Quizzes & Puzzles20 mins ago
Angela Rayner/Kier Starmer Beer And Curry Party
Just watching Rayner on the BBC and I have to say I think she's pretty impressive, much more so than her clown boss.
However...
Can we draw a line under this ridiculous idea that Starmer is "honourable" by saying he'll resign if fined?
1. Durham Constabulary do not issue retrospective fines - so Starmer will NOT be fined, and he knows this.
2. He refused to answer the question whether he would resign if Durham Constabulary found he broke the (absurd) rules, but wouldn't fine him.
3. During the investigation into Johnson (before Johnson was fined) Starmer was screaming for Johnson's Resignation. Why hasn't Starmer resigned? He's a hypocrite.
4. For months Starmer swore blind Rayner wasn't at the beer and curry party...until a photo was produced proving she was at the party, and then it becomes a "genuine mistake".
The man is a liar and is as far from being honourable as it's possible to be.
However...
Can we draw a line under this ridiculous idea that Starmer is "honourable" by saying he'll resign if fined?
1. Durham Constabulary do not issue retrospective fines - so Starmer will NOT be fined, and he knows this.
2. He refused to answer the question whether he would resign if Durham Constabulary found he broke the (absurd) rules, but wouldn't fine him.
3. During the investigation into Johnson (before Johnson was fined) Starmer was screaming for Johnson's Resignation. Why hasn't Starmer resigned? He's a hypocrite.
4. For months Starmer swore blind Rayner wasn't at the beer and curry party...until a photo was produced proving she was at the party, and then it becomes a "genuine mistake".
The man is a liar and is as far from being honourable as it's possible to be.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Deskdiary. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
naomi24
//I guess he didn’t know she was in another room//
//Splutter! :o)))//
Just like the country did I guess when Johnson claimed to have no knowledge of the 16-18 events that took place in Downing St because by all accounts it’s a big building with a lot of rooms?
Must’ve missed all the jelly, cake and puke I suppose and I doubt he puts the bins out so wouldn’t have seen all the booze bottles in the recycling?
Amazing what some people miss so frequently, eh?
//I guess he didn’t know she was in another room//
//Splutter! :o)))//
Just like the country did I guess when Johnson claimed to have no knowledge of the 16-18 events that took place in Downing St because by all accounts it’s a big building with a lot of rooms?
Must’ve missed all the jelly, cake and puke I suppose and I doubt he puts the bins out so wouldn’t have seen all the booze bottles in the recycling?
Amazing what some people miss so frequently, eh?
ToraToraTora
//"1. Durham Constabulary do not issue retrospective fines - so Starmer will NOT be fined, and he knows this. " - they did with the PM so they'd better be consistent.//
I totally agree. The problem may be that the Met and Durham have different criteria.
I’m not bothered if Starmer does get an FPN but if he does and resigns isn’t it reasonable for the PM to be equally consistent, no?
//"1. Durham Constabulary do not issue retrospective fines - so Starmer will NOT be fined, and he knows this. " - they did with the PM so they'd better be consistent.//
I totally agree. The problem may be that the Met and Durham have different criteria.
I’m not bothered if Starmer does get an FPN but if he does and resigns isn’t it reasonable for the PM to be equally consistent, no?
//I’m not bothered if Starmer does get an FPN but if he does and resigns isn’t it reasonable for the PM to be equally consistent, no? //
No. Starmer's choice is his alone - and that he promised in the almost certain knowledge that he wouldn't be fined. If he had the courage of his convictions he'd have resigned the moment he was accused - as he demanded Boris should do. Two-faced git.
No. Starmer's choice is his alone - and that he promised in the almost certain knowledge that he wouldn't be fined. If he had the courage of his convictions he'd have resigned the moment he was accused - as he demanded Boris should do. Two-faced git.
fatticus: "//I’m not bothered if Starmer does get an FPN but if he does and resigns isn’t it reasonable for the PM to be equally consistent, no? // " - No because he would not be resigning over Beer gate, he would be resigning because he called for the PM to go over a similar issue. School boy error, note how Boris has not called for his resignation. Just shows what an amateur Rodders is.
ToraToraTora
//fatticus: "//I’m not bothered if Starmer does get an FPN but if he does and resigns isn’t it reasonable for the PM to be equally consistent, no? // " - No because he would not be resigning over Beer gate, he would be resigning because he called for the PM to go over a similar issue. School boy error, note how Boris has not called for his resignation. Just shows what an amateur Rodders is.//
Ah right, so you want consistency…..but only to suit your own agenda?
Fancy that!
//fatticus: "//I’m not bothered if Starmer does get an FPN but if he does and resigns isn’t it reasonable for the PM to be equally consistent, no? // " - No because he would not be resigning over Beer gate, he would be resigning because he called for the PM to go over a similar issue. School boy error, note how Boris has not called for his resignation. Just shows what an amateur Rodders is.//
Ah right, so you want consistency…..but only to suit your own agenda?
Fancy that!
NAOMI, did you read my link?
'During Prime Minister’s Questions on 20 April, Boris Johnson said there are “more people in work than there were before the pandemic.”'
'However, this figure does not cover all people in work, as Mr Johnson suggested, as it only includes employees. It excludes people who are self-employed, the number of which is 800,000 lower than before the pandemic.
Full Fact first wrote about the Prime Minister making this false claim back in November 2021. He has since repeated the claim eight times in Parliament, and failed to correct the record on any of these occasions.
Mr Johnson also made the claim during media appearances, as did other MPs and ministers in Parliament.
In February, the Director General of the Office for Statistics Regulation wrote to 10 Downing Street calling the Prime Minister’s use of the statistics “disappointing”.
The Chair of the UK Statistics Authority has also written to Mr Johnson, saying his statements are “likely to give a misleading impression of trends in the labour market.”'
'During Prime Minister’s Questions on 20 April, Boris Johnson said there are “more people in work than there were before the pandemic.”'
'However, this figure does not cover all people in work, as Mr Johnson suggested, as it only includes employees. It excludes people who are self-employed, the number of which is 800,000 lower than before the pandemic.
Full Fact first wrote about the Prime Minister making this false claim back in November 2021. He has since repeated the claim eight times in Parliament, and failed to correct the record on any of these occasions.
Mr Johnson also made the claim during media appearances, as did other MPs and ministers in Parliament.
In February, the Director General of the Office for Statistics Regulation wrote to 10 Downing Street calling the Prime Minister’s use of the statistics “disappointing”.
The Chair of the UK Statistics Authority has also written to Mr Johnson, saying his statements are “likely to give a misleading impression of trends in the labour market.”'
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles25 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles27 mins ago
I Am Supposed To To What I Am Told
Body & Soul101 mins ago
How it Works103 mins ago
ChatterBank106 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.