Boris Johnson tells MPs partygate event may have 'technically' been within rules: What PM said... and what he REALLY meant
The PM's admission that he was at the al-fresco soiree in the Downing Street garden in May 2020 was his first confirmation that he had attended an event whose existence was revealed last week. But the 300-word address at the start of an angry Prime Minister's Questions, was very carefully worded, something spotted by legal experts. Two passages especially could be seen as key; Mr Johnson told the Commons he 'believed implicitly that this was a work event'. He also said that it might 'technically ... fall within the guidance' that was in place. But afterwards, Downing Street declined to say what the basis was for Boris Johnson's claim that the May 20, 2020 gathering may 'technically' have fallen within the guidance. They did claim Mr Johnson did not receive or see the email inviting staff to 'socially distanced drinks' on May 20, or tell Martin Reynolds to send it.
Boris Johnson is not the sharpest tool in the box.
He has spent most of his life believing that his privileged upbringing and a level of "charm" means that he doesn't have to concern himself with what he regards as the fine detail, the "small" stuff. He is likely to be judged on 3 things in relation to "Partygate".
1. Did he go to a "Party" in breach of lockdown rules, and is that a good look when there were people not allowed to see their loved ones die?
2. Has he lied to the Public (and to Parliament) about this ever since?
3. Is he truly sorry now/will those that matter forgive him?
The simple answer to 1 is "yes". However, there are technical reasons why the answer may (legally) more complex.
The simple answer to 2 is almost certainly yes. Whether people can prove that is more questionable. Oddly (at least to my mind) lying to Parliament is much more serious.
The answer to the first part of 3 is most certainly a resounding "no". If you are truly sorry, you take ownership of your own mistakes. You do not use the main speech with a supposed "apology" BOTH to say that we must wait for the independent inquiry AND to use this speech effectively to present your Defence as to why that Inquiry should hold you blameless.
Go. Just go. You shameless, contemptible little man.
Boris Johnson is not the sharpest tool in the box.
He has spent most of his life believing that his privileged upbringing and a level of "charm" means that he doesn't have to concern himself with what he regards as the fine detail, the "small" stuff. He is likely to be judged on 3 things in relation to "Partygate".
1. Did he go to a "Party" in breach of lockdown rules, and is that a good look when there were people not allowed to see their loved ones die?
2. Has he lied to the Public (and to Parliament) about this ever since?
3. Is he truly sorry now/will those that matter forgive him?
The simple answer to 1 is "yes". However, there are technical reasons why the answer may (legally) more complex.
The simple answer to 2 is almost certainly yes. Whether people can prove that is more questionable. Oddly (at least to my mind) lying to Parliament is much more serious.
The answer to the first part of 3 is most certainly a resounding "no". If you are truly sorry, you take ownership of your own mistakes. You do not use the main speech with a supposed "apology" BOTH to say that we must wait for the independent inquiry AND to use this speech effectively to present your Defence as to why that Inquiry should hold you blameless.
Go. Just go. You shameless, contemptible little man.
Boris Johnson is not the sharpest tool in the box.
He has spent most of his life believing that his privileged upbringing and a level of "charm" means that he doesn't have to concern himself with what he regards as the fine detail, the "small" stuff. He is likely to be judged on 3 things in relation to "Partygate".
1. Did he go to a "Party" in breach of lockdown rules, and is that a good look when there were people not allowed to see their loved ones die?
2. Has he lied to the Public (and to Parliament) about this ever since?
3. Is he truly sorry now/will those that matter forgive him?
The simple answer to 1 is "yes". However, there are technical reasons why the answer may (legally) more complex.
The simple answer to 2 is almost certainly yes. Whether people can prove that is more questionable. Oddly (at least to my mind) lying to Parliament is much more serious.
The answer to the first part of 3 is most certainly a resounding "no". If you are truly sorry, you take ownership of your own mistakes. You do not use the main speech with a supposed "apology" BOTH to say that we must wait for the independent inquiry AND to use this speech effectively to present your Defence as to why that Inquiry should hold you blameless.
Go. Just go. You shameless, contemptible little man.
Sending out Ministers to defend the indefensible does not help his cause. It just makes those that feel aggrieved more irate. The fact that some friends of Mrs Boris attended, in addition to some of Michael Goves staff, just makes the hole he is in that little bit deeper. Jonathan Van Tam resigning will not help his cause either. I think this will be the end of him. I think that many people will see through his "apology". I believe he is just sorry that he was caught. There are allegedly more revelations to follow, including videos etc.
Boris Johnson is not the sharpest tool in the box.
He has spent most of his life believing that his privileged upbringing and a level of "charm" means that he doesn't have to concern himself with what he regards as the fine detail, the "small" stuff. He is likely to be judged on 3 things in relation to "Partygate".
1. Did he go to a "Party" in breach of lockdown rules, and is that a good look when there were people not allowed to see their loved ones die?
2. Has he lied to the Public (and to Parliament) about this ever since?
3. Is he truly sorry now/will those that matter forgive him?
The simple answer to 1 is "yes". However, there are technical reasons why the answer may (legally) more complex.
The simple answer to 2 is almost certainly yes. Whether people can prove that is more questionable. Oddly (at least to my mind) lying to Parliament is much more serious.
The answer to the first part of 3 is most certainly a resounding "no". If you are truly sorry, you take ownership of your own mistakes. You do not use the main speech with a supposed "apology" BOTH to say that we must wait for the independent inquiry AND to use this speech effectively to present your Defence as to why that Inquiry should hold you blameless.
Go. Just go. You shameless, contemptible little man.
Boris Johnson is not the sharpest tool in the box.
He has spent most of his life believing that his privileged upbringing and a level of "charm" means that he doesn't have to concern himself with what he regards as the fine detail, the "small" stuff. He is likely to be judged on 3 things in relation to "Partygate".
1. Did he go to a "Party" in breach of lockdown rules, and is that a good look when there were people not allowed to see their loved ones die?
2. Has he lied to the Public (and to Parliament) about this ever since?
3. Is he truly sorry now/will those that matter forgive him?
The simple answer to 1 is "yes". However, there are technical reasons why the answer may (legally) more complex.
The simple answer to 2 is almost certainly yes. Whether people can prove that is more questionable. Oddly (at least to my mind) lying to Parliament is much more serious.
The answer to the first part of 3 is most certainly a resounding "no". If you are truly sorry, you take ownership of your own mistakes. You do not use the main speech with a supposed "apology" BOTH to say that we must wait for the independent inquiry AND to use this speech effectively to present your Defence as to why that Inquiry should hold you blameless.
Go. Just go. You shameless, contemptible little man.
Sending out Ministers to defend the indefensible does not help his cause. It just makes those that feel aggrieved more irate. The fact that some friends of Mrs Boris attended, in addition to some of Michael Goves staff, just makes the hole he is in that little bit deeper. Jonathan Van Tam resigning will not help his cause either. I think this will be the end of him. I think that many people will see through his "apology". I believe he is just sorry that he was caught. There are allegedly more revelations to follow, including videos etc.
I can think of lots of reasons why Prof Van Tam might be going back to his main employer. Lots of them have nothing to do with Boris.
But the timing? Look-if he is leaving at the end of March, it is a fair bet that his resignation was at the end of December. So-why now?
Van-Tam, or to give him his correct title, Sir Jonathan Stafford Nguyen-Van-Tam MBE FRCPath FRSB FMedSc, has, along with Sir Whitty, been a beacon of truth, calm assurance & authority throughout this COVID nightmare for so many of us. We'd be complete fools to believe Politicians, especially Team Boris, but we'd be complete fools not to believe Sir V-T. He has no edge, angle, or narrative, just an honest man of great integrity from what I can tell.
He's actually returning to his old employer, University of Nottingham, & he was only on secondment in his role, so in itself, nothing to see here. The timing is possibly interesting, though I suspect we can take his departure vat face value.
He's a highly decorated man of great learning, as we can see from his Wiki page;
Van-Tam, or to give him his correct title, Sir Jonathan Stafford Nguyen-Van-Tam MBE FRCPath FRSB FMedSc, has, along with Sir Whitty, been a beacon of truth, calm assurance & authority throughout this COVID nightmare for so many of us. We'd be complete fools to believe Politicians, especially Team Boris, but we'd be complete fools not to believe Sir V-T. He has no edge, angle, or narrative, just an honest man of great integrity from what I can tell.
He's actually returning to his old employer, University of Nottingham, & he was only on secondment in his role, so in itself, nothing to see here. The timing is possibly interesting, though I suspect we can take his departure vat face value.
He's a highly decorated man of great learning, as we can see from his Wiki page;
He was at either the 2018 simulation, or the Event 2001, held October 2019 in the US,possibly both. Fauci saying in 2017 that Trump will ‘ definitely’ have a pandemic during his term,shows it was a good job that Tam was there.
All fact checked.
It’s uncanny to plan for a pandemic,when there hasn’t been one for a hundred years.
Van-Tam, or to give him his correct title, Sir Jonathan Stafford Nguyen-Van-Tam MBE FRCPath FRSB FMedSc, has, along with Sir Whitty, been a beacon of truth, calm assurance & authority throughout this COVID nightmare for so many of us. We'd be complete fools to believe Politicians, especially Team Boris, but we'd be complete fools not to believe Sir V-T. He has no edge, angle, or narrative, just an honest man of great integrity from what I can tell.
He's actually returning to his old employer, University of Nottingham, & he was only on secondment in his role, so in itself, nothing to see here. The timing is possibly interesting, though I suspect we can take his departure vat face value.
He's a highly decorated man of great learning, as we can see from his Wiki page;
He was at either the 2018 simulation, or the Event 2001, held October 2019 in the US,possibly both. Fauci saying in 2017 that Trump will ‘ definitely’ have a pandemic during his term,shows it was a good job that Tam was there.
All fact checked.
It’s uncanny to plan for a pandemic,when there hasn’t been one for a hundred years.
Always plan for the unexpected....... then it doesn't take you (too much) by surprise
He was at either the 2018 simulation, or the Event 2001, held October 2019 in the US,possibly both. Fauci saying in 2017 that Trump will ‘ definitely’ have a pandemic during his term,shows it was a good job that Tam was there.
All fact checked.
It’s uncanny to plan for a pandemic,when there hasn’t been one for a hundred years.
Not too long ago drainage systems used to be designed using the Hundred Year Flood principal.
Now the same floods are occurring every year or two.
Boris Johnson tells MPs partygate event may have 'technically' been within rules: What PM said... and what he REALLY meant
The PM's admission that he was at the al-fresco soiree in the Downing Street garden in May 2020 was his first confirmation that he had attended an event whose existence was revealed last week. But the 300-word address at the start of an angry Prime Minister's Questions, was very carefully worded, something spotted by legal experts. Two passages especially could be seen as key; Mr Johnson told the Commons he 'believed implicitly that this was a work event'. He also said that it might 'technically ... fall within the guidance' that was in place. But afterwards, Downing Street declined to say what the basis was for Boris Johnson's claim that the May 20, 2020 gathering may 'technically' have fallen within the guidance. They did claim Mr Johnson did not receive or see the email inviting staff to 'socially distanced drinks' on May 20, or tell Martin Reynolds to send it.
I shall today be contacting HMRC to confirm that, as an extension of my office, I shall be able to claim any garden expenses against my tax bill. I am not, however, holding my breath.
He was at either the 2018 simulation, or the Event 2001, held October 2019 in the US,possibly both. Fauci saying in 2017 that Trump will ‘ definitely’ have a pandemic during his term,shows it was a good job that Tam was there.
All fact checked.
It’s uncanny to plan for a pandemic,when there hasn’t been one for a hundred years.
Not too long ago drainage systems used to be designed using the Hundred Year Flood principal.
Now the same floods are occurring every year or two.
If Fauci was filmed during 2017 inside a tent,wearing rather large earrings , looking into a crystal ball,I might go with 50-50. With warehouses stocked with vaccines before approval, with chips designed and manufactured in no time? Quick chips.
Incidentally, the Pfizer ‘vaccine’ in trials, used the relative risk reduction,not the absolute risk reduction. So if those want to compare these to a smallpox vaccine, etc, that’s your choice,as usual.
Van-Tam, or to give him his correct title, Sir Jonathan Stafford Nguyen-Van-Tam MBE FRCPath FRSB FMedSc, has, along with Sir Whitty, been a beacon of truth, calm assurance & authority throughout this COVID nightmare for so many of us. We'd be complete fools to believe Politicians, especially Team Boris, but we'd be complete fools not to believe Sir V-T. He has no edge, angle, or narrative, just an honest man of great integrity from what I can tell.
He's actually returning to his old employer, University of Nottingham, & he was only on secondment in his role, so in itself, nothing to see here. The timing is possibly interesting, though I suspect we can take his departure vat face value.
He's a highly decorated man of great learning, as we can see from his Wiki page;
Downing Street 'held wine-time Fridays EVERY week' throughout the pandemic: Now staff are accused of routinely taking a suitcase to Tesco to fill with booze and having a drinks fridge delivered in December 2020
Downing Street held 'wine-time Fridays' every week throughout the pandemic with Boris Johnson watching on, with staff even investing in a £142 drinks fridge to keep their beer, prosecco and wine cold, it has been claimed. Government aides were encouraged by the prime minister to 'let off steam' at the regular drinks, which would often continue until midnight, at a time when Britons were banned from socialising indoors, sources said. Aides took turns to stock up on drinks at the local Tesco Metro with a wheely suitcase to fill up the 34-bottle fridge which was delivered through the back door of Downing Street on December 11, 2020, according to The Mirror . At the time, households were not allowed to mix indoors or in most outdoor places, with exemptions for people in support bubbles, and a maximum of six people were allowed to meet in some outdoor public spaces like parks and public gardens. Despite the harsh rules, Downing Street scheduled 'wine-time Fridays' into the electronic calendars of 50 No 10 staff every week between 4pm and 7pm.
He was at either the 2018 simulation, or the Event 2001, held October 2019 in the US,possibly both. Fauci saying in 2017 that Trump will ‘ definitely’ have a pandemic during his term,shows it was a good job that Tam was there.
All fact checked.
It’s uncanny to plan for a pandemic,when there hasn’t been one for a hundred years.
Not too long ago drainage systems used to be designed using the Hundred Year Flood principal.
Now the same floods are occurring every year or two.
If Fauci was filmed during 2017 inside a tent,wearing rather large earrings , looking into a crystal ball,I might go with 50-50. With warehouses stocked with vaccines before approval, with chips designed and manufactured in no time? Quick chips.
Incidentally, the Pfizer ‘vaccine’ in trials, used the relative risk reduction,not the absolute risk reduction. So if those want to compare these to a smallpox vaccine, etc, that’s your choice,as usual.
He was at either the 2018 simulation, or the Event 2001, held October 2019 in the US,possibly both. Fauci saying in 2017 that Trump will ‘ definitely’ have a pandemic during his term,shows it was a good job that Tam was there.
All fact checked.
It’s uncanny to plan for a pandemic,when there hasn’t been one for a hundred years.
Not too long ago drainage systems used to be designed using the Hundred Year Flood principal.
Now the same floods are occurring every year or two.
If Fauci was filmed during 2017 inside a tent,wearing rather large earrings , looking into a crystal ball,I might go with 50-50. With warehouses stocked with vaccines before approval, with chips designed and manufactured in no time? Quick chips.
Incidentally, the Pfizer ‘vaccine’ in trials, used the relative risk reduction,not the absolute risk reduction. So if those want to compare these to a smallpox vaccine, etc, that’s your choice,as usual.
Comments
The PM's admission that he was at the al-fresco soiree in the Downing Street garden in May 2020 was his first confirmation that he had attended an event whose existence was revealed last week. But the 300-word address at the start of an angry Prime Minister's Questions, was very carefully worded, something spotted by legal experts. Two passages especially could be seen as key; Mr Johnson told the Commons he 'believed implicitly that this was a work event'. He also said that it might 'technically ... fall within the guidance' that was in place. But afterwards, Downing Street declined to say what the basis was for Boris Johnson's claim that the May 20, 2020 gathering may 'technically' have fallen within the guidance. They did claim Mr Johnson did not receive or see the email inviting staff to 'socially distanced drinks' on May 20, or tell Martin Reynolds to send it.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10395197/PM-tells-Commons-boozy-Downing-Street-event-technically-rules.html
He has spent most of his life believing that his privileged upbringing and a level of "charm" means that he doesn't have to concern himself with what he regards as the fine detail, the "small" stuff. He is likely to be judged on 3 things in relation to "Partygate".
1. Did he go to a "Party" in breach of lockdown rules, and is that a good look when there were people not allowed to see their loved ones die?
2. Has he lied to the Public (and to Parliament) about this ever since?
3. Is he truly sorry now/will those that matter forgive him?
The simple answer to 1 is "yes". However, there are technical reasons why the answer may (legally) more complex.
The simple answer to 2 is almost certainly yes. Whether people can prove that is more questionable. Oddly (at least to my mind) lying to Parliament is much more serious.
The answer to the first part of 3 is most certainly a resounding "no". If you are truly sorry, you take ownership of your own mistakes. You do not use the main speech with a supposed "apology" BOTH to say that we must wait for the independent inquiry AND to use this speech effectively to present your Defence as to why that Inquiry should hold you blameless.
Go. Just go. You shameless, contemptible little man.
It just makes those that feel aggrieved more irate.
The fact that some friends of Mrs Boris attended, in addition to some of Michael Goves staff, just makes the hole he is in that little bit deeper.
Jonathan Van Tam resigning will not help his cause either.
I think this will be the end of him.
I think that many people will see through his "apology".
I believe he is just sorry that he was caught.
There are allegedly more revelations to follow, including videos etc.
But the timing? Look-if he is leaving at the end of March, it is a fair bet that his resignation was at the end of December. So-why now?
And-never assume that the new ship will be better than this one
Very sad to see Prof Van-Tam leave.
Van-Tam, or to give him his correct title, Sir Jonathan Stafford Nguyen-Van-Tam MBE FRCPath FRSB FMedSc, has, along with Sir Whitty, been a beacon of truth, calm assurance & authority throughout this COVID nightmare for so many of us. We'd be complete fools to believe Politicians, especially Team Boris, but we'd be complete fools not to believe Sir V-T. He has no edge, angle, or narrative, just an honest man of great integrity from what I can tell.
He's actually returning to his old employer, University of Nottingham, & he was only on secondment in his role, so in itself, nothing to see here. The timing is possibly interesting, though I suspect we can take his departure vat face value.
He's a highly decorated man of great learning, as we can see from his Wiki page;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Van-Tam
Fauci saying in 2017 that Trump will ‘ definitely’ have a pandemic during his term,shows it was a good job that Tam was there.
All fact checked.
It’s uncanny to plan for a pandemic,when there hasn’t been one for a hundred years.
Fauci saying in 2017 that Trump will ‘ definitely’ have a pandemic during his term,shows it was a good job that Tam was there.
All fact checked.
It’s uncanny to plan for a pandemic,when there hasn’t been one for a hundred years.
Not too long ago drainage systems used to be designed using the Hundred Year Flood principal.
Now the same floods are occurring every year or two.
With warehouses stocked with vaccines before approval, with chips designed and manufactured in no time? Quick chips.
Incidentally, the Pfizer ‘vaccine’ in trials, used the relative risk reduction,not the absolute risk reduction. So if those want to compare these to a smallpox vaccine, etc, that’s your choice,as usual.
Anyone seen the No 10 cat?
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/jonathan-van-tam-s-failure-to-mention-boris-johnson-in-his-resignation-statement-may-tell-it-s-own-story/ar-AASJMa2?ocid=msedgntp
Downing Street held 'wine-time Fridays' every week throughout the pandemic with Boris Johnson watching on, with staff even investing in a £142 drinks fridge to keep their beer, prosecco and wine cold, it has been claimed. Government aides were encouraged by the prime minister to 'let off steam' at the regular drinks, which would often continue until midnight, at a time when Britons were banned from socialising indoors, sources said. Aides took turns to stock up on drinks at the local Tesco Metro with a wheely suitcase to fill up the 34-bottle fridge which was delivered through the back door of Downing Street on December 11, 2020, according to The Mirror . At the time, households were not allowed to mix indoors or in most outdoor places, with exemptions for people in support bubbles, and a maximum of six people were allowed to meet in some outdoor public spaces like parks and public gardens. Despite the harsh rules, Downing Street scheduled 'wine-time Fridays' into the electronic calendars of 50 No 10 staff every week between 4pm and 7pm.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10404315/Downing-Street-held-wine-time-Fridays-week-pandemic-Partygate-scandal-deepens.html