DCI Frank Burnside 2,694 Posted January 21, 2022 "For as long as possible" Translation: "Until someone else plunges the knife in so I don't do a Heseltine". Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bibliogryphon 8,662 Posted January 21, 2022 It seems to me if getting 54 names to Graham Brady is so difficult, it is going to be nearly insurmountable to get the 180 votes to topple him in an actual vote of no confidence Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DCI Frank Burnside 2,694 Posted January 24, 2022 Dave's put on a bit of weight. Has he been at that ham again Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TQR 12,194 Posted January 24, 2022 1 minute ago, DCI Frank Burnside said: Dave's put on a bit of weight. Has he been at that ham again I see he’s mastered not looking like a pig fucker. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Grim Up North 3,565 Posted January 24, 2022 12 minutes ago, TQR said: I see he’s mastered not looking like a pig fucker. & working on the fucked pig look. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Windsor 2,143 Posted January 24, 2022 On 21/01/2022 at 10:49, DCI Frank Burnside said: "For as long as possible" Translation: "Until someone else plunges the knife in so I don't do a Heseltine". She must love his cock. Only explanation. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Redrumours 820 Posted January 24, 2022 27 minutes ago, Windsor said: She must love his cock. Only explanation. He calls it Cressida. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TQR 12,194 Posted January 26, 2022 EXCLUSIVE - Sue Gray’s report leaked: 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TQR 12,194 Posted January 28, 2022 And so begins the great cover up: Fuck Johnson, fuck Dick*, fuck the Tories and fuck the Met. Fuck them all to kingdom come. Shower of cunts. *Yes I know 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TQR 12,194 Posted January 28, 2022 A genuine question here, open to anyone with legal (not political) experience/knowledge/qualifications: How can an independent, fact-finding report threaten to ‘prejudice’ an investigation? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Toast 14,847 Posted January 28, 2022 4 hours ago, TQR said: And so begins the great cover up: Fuck Johnson, fuck Dick*, fuck the Tories and fuck the Met. Fuck them all to kingdom come. Shower of cunts. *Yes I know How do you mean, "begins"? It's all very convenient, but as we've recently learned how corrupt the Met is in terms of being a Government puppet, why should anyone be surprised. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
msc 17,762 Posted January 28, 2022 2 hours ago, TQR said: A genuine question here, open to anyone with legal (not political) experience/knowledge/qualifications: How can an independent, fact-finding report threaten to ‘prejudice’ an investigation? Well, we don't have an independent report (we have one commissioned from within about within) but given the police have considered tweets by drunken no names in the past as prejudicing their investigations, no chance was Sue Gray's report escaping that. Anyhow, smells a bit of Owen Patterson to me? If they'd just gone "Yep, it was a party, sorry", people would have been fucked off but forgot it eventually. It's the trying to cover it up and look superior to everyone else that's sinking them. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TQR 12,194 Posted January 28, 2022 45 minutes ago, msc said: Well, we don't have an independent report (we have one commissioned from within about within) but given the police have considered tweets by drunken no names in the past as prejudicing their investigations, no chance was Sue Gray's report escaping that. Well, yes, but the report is being considered in an official capacity as ‘independent’. The report is a fact-finder. Using facts does not amount to prejudice. 47 minutes ago, msc said: Anyhow, smells a bit of Owen Patterson to me? If they'd just gone "Yep, it was a party, sorry", people would have been fucked off but forgot it eventually. It's the trying to cover it up and look superior to everyone else that's sinking them. I very much doubt that. Sure, the way they’ve gone about it is worse for them, but people would not have simply forgotten how the cunts had group piss ups while they watched their parents/grandparents die on fucking Zoom. Their coffin was nailed already, the superiority the cunts seem to think they have over everyone is merely some superglue and gaffa tape to make sure. And let’s face it, that attitude is not surprising of them in the slightest. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
msc 17,762 Posted January 28, 2022 Just now, TQR said: Well, yes, but the report is being considered in an official capacity as ‘independent’. The report is a fact-finder. Using facts does not amount to prejudice. Its called independent but it wasn't actually independent, it was in-house. Sue Gray's boss is Boris Johnson. That she found evidence to spring the Met into action is already above expectations. Just now, TQR said: I very much doubt that. Sure, the way they’ve gone about it is worse for them, but people would not have simply forgotten how the cunts had group piss ups while they watched their parents/grandparents die on fucking Zoom. Their coffin was nailed already, the superiority the cunts seem to think they have over everyone is merely some superglue and gaffa tape to make sure. And let’s face it, that attitude is not surprising of them in the slightest. Slightly overanalysing the "conspiracy gets you more than the act" comment there but I'd just point out in that scenario the party would have come out 2 years ago when it happened, before anger was allowed to ferment. Dominic Cummings pretty much got away with his castle spotting trip and he had far less "political capital" than Boris Johnson did at that time. I stand by my earlier comments - he's fucked. It doesn't matter if he resigns today or in a years time in this specific regard, it wont change the matter. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Toast 14,847 Posted January 28, 2022 What can we do to get rid of them? It's just frightening now. Desperate times call for desperate remedies. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TQR 12,194 Posted January 28, 2022 18 minutes ago, msc said: Its called independent but it wasn't actually independent, it was in-house. Sue Gray's boss is Boris Johnson. That she found evidence to spring the Met into action is already above expectations. Yes, I know it’s not actually independent, I said that, and inquiries seldom are, but officially it is. The purpose of the report was not to make any judgements, merely state facts. Facts cannot be prejudiced. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Great Uncle Bulgaria 1,051 Posted January 28, 2022 1 hour ago, Toast said: What can we do to get rid of them? It's just frightening now. Desperate times call for desperate remedies. Time for a lib/lab pact. They've been fighting each other on the same ground and letting the tories in for too long.. Sitting MPs to be unopposed by the other lot. Whoever came 2nd to a Tory last time gets the nod - no exceptions. Another 'moral victory' like 2017 when labour made reasonable gains but still lost does no one any good. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Toast 14,847 Posted January 28, 2022 3 minutes ago, Great Uncle Bulgaria said: Time for a lib/lab pact. They've been fighting each other on the same ground and letting the tories in for too long.. Sitting MPs to be unopposed by the other lot. Whoever came 2nd to a Tory last time gets the nod - no exceptions. Another 'moral victory' like 2017 when labour made reasonable gains but still lost does no one any good. But how much more damage will they do before that solution can be applied? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TQR 12,194 Posted January 28, 2022 1 hour ago, Great Uncle Bulgaria said: Time for a lib/lab pact. They've been fighting each other on the same ground and letting the tories in for too long.. Sitting MPs to be unopposed by the other lot. Whoever came 2nd to a Tory last time gets the nod - no exceptions. Another 'moral victory' like 2017 when labour made reasonable gains but still lost does no one any good. Yep. Progressive Alliance is the way forward. Lib, Lab, Grn (though they’d likely still only keep the Lucas seat). If done effectively, the Tories could end up with as many or even fewer seats than they got in 1997. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lord Fellatio Nelson 6,132 Posted January 28, 2022 While I know that we have a corrupt, lying bunch of cunts in power, the utter desperation in suggesting a Lib/Lab pact is a bit jaw dropping. It's like walking dog shit into your carpet and being told that the only way to remove it would be to rub cat shit over it. This is how bad it all is, we have a Government that is fucking disgraceful and the alternatives are fucking horrendous. Sir Keith and Sir Ed as a partnership would make Joe Biden look like JFK. I'd rather not vote for anybody, thanks. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Windsor 2,143 Posted January 29, 2022 7 hours ago, TQR said: Yep. Progressive Alliance is the way forward. Lib, Lab, Grn (though they’d likely still only keep the Lucas seat). If done effectively, the Tories could end up with as many or even fewer seats than they got in 1997. Don't forget the SNP...who the Tories would tell you would have the balance of power...and that Labour would risk the future of the UK by granting indyref as the SNP fee for power... Not like it hasn't happened at the last couple of elections... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
