| I really think this might be the end for Johnson 10:40 - Mar 22 with 8290 views | ArnoldMoorhen |
Pippa Crerar (the lead journalist breaking the original Partygate story) is combing through the documents bundle released today by the Parliamentary Committee.
Here's a fairly key Tweet:
Nice strategy Number10! That worked out well!
The tweet following re Case's evidence is also another nail in the coffin for Johnson. [Post edited 22 Mar 2023 10:41]
|  | | |  |
| I really think this might be the end for Johnson on 09:19 - Mar 24 with 495 views | bluelagos |
| I really think this might be the end for Johnson on 09:06 - Mar 24 by HARRY10 |
Not looking good for the podgy 'porkie pie' peddler
https://www.independent.co.uk/tv/news/boris-johnson-question-time-partygate-b230
Which makes you wonder how that stacks up with his sweaty paw on the Bible, vowing to tell the truth
It's one thing ranting in Parliament, but this was him answering questions having sworn an oath to tell the truth - on oath.
"Johnson claimed the notorious “bring your own booze” garden party on 20th May 2020 had been aimed at motivating staff because cabinet secretary Mark Sedwill had quit.
But Mr Sedwill did not resign until 28th June 2020 — more than a month later — revealing he would step down from his top Downing Street role in September."
Lord Sedwill’s resignation was not announced until 28th June — more than a month after the event on 20th May. Sedwill's resignation letter was also dated 28th June. *
Which is technically perjury. Actually no. No technicalities about it. It is perjury........ 'wilfully telling an untruth or making a misrepresentation under oath'. Having repeatedly made that erroneous claim. he would have been well aware he was lying - hence, wilfully.
* https://www.civilserviceworld.com/professions/article/boris-johnson-says-sedwill |
Not one to defend Johnson, I think he's a piece of sh1t.
But I dont think that is the smoking gun you think (I wish it was) as he can simply claim he misremebered the timings and genuinely believed it was the reason for the 20 May event.
It does clearly show that what he said to the committee was untruthful. Wonder if they could recall him and further embarrass him.
I think he is a busted flush, but no way does that meet the standard of perjury which is a shame as a jail does feel like the place he belongs. |  |
| |
| I really think this might be the end for Johnson on 09:51 - Mar 24 with 437 views | HARRY10 |
| I really think this might be the end for Johnson on 09:19 - Mar 24 by bluelagos |
Not one to defend Johnson, I think he's a piece of sh1t.
But I dont think that is the smoking gun you think (I wish it was) as he can simply claim he misremebered the timings and genuinely believed it was the reason for the 20 May event.
It does clearly show that what he said to the committee was untruthful. Wonder if they could recall him and further embarrass him.
I think he is a busted flush, but no way does that meet the standard of perjury which is a shame as a jail does feel like the place he belongs. |
Not correct, as he had been made aware of the dates - submitted to him as evidence by the committee.
There was only one such event. Not like asking someone what they had to eat the morning before some match two years ago.
"his former communications chief Lee Cain as saying the event was a “purely social function" submitted as evidence to Johnson by the committee
Therefore, Johnson would have known his claim that it was a leaving do was a lie.
Put bluntly - Johnson claims in Parliament it was a leaving do
Evidence submitted to him shows it was not
Johnson states that it was a leaving do when answering a question under oath [Post edited 24 Mar 2023 9:55]
| | | |
| I really think this might be the end for Johnson on 10:05 - Mar 24 with 424 views | bluelagos |
| I really think this might be the end for Johnson on 09:51 - Mar 24 by HARRY10 |
Not correct, as he had been made aware of the dates - submitted to him as evidence by the committee.
There was only one such event. Not like asking someone what they had to eat the morning before some match two years ago.
"his former communications chief Lee Cain as saying the event was a “purely social function" submitted as evidence to Johnson by the committee
Therefore, Johnson would have known his claim that it was a leaving do was a lie.
Put bluntly - Johnson claims in Parliament it was a leaving do
Evidence submitted to him shows it was not
Johnson states that it was a leaving do when answering a question under oath [Post edited 24 Mar 2023 9:55]
|
If you are so confident Harry you can report him, anyone can.
Nonetheless I think you'll be disappointed as to get a conviction requires a jury to believe it "beyond all reasonable doubt" that Johnson intended to lie rather than simply misremembered. | |
| |
| I really think this might be the end for Johnson on 10:05 - Mar 24 with 423 views | Churchman |
| I really think this might be the end for Johnson on 09:19 - Mar 24 by bluelagos |
Not one to defend Johnson, I think he's a piece of sh1t.
But I dont think that is the smoking gun you think (I wish it was) as he can simply claim he misremebered the timings and genuinely believed it was the reason for the 20 May event.
It does clearly show that what he said to the committee was untruthful. Wonder if they could recall him and further embarrass him.
I think he is a busted flush, but no way does that meet the standard of perjury which is a shame as a jail does feel like the place he belongs. |
Your last paragraph is the key to this. There are swivel eyed loons that will continue to dreamily yearn for ‘Boris’ and he will continue to make a fortune, but he really is a busted flush. Politically done and dusted.
It never ceases to amaze me how shallow, empty people like him attract so much interest. I suspect after the next election and what’s left of the tories are conducting their civil war, there will be a clamour from the weirds to bring him back. But even they are not that stupid, are they? |  | | |
| I really think this might be the end for Johnson on 10:52 - Mar 24 with 403 views | HARRY10 |
| I really think this might be the end for Johnson on 10:05 - Mar 24 by bluelagos |
If you are so confident Harry you can report him, anyone can.
Nonetheless I think you'll be disappointed as to get a conviction requires a jury to believe it "beyond all reasonable doubt" that Johnson intended to lie rather than simply misremembered. |
The point here is whether a Parliamentary select committee has any legal standing in regard to criminal law. Though that he knowingly lied on oath has been shown (see previous comment).
Knowingly lying deals with the mens rea and the actus reus was there for all in attendance, and watching on TV.
If he is found guilty of misleading Parliament then a perjury charge would fall, and you would have a hard job convincing the Public Prosecution that any further action was in the public interest. So we will have to see.
As to what he will do if he is out of politics I would suggest that the cause of that, will also be the cause of a fair number of 'gigs' being pulled, or not booked.
Corporations are not so keen on the infamous, as they are the famous. Not good for the public image, and all that (Archer, Aitken) | | | |
| I really think this might be the end for Johnson on 11:37 - Mar 24 with 368 views | Ryorry |
| I really think this might be the end for Johnson on 09:06 - Mar 24 by HARRY10 |
Not looking good for the podgy 'porkie pie' peddler
https://www.independent.co.uk/tv/news/boris-johnson-question-time-partygate-b230
Which makes you wonder how that stacks up with his sweaty paw on the Bible, vowing to tell the truth
It's one thing ranting in Parliament, but this was him answering questions having sworn an oath to tell the truth - on oath.
"Johnson claimed the notorious “bring your own booze” garden party on 20th May 2020 had been aimed at motivating staff because cabinet secretary Mark Sedwill had quit.
But Mr Sedwill did not resign until 28th June 2020 — more than a month later — revealing he would step down from his top Downing Street role in September."
Lord Sedwill’s resignation was not announced until 28th June — more than a month after the event on 20th May. Sedwill's resignation letter was also dated 28th June. *
Which is technically perjury. Actually no. No technicalities about it. It is perjury........ 'wilfully telling an untruth or making a misrepresentation under oath'. Having repeatedly made that erroneous claim. he would have been well aware he was lying - hence, wilfully.
* https://www.civilserviceworld.com/professions/article/boris-johnson-says-sedwill |
Far be it from me to make excuses for LiarJohnson, but he could easily say that Sedwill told him & other staff privately that he'd be resigning before he formally handed in notice, and that they decided to hold a leaving do early because of busy schedules later.
IIrc there was an ITV pundit who highlighted the crux of the Committee's sanction - if he's suspended for more than 10 days from the HoC there has to be a bye-election & he's done.
There's also this -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recall_of_MPs_Act_2015#:~:text=The%20Recall%20of%2
"The Recall of MPs Act 2015 (c. 25) is an act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom that makes provision for constituents to be able to recall their Member of Parliament (MP) and call a by-election. It received royal assent on 26 March 2015 after being introduced on 11 September 2014.[1][3]
Unlike recall procedures in some other countries, the act does not allow constituents to initiate proceedings. Instead, proceedings are initiated only if an MP is found guilty of a wrongdoing that fulfils certain criteria. This petition is successful if at least one in ten voters in the constituency sign. Successful petitions force the recalled MP to vacate the seat, resulting in a by-election.
To date, three petitions have been made under the act; two of these received sufficient signatures to trigger a by-election."
It's possible that things have reached a point now that if the Committee don't in effect get rid of him, his constituents might! |  |
| |
| I really think this might be the end for Johnson on 12:46 - Mar 24 with 324 views | Churchman |
| I really think this might be the end for Johnson on 11:37 - Mar 24 by Ryorry |
Far be it from me to make excuses for LiarJohnson, but he could easily say that Sedwill told him & other staff privately that he'd be resigning before he formally handed in notice, and that they decided to hold a leaving do early because of busy schedules later.
IIrc there was an ITV pundit who highlighted the crux of the Committee's sanction - if he's suspended for more than 10 days from the HoC there has to be a bye-election & he's done.
There's also this -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recall_of_MPs_Act_2015#:~:text=The%20Recall%20of%2
"The Recall of MPs Act 2015 (c. 25) is an act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom that makes provision for constituents to be able to recall their Member of Parliament (MP) and call a by-election. It received royal assent on 26 March 2015 after being introduced on 11 September 2014.[1][3]
Unlike recall procedures in some other countries, the act does not allow constituents to initiate proceedings. Instead, proceedings are initiated only if an MP is found guilty of a wrongdoing that fulfils certain criteria. This petition is successful if at least one in ten voters in the constituency sign. Successful petitions force the recalled MP to vacate the seat, resulting in a by-election.
To date, three petitions have been made under the act; two of these received sufficient signatures to trigger a by-election."
It's possible that things have reached a point now that if the Committee don't in effect get rid of him, his constituents might! |
Hopefully one way or another he’ll be gone.
I still can’t get my head around this. What was he thinking allowing it, joining in, the senior CS people the same? Arrogance, disrespect, dangerous stupidity and It goes against everything I heard and saw in the CS. Standing in front of the tv camera, little lectern and slogans and burbling away with a serious face somehow make it worse for me.
Was he just taking the p£ss or did he think the advice/rules applied only to others? He clearly thought so when he tried to defend former best mate Cummings.
My sister retired at about this time after many years in the library service. Did she have any sort of do? Of course not. It didn’t cross her mind. ‘We will do something when this is over’ was what she said to her chums and did. It wasn’t difficult. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
