| Can Johnson sink any lower ? 22:55 - Jul 19 with 6684 views | HARRY10 |
"Boris Johnson refused to take the country into lockdown in the autumn because "the people dying are essentially all over 80"#
" also show the prime minister saying he did not "buy all this NHS overwhelmed stuff" months before deaths soared to over 1,000 a day."#
"the PM had to be stopped from going to see the Queen at the start of the pandemic. "
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-lockdown-autumn-cov
a very shallow and weak willed person, who governs by opinion polls and acts according to who is paying him at any given time
a level of incompetence that has fcked up so much from Covid, Brexit, free school meals, PPE, social care, NI protocol and now his lastest failure....levelling up the north for which it appears there is no plan, just another empty promise told to the gormless to garner their votes |  | | |  |
| Can Johnson sink any lower ? on 17:42 - Jul 21 with 1081 views | Gogs |
| Can Johnson sink any lower ? on 16:48 - Jul 21 by HARRY10 |
'goods, evidence wise' would be
The prime minister said the "median age" for those dying was "above life expectancy", in a What'sApp message leaked to the BBC by Mr Cummings, the PM's former adviser, adding: "So get Covid and Live longer". |
Thanks for pointing it out in big bold letters so I can understand. I know how evidence works.
You seem to misunderstand my motives for posting on this thread in the first place. It was not to defend Johnson in any way shape or form. I’ve told you my view on him. My point was Cummings is not necessarily to be trusted either. I wasn’t wholly convinced by him in the tv interview either. Until and unless Cumminsgs gives whatever evidence he has to a full public enquiry, Johnson is going nowhere. I hope he and some others have got plenty of rope to hang him with.
You may disagree with me. I don’t care.
I Hate Johnson just as much as you, so be angry with him, not me. I really have nothing more to say on the matter. Please can we leave it there?? I repeat we’ll go around in circles otherwise.
Thanks
Enjoy the rest of your day [Post edited 21 Jul 2021 17:58]
|  | | |
| Can Johnson sink any lower ? on 22:22 - Jul 21 with 1022 views | HARRY10 |
Putting something into bold is merely a means of highlighting where a quote is being used - something I regularly do.
It is not about trust in Cummings either, but whether the Whatsapp texts are correct, or fabricated. I believe them to be correct, irrespective of Cummings motives for producing them.
"Mr Johnson saying in October 2020 that he did not “buy all this NHS overwhelmed stuff”. Folks I think we may need to recalibrate. There are max 3m in this country aged over 80. It shows we don’t go for nationwide lockdown.”
Those comments are damning alone. Yet you are still claiming they are not valid "Until and unless Cummings gives whatever evidence he has to a full public enquiry". It is not about whether Johnson goes, or not, It is about whether Johnson made those comments, or not.
Something you have been careful to avoid answering, as " I'd be a little bit wary of quoting too much from Cummings as verbatim just yet"
Do you then still dismiss Whatsapp text messages, sent from Johnsons number as not being valid, because they went sent to Cummings ?
" | | | |
| Can Johnson sink any lower ? on 23:37 - Jul 21 with 997 views | Gogs |
| Can Johnson sink any lower ? on 22:22 - Jul 21 by HARRY10 |
Putting something into bold is merely a means of highlighting where a quote is being used - something I regularly do.
It is not about trust in Cummings either, but whether the Whatsapp texts are correct, or fabricated. I believe them to be correct, irrespective of Cummings motives for producing them.
"Mr Johnson saying in October 2020 that he did not “buy all this NHS overwhelmed stuff”. Folks I think we may need to recalibrate. There are max 3m in this country aged over 80. It shows we don’t go for nationwide lockdown.”
Those comments are damning alone. Yet you are still claiming they are not valid "Until and unless Cummings gives whatever evidence he has to a full public enquiry". It is not about whether Johnson goes, or not, It is about whether Johnson made those comments, or not.
Something you have been careful to avoid answering, as " I'd be a little bit wary of quoting too much from Cummings as verbatim just yet"
Do you then still dismiss Whatsapp text messages, sent from Johnsons number as not being valid, because they went sent to Cummings ?
" |
You're still going on. The attempt at a polite touch obviously hasn't worked and you still feel the need to patronise and vent your anger at me. I'm not your enemy but I really don't care if you think I am. When I posted what I initially posted, no Whatsapp messages were out in the open, none that I was aware of anyway. It was just when a few snippets of Cummings BBC interview were released. More evidence has come to light since then, including Whatsapp messages. I haven't dismissed them or anything as being valid, come to that. Since when has being wary of someone/something equalled dismissal of it? Johnson's a lying horrible b@stard, and I suspect Cummings is something fairly similar. It will come out in the wash in a public enquiry hopefully, but Johnson is sneaky enough to know there is little public trust in Cummings, particularly in light of the Barnard Castle affair (and i don't think the interview altogether particularly helped his cause either) and will get away with it at least until then irrespective of whatever Cummings is saying whether it's 100% true, 100% lies or somewhere in-between. That's really all I'm trying to say. We're clearly on different wavelengths and you appear to have misunderstood what I'm trying to get across. Please let it drop. If we have to agree to disagree over this that's fine by me. | | | |
| Can Johnson sink any lower ? on 02:37 - Jul 22 with 977 views | HARRY10 |
Whatsapp messages had been 'out in the open', for over a month
"was included in screenshots of WhatsApp exchanges published by former No 10 adviser Dominic Cummings" 16th June 2021
The truth is, you are still trying to squirm out of your trying to discredit Johnson's text messages. It is clear they were made by Johnson, irrespective of who brought then 'out in the open'.
They are texts send by Johnson. It is not about any trust or not in Cummings. And I suspect your constant spin to make it such doesn't go unnoticed by others on here.
Nor that you talk of being wary, and not trusting Cummings yet suggest we hear his evidence in a forthcoming enquiry - where/when, we have to presume, he can be trusted.
As said, the evidence is out there. Johnson's own words in those texts. And they are what have occupied the media, and others. So why not tell us if those texts are true. Not waffle about Cummings, just were they made by Johnson ?
That's all, no emotive guff about my supposed anger, being an enemy etc, Just a simple answer. Are these text messages from Johnson ? | | | |
| Can Johnson sink any lower ? on 07:56 - Jul 22 with 946 views | Gogs |
| Can Johnson sink any lower ? on 02:37 - Jul 22 by HARRY10 |
Whatsapp messages had been 'out in the open', for over a month
"was included in screenshots of WhatsApp exchanges published by former No 10 adviser Dominic Cummings" 16th June 2021
The truth is, you are still trying to squirm out of your trying to discredit Johnson's text messages. It is clear they were made by Johnson, irrespective of who brought then 'out in the open'.
They are texts send by Johnson. It is not about any trust or not in Cummings. And I suspect your constant spin to make it such doesn't go unnoticed by others on here.
Nor that you talk of being wary, and not trusting Cummings yet suggest we hear his evidence in a forthcoming enquiry - where/when, we have to presume, he can be trusted.
As said, the evidence is out there. Johnson's own words in those texts. And they are what have occupied the media, and others. So why not tell us if those texts are true. Not waffle about Cummings, just were they made by Johnson ?
That's all, no emotive guff about my supposed anger, being an enemy etc, Just a simple answer. Are these text messages from Johnson ? |
Blimey. You don’t know me at all, so please don’t falsely accuse me of ‘squirming out’ of something. I’ve given my reasons for posting what I did and you’ve either misconstrued or ignored them for whatever reason. Fine, maybe I’ve explained it poorly. In hindsight my initial post would have been more along the lines of simply ‘I don’t trust Cummings or Johnson’ and left it there. My view has not changed
But if it helps you calm down and move on from your unnecessary anger with me, yes I do suspect Johnson sent those texts. Please leave it there | | | |
| Can Johnson sink any lower ? on 10:06 - Jul 22 with 895 views | Darth_Koont |
| Can Johnson sink any lower ? on 02:37 - Jul 22 by HARRY10 |
Whatsapp messages had been 'out in the open', for over a month
"was included in screenshots of WhatsApp exchanges published by former No 10 adviser Dominic Cummings" 16th June 2021
The truth is, you are still trying to squirm out of your trying to discredit Johnson's text messages. It is clear they were made by Johnson, irrespective of who brought then 'out in the open'.
They are texts send by Johnson. It is not about any trust or not in Cummings. And I suspect your constant spin to make it such doesn't go unnoticed by others on here.
Nor that you talk of being wary, and not trusting Cummings yet suggest we hear his evidence in a forthcoming enquiry - where/when, we have to presume, he can be trusted.
As said, the evidence is out there. Johnson's own words in those texts. And they are what have occupied the media, and others. So why not tell us if those texts are true. Not waffle about Cummings, just were they made by Johnson ?
That's all, no emotive guff about my supposed anger, being an enemy etc, Just a simple answer. Are these text messages from Johnson ? |
Harry, calm down.
I think Gogs has been perfectly clear and fair in his posts. Cummings’s testimony/tweets are entirely believable because it confirms what we know about Johnson already. But rather than take it 100% as read we also need to remember what we already know about Cummings.
This stuff adds to the weight of evidence, no doubt. |  |
| |
| Can Johnson sink any lower ? on 11:19 - Jul 22 with 857 views | Swansea_Blue |
| Can Johnson sink any lower ? on 17:42 - Jul 21 by Gogs |
Thanks for pointing it out in big bold letters so I can understand. I know how evidence works.
You seem to misunderstand my motives for posting on this thread in the first place. It was not to defend Johnson in any way shape or form. I’ve told you my view on him. My point was Cummings is not necessarily to be trusted either. I wasn’t wholly convinced by him in the tv interview either. Until and unless Cumminsgs gives whatever evidence he has to a full public enquiry, Johnson is going nowhere. I hope he and some others have got plenty of rope to hang him with.
You may disagree with me. I don’t care.
I Hate Johnson just as much as you, so be angry with him, not me. I really have nothing more to say on the matter. Please can we leave it there?? I repeat we’ll go around in circles otherwise.
Thanks
Enjoy the rest of your day [Post edited 21 Jul 2021 17:58]
|
Quite right. Cummings is a conniving little sh*t weasel who shouldn’t be trusted as far as he can be thrown. We only know he’s right about Johnson’s unsuitability as PM because we can see that clearly enough for ourselves. I would trust a word he says unless it can be verified.
Nobody comes out of this saga in a good light. It’s a bad look for the country as a whole too. |  |
| |
| Can Johnson sink any lower ? on 17:35 - Jul 22 with 815 views | HARRY10 |
| Can Johnson sink any lower ? on 10:06 - Jul 22 by Darth_Koont |
Harry, calm down.
I think Gogs has been perfectly clear and fair in his posts. Cummings’s testimony/tweets are entirely believable because it confirms what we know about Johnson already. But rather than take it 100% as read we also need to remember what we already know about Cummings.
This stuff adds to the weight of evidence, no doubt. |
So motr evasive nonsense to add to the pot.
I have repeatedly stated that my ppint is not about Cummings integrity, or, most imortant, his take on things.
It is about wjether Johnson made those comments in messages he sent out.
Clearly he did, or the only credible alternative explanation is that someone 'hijacked' his 'phone. As the latter has not been claimed by number 10 then the presumption is as, every media source agrees, these are Johnsons words.
Post after post by gogs has been ones of trying to spin it, that it is about Cummings take on things. A pretty easy to spot ploy so as to dismiss it all, as Cummings is unreliable.
Much of the current mess the country is in, is down to lies being allowed to go unchecked (see Farage, Question Time). For whatever reason gogs has sought to make this about Cummings integrity, NOT the content and authorship of these messages,
Both Darth and Swansea have spouted the same misdirection - Cummings bad, boooo.
Whether intentionally only they know. However as todays court case has re-affirmed electronic communication is acceptable in court as evidence, and judged on its words. Not, as others on here would have, the weasel words of explanation/justification of Yaxley-Lennon. Or as here Cummings.
As said, taken as probability Cumming comments are most likely the truth. Not the whole, but enough to highlight much that was wrong.
However Cummings words (not the texts) can be dismissed as having a greater motive than a wish to put the record straight. So it leaves us with the texts. Are they Johnson's words, if so then comment follows from there, as it has done in the media and the lower house of Parliament.
Odd how the latter accepts the texts as being true, yet gogs has repeatedly tried to dismiss them as something to be wary of, because they were produced by Cummings. Yet (Darth/Swansea), I would have thought that it is nigh on impossible to 'forge' a text message or email from a phone you do not have control of.
So why the misdirection ? | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Can Johnson sink any lower ? on 18:22 - Jul 22 with 784 views | Darth_Koont |
| Can Johnson sink any lower ? on 17:35 - Jul 22 by HARRY10 |
So motr evasive nonsense to add to the pot.
I have repeatedly stated that my ppint is not about Cummings integrity, or, most imortant, his take on things.
It is about wjether Johnson made those comments in messages he sent out.
Clearly he did, or the only credible alternative explanation is that someone 'hijacked' his 'phone. As the latter has not been claimed by number 10 then the presumption is as, every media source agrees, these are Johnsons words.
Post after post by gogs has been ones of trying to spin it, that it is about Cummings take on things. A pretty easy to spot ploy so as to dismiss it all, as Cummings is unreliable.
Much of the current mess the country is in, is down to lies being allowed to go unchecked (see Farage, Question Time). For whatever reason gogs has sought to make this about Cummings integrity, NOT the content and authorship of these messages,
Both Darth and Swansea have spouted the same misdirection - Cummings bad, boooo.
Whether intentionally only they know. However as todays court case has re-affirmed electronic communication is acceptable in court as evidence, and judged on its words. Not, as others on here would have, the weasel words of explanation/justification of Yaxley-Lennon. Or as here Cummings.
As said, taken as probability Cumming comments are most likely the truth. Not the whole, but enough to highlight much that was wrong.
However Cummings words (not the texts) can be dismissed as having a greater motive than a wish to put the record straight. So it leaves us with the texts. Are they Johnson's words, if so then comment follows from there, as it has done in the media and the lower house of Parliament.
Odd how the latter accepts the texts as being true, yet gogs has repeatedly tried to dismiss them as something to be wary of, because they were produced by Cummings. Yet (Darth/Swansea), I would have thought that it is nigh on impossible to 'forge' a text message or email from a phone you do not have control of.
So why the misdirection ? |
I’ll be honest. I started reading, gave up after a couple of lines, then skipped right to the end.
I’ve zero interest in engaging beyond this. | |
| |
| Can Johnson sink any lower ? on 18:28 - Jul 22 with 769 views | Gogs |
| Can Johnson sink any lower ? on 18:22 - Jul 22 by Darth_Koont |
I’ll be honest. I started reading, gave up after a couple of lines, then skipped right to the end.
I’ve zero interest in engaging beyond this. |
Ditto. I give up now. | | | |
| Can Johnson sink any lower ? on 22:55 - Jul 22 with 725 views | NewcyBlue |
I have no words. |  |
| |
| Can Johnson sink any lower ? on 20:38 - Jul 23 with 614 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
| Can Johnson sink any lower ? on 22:55 - Jul 22 by NewcyBlue |
I have no words. |
Just browsing through some old threads and saw this.
I have never seen that interview or the Tweet from Natalie Rowe.
As you say, no words. |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
