General Chat

We shouldn't forget that Johnson's trying to say the many parties held at No.10 were 'work events', and therefore 'acceptable'.

If that's the Tory's 'get out' clause, their pointing the finger at Starmer - who really was on a 'work event' - and saying he was in the wrong, will turn around and bite the Tories on the bum!

I’ve seen the video. Two people in the room with Starmer, two in the corridor outside the room and one passing in the corridor.

I believe someone must have stood around on the opposite side of the road for ages to be able to get that video as they are on the first floor with the entrance and shops on the ground floor.

I’d love to know who it was - we all know why - but they’ve failed to prove that there were more than three people (including Starmer) in that office.

And that’s a brilliant point you’ve made there, Maggie.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/boris-johnson-pictured-hosting-number-25675443

A photo with 2 people very close to Johnson - not at all work related - and they've got drink. This is available in several newspapers, too.

Starmer didn't allow his house to be used for any parties during covid, either.

It's weird that the Met Police who guard No 10, and who sign in everyone who enters the buildings, appear to have no 'evidence'.
Then you realise, Sajid Javid's brother, Basit, is commander at London Metropolitan Police. Coincidence?

https://www.thenational.scot/news/19851372.keir-starmer-denies-breaking-covid-rules-drinking-labour-office/

This photo with two people in the background is available in several newspapers.

They are all as bad as each other in many ways just not the Covid issues.

I agree, Maggie. Apparently, Starmer was photographed through a window on a break at a meeting with Durham Constituency MP, Mary Foy at her office which is walking distance of where I live - not in Hartlepool but in Durham.

I don't think anyone is certain how many people were there apart from Mary and Starmer but I should think her assistant would have been there also as it is a workplace. I have no idea who took the photo which shows Mary, Starmer and one other - it could easily have been a passer-by as the office fronts straight onto the footpath, I know the area very well.

I wrote a while ago that I felt it was not unreasonable for those who had worked together during the day to have lunch and tea breaks together in the office or to end the day with a drink there, be it alcohol or coffee - and this was in connection with the first inklings of Johnson's drinks with colleagues, before they were stupid enough to ignore their own advice, go for broke and let everything fall into the lap of the press (self-entitlement has a lot to answer for)!

I have no axe to grind as I've already indicated on these boards that I am a swinging voter who never votes in a general election, confining my efforts to local elections.

However, I don't think there is any comparison with the numerous drink sessions/parties held by Boris and his colleagues in Number Ten. I can't see three or so people sending someone out with a suitcase to buy booze either!

I obviously saw a different photo as the one I saw had at least two other people in the background.

Starmer wasn't in a pub, He also wasn't getting bladdered.

Just a thought - remind me - under whose watch these rules created?

Starmer was caught drinking alcohol indoors. Both committed a faux pas during lockdown. Starmer cannot claim Boris is the devil incarnate whilst also drinking with colleagues.

Both are equally guilty of not following the rules though yes Boris ran through them with a ten ton truck.

Starmer was with 2 other people, across a table, at a constituency meeting, having a zoom call - once!

May 20 - the BYOB party - Johnson attended

November 27 - Johnson gave a speech at an indoor leaving party - which even he said was crowded.

December 15 -There are pictures of Johnson, sat indoors, having a zoom quiz - with 2 members of staff in xmas hats sat right next to him.

Many other parties were held inside No. 10 - both Johnson and the Met police would have known about them.


But Starmer, actually holding a work meeting - once - obviously he's the one in the wrong then! :-S

As much as they do to Sir Kier Starmer. Whilst I don’t agree with what Boris did at least they were outside unlike Sir Kier.

When you have as much money as he does anything is possible :-D

:-D :-D :-D
Oh dear!
Can tennis be played via 'Zoom'?

Bye bye.

He has now been deported and has a three year ban on returning to Australia.

Let’s not forget that this is the guy who threw a covid party! For me it indicated that he cares not a jot about other people.

I do wish he and those protesting would stop their bleating. If he’d had shown medical reasons why he could not get vaccinated or if he’d got vaccinated he’d have had no problem so he only has himself to blame.

He has until Monday when his case goes forward to come up with proof of a good reason why he can’t have the vaccination, or proof of vaccination. It’ll be interesting what he and his counsel come up with as he’s blaming the State of Victoria whose covid regs for some reason, as far as I can gather, differ from Federal regs. It’ll be anyone’s guess, but I can’t see that he’s endeared himself to the majority of Victoria residents who have gone through many more days of isolation than we have in the UK.

I wonder what will happen if and when he goes to play in the USA later this year.

It now appears that a female tennis player who was previously allowed in has now had her visa revoked.
It is also being suggested that the tennis authority didn’t pass on the correct information to the players.

He obviously believes he is in the right, otherwise he wouldn’t remain in the ‘hotel’. If he wins his case will he then sue for millions?

If he does win won’t it make it difficult for other countries to enforce their own rules?

How are the mighty fallen :-D :-D

https://tinyurl.com/22h7ekyf

I love it!
It's like anti-vaxxers who are banned from some restaurants and bars - they turn around and say 'We'll boycott you, then'!
Umm, they're attempting to boycott a place they can't visit!! :-D :-D :-D

Ah! topical news.....