• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

A Political Thread pt. 2



Sured up yesterday afternoon but reality is it was just a calm before another storm.

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.
 
But the news said everything was calm and settled...the news wouldn't lie to me would it?
 
But the news said everything was calm and settled...the news wouldn't lie to me would it?
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?).

They should of course for the good of the country just remove the ****.
 
Not sure why the Tories thought labelling the dissent within the ranks as the "pork pie plot" seemed like a good idea given it's just ammo to say the government like porky pies...

With regards to blackmail, surely on this front this is usually what a party does with its own members behind the scenes?
 
Last edited:
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.
 
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.
Yes that's why Labour picked Tony Blair not Gordon Brown to be leader..
 
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...
 
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...

I'm a bit concerned about the amount of publicity Sue Gray is getting and hope she won't be subjected to any threats or abuse after issuing her report. I also hope this won't result in her holding back with her findings in the report. I wouldn't put anything past the current shower and their supporters.

Another element is whether or not he broke the ministerial code by misleading Parliament (usually a resignation offence). This wouldn't be a police matter but I'm not sure if Sue Gray would be responsible for concluding on this or whether she will simply refer Boris to a Parliamentary hearing if she thinks it needs to be examined further.
 
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.
 
Posting a slightly good news story from Eastern Europe to balance out my recent criticism of Serbia. Last weekend they voted Yes in a referendum to reduce political interference in the appointment of judges and thereby strengthen the rule of law. This keeps the door open to joining other parts of the former Yugoslavia in the EU, which is arguably going to be key in ever bringing lasting peace to the Balkans. Still a long way off and Serbia continues to keep its options open by dealing heavily with both Russia and China, but a No vote would have been pretty disasterous.

 

Latest posts

Top