Dominic Cummings

derwent · **Joined:** Wed Jun 24, 2009 7:59 pm **Posts:** 12367

Rudolph Hucker wrote:

Obviously, they have had to work backwards and weave a story which explained the facts and those yet to be revealed but I think they have left a lot of loose ends. You can hear them now, "Let's make your son the focal point of the exercise and hope that it all blows over. There's evidence that you were seen in a bluebell wood in Barnard Castle so let's say that your son needed a 'Zorba'". However, he wanted to strain the potatoes after half an hour plus yet managed to travel for five hours quite comfortably, apparently.

He repeatedly emphasized things like, "Our home was 50 metres from our parents", "I didn't stop on the journey up", the minute details of the Barnard Castle trip etc. to demonstrate how he had obeyed the rules but, bizarrely, wasn't certain whether he had stopped for petrol on the return journey.

This behaviour of providing precise but sometimes excessive detail is akin to guilty criminals who have a tendency to offer information in exactly this manner when questioned. Considering that this story had been doing the rounds for several weeks, the piss-poor performance of Johnson's flunkies who were wheeled out in support of Cummings and continually said "I understand" or "It's my understanding" demonstrated a complete lack of togetherness. They stumbled in providing any meaningful reply to questions put to them and it had to be seen to be believed. Abysmal. This was an appalling display of ignorance considering the volume of briefing they would have undertaken to get their story correct and stay "on-message".

Now, here's one for you locals. When Cummings read out his prepared statement [and I said to the missus that I thought he would wear a 'proper' white shirt (the good guy) minus tie], apart from the odd stumble, he delivered it in a measured, 'neutral' voice. When he fended off the questions, however, his replies were hesitant, ponderous and repetitive and as the session progressed, his North-East accent became more and more pronounced!

No doubt this has been voiced elsewhere but if Cummings needed to travel all the way up to Durham to seek help, he might just consider that he could be a bit of a 'grumble and grunt'.

I said the exact same thing about his accent.
And when he was late our lass said he was having problems picking a shirt !!!
That's the first time I've heard the guy speak so i haven't really got anything to compare.
I personally think he was shocked at the tone from the press. Has he done press conferences before.
There didn't appear to be much orchestration to me. The impression I got was that Boris has said you get out there and explain yourself instead of relying on the rest of us to defend you and that is what happened. There appear to be various camps on this.
Some people will condemn him no matter what he says, conversely others will defend him even if he shot the Lord Lieutenant of the County Palatine of Durham, whilst the rest will just say Can we move on, we have more important things to do.
I can't muster any emotion one way or the other and the more it goes on the more entrenched people will get and that will get us nowhere.
I have the theory that he might have already said to Johnson, look I've had enough of this, I'm off and Boris has said something like, you are staying put, I'm not having trial by media and when I appoint the press as my advisers then I'll start considering their advice.
I think Boris will be more influenced with the views and actions of his MPs and members and that is finely balanced in my opinion.

Bluestreak · **Posted:** Tue May 26, 2020 1:59 pm

Although DC is said to be very effective in his job he is now damaged goods associated with a very poor PM.
If i was SKS i would keep this running because most of the population are not happy what DC did and that strongly reflects on the PM.

derwent · **Joined:** Wed Jun 24, 2009 7:59 pm **Posts:** 12367

phil wrote:

One of my colleagues has a young son. Whilst driving back from the shops he needed the toilet. She pulled over near some woods to let him go. A police officer stopped them and made them get back in the car. No surprises for what happened next.

One rule for Cummings, another for everyone else.

Sent from my CLT-L09 using Tapatalk

What happened next he very uncivilly crapped in the car.

A friend of mine went out in his motorhome to a local beauty spot and parked legally at a place with a nice view. A police car pulled up and the bobby asked him why he was there.
He told the bobby that, although he didn't have any symptoms and was in rude health, he was socially distancing from everything and everyone and the reason he chose the place was that it was a serene and peaceful experience which had an excellent affect on his mental health and well being and the reason he had brought his motorhome was because it was self contained with it's own facilities of shower, toilet, cooker, fridge etc etc. In fact he wanted for nothing and therefore would have no need to bother or contact any other person. He was in fact completely self isolated. The bobby asked him when and where did he fill up with fuel and he replied just before the shut down and this is the first time I've been out and I've travelled nine miles. He asked the bobby if he should go home and the bobby said you are probably the least person in this area to be any danger to anyone else, unless you knock them over on your way home and went on his way.
Was the bobby right?

Rudolph Hucker · **Joined:** Thu May 11, 2017 3:59 pm **Posts:** 165

That's exactly the point, Phil. I heard a comment from the Bill earlier this morning who said that if he had stopped Cummings, he would have told him to turn round and if he had given him the inevitable mouthful, he would have fined him for good measure.

This whole episode has been handled shambolically with, sadly, far-reaching consequences.

derwent · **Joined:** Wed Jun 24, 2009 7:59 pm **Posts:** 12367

Bluestreak wrote:

Although DC is said to be very effective in his job he is now damaged goods associated with a very poor PM.
If i was SKS i would keep this running because most of the population are not happy what DC did and that strongly reflects on the PM.

SKS has to be very careful because the knives are allegedly being sharpened against two of his MPs, who are also accused of breaking the rules.
I don't get this "most of the population". How do we know that? How many people have we asked?

derwent · **Joined:** Wed Jun 24, 2009 7:59 pm **Posts:** 12367

Rudolph Hucker wrote:

That's exactly the point, Phil. I heard a comment from the Bill earlier this morning who said that if he had stopped Cummings, he would have told him to turn round and if he had given him the inevitable mouthful, he would have fined him for good measure.

This whole episode has been handled shambolically with, sadly, far-reaching consequences.

The police bit concerned me as well. He drove all the way from London to Durham without being stopped and probably appeared on numerous cameras. These are questions which should have been asked. We've had conflicting stories from the police and it is so easy for them now to say if this if that and if the other. Maybe the police knew of his journey and knew who he was through number plate recognition and thought he was on government business.
Before we're finished we'll have MI6 behind all this.
Hey Sarge, Tommy here, you know that geezer who works for Boris, that Cummings geezer, he's on the move, what shall I do?

derwent · **Joined:** Wed Jun 24, 2009 7:59 pm **Posts:** 12367

phil wrote:

derwent wrote:

SKS has to be very careful because the knives are allegedly being sharpened against two of his MPs, who are also accused of breaking the rules.
I don't get this "most of the population". How do we know that? How many people have we asked?

I hope Keir does the right thing and suspends them pending an investigation. If the claims are true, then remove the whip and encourage the local community to use their right to recall an MP. No one is above the law and to be honest, 90% of MPs on all parties are completely expendable.

Sent from my CLT-L09 using Tapatalk

It's very difficult. We expect so much of our public figures. I wonder if the press are going to censure their employees who blatantly ignored social distancing when they were outside Cummings house, or will the police fine them on the evidence. It's a bit like the pot calling the pan grimy arse. They keep preaching one rule for one and another rule for another. Will they practise what they preach.
But what you suggest will probably be Starmer's stance.

Bluestreak · **Posted:** Tue May 26, 2020 2:55 pm

derwent wrote:

Bluestreak wrote:

Although DC is said to be very effective in his job he is now damaged goods associated with a very poor PM.
If i was SKS i would keep this running because most of the population are not happy what DC did and that strongly reflects on the PM.

SKS has to be very careful because the knives are allegedly being sharpened against two of his MPs, who are also accused of breaking the rules.
I don't get this "most of the population". How do we know that? How many people have we asked?

I would have thought there would be many MPs on both sides who have broken the rules so if it were a football match it might end up as a 20-20 score draw further eroding public confidence in the Covid19 health message.
DC has undermined the Health message, his excuses were weak.

Bluestreak · **Posted:** Tue May 26, 2020 3:44 pm

"There are more hooligans in the House of Commons than at a football match." ~ Brian Clough

Bluestreak · **Posted:** Tue May 26, 2020 4:03 pm

Got to smile.
https://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/ ... K6_vkP0yqg

mugsy · **Joined:** Sun Aug 24, 2014 8:17 pm **Posts:** 67

I couldn't care less whether he gets the sack or not because he will be replaced by another Tory but the whole story is absolutely ludicrous, everybody knows what he did and the fact that they are trying to legitimise it with this cock and bull story shows the contempt with which they have for the population of this country.

horden · **Posted:** Tue May 26, 2020 8:02 pm

Bluestreak wrote:

Got to smile.
https://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/ ... K6_vkP0yqg

He said on tv earlier , that he only snorted cocaine to test if his nostrils worked banghead

Bluestreak · **Posted:** Tue May 26, 2020 8:03 pm

phil wrote:

Yeah them bloody Labour journalists at the famously left wing Daily Mail.

Sent from my CLT-L09 using Tapatalk

Bloody left wing pinko rag.

Mr Irrelevant · **Joined:** Thu Aug 17, 2006 8:25 pm **Posts:** 22669

Loved the put down on Peston at the briefing today. It translated to me as ‘oh fuck off Peston’. Lovely.

RAY52 · **Joined:** Sat Aug 11, 2007 7:36 pm **Posts:** 932

I’m thinking about having a drive up to Seaham later, it’s about 15 miles i think, got to test one eye!!

accrington fan · **Joined:** Wed Jan 20, 2016 3:22 pm **Posts:** 19746

mugsy wrote:

I couldn't care less whether he gets the sack or not because he will be replaced by another Tory but the whole story is absolutely ludicrous, everybody knows what he did and the fact that they are trying to legitimise it with this cock and bull story shows the contempt with which they have for the population of this country.

they only want you and the general public at large when there is a general election. then all parties can think of their own cock and bull stories to get your vote. they were bothered about the over 70,s as they are more likely to vote and to vote tory anyway. in my over 50,s club there are only 2 out of 20 odd who are anti tory. me and guess what a lass from wallsend.

derwent · **Joined:** Wed Jun 24, 2009 7:59 pm **Posts:** 12367

mugsy wrote:

I couldn't care less whether he gets the sack or not because he will be replaced by another Tory but the whole story is absolutely ludicrous, everybody knows what he did and the fact that they are trying to legitimise it with this cock and bull story shows the contempt with which they have for the population of this country.

The Irony is he is not a Tory. He has never been a member of the Tory party and has spent most of his time ruffling Tory feathers and the establishment.

Part of his job at the moment is to enact the levelling up between the North and South, which was his idea and it is designed to help towns like Hartlepool, and if you are right and he is replaced by a Tory, that idea will be one of the first to disappear.

There are a lot of Tory MPs who dislike, even hate Cummings because of his beliefs which generally go against hard core Tory ideals. Johnson claims to be a one nation Tory and sees Cummings as the one man to deliver that. There are still a lot of Tories who like the idea of austerity and they see Cummings as the main opposition to austerity and are using this opportunity to get rid of him.

As I've said I can't get excited about what he did and how he interpreted the lockdown rules and this holier than thou approach by the media and others, because I must have asked at least one hundred people if they have stuck one hundred per cent to the rules and the most used answer is "that's different" and yet the very thing they are accusing the guy of is acting "differently".

If and it's a big if, he can bring a bit of hope and prosperity to northern towns like Hartlepool then I say kick his arse, fine him if you like or put him in the stocks and chuck shit at him but don't deny him the chance to provide you with a better future. That would be a lot more stupid than him washing his socks in the River Tees at Barnard Castle.

RAY52 · **Joined:** Sat Aug 11, 2007 7:36 pm **Posts:** 932

derwent wrote:

mugsy wrote:

I couldn't care less whether he gets the sack or not because he will be replaced by another Tory but the whole story is absolutely ludicrous, everybody knows what he did and the fact that they are trying to legitimise it with this cock and bull story shows the contempt with which they have for the population of this country.

The Irony is he is not a Tory. He has never been a member of the Tory party and has spent most of his time ruffling Tory feathers and the establishment.

Part of his job at the moment is to enact the levelling up between the North and South, which was his idea and it is designed to help towns like Hartlepool, and if you are right and he is replaced by a Tory, that idea will be one of the first to disappear.

There are a lot of Tory MPs who dislike, even hate Cummings because of his beliefs which generally go against hard core Tory ideals. Johnson claims to be a one nation Tory and sees Cummings as the one man to deliver that. There are still a lot of Tories who like the idea of austerity and they see Cummings as the main opposition to austerity and are using this opportunity to get rid of him.

As I've said I can't get excited about what he did and how he interpreted the lockdown rules and this holier than thou approach by the media and others, because I must have asked at least one hundred people if they have stuck one hundred per cent to the rules and the most used answer is "that's different" and yet the very thing they are accusing the guy of is acting "differently".

If and it's a big if, he can bring a bit of hope and prosperity to northern towns like Hartlepool then I say kick his arse, fine him if you like or put him in the stocks and chuck shit at him but don't deny him the chance to provide you with a better future. That would be a lot more stupid than him washing his socks in the River Tees at Barnard Castle.

But Did any of those one hundred people come out with such a cock and bull story like his. EYE SIGHT TEST my arse as Jim would say

Mr Irrelevant · **Joined:** Thu Aug 17, 2006 8:25 pm **Posts:** 22669

The story about the story is now bigger than the story. Loved the slap down of Peston yesterday by the way.

Compo · **Posted:** Wed May 27, 2020 12:38 pm

Anyone supporting him is a joke eg MR I

Mr Irrelevant · **Joined:** Thu Aug 17, 2006 8:25 pm **Posts:** 22669

I simply don’t believe the hype. This is about Brexit not whether Cummings went to Durham or not. That’s why there is very little comment on others who have been caught.

derwent · **Joined:** Wed Jun 24, 2009 7:59 pm **Posts:** 12367

RAY52 wrote:

derwent wrote:

mugsy wrote:

I couldn't care less whether he gets the sack or not because he will be replaced by another Tory but the whole story is absolutely ludicrous, everybody knows what he did and the fact that they are trying to legitimise it with this cock and bull story shows the contempt with which they have for the population of this country.

The Irony is he is not a Tory. He has never been a member of the Tory party and has spent most of his time ruffling Tory feathers and the establishment.

Part of his job at the moment is to enact the levelling up between the North and South, which was his idea and it is designed to help towns like Hartlepool, and if you are right and he is replaced by a Tory, that idea will be one of the first to disappear.

There are a lot of Tory MPs who dislike, even hate Cummings because of his beliefs which generally go against hard core Tory ideals. Johnson claims to be a one nation Tory and sees Cummings as the one man to deliver that. There are still a lot of Tories who like the idea of austerity and they see Cummings as the main opposition to austerity and are using this opportunity to get rid of him.

As I've said I can't get excited about what he did and how he interpreted the lockdown rules and this holier than thou approach by the media and others, because I must have asked at least one hundred people if they have stuck one hundred per cent to the rules and the most used answer is "that's different" and yet the very thing they are accusing the guy of is acting "differently".

If and it's a big if, he can bring a bit of hope and prosperity to northern towns like Hartlepool then I say kick his arse, fine him if you like or put him in the stocks and chuck shit at him but don't deny him the chance to provide you with a better future. That would be a lot more stupid than him washing his socks in the River Tees at Barnard Castle.

But Did any of those one hundred people come out with such a cock and bull story like his. EYE SIGHT TEST my arse as Jim would say

All of them.

Compo · **Posted:** Wed May 27, 2020 1:17 pm

Mr Irrelevant wrote:

I simply don’t believe the hype. This is about Brexit not whether Cummings went to Durham or not. That’s why there is very little comment on others who have been caught.

How on earth can you defend his behaviour it’s not about how story is reported it’s his blatant lies and stupid stories for a man who created the rules saying fuck you to everyone in country. Take your nose out of Boris arse for five seconds and wake up.

derwent · **Joined:** Wed Jun 24, 2009 7:59 pm **Posts:** 12367

phil wrote:

I love all this "I'm not even a Tory" nonsense.

"I'm not even a Tory, I just agree that taxes are stupid, poor people should get a better job, foreigners should stay away, the NHS needs claps not funding, austerity is great, Boris is hilarious, Cummings is a genius and the Tories are the best."

Sent from my CLT-L09 using Tapatalk

What's to love about it. Cummings is not, or ever has been a member of the Tory party. I thought you liked facts or is that only the facts that suit your political bias. When we are all clapping the NHS what do you do, close the curtains, draw your blanket round you, spit in the fire and shout BAH HUMBUG !!!! clappp

Come to think of it, I can just imagine that scenario.
You keep praising Boris....Are you a fan ??? :laugh:

Lighten up Young Phil.

derwent · **Joined:** Wed Jun 24, 2009 7:59 pm **Posts:** 12367

Compo wrote:

Mr Irrelevant wrote:

I simply don’t believe the hype. This is about Brexit not whether Cummings went to Durham or not. That’s why there is very little comment on others who have been caught.

How on earth can you defend his behaviour it’s not about how story is reported it’s his blatant lies and stupid stories for a man who created the rules saying fuck you to everyone in country. Take your nose out of Boris arse for five seconds and wake up.

Are you referring to the story that he was in Durham on April 19th as blatant lies???
If so I agree with you.
What do you reckon should be done about that?
Do you realise that I have just had my nose dragged out of Boris's arse by Mr I. Can you please keep your suggestions to yourself ???
It's turnses eachies you know.

Compo · **Posted:** Wed May 27, 2020 1:33 pm

Arnt you a mason? I can’t remember? If so you have to have a faith therefore in my opinion you don’t abide with logic so anything you say can be taken on the basis logic means nothing to you. Eg being the biggest Tory labour card carrying member going

Mr Irrelevant · **Joined:** Thu Aug 17, 2006 8:25 pm **Posts:** 22669

Compo. Cummings drove to Durham and back [insert justification here] now I’m not saying that I believe or disbelieve his story I just don’t think it’s a big enough story to justify the frenzy.

The London media on the other hand hate Cummings because he delivered Brexit and upset a lot of their cosy lobby arrangements. He doesn’t conform to their idea of how he should dress, speak or behave and he is clearly contemptuous of them. They don’t give a flying shit about social distancing or anything else other than ousting Cummings. That was proven beyond any doubt by the packs of reporters at his door jostling for position.

They are not holding him to account, they are a baying mob of hyenas scenting blood.

Mr Irrelevant · **Joined:** Thu Aug 17, 2006 8:25 pm **Posts:** 22669

Compo wrote:

Arnt you a mason? I can’t remember? If so you have to have a faith therefore in my opinion you don’t abide with logic so anything you say can be taken on the basis logic means nothing to you. Eg being the biggest Tory labour card carrying member going

No I’m not.

Compo · **Posted:** Wed May 27, 2020 1:36 pm

I was talking about the Modfather

Compo · **Posted:** Wed May 27, 2020 1:40 pm

Mr Irrelevant wrote:

Compo. Cummings drove to Durham and back [insert justification here] now I’m not saying that I believe or disbelieve his story I just don’t think it’s a big enough story to justify the frenzy.

The London media on the other hand hate Cummings because he delivered Brexit and upset a lot of their cosy lobby arrangements. He doesn’t conform to their idea of how he should dress, speak or behave and he is clearly contemptuous of them. They don’t give a flying shit about social distancing or anything else other than ousting Cummings. That was proven beyond any doubt by the packs of reporters at his door jostling for position.

They are not holding him to account, they are a baying mob of hyenas scenting blood.

And with that I am done. A guy who made the rules broke them and you can’t see why people are annoyed? If it was Alistair Campbell you would be all over it. Because it’s a Tory you can’t look behind your Maggie Falkland Rose glasses

Compo · **Posted:** Wed May 27, 2020 1:51 pm

Why has no one asked why couldn’t his wife drive the car if he had bad eyesight

Mr Irrelevant · **Joined:** Thu Aug 17, 2006 8:25 pm **Posts:** 22669

No fishing trip but you can’t tell me the media don’t have an agenda.

paulus the woodgnome and a side salad · **Posted:** Wed May 27, 2020 2:18 pm

She probably doesn't have a license, although nobody's bothered to check....yet. I mean picture the scene ''you'll have to drive back down to London honey, ooh my eyes'', .......as he mounts the pavement in Barnard Castle High Street and mows down 3 innocent pedestrians, ''quick jump in the drivers seat before the police arrive........ son''.... bbolt

derwent · **Joined:** Wed Jun 24, 2009 7:59 pm **Posts:** 12367

Compo wrote:

Arnt you a mason? I can’t remember? If so you have to have a faith therefore in my opinion you don’t abide with logic so anything you say can be taken on the basis logic means nothing to you. Eg being the biggest Tory labour card carrying member going

No I'm not a mason nor ever have been nor ever wanted to be. Where did you get that from???
The only freemason's hall I've been in is the one at Beamish Museum as far as I know.
In the discussions on here which took place during the election, I don't think I ever once advocated voting for Tory, what I did do however was warn people of the folly of voting for a Corbyn led Labour government. From that you and others deduced that I was a Tory. I repeatedly told you all that I didn't know who to vote for as my normal choice was unelectable, which it was in my opinion. I was called a Tory, a neoLiberal, a member of the Boris fan club etc etc, amongst other less humourous names. I am a card carrying member of the Labour party and wouldn't vote for any other party whilst I am a member. If Corbyn had won I wouldn't now be a member. It is frowned on by the party to vote for other parties.
The logic comment made me laugh. It is misguided logic to assume that because somebody campaigns against Corbyn that automatically makes that person a Boris fan. One of my mates is a Lib Dem (yeah daft I know) and he railroaded Corbyn more than I did.
You will have noticed that SKS hasn't received the treatment Corbyn got from me. I was annoyed that the shadow education secretary was missing during the hoo hah over schools re opening.
When Mr I responds to the Tory taunts with descriptions of the leftwaffe etc, people get agitated but isn't he doing like the rest of you but you see that as ok and fair game when you do it, as you've just done again by calling me a tory, but objectionable when it reverts back to you..
Twisted logic there don't you think.
People say I'm very logical but that's neither here nor there.

Rudolph Hucker · **Joined:** Thu May 11, 2017 3:59 pm **Posts:** 165

I doubt that he has much experience of facing the press, Derwent, as he comes across as a sinister creature (you may prefer to add your own expletive) who lurks in the shadows, pulling Johnson's strings and treating with disdain, anyone or anything that dares to challenge his authority. It may well be that he was shoved out to face the music but I suspect that it was all part of the 'masterplan' to, possibly, tug the public's emotions and allow all the subsequent flak to be defended by supportive MP's who could claim (accompanied by the obligatory spluttering, prevarication and nervous laughter) that he answered all the questions openly, honestly and in great detail, invited additional questions blah blah and is a jolly good fellow.

It has been well documented that Johnson is not exactly noted for working too hard and has never really taken any of his previous jobs too seriously (unless, possibly, spearing the bearded clam, if that counts), having set his eyes firmly on No.10. Now that he has achieved his aim, it is patently obvious (even to those with eyesight problems and has been so ever since his name became public knowledge) that he finds himself rather exposed in a position which is far above his capabilities and requires much more than his blustering, mendacious, cowardly behaviour to cut the mustard. Step forward the enforcer who is a perfect fit for this scenario - problem solved. Got it in one. As B-liar once opined, "Smile at everyone and get someone else to stab people in the back" or words to that effect.

Cummings is described as having a brilliant brain and is, by all accounts, running the country so how did he come up with such a lame, totally implausible and frankly ludicrous excuse about his eyesight when caught making that journey? It is impossible to believe that he could not foresee the inevitable backlash of questions his explanation would evoke, promoting what was already a complete and utter farce into Whitehall proportions. If that was the best he could manage and it goes without saying it was agreed by top officials, what message does this give to the public about the Government's ability to wipe their freckles clean after a shite? Stating the bleedin' obvious, it demonstrates that it has a weak, totally inept, lacking in authority leadership who are rapidly losing support from all and sundry, particularly among a lot of their own supporters. Irrespective of one's political leanings, what is critically needed under the current circumstances is a strong, plausible leadership that the public have confidence in and are prepared to support but the longer this laughable attempt to pull the wool over their eyes continues, well, we're all doooomed, I tell ye.

I heard last night that the amendment used regarding vulnerable children was actually introduced to support those children who were with women suffering from abuse. Very interesting.

I'm off for a lie down now and dreaming about Pools pulling up a few trees next season, whenever that may be.

derwent · **Joined:** Wed Jun 24, 2009 7:59 pm **Posts:** 12367

Compo wrote:

Why has no one asked why couldn’t his wife drive the car if he had bad eyesight

Our lass asked that, but wasn't she supposed to be throwing up before the journey.
She could've drove back though.

Rudolph Hucker · **Joined:** Thu May 11, 2017 3:59 pm **Posts:** 165

If Cummings had come out to face the cameras and just delivered his statement, it would have appeared spontaneous and possibly given it a tad more weight rather than reading from a prepared statement. The mere fact that this was deemed necessary demonstrates that Johnson and co. were terrified of the possibility that he might drop a bollock, resulting in even more awkard questions to duck and dive. Let's not forget that what we all heard had passed through several hands, been discussed, amended and massaged accordingly prior to agreement being given for the 'line to take'. Therefore, in essence, Cumming's lamentable remarks were, by definition, actually a Government statement.

To use an analogy, I'm sitting in the Mill having a pint with a couple of you prior to a Pools match. You ask me a question and I reply, "Give me a second", promptly make a 'phone call, scribble a few notes and read out my reply to you. Now, wouldn't you legitimately think, at the very least, that all looks rather suspicious and ask, "What the fuck is this bloke up to?", to put it mildly.

Listening to the continuing avoidance tactics being employed today, is there even one of the main players in this Government who comes across as remotely convincing? By attempting to close ranks and toe the party line, they are looking as silly as a bagful of arseholes.

Splod · **Posted:** Wed May 27, 2020 9:20 pm

https://twitter.com/i/status/1265602830443962368

accrington fan · **Joined:** Wed Jan 20, 2016 3:22 pm **Posts:** 19746

[/quote]Why would the entire British media, including Dominic Cummings's former cheer leaders and the Brexit papers, want him sacked? The answer is not Brexit. The answer is because he broke the law and the government loses credibility every day he remains in his post.

true. some are missing the whole point because they are concentrating more on him being a tory than what he did or his reasons for doing it. attack the blokes reasoning and not his political leanings. anyone should know that those of a high profile always say do as i say and not as i do. if you are high profile person in or out of politics you have always had a good chance of getting away with stuff much more than the man in the street.

derwent · **Joined:** Wed Jun 24, 2009 7:59 pm **Posts:** 12367

accrington fan wrote:

Why would the entire British media, including Dominic Cummings's former cheer leaders and the Brexit papers, want him sacked? The answer is not Brexit. The answer is because he broke the law and the government loses credibility every day he remains in his post.

true. some are missing the whole point because they are concentrating more on him being a tory than what he did or his reasons for doing it. attack the blokes reasoning and not his political leanings. anyone should know that those of a high profile always say do as i say and not as i do. if you are high profile person in or out of politics you have always had a good chance of getting away with stuff much more than the man in the street.[/quote]

What surprises me is that all this concern that someone in the public eye broke the rules is only directed at Cummings whereas some MPs and some members of the press are just as culpable.
That proves beyond doubt that the witch hunt surrounding Cummings is politically motivated. Or perhaps revenge motivated.
Personally I can't criticise any of them because I have broke the rules but I say to the people on the outrage bus that if you are going for one, go for the lot. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
The problem might be that if anyone who has broke the rules stood up and admitted it, Parliament would possibly end up being totally empty and we wouldn't have any journalists. Now there's an interesting scenario.

Bluestreak · **Posted:** Fri May 29, 2020 6:17 pm

This aint going away.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/0 ... -handling/

Mr Irrelevant · **Joined:** Thu Aug 17, 2006 8:25 pm **Posts:** 22669

It’s Already gone away as far as any chance of DC getting sacked.

Bluestreak · **Posted:** Fri May 29, 2020 6:43 pm

I dont think he was ever going to be sacked but the opposition is going to keep this going to smear him and the PM. Quite frankly my concern is what his actions and questionable excuses have done to the message the government should be giving at the moment.
Its a sick joke and has given the green light to many to say "*uck it"

Bluestreak · **Posted:** Fri May 29, 2020 6:47 pm

I have just read my "strap line" at the bottom of my posts and i think it sums this story up.

"If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck and quacks like a duck it is probably a duck!"

That was first used as i recall in the McCarthy era to describe communists.

Rudolph Hucker · **Joined:** Thu May 11, 2017 3:59 pm **Posts:** 165

Sorry but I can't quite go along with all this witch-hunt, media frenzy business as I believe it is yet another part of the smokescreen being deployed. If I hadn't been paid for three months and my two year old's birthday was coming up, I made a decision to relieve an elderly lady of her purse but got my collar felt for my efforts. I subsequently got told, "I have listened to the difficult circumstances you have found yourself in Mr.H and fully understand why you took that particular course of action. I have, therefore, drawn a line under this and let's move on". I would be gobsmacked if anyone reading this (kidding myself that someone may be) would agree that was a satisfactory outcome to the case. There would be indignant howls of "Fucking horrible bastard" and quite rightly so. Obviously, the cases are chalk and cheese but the principle remains the same. The country is full of laws, regulations etc. and the bottom line is we are ALL expected to abide by the rules. I naturally understand why people have said that they would have done exactly the same thing in the circumstances but, to the best of my knowledge, none of them had been involved in drawing up the rules and then decided to ignore them.

There will always be political intrigue but the problem that both Johnson and Cummings have is that they both come with an excessive amount of additional baggage and have placed themselves in an invidious position purely by their own actions. This whole shambolic situation is down to just two people. Absolutely sod all to do with anyone else be they media or whoever. They are merely a bi-product. The object of the exercise was to bluff and tough it out from day one as I stated in my original post. Why won't Cummings see that the word 'sorry' carries an enormous amount of weight??? Why does an unelected individual wield so much power - I think I answered this earlier also.

I have attempted to keep my views unbiased and have based my comments on a spot of knowledge and a bit of brainwork listening to what Johnson has, or rather, has not said. If we substitute Mr Seymour and Mrs Snatch for Johnson and Cummings, the names have certainly changed but the situation hasn't altered one iota.

The Durham Bill have provided Johnson with wiggle room by stating that there "may" have been a minor breach but do not intend to take any action. Why am I not surprised that it was couched in those terms? He conveniently omitted the first part of this statement when repeating the second to justify his decision to close the matter.

The one person who I am warming to is the Chancellor. He speaks with a calm authority, is polite and gracious when taking questions, appears to show a genuine interest in proceedings and, I would suggest, commands respect. Johnson, perhaps, should take note. I could well be mistaken as I haven't avidly followed events but I can't recall him being among those hauled out to support Cummings?

As AF has just said, there will always be one law for them and one for the rest of us but, at the monent, I am unable to think of an instance to illustrate this.

Mr I, but there's still time for him to resign! It now appears that his electronic records have been doctored to fit the circumstances. I see on the other thread that you thought Boris had bottle - was that being used in the Cock-er-ney sense of the word to suggest that he was talking out of his arse??? I have already nailed my colours to the mast and all the while he continues to bluster, prevaricate and play for time, gag his Scientific Advisors, blatently ignore legitimate questions or curtail them when he is squirming, then I think I'll be sticking with my original opinion if you don't mind, mate.

The bottom line is that this has been a totally unnecessary diversion which has proved to be both dangerous and damaging to the Goverment's authority when they can least afford it.

Amen

derwent · **Joined:** Wed Jun 24, 2009 7:59 pm **Posts:** 12367

Rudolph Hucker wrote:

Sorry but I can't quite go along with all this witch-hunt, media frenzy business as I believe it is yet another part of the smokescreen being deployed. If I hadn't been paid for three months and my two year old's birthday was coming up, I made a decision to relieve an elderly lady of her purse but got my collar felt for my efforts. I subsequently got told, "I have listened to the difficult circumstances you have found yourself in Mr.H and fully understand why you took that particular course of action. I have, therefore, drawn a line under this and let's move on". I would be gobsmacked if anyone reading this (kidding myself that someone may be) would agree that was a satisfactory outcome to the case. There would be indignant howls of "Fucking horrible bastard" and quite rightly so. Obviously, the cases are chalk and cheese but the principle remains the same. The country is full of laws, regulations etc. and the bottom line is we are ALL expected to abide by the rules. I naturally understand why people have said that they would have done exactly the same thing in the circumstances but, to the best of my knowledge, none of them had been involved in drawing up the rules and then decided to ignore them.

No need to be sorry about anything Mr Hucker. No one is asking you to agree with everything or even anything they say. Just as some people may disagree with anything or everything you say.
The important factor is that everyone is entitled to their point of view and is entitled to state it, which you do very eloquently.
You clearly read and understand the various points of view and you clearly indicate your tolerance of those points of view

There will always be political intrigue but the problem that both Johnson and Cummings have is that they both come with an excessive amount of additional baggage and have placed themselves in an invidious position purely by their own actions. This whole shambolic situation is down to just two people. Absolutely sod all to do with anyone else be they media or whoever. They are merely a bi-product. The object of the exercise was to bluff and tough it out from day one as I stated in my original post. Why won't Cummings see that the word 'sorry' carries an enormous amount of weight??? Why does an unelected individual wield so much power - I think I answered this earlier also.

I have attempted to keep my views unbiased and have based my comments on a spot of knowledge and a bit of brainwork listening to what Johnson has, or rather, has not said. If we substitute Mr Seymour and Mrs Snatch for Johnson and Cummings, the names have certainly changed but the situation hasn't altered one iota.

The Durham Bill have provided Johnson with wiggle room by stating that there "may" have been a minor breach but do not intend to take any action. Why am I not surprised that it was couched in those terms? He conveniently omitted the first part of this statement when repeating the second to justify his decision to close the matter.

The one person who I am warming to is the Chancellor. He speaks with a calm authority, is polite and gracious when taking questions, appears to show a genuine interest in proceedings and, I would suggest, commands respect. Johnson, perhaps, should take note. I could well be mistaken as I haven't avidly followed events but I can't recall him being among those hauled out to support Cummings?

As AF has just said, there will always be one law for them and one for the rest of us but, at the monent, I am unable to think of an instance to illustrate this.

Mr I, but there's still time for him to resign! It now appears that his electronic records have been doctored to fit the circumstances. I see on the other thread that you thought Boris had bottle - was that being used in the Cock-er-ney sense of the word to suggest that he was talking out of his arse??? I have already nailed my colours to the mast and all the while he continues to bluster, prevaricate and play for time, gag his Scientific Advisors, blatently ignore legitimate questions or curtail them when he is squirming, then I think I'll be sticking with my original opinion if you don't mind, mate.

The bottom line is that this has been a totally unnecessary diversion which has proved to be both dangerous and damaging to the Goverment's authority when they can least afford it.

Amen

You want him to resign or be sacked and others don't. I don't think there is much more to say on the matter because intransigence seems to have taken over. Both sides of the matter have the absolute right to have and express their view but I think the whole thing has become repetitive but carry on with expressing you stance if you wish.

Mr Irrelevant · **Joined:** Thu Aug 17, 2006 8:25 pm **Posts:** 22669

Rudolph Hucker wrote:

Sorry but I can't quite go along with all this witch-hunt, media frenzy business as I believe it is yet another part of the smokescreen being deployed. If I hadn't been paid for three months and my two year old's birthday was coming up, I made a decision to relieve an elderly lady of her purse but got my collar felt for my efforts. I subsequently got told, "I have listened to the difficult circumstances you have found yourself in Mr.H and fully understand why you took that particular course of action. I have, therefore, drawn a line under this and let's move on". I would be gobsmacked if anyone reading this (kidding myself that someone may be) would agree that was a satisfactory outcome to the case. There would be indignant howls of "Fucking horrible bastard" and quite rightly so. Obviously, the cases are chalk and cheese but the principle remains the same. The country is full of laws, regulations etc. and the bottom line is we are ALL expected to abide by the rules. I naturally understand why people have said that they would have done exactly the same thing in the circumstances but, to the best of my knowledge, none of them had been involved in drawing up the rules and then decided to ignore them.

There will always be political intrigue but the problem that both Johnson and Cummings have is that they both come with an excessive amount of additional baggage and have placed themselves in an invidious position purely by their own actions. This whole shambolic situation is down to just two people. Absolutely sod all to do with anyone else be they media or whoever. They are merely a bi-product. The object of the exercise was to bluff and tough it out from day one as I stated in my original post. Why won't Cummings see that the word 'sorry' carries an enormous amount of weight??? Why does an unelected individual wield so much power - I think I answered this earlier also.

I have attempted to keep my views unbiased and have based my comments on a spot of knowledge and a bit of brainwork listening to what Johnson has, or rather, has not said. If we substitute Mr Seymour and Mrs Snatch for Johnson and Cummings, the names have certainly changed but the situation hasn't altered one iota.

The Durham Bill have provided Johnson with wiggle room by stating that there "may" have been a minor breach but do not intend to take any action. Why am I not surprised that it was couched in those terms? He conveniently omitted the first part of this statement when repeating the second to justify his decision to close the matter.

The one person who I am warming to is the Chancellor. He speaks with a calm authority, is polite and gracious when taking questions, appears to show a genuine interest in proceedings and, I would suggest, commands respect. Johnson, perhaps, should take note. I could well be mistaken as I haven't avidly followed events but I can't recall him being among those hauled out to support Cummings?

As AF has just said, there will always be one law for them and one for the rest of us but, at the monent, I am unable to think of an instance to illustrate this.

Mr I, but there's still time for him to resign! It now appears that his electronic records have been doctored to fit the circumstances. I see on the other thread that you thought Boris had bottle - was that being used in the Cock-er-ney sense of the word to suggest that he was talking out of his arse??? I have already nailed my colours to the mast and all the while he continues to bluster, prevaricate and play for time, gag his Scientific Advisors, blatently ignore legitimate questions or curtail them when he is squirming, then I think I'll be sticking with my original opinion if you don't mind, mate.

The bottom line is that this has been a totally unnecessary diversion which has proved to be both dangerous and damaging to the Goverment's authority when they can least afford it.

Amen

There you go you see. A perfectly reasonable post with points that need some thinking about before responding to and not a hint of abuse. Well done Mr H, I might not agree with you but I applaud your reason.

Bluestreak · **Posted:** Sat May 30, 2020 7:28 pm

Just thinking back but did Alastair Campbell ever get into any mess of any significant proportions when he was Tonys boy?

derwent · **Joined:** Wed Jun 24, 2009 7:59 pm **Posts:** 12367

Mr Irrelevant wrote:

Rudolph Hucker wrote:

Sorry but I can't quite go along with all this witch-hunt, media frenzy business as I believe it is yet another part of the smokescreen being deployed. If I hadn't been paid for three months and my two year old's birthday was coming up, I made a decision to relieve an elderly lady of her purse but got my collar felt for my efforts. I subsequently got told, "I have listened to the difficult circumstances you have found yourself in Mr.H and fully understand why you took that particular course of action. I have, therefore, drawn a line under this and let's move on". I would be gobsmacked if anyone reading this (kidding myself that someone may be) would agree that was a satisfactory outcome to the case. There would be indignant howls of "Fucking horrible bastard" and quite rightly so. Obviously, the cases are chalk and cheese but the principle remains the same. The country is full of laws, regulations etc. and the bottom line is we are ALL expected to abide by the rules. I naturally understand why people have said that they would have done exactly the same thing in the circumstances but, to the best of my knowledge, none of them had been involved in drawing up the rules and then decided to ignore them.

There will always be political intrigue but the problem that both Johnson and Cummings have is that they both come with an excessive amount of additional baggage and have placed themselves in an invidious position purely by their own actions. This whole shambolic situation is down to just two people. Absolutely sod all to do with anyone else be they media or whoever. They are merely a bi-product. The object of the exercise was to bluff and tough it out from day one as I stated in my original post. Why won't Cummings see that the word 'sorry' carries an enormous amount of weight??? Why does an unelected individual wield so much power - I think I answered this earlier also.

I have attempted to keep my views unbiased and have based my comments on a spot of knowledge and a bit of brainwork listening to what Johnson has, or rather, has not said. If we substitute Mr Seymour and Mrs Snatch for Johnson and Cummings, the names have certainly changed but the situation hasn't altered one iota.

The Durham Bill have provided Johnson with wiggle room by stating that there "may" have been a minor breach but do not intend to take any action. Why am I not surprised that it was couched in those terms? He conveniently omitted the first part of this statement when repeating the second to justify his decision to close the matter.

The one person who I am warming to is the Chancellor. He speaks with a calm authority, is polite and gracious when taking questions, appears to show a genuine interest in proceedings and, I would suggest, commands respect. Johnson, perhaps, should take note. I could well be mistaken as I haven't avidly followed events but I can't recall him being among those hauled out to support Cummings?

As AF has just said, there will always be one law for them and one for the rest of us but, at the monent, I am unable to think of an instance to illustrate this.

Mr I, but there's still time for him to resign! It now appears that his electronic records have been doctored to fit the circumstances. I see on the other thread that you thought Boris had bottle - was that being used in the Cock-er-ney sense of the word to suggest that he was talking out of his arse??? I have already nailed my colours to the mast and all the while he continues to bluster, prevaricate and play for time, gag his Scientific Advisors, blatently ignore legitimate questions or curtail them when he is squirming, then I think I'll be sticking with my original opinion if you don't mind, mate.

The bottom line is that this has been a totally unnecessary diversion which has proved to be both dangerous and damaging to the Goverment's authority when they can least afford it.

Amen

There you go you see. A perfectly reasonable post with points that need some thinking about before responding to and not a hint of abuse. Well done Mr H, I might not agree with you but I applaud your reason.

Absolutely

derwent · **Joined:** Wed Jun 24, 2009 7:59 pm **Posts:** 12367

Bluestreak wrote:

Just thinking back but did Alastair Campbell ever get into any mess of any significant proportions when he was Tonys boy?

How long have you got?? He was the man who invented the spin doctor.

Dominic Cummings

Gadgies online