Are we heading for the UK’s own ‘Watergate’-scale scandal over Brexit and prorogation?
Liar, liar: Did Boris Johnson look like this, in this now-infamous photo, because his pants were on fire?
Boris Johnson tells us that he did not lie to the Queen about his reasons for wanting Parliament prorogued. Do you believe this habitual liar?
I don’t.
I’m far more likely to believe Joanna Cherry MP, one of the 75 Parliamentarians who took the Tory government to court in Scotland over the decision to prorogue.
She thinks BoJob lied to our monarch, and she thinks that the government’s refusal to release communications on the subject by Downing Street aides – who were using their personal equipment to do so, is intended to hide the evidence. She says we could be heading for a scandal of Watergate-sized proportions.
And let’s be honest – the fact that the government is refusing to hand over the messages is extremely suspicious. If there was nothing incriminating on those devices, what’s the problem?
There is also a double-standard going on here.
Parliament has been prorogued because the Queen ordered it – on the advice of Mr Johnson, relayed by Jacob Rees-Mogg.
But it is also the Queen who ordered the release of information on these aides’ mobile devices – on the urging of a “humble address” to her by Parliament.
Boris Johnson’s government does not have the option to choose which of Her Majesty’s orders it chooses to obey. She wants the information out in the open so out is where it should be.
Looking at the government’s reasons for refusing the order – representatives like Michael Gove have said it is unreasonable to demand aides’ personal devices in order to see the messages on them.
But according to the law, aides are not permitted use their personal devices to discuss government business and the order was made because of concerns that this is exactly what they have been doing – in order to hide the facts from the public.
So the situation is clear: if these aides didn’t want us to see the contents of their mobile phones (or whatever devices they used), they should not have broken the law and used them. The evidence – the refusal to provide these devices – suggests that they did. They only way to vindicate themselves is to hand over the gear.
Otherwise we’re going to go forward – into a general election, as we understand it – in the belief that the leader of a party of government misled Queen and country for his own selfish reasons. That’s not a good platform on which to campaign.
I mean, nobody’s going to believe the word of a proven liar, are they?
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical
3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/
Join the Vox Political Facebook page.
4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.
The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:
Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:
The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:
What’s Government’s favourite phrase when they erode our freedom with bills like the Snoopers Charter? Something along the lines of, “if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to worry about” isn’t it?
If it was sent on a personal device then surely it’s subject to the same laws under the Snoopers charter? It will obviously take a court order, like it would if they were investigating one of us (yeah, right) to obtain it but it must be doable?
Yep, it’s ‘Watergate’ allover again. History really does seem to be repeating itself in cycles on an ever -tightening spiral, just as Terrence McKenna said.
I doubt we will enter into Watergate style investigation as we don’t have a Woodward or Bernstein. All we have is lazy, R Wing MSM who write opinion pieces. We don’t have any investigative journalists in our MSM.