Boris Would Have Been Suspended...

[choux]

for 90 days had he not resigned. tbh, I am not surprised but it is a mucky game in politics and there will be more dirt-throwing, no doubt. The world still spins ;)

[Untitled]

do you believe that the chair showed bias during the actual conduct of the investigation and where in particular do you believe this happened?

the details of how the investigation was conducted are included in the report

[Untitled]

the rules of the house of commons are enforced by members of the house of commons... almost none of whom are impartial by definition

the important thing is whether or not the committee conducted its actual investigation in a manner that was unfair or unethical regardless of what their political positions were... you cannot provide any examples of them doing this because they did not in fact do it

[naomi24]

Her appointment was controversial from the beginning and with good reason. It shouldn’t have been acceptable to anyone but with the outcome predictable, it suited those who wanted him gone. And they bang on about honesty. A joke surely.

[naomi24]

Oh - and best not to mention Sue Grey, her report, and her new career. The whole thing stinks to high heaven.

[perseverer]

Naomi, you are so positive in your assertions, can I say with equal positivity that you are wrong.

[ClareTG0ld]

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/06/15/boris-johnson-was-brought-down-by-his-own-chaos/

[naomi24]

You don’t need to ask me what you may say, perseverer.

[ClareTG0ld]

// [Harman's] appointment was controversial from the beginning and with good reason. //

Not really -- it was supported by the whole House at the time (and, incidentally, when Johnson was still Prime Minister) without division. It's only become "controversial" since because it suits Johnson and his supporters to try to undermine the credibility of the report. And that's the only thing they *can* do, clearly, since *still* you haven't addressed any of the substance of the report.

[perseverer]

Naomi, I said can, not may.

[naomi24]

ClareTG0ld, as someone who, in an effort to argue against accepting and respecting the result of the EU referendum, told me, quite bizarrely, that democracy doesn’t mean what I think it means, you really would be better placed talking to someone for whom your deliberations on these topics retain a modicum of credibility.

[Untitled]

still not a single example from naomi to demonstrate that the actual investigation itself was carried out in an unethical or unfair way... nor a single example from the committee's report where this bias is strongly in evidence

one would think she had not actually read it!!

[naomi24]

Incidentally, ClareTG0ld, you are mistaken. The Chair’s appointment caused controversy before her bottom hit the seat. I’m sure you’ll find reference to it if you want to.

[ClareTG0ld]

It didn't caused controversy where it mattered, which is in Parliament.

[Untitled]

i think what has happened here is that naomi long ago nailed her colours to the johnson mast and is unwilling to admit a mistake

[ClareTG0ld]

Also if I have no credibility with you then I wonder why you bother replying to or even acknowledging me at all.

[naomi24]

Untitled, I don’t give credence to people with spiteful agendas so you may as well stop waiting - and asking - for my comments on the report. As I said the whole thing stinks.

[naomi24]

ClareTG0ld, you’re talking to me. I’m responding.

[ClareTG0ld]

Since you -- bizarrely -- commented that you wouldn't even bother to read a report before dismissing it, then you really would be better placed talking to someone for whom your deliberations on these topics retain a modicum of credibility. :)

[Untitled]

go on naomi what's my agenda? :)

[naomi24]

No one, as far as I can see, is talking about you, untitled.