'Hand On Heart, I Did Not Lie'

[Roobaba]

Boris Johnson challenged in hearing: Key moments - BBC News
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-65043513

.. Lie or no lie?

[ToraToraTora]

LJ: I just want an example of what you call a porky, is that too much to ask? Unless.....

[Peter Pedant]

As ever I am still waiting for an example of a Boris porkie.

he admitted it for chrissakes - Boris the Liar " I admit ( that ever lie of the week he was caught out in) and hand on heart I am truly sorry I misled....."
The rest is just window dressing

oh - - what?

wrong kind of lie - yeah, OK so he didnt lie like you define it. Got it. fank-oo

[Peter Pedant]

Does anyone rememember Nixon 1973

" I am innocent of Watergate,
I am innocent, you know
I am innocent of watergate
so please dont let me go.....

[gulliver1]

TTT @ 09.34 ..."As ever I am still waiting for an example of a Boris Porkie",,,,,Here's one for you TTT.
.....When he was MOL and he gave Jennifer Arcuri,
£126,000 of tax payers money supposedly for sponsorship and grants when it was really hush money ....Because he was having an affair with her....Wonder if he is still paying her....

[Ken4155]

I'd bet Marina could give you a long, long list of lies Johnson has told:-/

[tomus42]

He's been a habitual liar since his school days. He's been sacked twice for it, and forced to resign just lately.
Anyone who really wants to know can easily Google it. I'd suggest 'Johnsons history of lying' might be a good start.

[Peter Pedant]

and if you do ( johnson etc)
you get
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/dec/10/lies-accusations-boris-johnson-full-list-dishonesty-christmas-party

I thought he had been dismissed
( O god sir Beer doing his Crown-summing-up-damning speech on this - 12 23 Beeb)
dismissed for dishnesty no less than SIX times
or - - - is that ( hand on my heart) a lie?

[Peter Pedant]

since his school days - - yo mean he told the truth at Eton?
I really dont think so

[maggiebee]

Heart? - black of the Earl of Hell's waistcoat as my old dad would have said.

[andy-hughes]

This situation speaks to the interesting concept - speaking the truth, as you believe it to be true.

I always use the same example -

If you ask someone who believes the earth is flat, if they believe that they earth is flat, they will say that yes, they believe the earth is flat.

Now science, and centuries of experience, proves beyond any doubt whatsoever, that the world is not flat, so the statement is not true.

So is the flat-earther telling a lie?

No, because he believes that what he says is the truth, and therefore he is not telling a lie.

What he says is categorically not true, but because he believes it to be true, he is speaking the truth as he understands it.

It is therefore possible for Mr Johnson to say something that has been proven not to be true, but if he believed at the time that it was true then he is not lying.

This will be the thrust of his defence, and in all reasonableness, it will be very very difficult to prove that he knew what he was saying at the time was untrue, which would make him the liar that so many people accuse him of being.

I believe that at the end of this procedure, the inability to prove that Mr Johnson has knowingly lied to the House, will see him walk away unscathed, and history shows that his skin is more than thick enough to shrug off this situation, and leave his detractors fuming with impotent rage, while he continues to act exactly as he pleases.

[ToraToraTora]

AH: "No, because he believes that what he says is the truth, and therefore he is not telling a lie" - precisely! Now see if you can crowbar that into the craniums of those who think it is lie to be wrong about something, to fail in an intention, to get a prediction wrong.

[maggiebee]

TTT you need to wash your mouth and tongue, they're all brown.

[ToraToraTora]

ok maggie, do you have an example of a porky? Everyone seems to think there are plenty yet no one seems to be able to find one.

[ClareTG0ld]

While that [Andy at 12.32] is a fair point, there are limits to how far sincerity can go as a defence. In this case, for example, one important aspect of Johnson's statement was that he had been "reassured" that the rules and guidance were followed at all times. To what extent did he take reasonable steps to ensure that these "reassurances" were on firm footing? Since, for example, it was a question of legal interpretation, then asking a lawyer (or multiple lawyers) might have been fine. On the other hand, he seems to have asked mainly other attendees, or political advisors, or senior Civil Servants, rather than legal experts. But "I believed it was OK because one of the other people breaking the rules said it was fine," is -- it could be argued -- not sufficient to stand before the House and claim that you had been "reassured" that nothing had gone on.

This definitely becomes technical, though, and for that matter as more time passes the public anger will have continued to subside. So, when the report comes out and it's inevitably not all that clear-cut, I do suspect that you're right that Johnson will broadly come out with his public reputation relatively unchanged. We already "know he lied", or we already don't care one way or another, and a relatively minor aspect of that behaviour in the grand scheme of things is going to change nobody's opinion of the man.

[bhg481]

In this case Boris was the man responsible for making the rule and then he claims he didn't understand it.

[ToraToraTora]

bhg: "In this case Boris was the man responsible for making the rule and then he claims he didn't understand it. " - So PMs devise all the laws personally? Right oh!

[naomi24]

//he [Boris] claims he didn't understand it [the rule]. //

I didn't hear him say that.

[gness]

Andy, Boris lies to get himself out of a mess of his own making. From school, through marriages and his political career.
Flat earth believers simply believe the earth is flat without damaging children, wives, lovers and a whole country.

[naomi24]

Not sure how you know he's damaged children, wives and lovers, gness - but he hasn't, in my opinion, damaged the country. I think in unprecedented circumstances he did a pretty good job.

[youngmafbog]

I see many on here believe because he told a lie once then it must be a lie this time.

So should we say to a known burglar we know you have done it before therefore all burglaries are down to you, we dont need proof or a jury or judge?

Mind you on here that seems to be the case for many things.