Not a party? This shot was taken during a Christmas quiz at Downing Street – note the tinsel around one person’s neck and the open bottle of alcoholic beverage. Johnson later said all Covid-19 rules were followed at these events – including those for which he and others were fined. Was he lying? That’s what the current inquiry is tasked with determining.
Why is a Cabinet Office lawyer advising a private individual – Boris Johnson – on Partygate?
Apparently a decision by the Commons Privileges committee, that is investigating whether Johnson misled Parliament over the Partygate scandal, that it does not have to prove that he intended to do so, to prove contempt of Parliament.
But Lord Pannick, the legal eagle hired by the government to examine the committee’s approach, said the inquiry needs to establish “that Mr Johnson intended to mislead the House [of Commons] – that is that he knew that what he told the House was incorrect”.
He added that that “the threat of contempt proceedings for unintentional mistakes would have a seriously chilling effect” on MPs.
He said the committee’s approach is inconsistent with past cases where intent was taken into account and the process would be deemed “unlawful” if it was tested in a court.
And he criticised the committee for taking evidence anonymously and said Mr Johnson should be told the detail of the case against him.
The committee’s own lawyer, former judge Sir Ernest Ryder, has already said potential witnesses may not be prepared to give evidence if their identity is made public.
The committee’s spokesperson said it will respond to the other criticisms in due course.
But the fact that Pannick was commissioned to act on Johnson’s behalf suggests that the government is still trying to interfere with Parliamentary process and has learned nothing from the results of – for example – the Owen Paterson scandal.
It seems we won’t be free of the stench of corruption around Boris Johnson – even after he has stopped being prime minister.
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.
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!
Liz Truss: Ethics? Integrity? It seems more accurate to suggest she’s just another Tory liar.
Tory leadership contender Liz Truss has said she would not appoint a new ethics advisor to replace the one who quit in protest at Boris Johnson, because she has “always acted with integrity”.
Let’s think about that for a moment, shall we?
In October 2014, as Environment Secretary, Truss announced that her number one priority was bringing back fox hunting, after the Country Land and Business Association lobbied both the Tories and UKIP (remember them?) and it was suggested that UKIP could gain half a million votes if the Tories refused to commit themselves to repealing the Hunting Act.
So it seems Truss wanted to restore fox hunting in order to safeguard Tory votes, rather than because there was anything wrong with the ban. Ethical? Acting with integrity?
In 2016, as Justice Minister, Truss oversaw a jail riot caused by overcrowding and a lack of prison officers. Standards were considered “unacceptable” and fell short of “basic levels of decency” because of the regime inaugurated by her forerunner Chris Grayling and continued by Truss herself. Ethical? Acting with integrity?
In August that year, Truss affirmed the Conservative government’s plan to repeal the Human Rights Act and replace your rights with a much more limited British bill of rights (although the idea was later dropped because other Tory MPs opposed it. Ethical? Acting with integrity?
In 2017 it was revealed that Truss had presided over the largest number of prison suicides since records began in 1978.
In February that year it was revealed that inmates at a privatised prison were incapacitated by drugs, officers sometimes left on their own to manage large groups of inmates, and inmates threatening staff – on Truss’s watch.
That same month, Truss earned her nickname “Lukewarm Liz” after she failed to rebuke newspapers for calling the judiciary “enemies of the people” after the Supreme Court ruled that Parliament should vote on whether to trigger the process of leaving the European Union. It was suggested that her reluctance to defend the judges risked “undermining” society.
Those are just a few examples from a few years ago.
But it seems clear that ethics and integrity are sorely lacking from Ms Truss’s psychological makeup.
Indeed, her claim that the existence of “numerous advisers and independent bodies” was “one of the problems we have got in this country” suggests that she wants even less scrutiny of her decisions. Doesn’t that denote a guilty conscience to you?
And she said she would strengthen the Tory Party whips’ office – the organisation that kept a dossier on party members’ sexual (and other?) … indiscretions… in order to blackmail them? Is that an ethical way to behave? Is it acting with integrity?
It isn’t, is it? And her claim to be doing so would therefore appear to be dishonest. Do we really want yet another brazen liar in 10 Downing Street?
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.
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!
Boris Johnson: regarding his honesty, public opinion tends to go against him, as this graphic shows.
Isn’t it scandalous that some Conservative MPs are trying to use their position and influence to pre-judge an investigation into whether Boris Johnson misled Parliament?
According to the BBC,
allies of the outgoing PM dismissed the investigation by the Commons Privileges Committee as a “witch hunt” and “rigged”.
The inquiry will examine whether he obstructed Parliament by telling it that pandemic rules had been followed [when in fact more than a dozen rule-breaking parties are known to have happened, with many more suspected].
The probe could lead to Mr Johnson facing a by-election to remain an MP, if it leads to his suspension from the Commons for more than 10 days.
Apparently the comments started flying after the committee said it would not have to prove that Johnson deliberately misled MPs to show he committed a “contempt of Parliament” by obstructing its work.
Johnson loyalist and Culture Secretary Nadine Dorries said the “Machiavellian” inquiry was “the means to a by-election” and called on Tory MPs to “have no part in it”.
Environment Minister Lord Goldsmith, whom Mr Johnson made a peer in December 2019, said the inquiry was “clearly rigged” and an “obscene abuse of power”.
Backbench Tory MP Michael Fabricant also accused the committee of wanting to “get rid of Boris Johnson” and “changing the rules”.
In response,
one of the Tory MPs on the committee, Sir Bernard Jenkin, said the committee had a “duty” to carry out the inquiry and accused Ms Dorries of waging a “terrorist campaign to try and discredit the committee”.
So now, in a move to halt this internecine fighting within the Tory Party, chief whip Chris Heaton-Harris has demanded decorum:
“May I urge caution against any further comments in the media about the Privileges Committee and especially its Clerk and Members,” wrote Mr Heaton-Harris, who is in charge of party discipline.
“Invariably these comments will be misinterpreted by those who do not wish to help us.”
Johnson has denied deliberately misleading MPs. The committee – with a majority of Conservative MPs – has said it has not “prejudged” any aspect of its inquiry, and the parliamentary officials advising it are politically impartial.
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.
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!
Bowing his head: but it would be too much to hope that Boris Johnson is ashamed of the depths to which he has dragged his government, the Conservative Party, or the United Kingdom as a whole.
How humiliating for UK voters to see a disgraced prime minister clinging to his office while all his lieutenants – rightly – desert him.
After then-“Levelling-Up” secretary Michael Gove publicly called for Boris Johnson to give up and go gracefully, a delegation of Cabinet ministers attended 10 Downing Street to beg him to see sense.
And what happened?
He sacked Gove.
Yesterday, a BBC Newsnight editor reported a confidante of one of the dissenting Cabinet members’ reaction when asked what would happen if Johnson refused to resign: “Then he won’t have a Cabinet.”
So, this morning (July 7), we started to see the first resignations of Cabinet ministers since Sajid Javid and Rishi Sunak quit on Tuesday.
Key among them was Michelle Donelan, who was only appointed as Education Secretary on Tuesday evening after Nadhim Zahawi was promoted to become Chancellor of the Exchequer.
Her resignation letter to Johnson states: “Yesterday, I pleaded with you to do the right thing and resign for the sake of our country and our party, both are more important than any one person.
“I see no way that you continue in post, but without a formal mechanism to remove you it seems that the only way this is only possible, is for those of us who remain in cabinet to force your hand.”
Also out was Northern Ireland Secretary Brandon Lewis. while the total number of resignations from the government climbed towards 50.
Meanwhile, Nadhim Zahawi, who was only made Chancellor on Tuesday and was said to be “solidly behind” Johnson at 2am today, appears to have been moving to slip a knife into his boss’s back – because he was urging Johnson to quit by 8.45.
And now the BBC is reporting that Johnson is set to resign as Conservative leader later today – but will continue as prime minister until the autumn (to outlast his immediate forerunner Theresa May?) while a leadership contest takes place.
So the nation can breathe a sigh of relief.
But, after the national disaster of the last three years, what new nightmare will replace him?
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.
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!
Laughing at us: Boris Johnson has previously mocked his opponents as they tried to lever him out of office for previous corruptions. Will he be smiling with attacks coming from behind him, as well as in front?
The Conservative government stands divided and paralysed as more members resign and Boris Johnson’s attempts to save himself grow even more desperate.
Late yesterday evening, Attorney General Alex Chalk threw in the towel. His resignation letter stated: “To be in government is to accept the duty to argue for difficult or even unpopular policy positions where that serves the broader national interest. But it cannot extend to defending the indefensible.
“The cumulative effect of the Owen Paterson debacle, Partygate and now the handling of the former Deputy Chief Whip’s resignation, is that public confidence in the ability of Number 10 to uphold the standards of candour expected of a British Government has irretrievably broken down. I regret that I share that judgement.”
Then came a flurry of resignations, intended to fit in before Prime Minister’s Questions.
First to go this morning (July 6) was another Parliamentary Private Secretary, Laura Trott. Her resignation letter, posted on her Facebook account, said trust in politics was of the “upmost [sic] importance”, adding “but sadly in recent months this has been lost”.
Next was Children’s Minister Will Quince, who said he was left with “no choice” after 10 Downing Street sent him out to defend Johnson with “inaccurate” lines. He said: “I accepted and repeated assurances on Monday to the media which have now been found to be inaccurate.”
On Monday in media interviews, Quince said he had been given assurances that Johnson had not been aware of complaints against Chris Pincher. It later emerged this was not true.
Robin Walker, Minister for School Standards, quit saying the government has been “overshadowed by mistakes and questions about integrity”.
Lee Anderson, the Red Wall Tory who was ridiculed for saying it was possible to cook nutritious meals for 30p, quit at around 10.30am. On the Pinchergate lies, he stated: “I cannot look myself in the mirror and accept this… Integrity should always come first and sadly this has not been the case over the past few days.”
Also quitting were Treasury Minister John Glen and another PPS, Felicity Buchan.
Oh – and Justice Minister Victoria Atkins.
And key backbencher Robert Halfon has also announced that he has lost confidence in Johnson. In a letter, he said he was “previously against any leadership change… during Covid, a cost-of-living crisis and the war in Ukraine. However, after the events of the past few days and the resignation of Cabinet members, I feel that the public have been misled about the appointment of the former deputy chief whip [Chris Pincher].
“The parties at Number 10 Downing Street were bad enough but the appointment of this individual and the untruthful statement about what was known is unacceptable to me.”
Also withdrawing support were Chris Skidmore and Tom Hunt.
It’s over, isn’t it?
That’s what everyone’s saying.
New Chancellor Nadhim Zahawi was even challenged with those words when faced with the sudden resignations of two government members during a TV interview.
Johnson says he won’t go, as he prepares to face attacks from all sides during Prime Minister’s Questions.
But it’s not entirely up to him.
Would it be better for him to jump before he is pushed?
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.
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!
Sajid Javid and Rishi Sunak: by backstabbing Boris Johnson, are these Star Wars fans hoping to be star choices to replace him?
Boris Johnson’s Chancellor of the Exchequer and Health Secretary have both quit, along with several junior ministers, in what is being seen as signs that his government is collapsing.
The resignations follow revelations by the former Permanent Under-Secretary to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Lord McDonald, that Boris Johnson’s claim that he was never informed of an investigation into improper behaviour by Chris Pincher was false.
The major Cabinet resignations are Health Secretary Sajid Javid and Chancellor Rishi Sunak, but MPs who are Parliamentary aides to Cabinet ministers have also gone: Jonathan Gullis, Saqib Bhatti, Nicola Richards, and Virginia Crosbie. Tory vice-chair Bim Afolami is also out.
Andrew Murrison resigned as Johnson’s trade emissary to Morocco, as did Theodora Clarke, trade emissary to Kenya.
In his resignation letter, Javid stated: “I am instinctively a team player but the British people also rightly expect integrity from their Government.
“We may not always have been popular, but we have been competent in acting in the national interest. Sadly, in the current circumstances, the public are concluding that we are neither. The vote of confidence last month showed that a large number of our colleagues agree. It was a moment for humility, grip and new direction. I regret to say, however, that it is clear to me that this situation will not change under your leadership – and you have therefore lost my confidence too.”
Sunak’s letter stated: “The public rightly expect government to be conducted properly, competently and seriously.
“It has become clear to me that our approaches are fundamentally too different. I am sad to be leaving Government but I have reluctantly come to the conclusion that we cannot continue like this.”
Former Brexit Minister Lord David Frost said Javid and Sunak had done the right thing. In a statement on Twitter, he said: “The developments of the last week show there is no chance of the prime minister either putting in place the necessary change of approach to running a government or of establishing a new policy direction.”
According to Nick Watt, political editor of the BBC’s Newsnight, one of Johnson’s closest allies has told him the resignations mean Boris Johnson’s premiership will be over by the evening of Wednesday, July 6: “No PM can survive the resignation of two senior cabinet ministers like that.”
In his letter, Murrison said, “the last straw in the rolling chaos of the past six months has been the unavoidable implications of Lord McDonald’s letter”.
Saqib Bhatti said: “The Conservative party has always been the party of integrity and honour but recent events have undermined trust and standards in public life.”
Jonathan Gullis said for too long “we have been focused on dealing with our reputational damage rather than delivering for the people”.
Nicola Richards described the Conservative Party under Johnson as “currently unrecognisable”.
And Virginia Crosbie said in her resignation letter that if Boris Johnson continues as PM he risks “irrevocably harming this government, and the Conservative party”.
Theodora Clarke went a little further in hers: “To learn that you chose to elevate a colleague to a position of pastoral care for MPs, whilst in full knowledge of his own wrongdoing, shows a severe lack of judgement and care for your Parliamentary party.
“I was shocked to see colleagues defending the Government with assurances that have turned out to be false. This is not the way that any responsible Government should act.”
Johnson has already moved to replace his resigning Cabinet ministers – with nonentities. Nadhim Zahawi, who will forever be remembered as the MP who used public money to heat his stables, becomes Chancellor.
Steve Barclay becomes Health Secretary. When he was appointed Brexit Secretary in 2018, he was given no power to conduct negotiations, prompting journalist Owen Jones to tweet: “They’re just putting random people off the street into ministerial positions now and hoping we don’t notice.” It seems they are still doing that.
But the damage is done and it seems all but the most staunch Johnson toadies are agitating for him to be removed.
Andrew Bridgen told the BBC the PM “should do what he should have done some time ago, and resign”.
“If he doesn’t do that, the party will have to force him out.”
It seems the Tories are on the march. To add snap to their step, YouGov has conducted a lightning poll showing more than two-thirds of UK voters – and a majority of Tories – want Boris Johnson to quit as prime minister:
SNAP POLL: Most Tory voters – and two thirds of Britons – say Boris Johnson should resign as PM
One thing is certain: Johnson is unlikely to go willingly.
If he is to leave 10 Downing Street, he’ll have to be forced out. But how soon can it happen?
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.
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!
Boris Johnson and Chris Pincher: a poor choice of friends?
Boris Johnson could be ousted from power if new Ministerial Code breaches are alleged over Downing Street’s changing story about the Chris Pincher scandal.
At first, the prime minister’s office claimed that “no official complaints [about Pincher] were ever made”.
But McDonald of Salford, a crossbench peer who was formerly (as Simon McDonald) Permanent Under-Secretary at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, has blown that – and subsequent li(n)es out of the water.
In a letter to Kathryn Stone, the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards, he stated [boldings mine]: “This is not true. In the summer of 2019, shortly after he was appointed minister of state at the Foreign Office, a group of officials complained to me about Mr Pincher’s behaviour. I discussed the matter with the relevant official at the Cabinet Office. (In substance, the allegations were similar to those made about his behaviour at the Carlton Club.) An investigation upheld the complaint; Mr Pincher apologised and promised not to repeat the inappropriate behaviour. There was no repetition at the FCO before he left seven months later.”
The letter added that a BBC website report stated: “Downing Street has said Boris Johnson was not aware of any specific allegations when he appointed Mr Pincher deputy chief whip in February,” then added: “By 4 July, the BBC website reflected a change in No 10’s line: ‘The prime minister’s official spokesman said Mr Johnson knew of “allegations that were either resolved or did not progress to a formal complaint”, adding that “it was deemed not appropriate to stop an appointment simply because of unsubstantiated allegations”.’
“The original No 10 line is not true and the modification is still not accurate. Mr Johnson was briefed in person about the initiation and outcome of the investigation. There was a ‘formal complaint’. Allegations were ‘resolved’ only in the sense that the investigation was completed; Mr Pincher was not exonerated. To characterise the allegations as ‘unsubstantiated’ is therefore wrong.
“I am aware that [it] is unusual to write to you and simultaneously publicise the letter. I am conscious of the duty owed to the target of an investigation but I act out of my duty towards the victims. Mr Pincher deceived me and others in 2019. He cannot be allowed to use the confidentiality of the process three years ago to pursue his predatory behaviour in other contexts.”
He didn’t say Boris Johnson had been lying in his letter, but in a subsequent interview on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme, he might as well have: “I think they need to come clean. I think that the language is ambiguous, the sort of telling the truth and crossing your fingers at the same time and hoping that people are not too forensic in their subsequent questioning and I think that is not working.”
Stone isn’t – technically – the right person to have received Lord McDonald’s letter; she investigates complaints about breaches of the code of conduct for MPs and, although Pincher’s conduct in 2019 probably would have been in breach of that, McDonald was really objecting to what No 10 is saying about the matter now.
It would have been more appropriate to write to the Downing Street ethics adviser – but of course there isn’t one; Lord Geidt resigned last month and hasn’t been replaced.
The peer’s revelations have triggered a slew of new accusations against Boris Johnson and his administration.
Lib Dem deputy leader Daisy Cooper said: “Boris Johnson needs to own up to his web of lies and finally come clean today. Every day this carries on our politics gets dragged further through the mud.”
Labour deputy leader Angela Rayner said: “The prime minister knew about the seriousness of these complaints but decided to promote this man to a senior position in government anyway. He refused to act and then lied about what he knew.
“Boris Johnson is dragging British democracy through the muck. His appalling judgement has made Westminster a less safe place to work.”
It became apparent that Downing Street had not even provided the government’s spokesperson-of-the-day with the facts, when Dominic Raab tried, on the Today programme, to push the line that Boris Johnson had not been briefed about disciplinary action against Pincher.
Himself a former foreign secretary, Raab said he had spoken with Johnson over the last 24 hours and had been assured that the prime minister had not been briefed.
Then Lord McDonald appeared on the same programme and categorically stated that Johnson had been told everything at the time.
So Raab’s story changed by the time he got to LBC radio: “There was a review, an investigation if you like … to decide whether a formal disciplinary action or an investigation and process was warranted.
“The review, conducted under the auspices of Sir Simon – now Lord – McDonald was that disciplinary action was not warranted. That doesn’t mean that inappropriate behaviour didn’t take place. We were clear that what happened was inappropriate, but we resolved it without going for a formal disciplinary process.”
Raab said he told Pincher “in no uncertain terms” that his conduct had been unacceptable.
So Raab was saying that the complaint against Pincher had been upheld, but that did not mean he was guilty – even though Raab himself had told the MP that his conduct had been unacceptable.
Does that make any sense to you?
It didn’t make sense to Susanna Reid on Good Morning Britain, who grilled Raab over his misuse of language:
It seems this cack-handed handling of a serious matter has been the last straw for many backbench Tory MPs, who are now saying Johnson would lose a vote of no confidence if it took place today.
And they are acting to change the rules of the 1922 Committee to allow another confidence vote to take place.
Tory Johnson critic Sir Roger Gale said: “Mr Johnson has for three days now been sending ministers – in one case a cabinet minister – out to defend the indefensible, effectively to lie on his behalf. That cannot be allowed to continue.
“This prime minister has trashed the reputation of a proud and honourable party for honesty and decency and that is not acceptable.
“It is so blatant a lie it has to be acted upon as swiftly as possible by my party.”
John Penrose, the former “anti-corruption tsar” who quit over Sue Gray’s Partygate report, has expanded on why Lord McDonald’s letter is so explosive:
“This is dynamite. Honesty is one of 7 Nolan Principles of integrity in public life & at the core of the Ministerial Code so a) #10 not telling the truth is another serious breach & b) the PM’s promised reset has no credibility because their behaviour hasn’t changed at all.”
This may explain why Tory backbenchers are after another “no confidence” vote.
Meanwhile, the business of government takes a back seat once more as Boris Johnson again scrabbles to save his own wretched skin.
Some Parliamentary reporters are already suggesting that this is the end of the road for Johnson – but he’s a slippery character. I’ll report more developments as they appear.
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.
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!
Carrie Johnson: it seems she demanded that The Times keep its big mouth shut but if she had done that, there might not have been a story in the first place.
Remember Carriegate? The claim that a Times story about Boris Johnson trying to get his then-lover (now wife) Carrie Symonds (as was) a high-paying Foreign Office job, back when he was Foreign Secretary, was removed from the paper and deleted from the World Wide Web because of interference from Downing Street?
Now, Private Eye has claimed that the woman now known as Mrs Johnson had demanded the story’s removal out of a fear that the more salacious details of her relationship with Johnson would be trotted out.
(This is probably baseless; The Times may be a Murdoch rag but it isn’t The Sun or the News of the World.)
But now we know anyway, because Private Eye has told us that another member of Parliament walked in on Johnson and (now) Johnson just as she was attending to his important little places in an intimate way:
The Friday night attack of the ab-dabs was caused by a baseless fear that the Times might be more specific about the compromising situation [those of a timid disposition should look away now] by adding that the MP walked in while Carrie was giving Boris oral sex on the sofa.”
This raises serious questions:
Yes, blackmail – because the MP who burst in on such an act could demand elevation in return for his silence. Some have suggested that Gavin (now Lord) Williamson may have been that person, because he has subsequently done very well for himself despite being utterly incompetent;
Presumably, former chief whip Gavin Williamson got his ridiculous knighthood for keeping schtum about the extra-marital blow job that is now public knowledge anyway. What an utterly appalling shambles our country has become.
There are also concerns about misconduct in public office.
Firstly, it may be misconduct if the sex act “renders the public office holder vulnerable to misjudgement” – such as trying to get the provider of said act a job worth more than £100,000 a year? Note that Johnson has ‘form’ in this respect as he funnelled more than £100K to Jennifer Arcuri, who alleges a similar relationship with him.
Alternatively, if the act occurred when the public office holder was “on duty” – that dereliction of duty/unprofessionalism attends the conduct and it could be seen to undermine trust in the office holder.
It’s alleged that Johnson was interrupted in his office by a colleague wishing to discuss work with him, and could have easily been interrupted by any number of other foreign office officials or government staff.
They may have used it as kompromat – compromising information collected for use in blackmailing, discrediting, or manipulating someone, typically for political purposes – as has been (humorously?) suggested of Gavin Williamson. Junior or female staff may have seen it as sexual harassment.
So, in withdrawing the article, it seems The Times did us all a favour and revealed that the man who is now our prime minister may have casually – and possibly habitually – put himself in the kind of compromising situations that may endanger the security of the United Kingdom.
As Yorkshire Bylinessuggests, this is a matter for investigation – possibly by the Metropolitan Police, possibly by the Parliamentary Standards Commissioner. Personally, I would add that the security services might also wish to become involved.
Whoever takes in the task (if anyone does in Johnson’s corrupt UK dystopia), This Writer can only agree with the final sentiment of the Bylines piece:
Let’s hope for their sake there’s no photographic evidence.
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.
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!
How will the Met Police justify this? Boris Johnson is pictured toasting departing Downing Street comms chief Lee Cain at a leaving party on November 13, 2020, that the prime minister told Parliament he never attended.
We are, today, issuing formal proceedings against the Met Police for their apparent continued failure to properly investigate Boris Johnson’s attendance at three lockdown gatherings, in November and December 2020 and January 2021, and their refusal to answer our legitimate questions about how they reached this decision.
The public have a right to know what really went on inside the Partygate investigation. The Met’s actions have raised grave concerns about the deferential way in which they are policing those in power. It stands in stark contrast to how ordinary people were policed during lockdown.
It was only after we threatened to sue the Met in January 2022 that they agreed to investigate at all and the Prime Minister was eventually fined for attending a lockdown gathering in June 2020.
We’ve given the Met multiple opportunities to explain why he was reportedly not sent questionnaires regarding these three other gatherings, nor issued with fixed penalty notices for attending them, when a number of civil servants and officials who did received both.
On 15 June, we wrote to the Met, giving them a week to finally live up to their duty to be honest and upfront with the public.
Rather than work with us in a spirit of transparency, or address to the substantive issues raised in our case, their response focuses on our right to bring this action at all (known as ‘standing’). Yet even here, they haven’t properly explained themselves. We asked them who, if not us, would have standing and they refused to answer.
We strongly believe that Good Law Project and our co-claimant, former senior Met Officer Lord Paddick, have standing to represent the public interest in this matter. If we aren’t allowed to bring this claim, we don’t believe anyone else will be in a position to do so.
So now we’re forced to sue the Met for a second time.
Lord Paddick: “Members of the public will have seen Boris Johnson raising a glass at a party that he was apparently not even questioned about, and thought ‘If that had been me, I would have been fined.’ We are determined that the Prime Minister should be held to the same standard as the rest of us.”
From its failure to hold the Prime Minister and those around him to account for their lockdown breaches, to shocking reports of institutional misogyny, discrimination and sexual harassment, the public’s faith in the Met has been shaken to the core this year. This is their moment to finally begin repairing the damage their inaction has done.
Our challenge is grounded in a single, simple idea: for the law to have any meaning, it must apply equally to us all. The Met must explain their seeming lack of action in this matter. We won’t stop until the full story is uncovered.
The Met have until 22 July to respond. We will keep you updated.
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.
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!
Lord Geidt: he has spoken out to clear up confusion about his reason for resigning as Boris Johnson’s ethics advisor – and the reason is clear: Johnson is determined to continue law-breaking and Geidt wouldn’t be a part of it.
So now we know.
Lord Geidt did not resign because he objected to plans for steel tariffs that might breach international law.
He resigned because he refused to give advanced cover to the prime minister – Boris Johnson – where there is contemplation of doing anything that may breach international (or indeed national) law.
To This Writer, it seems clear that Geidt was concerned that he might be creating a precedent that would give Johnson carte blanche for unlimited law-breaking in the future.
How sad that it has taken three days since his resignation for this to be revealed.
You can find out how the story developed on the BBC by reading articles here…
And here. They reveal much of the way the UK’s government has been trying to break the law while misleading the people about it, it seems.
And Geidt’s resignation confirms that, after Partygate, Boris Johnson is determined to continue breaking the law.
Why aren’t we seeing renewed calls for him to go?
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.
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!
By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. This includes scrolling or continued navigation. more information
The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.
