Calm definitely not settled, it really sounds like they decided yesterday afternoon was not the moment to strike (I don't get it, after PMQ's Johnsons was completely of deaths door) but its a matter of time. Rumours of trying to change the one year rules after a no confidence vote to 6 months. Its all to do with with needing a 2024 candidate because they can't change leader again but not throwing the hospital pass of the upcoming May local elections and London Assembly (anyone know what else is going on?).But the news said everything was calm and settled...the news wouldn't lie to me would it?
Got to remember the sign of a good politician is getting elected, not actually making the country better.They should of course for the good of the country just remove the ****.
Back in the day Alastair Campbell used to reckon a minister was toast if a story lasted 11 days. And that was in the era before social media really got cracking.And it will just keep happening now until they hoist him, this has essentially been going on for over a month now with a brief interlude for Christmas.
Yes that's why Labour picked Tony Blair not Gordon Brown to be leader..It really is tragic when party leaders (in the Tories' case at least) are selected on the basis of polling data and essentially "Who is our number one con artist who can get on the campaign trail and con the nation with empty promises and bluster" as opposed to who is the best candidate to run the country.
No one told him it was blackmailing.Boris Johnson: I've seen no evidence of plotters being blackmailed
The PM rejects the claims of a Tory MP, who says rebels face intimidation from ministers.www.bbc.co.uk
Johnson claims to have seen no evidence of blackmailing, which means chances are he was the one ordering it going by his track record.
Found this part of the BBC article (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-60045126) amusing.
Ms Gray's report is expected to give a factual account of what happened with reference to the guidance - this does not necessarily mean that she will say whether there have been breaches of it.
The terms of reference do not suggest that Ms Gray will decide whether laws have been broken. Also legal commentator David Allen Green points out: "[Ms] Gray cannot make a determination as to whether there is criminal liability, as she is not a court."
But I thought the independent and neutral met police were waiting for her report to find out if any laws had been broken...
Sounding like the equivalent of a Mueller report cop out to me.Found this part of the BBC article (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-60045126) amusing.
Ms Gray's report is expected to give a factual account of what happened with reference to the guidance - this does not necessarily mean that she will say whether there have been breaches of it.
The terms of reference do not suggest that Ms Gray will decide whether laws have been broken. Also legal commentator David Allen Green points out: "[Ms] Gray cannot make a determination as to whether there is criminal liability, as she is not a court."
But I thought the independent and neutral met police were waiting for her report to find out if any laws had been broken...