Westminster Politics

sullydnl said:
Click to expand...


The problem is that in terms of popularity, bumbling Boris wins hands down. And both are known for being compulsive liars.
The only way Cummings is going to hurt the PM is with something that can really turn public opinion.
And much as I hope this is the case, I am certainly not holding my breath.
 
The allegations are so sensational that Joe Public would find them difficult to believe. We are governed by a bunch of raving lunatics.
 
And it's shite like this that means we'll never have a series like The Thick of It again. We're too far gone.

The worst thing of all? We're completely stuck with this rabble, and I'm not convinced there is enough on the other side to do much better.
 
sun_tzu said:
Well so far cummings has said hankock should have been sacked 15 to 20 times and that he is a liar... has said the PM suggested Covid was a scare story and he would get injected with the virus on live TV to prove it wasnt serious

PMQ's should be like shooting fish in a barrel today ...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-57245479
Click to expand...
Kier Starmer will refrain from attacking the PM while we he is still doing his best to deal with these unprecedented circumstances
 
Cummings: "We are absolutely fecked, thousands of people are going to die"

Westminster voting intention:
CON: 55 (+15)
 
Buster15 said:
The problem is that in terms of popularity, bumbling Boris wins hands down. And both are known for being compulsive liars.
The only way Cummings is going to hurt the PM is with something that can really turn public opinion.
And much as I hope this is the case, I am certainly not holding my breath.
Click to expand...

Its all 'knock about' stuff...wait till the custard pies are brought out and the "he's behind you" chants start!
 
Something is seriously wrong if there are no serious discussions at the beeb about Kuenssberg. Cummings just admitted to using their journalist as a de facto press office.

Kuenssberg has stopped tweeting.
 
The state of the flags behind this lancashire MP :lol:

Also, why is there so much annoying background noise?
 
rpitchfo said:
This is crazy, properly crazy. Unprecedented stuff.
Click to expand...

Is it though? I mean it should be but he's only confirming what anyone with a functioning brain has known all along.

The governemnt is inept - check. Kuennsberg is a government mouthpiece - check. Hancock and Johnson are liars - check.
 
rotherham_red said:
Kuenssberg hasn't tweeted since Cummings dropped her in it :lol:
Click to expand...

I don't quite get how she was dropped in it? He said he was regularly speaking to Kuenssberg and, given her role, getting him to regularly speak to her is her doing her job well.

The issue is if she doesn't then handle or present that information appropriately. Which she may not have done, but revealing that Cummings was one of her sources doesn't in itself reflect badly on her.
 
sullydnl said:
I don't quite get how she was dropped in it? He said he was regularly speaking to Kuenssberg and, given her role, getting him to regularly speak to her is her doing her job well.

The issue is if she doesn't then handle or present that information appropriately. Which she may not have done, but revealing that Cummings was one of her sources doesn't in itself reflect badly on her.
Click to expand...
In the context of what he said, he and Boris had a lot of unauthorised conversations with her and only her. That's wrong on so many levels. She also presents these conversations as anonymous sources. That's textbook client journalism. That's why she has stopped tweeting. She should be embarrassed. She even started replying other journalists saying they were wrong on different stories. Her credibility is shot.
 
sullydnl said:
I don't quite get how she was dropped in it? He said he was regularly speaking to Kuenssberg and, given her role, getting him to regularly speak to her is her doing her job well.

The issue is if she doesn't then handle or present that information appropriately. Which she may not have done, but revealing that Cummings was one of her sources doesn't in itself reflect badly on her.
Click to expand...

True but with a significant caveat: what is she trading for that access and influence? If what she's trading is just being a mouthpiece of the government, if that's her special role, then it isn't a good trade-off for the public and it isn't good journalistic practice.

I don't think he's said anything that explicitly drops her in it but the implications are there and she'll have questions to answer now.
 
Brwned said:
True but with a significant caveat: what is she trading for that access and influence? If what she's trading is just being a mouthpiece of the government, if that's her special role, then it isn't a good trade-off for the public and it isn't good journalistic practice.

I don't think he's said anything that explicitly drops her in it but the implications are there and she'll have questions to answer now.
Click to expand...

Yep, agree with that.
 
sullydnl said:
I don't quite get how she was dropped in it? He said he was regularly speaking to Kuenssberg and, given her role, getting him to regularly speak to her is her doing her job well.

The issue is if she doesn't then handle or present that information appropriately. Which she may not have done, but revealing that Cummings was one of her sources doesn't in itself reflect badly on her.
Click to expand...
Her reporting was problematic because it was always suspected to be repetition without challenge of briefings from either Johnson or Cummings. Nobody had any proof of that though because nobody could ever prove her sources.

We now have it coming from the horses mouth that Johnson and Cummings were both meeting with her regularly and using her as a trusted platform for their spin to be propagated.
 
Pexbo said:
Her reporting was problematic because it was always suspected to be repetition without challenge of briefings from either Johnson or Cummings. Nobody had any proof of that though because nobody could ever prove her sources.

We now have it coming from the horses mouth that Johnson and Cummings were both meeting with her regularly and using her as a trusted platform for their spin to be propagated.
Click to expand...

In real terms we knew her sources came from there though, because they had to. And if she wasn't speaking to them then she wasn't doing her job properly. So Cummings being revealed as a source isn't an actual problem for her, at all. She can literally just say "yes I spoke to Cummings, because I'm supposed to speak to Cummings".

The repetition without challenging part is the problem. And if Cummings said that's what she had been doing in exchange for information then that would be a huge issue. But he didn't, which is why I was surprised by the idea that she's been dropped in it. It's something she can very comfortably brush off.
 
sullydnl said:
In real terms we knew her sources came from there though, because they had to. And if she wasn't speaking to them then she wasn't doing her job properly. So Cummings being revealed as a source isn't an actual problem for her, at all. She can literally just say "yes I spoke to Cummings, because I'm supposed to speak to Cummings".

The repetition without challenging part is the problem. And if Cummings said that's what she had been doing in exchange for information then that would be a huge issue. But he didn't, which is why I was surprised by the idea that she's been dropped in it. It's something she can very comfortably brush off.
Click to expand...

The latter was never a real problem for her when her sources were anonymous. They become a big problem for her now we know for a fact that she was definitely just an exclusive mouthpiece for Johnson/Cummings.
 
Inject himself with COVID on live TV? This is some The Thick of It shit right there. Completely mental. :lol:
 
sullydnl said:
In real terms we knew her sources came from there though, because they had to. And if she wasn't speaking to them then she wasn't doing her job properly. So Cummings being revealed as a source isn't an actual problem for her, at all. She can literally just say "yes I spoke to Cummings, because I'm supposed to speak to Cummings".

The repetition without challenging part is the problem. And if Cummings said that's what she had been doing in exchange for information then that would be a huge issue. But he didn't, which is why I was surprised by the idea that she's been dropped in it. It's something she can very comfortably brush off.
Click to expand...
No one is saying she is in any danger of anything but suspicions about her have been confirmed. This is all about her credibility and the BBC should care about it.
She is knowingly being used as a tool to spread government spin. She presents unofficial government line (Cummings/Boris) in a way that cannot be challenged regardless of the truth. For a self proclaimed impartial broadcaster, that cannot be acceptable. Please read this. Articulates what we are saying better than anyone here can.
British journalists have become part of Johnson’s fake news machine | openDemocracy
 
Johnson seems like he’s being very careful not to explicitly deny any specific details. I think he knows Cummings has audio recordings and if he is caught denying anything that can be undeniably proven then his defence falls apart, he’s going to let it play out and reserve the defence of “well that’s out of context” or “what I meant was...”
 
Hancock getting both barrels again saying he interferes with Test and Trace in order to fudge the numbers so he could go on TV and claim he has been hitting the targets.
 
Pexbo said:
Hancock getting both barrels again saying he interferes with Test and Trace in order to fudge the numbers so he could go on TV and claim he has been hitting the targets.
Click to expand...

That's no surprise or new news, I recall one target was 'hit' because they dispatched a load of tests in the posts to people.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.