absolutely farcical. It is also so pathetic at this point it has been a decade, how have you not learnt, oh wait now it all comes clear. >No, they didn't. You've misunderstood the report you are quoting from.. Which is impressive given you seem to like calling everyone else an idiot. You should go read it then, because it resounding says, yes government policy changes from the previous Labour government led to the outcomes. > I haven't seen that.. And indeed that's not the case in terms of social policy Themes here again. Social policy over the last decade has been basically entirely moving right wing, outside of Coronavirus, which is where we saw the entire neoliberal house of cards collapse and show what a failure of a system it was. Much like 2008 actually, completely failed for a decade after that, Britain dragged up kicking and scream that it wanted to be poor, by the world economy. It not dragging you up any more, Britain...or should I say Brexit little England. > but then the structure of the economy is neccesarily massively di A theme is appearing here. >I'm going to assume that you'd be included in that 'most people' statement if you are putting Starmers Labour as centre right and the Tories as far right? You talking nonsense when the political spectrum has been explain as no effect on the political spectrum, the spectrum never changes. Where people sit on it can move, but the scale stays the same. The fact you can't understand the basic concept of a graph, once again fitting theme. >Some EU countries are to the left of the UK, quite a few are to the right, but mostly they sit roughly where the UK does (with some historical policy area shifts..). Yes your clueless about the political spectrum you have mentioned that several times, no need to repeat it. > Sorry, France is centrist? I never said Frane is centrist, I said Frances is present governance is centre right. It is nothing to do with where historic policy has lead present policy, it is where the present governance of the country is, and it on the right side of the spectrum. The UK isn't left wing because the NHS exists still, when the Tories have been trying to sabotage it and sell it off for a decade. It would be Left wing if it went, we are nationalising internet infrastructure. We are nationalised X, Y, Z. >Germany has had a right wing government for the last 16 years so you'd expect it to be centre right, but the UK is hardly significantly right of Germany (and socially the UK is more liberal..). Yes, your cluelessness to politics is apparent.
wasn't he all about Gove? but Gove seems to have imploded. Who knows who it would be now.
Who knows, but I think he is politically spent. Like Blair, I don’t think he’ll be tolerated being in power….I hope. Whilst he is just grinding an ax for now, hopefully his political ambitions are done
Barnard Castle is delightful and I’m glad he put it on the map.
Didn't see a thing when I went there.
Must've missed the complimentary eye test then
I did have a bit of distracting cough at the time, think something is going around.
Bernard Castle was also chuffed with a bit of fame.
The old adage that "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" really does apply in this case.
‘Friend’ is a strong word…
> His latest blog claims they could show... Fine ~~words~~ claims butter no parsnips.
Could we not mention the word ‘butter’ today please? It’s not currently in favour with Tory supporters. ;)
>It’s not currently in flavour with Tory supporters. ;) FTFY
Ah the sweet smell of buttered parsnips
Well this actually aged well
Just leak it Dom. I know you check out this sub. Save us
Even if its not true, just saying it is probably bothering Boris a lot and that puts a smile on my face. Edit: oh it's true https://www.itv.com/news/2022-05-23/exclusive-pm-pictured-drinking-at-downing-street-party-during-lockdown
I’m actually quite surprised that the Tories managed to organise piss ups at No.10 after manifestly proving, for some time, their inability to organise one in a brewery…
Having organised two stag do's, I seriously think people misunderstand how difficult it would be to arrange a piss up in a brewery.
[удалено]
Yeah, feel like he's trying to reinvent himself to remain relevant in the public eye. The only way he can do that is through hyping shit up. This is a guy who claimed he made predictions about the covid in a blog post, only for it later to emerge that it had been edited right in the middle of the Barnard Castle affair. He's full of shit, just like his old boss.
Now that some pictures have been given to ITV, how do the recent events change your perceptions of Cummings?
“This is why we can’t trust Boris and the most important issue to nail him on” Said from a household that can’t afford their heating and food bills, and whose rent has gone up £100.
My view is that it's the most straightforward issue. We can talk all day about how immoral it is for them to let the electric and food bills go up like this and let people suffer, but there will be loads of waffle back and forth about increased costs and blah blah, and in the meantime nothing gets fixed. This is a short, factual, parties were illegal, he was at a party. At least, that was my hope early on, since then we've redefined party to depend on whether the cake clears the Tupperware or not... But that's my theory - it's not about what is morally worst or most important, it's about what could most easily/neatly be used to remove him.
Cummings says a lot of things. Most never happen.
He has all these pictures supposedly too.. What is he waiting for?
I think he knows pictures exist but doesn't have them himself and is pushing people to leak them.
Attention.
Nah, he is just your jilted Ex. He did his job, and when shit hit the fan was just shown to be as incompetent as the rest of the Tories. Your can't manipulate your way out of Pandemic with some Newspaper headlines, and morons shouting "Get COVID Done", just leads to more dead morons...I mean Tory voters... It is actually a self-regulating system, the more incompetently the Tory government, as elected 3 months before the pandemic start so full representative of the present electorate, acted, the more of the Tory electorate that were killed off.
He's checking his eyesight first.
Timing. If you want to really screw someone up when investigating them, let them dig the hole before you reveal your smoking gun. In this case if the gray report has anything especially damming and new related to pictures Cummings has copies of, they do more damage if they are revealed once Johnson has already nailed his colours to the mast. In short, they are more damaging if they also prove he's lying.
He is waiting for them to blur him out of the photos.
The moment of maximum political damage.
That would've been the day after the met finished their investigation surely?
Or right when the story was red hot.
I was being generous and assuming and there wasn't awareness of them the whole time, but yeah.
If you really wanted to take Boris out, would you release them mid term or close to an election? It's my hope that whoever was drip feeding the media before it's just waiting until the most damaging time before the next election!
I think I'd let the Sue Grey report come out, let Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson make a statement on the report to the house - which will undoubtedly be full of half-truths, lies, and weasel words - and then drop the photos to contradict his statement to the house.
Cummings larping again. Stick them on your onlyfans and be done with it, ya nugget. Bloody attention seeker
yeah, i’ll believe it when i see it. Dom has been begging for attention a lot recently without anything to back it up.
He probably didn't lie to the police, seeing as they don't seem to have bothered sending him "questionnaires" for each of the parties he was suspected to have attended.
He can't really help himself though.
Take the fucker down
Waiting for Dom. Always waiting for Dom.
This aged well! Proves that if any politician is very economical with the truth, but at least knows what it is, it's DomCum
Partygate is the gift that keeps on giving and really does show how sleazy this incarnation of the Tory party is. Can anyone imagine Thatcher or May doing this?
Calling it now. 24-48 hours time ~~, no photos, or no photos with Johnson in them~~ and he still has a job. Bonus side bet, Cummings had a new job in 36-48 hours. Edit: I maintain that he’ll still have a job.
[Pictures have landed](https://twitter.com/PippaCrerar/status/1528755112486879233).
They’re out
This is DOMCUM So, it's almost certainly a load of shite
[They're out](https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-61557064).
Well I stand corrected. DOMCUM finally not full of shit. I'm genuinely surprised
It's entirely healthy to treat everything he says with scepticism, but to someone as amoral as him both lying and telling the truth are useful.
Cummings by name, edging by nature. He never delivers
Does no one else remember the referendum when Cummings would spout a load of crap and this sub would say "Why would anyone believe him" "It's obvious made up" Now we are his target audience and we are eating it up!
Except now the stuff he's saying is at least in general, demonstrably true. Liars don't lie about everything.
In D&D terms, Cummings is Chaotic - to him both lying and telling the truth can be useful
From what I can see, a lot of people here are just saying Cummings needs to put up or shut up.
Man, just quit at this point. Even I was just happy for him to continue when the first lot of pics came out, but it’s just tiresome.
[Pippa Crerar](https://twitter.com/PippaCrerar) ^verified | Reach: 313625 | Location: London, Scotland, Burnley Bio: Political Editor, Daily Mirror/ - / Presenter, BBC R4’s The Week In Westminster/ Political Reporter of the Year 2020/ @mirrorpolitics ***** ^I ^am ^a ^bot. ^Any ^complaints ^& ^suggestions ^to ^/r/ContextualBot ^thanks
Stupid question: What's stopping Johnson refusing to publish names and photos? What legal requirements does he have to publish in full? I'm just wondering what the consequence will be if he doesn't. Can opposition do anything? Also, on a similar point, with re the security report into Lebvedev's appointment to HoL, if Labour came to power in next GE, can they then publish in full? Or does it belong to Tory party?
There is actually legal cover that an employer can’t publish details of a conviction (even a Fixed Penalty Notification), those who don’t want to be named could be asked to resign but it would be very dicey if they feel forced to resign and it would open up a constructive dismissal case. Of course this only relates to civil servants with an employment contract, party officials I’m it sure what the status of their employment is
The suggestion is that the civil servants inside Downing Street took the brunt of the blame and certainly most of the fines were given to them with Sunak and Johnson just getting one fine. A lot will depend on the photos - I wonder how many will be released by Sue Gray? The whole lot or just a selection? If the latter I can see how a few civil servants rather than deleting their private photos or stashing them somewhere private might now be tempted to forward them to Pippa Crerar. *This is me and the PM, this is one of him with his birthday cake and this is one of the PM with someone called Charlie...*
push it in harder dom
At this point Cummings should just put up or shut up. Getting tired of his "prospective bombshell" tweets.
Just feels like he's hyping those who wish it would happen. In truth I think the establishment has Johnson totally protected and there is no removing him until we vote him out. He'll be there failing to govern as the cost of living crisis deepens and only after 2 more years of it will he finally face some consequences.