the stinking enigma Posted May 2, 2019 Share Posted May 2, 2019 I'm going to resist the go away and shut up jibe, 'cos I'm better than to sink to such levels. He seems determined to prove his innocence though, which may be a bad move should he actually be guilty. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-48131091 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freggyragh Posted May 2, 2019 Share Posted May 2, 2019 If the Telegraph is complicit in security leaks its editor and owners should be locked up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the stinking enigma Posted May 2, 2019 Author Share Posted May 2, 2019 He even swore on his children's lives that he was innocent. I hate people that do that, usually they are lying. Swear on your own life if anybodies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Power Posted May 2, 2019 Share Posted May 2, 2019 I always think that when people say that there is compelling evidence to suggest something, there really isn't at all! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Down Posted May 2, 2019 Share Posted May 2, 2019 58 minutes ago, the stinking enigma said: He even swore on his children's lives that he was innocent. I hate people that do that, usually they are lying. Swear on your own life if anybodies. Or when somebody says "I swear down". Every word after that is a lie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinahand Posted May 2, 2019 Share Posted May 2, 2019 4 hours ago, the stinking enigma said: He even swore on his children's lives that he was innocent. I hate people that do that, usually they are lying. Swear on your own life if anybodies. Jonathan Aitken tried to get his teenage daughter to commit perjury for him. Ego before children is a common trait in politicians. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the stinking enigma Posted May 2, 2019 Author Share Posted May 2, 2019 Didn't know that. Did she refuse or did circumstances overtake them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinahand Posted May 2, 2019 Share Posted May 2, 2019 https://www.theguardian.com/politics/1997/jun/21/uk.davidpallister Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uhtred Posted May 2, 2019 Share Posted May 2, 2019 I’m prepared to convict him on the basis that he looks guilty. Because I’m shallow. And he’s guilty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woody2 Posted May 2, 2019 Share Posted May 2, 2019 1 hour ago, Uhtred said: I’m prepared to convict him on the basis that he looks guilty. Because I’m shallow. And he’s guilty. the 11 minute phone call with the torygraph just after the meeting doesn't help........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.K. Posted May 3, 2019 Share Posted May 3, 2019 2 hours ago, Uhtred said: I’m prepared to convict him on the basis that he looks guilty. Because I’m shallow. And he’s guilty. On QT this pm Ken Clarke made the very reasonable point that Williamson can claim he wants police involvement so he can clear himself safe in the knowledge that because of the nature of the gen under discussion it can never be allowed into the public domain. Q : Who watches the watchers? A : No one. So they have to watch themselves... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Declan Posted May 3, 2019 Share Posted May 3, 2019 8 hours ago, Uhtred said: I’m prepared to convict him on the basis that he looks guilty. Because I’m shallow. And he’s guilty. He looks like he’s being played by Steve Coogan and speaks like he’s scripted by Armando Iannunci. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woody2 Posted May 3, 2019 Share Posted May 3, 2019 7 hours ago, P.K. said: On QT this pm Ken Clarke qt 86% remoaner on the panel.......no wonder you like it.......... as for ken......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mojomonkey Posted May 3, 2019 Share Posted May 3, 2019 19 minutes ago, woody2 said: qt 86% remoaner on the panel. How you working that one out? A panel of five cannot work out to 86%, and neither can it even if you miscellaneously include the presenter to make six. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.K. Posted May 3, 2019 Share Posted May 3, 2019 5 minutes ago, mojomonkey said: How you working that one out? A panel of five cannot work out to 86%, and neither can it even if you miscellaneously include the presenter to make six. #Woodyfacts strike again. QT also had the now usual clutch of Gammons who are there to put their hands up and shout "Why can't we just leave!" Unfortunately that bold tactic to unnerve politcians comes with the subtext: "I haven't the faintest idea what this almighty clusterfuck I voted for actually entails....." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.