Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
" The new home secretary, Priti Patel, is facing allegations of breaching the ministerial code for the second time in her parliamentary career for accepting a lucrative position with a global communications firm before receiving the all-clear from an anti-corruption watchdog." Didn't take long for controversy to strike lol  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" The new home secretary, Priti Patel, is facing allegations of breaching the ministerial code for the second time in her parliamentary career for accepting a lucrative position with a global communications firm before receiving the all-clear from an anti-corruption watchdog. Didn't take long for controversy to strike lol "Was she cleared ? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" The new home secretary, Priti Patel, is facing allegations of breaching the ministerial code for the second time in her parliamentary career for accepting a lucrative position with a global communications firm before receiving the all-clear from an anti-corruption watchdog. Didn't take long for controversy to strike lol
Was she cleared ?"Of course she was. This is just another fake news, more Guardian rhetoric to appease the haters. And she wasn’t cleared as she wasn’t charged, they approved her appointment. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" The new home secretary, Priti Patel, is facing allegations of breaching the ministerial code for the second time in her parliamentary career for accepting a lucrative position with a global communications firm before receiving the all-clear from an anti-corruption watchdog. Didn't take long for controversy to strike lol
Was she cleared ?
Of course she was.
This is just another fake news, more Guardian rhetoric to appease the haters.
And she wasn’t cleared as she wasn’t charged, they approved her appointment."We, no. She took the position and had banked £10,000 before referral to the watchdog. She is supposed to do that before accepting any role. It's not a difficult one. In another time it would be suspension and investigation, but who cares about integrity as a trait in the Home Secretary nowadays?  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" The new home secretary, Priti Patel, is facing allegations of breaching the ministerial code for the second time in her parliamentary career for accepting a lucrative position with a global communications firm before receiving the all-clear from an anti-corruption watchdog. Didn't take long for controversy to strike lol
Was she cleared ?
Of course she was.
This is just another fake news, more Guardian rhetoric to appease the haters.
And she wasn’t cleared as she wasn’t charged, they approved her appointment.
We, no.
She took the position and had banked £10,000 before referral to the watchdog.
She is supposed to do that before accepting any role.
It's not a difficult one. In another time it would be suspension and investigation, but who cares about integrity as a trait in the Home Secretary nowadays? "As it is only an admin / timing issue it will hardly be of any interest to any rational person. Why would anyone care. It is all open and above board . | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" The new home secretary, Priti Patel, is facing allegations of breaching the ministerial code for the second time in her parliamentary career for accepting a lucrative position with a global communications firm before receiving the all-clear from an anti-corruption watchdog. Didn't take long for controversy to strike lol
Was she cleared ?
Of course she was.
This is just another fake news, more Guardian rhetoric to appease the haters.
And she wasn’t cleared as she wasn’t charged, they approved her appointment.
We, no.
She took the position and had banked £10,000 before referral to the watchdog.
She is supposed to do that before accepting any role.
It's not a difficult one. In another time it would be suspension and investigation, but who cares about integrity as a trait in the Home Secretary nowadays?
As it is only an admin / timing issue it will hardly be of any interest to any rational person. Why would anyone care. It is all open and above board ."Makes you wonder why we have any rules for anything | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" The new home secretary, Priti Patel, is facing allegations of breaching the ministerial code for the second time in her parliamentary career for accepting a lucrative position with a global communications firm before receiving the all-clear from an anti-corruption watchdog. Didn't take long for controversy to strike lol
Was she cleared ?
Of course she was.
This is just another fake news, more Guardian rhetoric to appease the haters.
And she wasn’t cleared as she wasn’t charged, they approved her appointment.
We, no.
She took the position and had banked £10,000 before referral to the watchdog.
She is supposed to do that before accepting any role.
It's not a difficult one. In another time it would be suspension and investigation, but who cares about integrity as a trait in the Home Secretary nowadays? As it is only an admin / timing issue it will hardly be of any interest to any rational person. Why would anyone care. It is all open and above board ."You would be one of the ones shout the loudest if it had been a member of the Labour party though, eh?!  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"In this energized, new golden age of can do, exciting news from No.10 that Boris asked the staff, “Do you want a dog?”. And the staff replied, “Yes” "Oh no the cat people will be up in arms. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Did you see her suck in up to Boris on that thing in Birmingham. As for the smiling i thought the camera men might need a new lens. " Noooooooooo bring back the death penalty how dare she,ffs can you lefties get any more petty. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" The new home secretary, Priti Patel, is facing allegations of breaching the ministerial code for the second time in her parliamentary career for accepting a lucrative position with a global communications firm before receiving the all-clear from an anti-corruption watchdog. Didn't take long for controversy to strike lol
Was she cleared ?
Of course she was.
This is just another fake news, more Guardian rhetoric to appease the haters.
And she wasn’t cleared as she wasn’t charged, they approved her appointment.
We, no.
She took the position and had banked £10,000 before referral to the watchdog.
She is supposed to do that before accepting any role.
It's not a difficult one. In another time it would be suspension and investigation, but who cares about integrity as a trait in the Home Secretary nowadays?
As it is only an admin / timing issue it will hardly be of any interest to any rational person. Why would anyone care. It is all open and above board .
Makes you wonder why we have any rules for anything "Or how can some people be so gullible to swallow the excuse.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" The new home secretary, Priti Patel, is facing allegations of breaching the ministerial code for the second time in her parliamentary career for accepting a lucrative position with a global communications firm before receiving the all-clear from an anti-corruption watchdog. Didn't take long for controversy to strike lol
Was she cleared ?
Of course she was.
This is just another fake news, more Guardian rhetoric to appease the haters.
And she wasn’t cleared as she wasn’t charged, they approved her appointment.
We, no.
She took the position and had banked £10,000 before referral to the watchdog.
She is supposed to do that before accepting any role.
It's not a difficult one. In another time it would be suspension and investigation, but who cares about integrity as a trait in the Home Secretary nowadays?
As it is only an admin / timing issue it will hardly be of any interest to any rational person. Why would anyone care. It is all open and above board .
Makes you wonder why we have any rules for anything
Or how can some people be so gullible to swallow the excuse.. "There is that | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" The new home secretary, Priti Patel, is facing allegations of breaching the ministerial code for the second time in her parliamentary career for accepting a lucrative position with a global communications firm before receiving the all-clear from an anti-corruption watchdog. Didn't take long for controversy to strike lol
Was she cleared ?
Of course she was.
This is just another fake news, more Guardian rhetoric to appease the haters.
And she wasn’t cleared as she wasn’t charged, they approved her appointment.
We, no.
She took the position and had banked £10,000 before referral to the watchdog.
She is supposed to do that before accepting any role.
It's not a difficult one. In another time it would be suspension and investigation, but who cares about integrity as a trait in the Home Secretary nowadays? As it is only an admin / timing issue it will hardly be of any interest to any rational person. Why would anyone care. It is all open and above board .
You would be one of the ones shout the loudest if it had been a member of the Labour party though, eh?! "Most people would have better things to do with their lives than to investigate administration errors. It is irrelevant which party it is. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" The new home secretary, Priti Patel, is facing allegations of breaching the ministerial code for the second time in her parliamentary career for accepting a lucrative position with a global communications firm before receiving the all-clear from an anti-corruption watchdog. Didn't take long for controversy to strike lol
Was she cleared ?
Of course she was.
This is just another fake news, more Guardian rhetoric to appease the haters.
And she wasn’t cleared as she wasn’t charged, they approved her appointment.
We, no.
She took the position and had banked £10,000 before referral to the watchdog.
She is supposed to do that before accepting any role.
It's not a difficult one. In another time it would be suspension and investigation, but who cares about integrity as a trait in the Home Secretary nowadays?
As it is only an admin / timing issue it will hardly be of any interest to any rational person. Why would anyone care. It is all open and above board .
Makes you wonder why we have any rules for anything
Or how can some people be so gullible to swallow the excuse.. "Hi. Nothing wrong in people being gullible. What actually matters is what you achieve in day to day life . Most people would prefer to support the government and make life in the a UK better. A tuning issue is neither here or there. Priti Patel is a rising star. It looks like life is good for here. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"In this energized, new golden age of can do, exciting news from No.10 that Boris asked the staff, “Do you want a dog?”. And the staff replied, “Yes” Oh no the cat people will be up in arms. "Worry not, and in a positive nod to the importance of preparedness for a no-deal brexit: “If you want to introduce a new pet into the home, the better prepared you are, the greater the likelihood of the pets living in harmony and even becoming friends,” | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Another Labour party wank fest thread. Priti Patel gets a bit of paperwork wrong and all the usual suspects on here get a hard on. Tom Watson supports a fantasist (now jailed for 18 years) uses parliamentary privilege to slur dead men who can't defend themselves, urges on a police enquiry that cost the taxpayer millions to find nothing. Yet still refuses to apologise and release emails. Probably the biggest story of the week but the silence on here is deafening." | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" The new home secretary, Priti Patel, is facing allegations of breaching the ministerial code for the second time in her parliamentary career for accepting a lucrative position with a global communications firm before receiving the all-clear from an anti-corruption watchdog. Didn't take long for controversy to strike lol
Was she cleared ?
Of course she was.
This is just another fake news, more Guardian rhetoric to appease the haters.
And she wasn’t cleared as she wasn’t charged, they approved her appointment.
We, no.
She took the position and had banked £10,000 before referral to the watchdog.
She is supposed to do that before accepting any role.
It's not a difficult one. In another time it would be suspension and investigation, but who cares about integrity as a trait in the Home Secretary nowadays?
As it is only an admin / timing issue it will hardly be of any interest to any rational person. Why would anyone care. It is all open and above board .
Makes you wonder why we have any rules for anything
Or how can some people be so gullible to swallow the excuse.. Hi. Nothing wrong in people being gullible. What actually matters is what you achieve in day to day life .
Most people would prefer to support the government and make life in the a UK better. A tuning issue is neither here or there.
Priti Patel is a rising star. It looks like life is good for here."Actually as you well know gullible people are sadly exploited by unscrupulous types, scamming elderly people is a scourge so there is something wrong with it.. It's up to friends and others to protect the gullible or to inform them so they are better protected perhaps.. Of course some will never learn sadly.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Another Labour party wank fest thread. Priti Patel gets a bit of paperwork wrong and all the usual suspects on here get a hard on. Tom Watson supports a fantasist (now jailed for 18 years) uses parliamentary privilege to slur dead men who can't defend themselves, urges on a police enquiry that cost the taxpayer millions to find nothing. Yet still refuses to apologise and release emails. Probably the biggest story of the week but the silence on here is deafening." Well start a discussion about it as you're contributing to the deafening silence too | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Another Labour party wank fest thread. Priti Patel gets a bit of paperwork wrong and all the usual suspects on here get a hard on. Tom Watson supports a fantasist (now jailed for 18 years) uses parliamentary privilege to slur dead men who can't defend themselves, urges on a police enquiry that cost the taxpayer millions to find nothing. Yet still refuses to apologise and release emails. Probably the biggest story of the week but the silence on here is deafening." A very interesting post. I had even thought of starting a thread on it. Tom Watson is responsible for destroying a number of people's lives and one MP dying before being cleared . In this case an apology is hardly even good enough , he should be required to resign as an MP. Even a basis review of the allegations would have indicated that they were untrue. Tom Watson decided to ignore the complete legal process and publish false allegations anyway. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Another Labour party wank fest thread. Priti Patel gets a bit of paperwork wrong and all the usual suspects on here get a hard on. Tom Watson supports a fantasist (now jailed for 18 years) uses parliamentary privilege to slur dead men who can't defend themselves, urges on a police enquiry that cost the taxpayer millions to find nothing. Yet still refuses to apologise and release emails. Probably the biggest story of the week but the silence on here is deafening. Well start a discussion about it as you're contributing to the deafening silence too "I think I just did. So, go on then. Do you defend him or condemn him? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Another Labour party wank fest thread. Priti Patel gets a bit of paperwork wrong and all the usual suspects on here get a hard on. Tom Watson supports a fantasist (now jailed for 18 years) uses parliamentary privilege to slur dead men who can't defend themselves, urges on a police enquiry that cost the taxpayer millions to find nothing. Yet still refuses to apologise and release emails. Probably the biggest story of the week but the silence on here is deafening." Tom Watson did support the the fantasist with zeal because it suited his agenda. The fact that he hasn't apologised publicly and profusely is terrible. He should be censured by his party, but his party is dysfunctional. Start a thread. It's a different point. Do you think that Patel's behaviour is not important like Pat does? That "administrative errors" by the Home Secretary and someone who has already been dismissed for improper conduct is irrelevant. You don't think that this establishes a pattern of dishonesty and exceptionalism? That rules aren't for her? Like Johnson. His party is also dysfunctional. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"In this energized, new golden age of can do, exciting news from No.10 that Boris asked the staff, “Do you want a dog?”. And the staff replied, “Yes” "Is Preeti Patel's behaviour acceptable? Especially when you take into account why she was dismissed previously? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"In this energized, new golden age of can do, exciting news from No.10 that Boris asked the staff, “Do you want a dog?”. And the staff replied, “Yes” Oh no the cat people will be up in arms. "What you see is reversing cuts imposed by the same government. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Brexit supporters struggling to answer on this directly. Not surprising "With four posts in five minutes from you we can't get a word in edgeways.  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why is it specific to brexit supporters ?" I don't know why Brexit supporters specifically are unable to answer this directly, other than rambling Pat. I noticed that the two replies have been to criticise me rather than state your opinion  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Another Labour party wank fest thread. Priti Patel gets a bit of paperwork wrong and all the usual suspects on here get a hard on. Tom Watson supports a fantasist (now jailed for 18 years) uses parliamentary privilege to slur dead men who can't defend themselves, urges on a police enquiry that cost the taxpayer millions to find nothing. Yet still refuses to apologise and release emails. Probably the biggest story of the week but the silence on here is deafening. Well start a discussion about it as you're contributing to the deafening silence too
I think I just did.
So, go on then. Do you defend him or condemn him?"Frankly it's the first I've heard about it and I have no idea about the case but if he's done wrong then he should be held accountable. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why is it specific to brexit supporters ? I don't know why Brexit supporters specifically are unable to answer this directly, other than rambling Pat. I noticed that the two replies have been to criticise me rather than state your opinion "I haven’t criticised you. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Tom Watson and that other horror Jared o Mara have slunk under the radar this week. I’m guessing because BOJO has dominated the news. Watson should be feeling a tiny bit uncomfortable right now. This Patel thing is a storm in a teacup as people race to stick the knife in. I actually think she will do her job well objectively murk aside. " I hope she will too but I do find it funny that half a day in Government royal protocol is broken and a couple of days after it's reported a previously shamed and resigned minister is given a promotion back into cabinet only to be found she's broken ministerial conduct rules
I know their all Brexit extremists and therefore can do no wrong in leavers eyes and anything will be dismissed and excused away as irrelevant
New world governance | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Tom Watson and that other horror Jared o Mara have slunk under the radar this week. I’m guessing because BOJO has dominated the news. Watson should be feeling a tiny bit uncomfortable right now. This Patel thing is a storm in a teacup as people race to stick the knife in. I actually think she will do her job well objectively murk aside. " So her behaviour is acceptable? She knew the rules and ignored them. She was dismissed for inappropriate behaviour before, bit this does not constitute a pattern of contempt for rules to you? At least you have made your position clear which is more than some | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Tom Watson and that other horror Jared o Mara have slunk under the radar this week. I’m guessing because BOJO has dominated the news. Watson should be feeling a tiny bit uncomfortable right now. This Patel thing is a storm in a teacup as people race to stick the knife in. I actually think she will do her job well objectively murk aside. " Ditto Charlie Elphicke.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why is it specific to brexit supporters ? I don't know why Brexit supporters specifically are unable to answer this directly, other than rambling Pat. I noticed that the two replies have been to criticise me rather than state your opinion
I haven’t criticised you."You responded to my post but didn't respond to the question. Implicit criticism for how it was phrased. It would be clever if not so transparent a deflection
Is Priti Patel's behaviour acceptable? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Tom Watson and that other horror Jared o Mara have slunk under the radar this week. I’m guessing because BOJO has dominated the news. Watson should be feeling a tiny bit uncomfortable right now. This Patel thing is a storm in a teacup as people race to stick the knife in. I actually think she will do her job well objectively murk aside. So her behaviour is acceptable? She knew the rules and ignored them. She was dismissed for inappropriate behaviour before, bit this does not constitute a pattern of contempt for rules to you? At least you have made your position clear which is more than some "Where did I comment that it was personally acceptable? I said objectively I believe she will do a good job. In the grand scheme of things that’s happening it’s a storm in a teacup. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Tom Watson and that other horror Jared o Mara have slunk under the radar this week. I’m guessing because BOJO has dominated the news. Watson should be feeling a tiny bit uncomfortable right now. This Patel thing is a storm in a teacup as people race to stick the knife in. I actually think she will do her job well objectively murk aside. So her behaviour is acceptable? She knew the rules and ignored them. She was dismissed for inappropriate behaviour before, bit this does not constitute a pattern of contempt for rules to you? At least you have made your position clear which is more than some
Where did I comment that it was personally acceptable? I said objectively I believe she will do a good job.
In the grand scheme of things that’s happening it’s a storm in a teacup.
"So her behaviour is not acceptable? Not understanding adminstration and detail unimportant for a Minister of State? Alright for her to be the Home Secretary though, despite previous dismissal for even worse behaviour? Is it OK that the new Prime Minister has not even acknowledged the issue and tried to defend it? Perhaps it's not something that a liar would be concerned about | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Fact is our politics seems to be getting dragged lower and lower, pretty much in the gutter now.. She would never have been brought back by any of boris's predecessors in such a short time.. But then again would he under any other circumstances apart from the madness that is brexit have been chosen, I doubt it.. " I think beneath BOJOs bluster and buffoonery lies an arrogance that makes anything possible to be honest. I believe he was member of the Bullingdon Club which is a certain indicator of character. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Fact is our politics seems to be getting dragged lower and lower, pretty much in the gutter now.. She would never have been brought back by any of boris's predecessors in such a short time.. But then again would he under any other circumstances apart from the madness that is brexit have been chosen, I doubt it.. I think beneath BOJOs bluster and buffoonery lies an arrogance that makes anything possible to be honest. I believe he was member of the Bullingdon Club which is a certain indicator of character. " His ego and arrogance are not news, and they plus his inability to think things through or listen to others more qualified as he did in London are not the best qualities.. Not sure I agree that an elitist boys piss up club is evident of the type of character that makes someone ready for the highest level of office.. Or is that just exuberance and jolly japes, which if any other group of guys were up to would be looked down upon by those who idolise him perhaps? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Tom Watson and that other horror Jared o Mara have slunk under the radar this week. I’m guessing because BOJO has dominated the news. Watson should be feeling a tiny bit uncomfortable right now. This Patel thing is a storm in a teacup as people race to stick the knife in. I actually think she will do her job well objectively murk aside. So her behaviour is acceptable? She knew the rules and ignored them. She was dismissed for inappropriate behaviour before, bit this does not constitute a pattern of contempt for rules to you? At least you have made your position clear which is more than some
Where did I comment that it was personally acceptable? I said objectively I believe she will do a good job.
In the grand scheme of things that’s happening it’s a storm in a teacup.
So her behaviour is not acceptable?
Not understanding adminstration and detail unimportant for a Minister of State?
Alright for her to be the Home Secretary though, despite previous dismissal for even worse behaviour?
Is it OK that the new Prime Minister has not even acknowledged the issue and tried to defend it? Perhaps it's not something that a liar would be concerned about "I have not made a comment on whether it’s acceptable or not? I have said objectively I think she would do a good job. If I wanted to comment on the rights and wrongs of this week I would be here all day. I get the impression you like to seem on top of the high ground even when there is no argument to be had. I’m too chill for that. Have at it. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Fact is our politics seems to be getting dragged lower and lower, pretty much in the gutter now.. She would never have been brought back by any of boris's predecessors in such a short time.. But then again would he under any other circumstances apart from the madness that is brexit have been chosen, I doubt it.. I think beneath BOJOs bluster and buffoonery lies an arrogance that makes anything possible to be honest. I believe he was member of the Bullingdon Club which is a certain indicator of character. His ego and arrogance are not news, and they plus his inability to think things through or listen to others more qualified as he did in London are not the best qualities.. Not sure I agree that an elitist boys piss up club is evident of the type of character that makes someone ready for the highest level of office.. Or is that just exuberance and jolly japes, which if any other group of guys were up to would be looked down upon by those who idolise him perhaps? " Sorry I may not have been clear. I’m saying the character is definitely not a positive. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Tom Watson and that other horror Jared o Mara have slunk under the radar this week. I’m guessing because BOJO has dominated the news. Watson should be feeling a tiny bit uncomfortable right now. This Patel thing is a storm in a teacup as people race to stick the knife in. I actually think she will do her job well objectively murk aside. So her behaviour is acceptable? She knew the rules and ignored them. She was dismissed for inappropriate behaviour before, bit this does not constitute a pattern of contempt for rules to you? At least you have made your position clear which is more than some
Where did I comment that it was personally acceptable? I said objectively I believe she will do a good job.
In the grand scheme of things that’s happening it’s a storm in a teacup.
So her behaviour is not acceptable?
Not understanding adminstration and detail unimportant for a Minister of State?
Alright for her to be the Home Secretary though, despite previous dismissal for even worse behaviour?
Is it OK that the new Prime Minister has not even acknowledged the issue and tried to defend it? Perhaps it's not something that a liar would be concerned about
I have not made a comment on whether it’s acceptable or not?
I have said objectively I think she would do a good job.
If I wanted to comment on the rights and wrongs of this week I would be here all day.
I get the impression you like to seem on top of the high ground even when there is no argument to be had.
I’m too chill for that. Have at it.
"Be careful, didn’t you know the left wing socialist is always right, he won’t answer any questions mind | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Tom Watson and that other horror Jared o Mara have slunk under the radar this week. I’m guessing because BOJO has dominated the news. Watson should be feeling a tiny bit uncomfortable right now. This Patel thing is a storm in a teacup as people race to stick the knife in. I actually think she will do her job well objectively murk aside. So her behaviour is acceptable? She knew the rules and ignored them. She was dismissed for inappropriate behaviour before, bit this does not constitute a pattern of contempt for rules to you? At least you have made your position clear which is more than some
Where did I comment that it was personally acceptable? I said objectively I believe she will do a good job.
In the grand scheme of things that’s happening it’s a storm in a teacup.
So her behaviour is not acceptable?
Not understanding adminstration and detail unimportant for a Minister of State?
Alright for her to be the Home Secretary though, despite previous dismissal for even worse behaviour?
Is it OK that the new Prime Minister has not even acknowledged the issue and tried to defend it? Perhaps it's not something that a liar would be concerned about
I have not made a comment on whether it’s acceptable or not?
I have said objectively I think she would do a good job.
If I wanted to comment on the rights and wrongs of this week I would be here all day.
I get the impression you like to seem on top of the high ground even when there is no argument to be had.
I’m too chill for that. Have at it.
"Then I don't understand. You have now asked me what you have said about Preti Patel's behaviour. On one occasion you asked if you said it was acceptable to which I inferred that you thought not. Now you have asked if you have offered any opinion at all. So you have no opinion? As it is a thread about a specific action on her part I thought you might take a position. Several others on here have just started talking about dogs and Tom Watson instead. Objectively based on what actions and behaviour on her part make it seem like she will do a good job as Home Secretary? Your opinion seems subjective. There's nothing wrong with that,but it's not the same. My morality is as flexible and dubious as anyone elses. Society and government should aspire to do better than you and me. I think. I'm trying to understand why you have said what you said. That's how I learn about other people's points of view. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" The new home secretary, Priti Patel, is facing allegations of breaching the ministerial code for the second time in her parliamentary career for accepting a lucrative position with a global communications firm before receiving the all-clear from an anti-corruption watchdog. Didn't take long for controversy to strike lol
Was she cleared ?
Of course she was.
This is just another fake news, more Guardian rhetoric to appease the haters.
And she wasn’t cleared as she wasn’t charged, they approved her appointment.
We, no.
She took the position and had banked £10,000 before referral to the watchdog.
She is supposed to do that before accepting any role.
It's not a difficult one. In another time it would be suspension and investigation, but who cares about integrity as a trait in the Home Secretary nowadays? As it is only an admin / timing issue it will hardly be of any interest to any rational person. Why would anyone care. It is all open and above board .
You would be one of the ones shout the loudest if it had been a member of the Labour party though, eh?! Most people would have better things to do with their lives than to investigate administration errors. It is irrelevant which party it is. "Until it's not the one you support eh? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" The new home secretary, Priti Patel, is facing allegations of breaching the ministerial code for the second time in her parliamentary career for accepting a lucrative position with a global communications firm before receiving the all-clear from an anti-corruption watchdog. Didn't take long for controversy to strike lol
Was she cleared ?
Of course she was.
This is just another fake news, more Guardian rhetoric to appease the haters.
And she wasn’t cleared as she wasn’t charged, they approved her appointment.
We, no.
She took the position and had banked £10,000 before referral to the watchdog.
She is supposed to do that before accepting any role.
It's not a difficult one. In another time it would be suspension and investigation, but who cares about integrity as a trait in the Home Secretary nowadays? As it is only an admin / timing issue it will hardly be of any interest to any rational person. Why would anyone care. It is all open and above board .
You would be one of the ones shout the loudest if it had been a member of the Labour party though, eh?! Most people would have better things to do with their lives than to investigate administration errors. It is irrelevant which party it is.
Until it's not the one you support eh? "**not the one you support | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Another Labour party wank fest thread. Priti Patel gets a bit of paperwork wrong and all the usual suspects on here get a hard on. Tom Watson supports a fantasist (now jailed for 18 years) uses parliamentary privilege to slur dead men who can't defend themselves, urges on a police enquiry that cost the taxpayer millions to find nothing. Yet still refuses to apologise and release emails. Probably the biggest story of the week but the silence on here is deafening." Well said. Tom Watson is a vile individual | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Fact is our politics seems to be getting dragged lower and lower, pretty much in the gutter now.. She would never have been brought back by any of boris's predecessors in such a short time.. But then again would he under any other circumstances apart from the madness that is brexit have been chosen, I doubt it.. I think beneath BOJOs bluster and buffoonery lies an arrogance that makes anything possible to be honest. I believe he was member of the Bullingdon Club which is a certain indicator of character. His ego and arrogance are not news, and they plus his inability to think things through or listen to others more qualified as he did in London are not the best qualities.. Not sure I agree that an elitist boys piss up club is evident of the type of character that makes someone ready for the highest level of office.. Or is that just exuberance and jolly japes, which if any other group of guys were up to would be looked down upon by those who idolise him perhaps? Sorry I may not have been clear. I’m saying the character is definitely not a positive. " My apologies, I agree.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Another Labour party wank fest thread. Priti Patel gets a bit of paperwork wrong and all the usual suspects on here get a hard on. Tom Watson supports a fantasist (now jailed for 18 years) uses parliamentary privilege to slur dead men who can't defend themselves, urges on a police enquiry that cost the taxpayer millions to find nothing. Yet still refuses to apologise and release emails. Probably the biggest story of the week but the silence on here is deafening. Well said. Tom Watson is a vile individual "Tom Watson is an odiousself centred git | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"In this energized, new golden age of can do, exciting news from No.10 that Boris asked the staff, “Do you want a dog?”. And the staff replied, “Yes” Oh no the cat people will be up in arms.
What you see is reversing cuts imposed by the same government."Getting a dog is reversing cuts  I might get one, make me better off | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" The new home secretary, Priti Patel, is facing allegations of breaching the ministerial code for the second time in her parliamentary career for accepting a lucrative position with a global communications firm before receiving the all-clear from an anti-corruption watchdog. Didn't take long for controversy to strike lol
Was she cleared ?
Of course she was.
This is just another fake news, more Guardian rhetoric to appease the haters.
And she wasn’t cleared as she wasn’t charged, they approved her appointment.
We, no.
She took the position and had banked £10,000 before referral to the watchdog.
She is supposed to do that before accepting any role.
It's not a difficult one. In another time it would be suspension and investigation, but who cares about integrity as a trait in the Home Secretary nowadays? As it is only an admin / timing issue it will hardly be of any interest to any rational person. Why would anyone care. It is all open and above board .
You would be one of the ones shout the loudest if it had been a member of the Labour party though, eh?! Most people would have better things to do with their lives than to investigate administration errors. It is irrelevant which party it is. "It is clearly not just an administrative error, it's a breach of the rules which all ministers have to abide by. Your pathetic attempt to defend her is risible even by your standards | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So after that. Tom Watson roundly condemned. However, many on here unable to clearly state that Priti Patel is completely unsuitable for public office due to her dishonesty and arrogance. If you believe in Brexit does anything disqualify you?" Nothing disqualifies you if you're a true believer it would seem | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"She is hot though "She is certainly easier on the eye than her predecessors. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"She is hot though "She was, but now she is developing what the Tories call Bottom... Must be all those ministerial freebie dinners on top of the subsidised Westminster canteen breakfasts and lunches... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" The new home secretary, Priti Patel, is facing allegations of breaching the ministerial code for the second time in her parliamentary career for accepting a lucrative position with a global communications firm before receiving the all-clear from an anti-corruption watchdog. Didn't take long for controversy to strike lol
Was she cleared ?
Of course she was.
This is just another fake news, more Guardian rhetoric to appease the haters.
And she wasn’t cleared as she wasn’t charged, they approved her appointment."Fake news? So what did the Guardian actually misreport? Any comment on Nadhim Zahawi’s ludicrous exchange with Andrew Neil, where he couldn’t say that wether or not Jeremy Corbyn would starve to death and shoot the rich. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" The new home secretary, Priti Patel, is facing allegations of breaching the ministerial code for the second time in her parliamentary career for accepting a lucrative position with a global communications firm before receiving the all-clear from an anti-corruption watchdog. Didn't take long for controversy to strike lol
Was she cleared ?
Of course she was.
This is just another fake news, more Guardian rhetoric to appease the haters.
And she wasn’t cleared as she wasn’t charged, they approved her appointment.
Fake news? So what did the Guardian actually misreport?
Any comment on Nadhim Zahawi’s ludicrous exchange with Andrew Neil, where he couldn’t say that wether or not Jeremy Corbyn would starve to death and shoot the rich. "I didn’t see it. Was it 15 weeks ago like the comment you’ve resurrected? (  ) | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" The new home secretary, Priti Patel, is facing allegations of breaching the ministerial code for the second time in her parliamentary career for accepting a lucrative position with a global communications firm before receiving the all-clear from an anti-corruption watchdog. Didn't take long for controversy to strike lol
Was she cleared ?
Of course she was.
This is just another fake news, more Guardian rhetoric to appease the haters.
And she wasn’t cleared as she wasn’t charged, they approved her appointment.
Fake news? So what did the Guardian actually misreport?
Any comment on Nadhim Zahawi’s ludicrous exchange with Andrew Neil, where he couldn’t say that wether or not Jeremy Corbyn would starve to death and shoot the rich.
I didn’t see it.
Was it 15 weeks ago like the comment you’ve resurrected?
()"here you go, nov 6 2019 I almost feel sorry for him https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MLnSxM3fYw8&feature=youtu.be | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" The new home secretary, Priti Patel, is facing allegations of breaching the ministerial code for the second time in her parliamentary career for accepting a lucrative position with a global communications firm before receiving the all-clear from an anti-corruption watchdog. Didn't take long for controversy to strike lol
Was she cleared ?
Of course she was.
This is just another fake news, more Guardian rhetoric to appease the haters.
And she wasn’t cleared as she wasn’t charged, they approved her appointment.
Fake news? So what did the Guardian actually misreport?
Any comment on Nadhim Zahawi’s ludicrous exchange with Andrew Neil, where he couldn’t say that wether or not Jeremy Corbyn would starve to death and shoot the rich.
I didn’t see it.
Was it 15 weeks ago like the comment you’ve resurrected?
()"The thread was current, and the most recent posts were only posted a few hours before mine. To recap... some Tory compared Corbyn to Stalin. Zahawi appeared on Andrew Neil’s show and, without any hint of irony, seemed unsure whether or not Corbyn would shoot the rich. It was quite the interview, but it’s as though the Tories have been tripping over each other to say something even more ludicrous than the last howler. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" The new home secretary, Priti Patel, is facing allegations of breaching the ministerial code for the second time in her parliamentary career for accepting a lucrative position with a global communications firm before receiving the all-clear from an anti-corruption watchdog. Didn't take long for controversy to strike lol
Was she cleared ?
Of course she was.
This is just another fake news, more Guardian rhetoric to appease the haters.
And she wasn’t cleared as she wasn’t charged, they approved her appointment.
Fake news? So what did the Guardian actually misreport?
Any comment on Nadhim Zahawi’s ludicrous exchange with Andrew Neil, where he couldn’t say that wether or not Jeremy Corbyn would starve to death and shoot the rich.
I didn’t see it.
Was it 15 weeks ago like the comment you’ve resurrected?
()
The thread was current, and the most recent posts were only posted a few hours before mine.
To recap... some Tory compared Corbyn to Stalin. Zahawi appeared on Andrew Neil’s show and, without any hint of irony, seemed unsure whether or not Corbyn would shoot the rich. It was quite the interview, but it’s as though the Tories have been tripping over each other to say something even more ludicrous than the last howler."I just watched it. That odious pompous BBC excuse for a human being Andrew Neil asked him repeatedly whether he thought Corbyn would have done as Stalin did with the rich farmers. A typical childish exercise and I thought the Conservative guy was remarkably restrained in his response to such bullying tactics. He didn’t want to stoop to Neil’s level, so fair play to him. Nothing more than I’ve come to expect from the BBC and Andrew Neil in particular. These smears will dominate the media for the next few weeks, and it’s a sad state of affairs that these campaigns of rubbishing each other will further compound this nations current political mess. FWIW I have little or no political leaning any longer. Way too much stress involved which I can simply do without. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" The new home secretary, Priti Patel, is facing allegations of breaching the ministerial code for the second time in her parliamentary career for accepting a lucrative position with a global communications firm before receiving the all-clear from an anti-corruption watchdog. Didn't take long for controversy to strike lol
Was she cleared ?
Of course she was.
This is just another fake news, more Guardian rhetoric to appease the haters.
And she wasn’t cleared as she wasn’t charged, they approved her appointment.
Fake news? So what did the Guardian actually misreport?
Any comment on Nadhim Zahawi’s ludicrous exchange with Andrew Neil, where he couldn’t say that wether or not Jeremy Corbyn would starve to death and shoot the rich.
I didn’t see it.
Was it 15 weeks ago like the comment you’ve resurrected?
()
The thread was current, and the most recent posts were only posted a few hours before mine.
To recap... some Tory compared Corbyn to Stalin. Zahawi appeared on Andrew Neil’s show and, without any hint of irony, seemed unsure whether or not Corbyn would shoot the rich. It was quite the interview, but it’s as though the Tories have been tripping over each other to say something even more ludicrous than the last howler.
I just watched it.
That odious pompous BBC excuse for a human being Andrew Neil asked him repeatedly whether he thought Corbyn would have done as Stalin did with the rich farmers. A typical childish exercise and I thought the Conservative guy was remarkably restrained in his response to such bullying tactics. He didn’t want to stoop to Neil’s level, so fair play to him.
Nothing more than I’ve come to expect from the BBC and Andrew Neil in particular.
These smears will dominate the media for the next few weeks, and it’s a sad state of affairs that these campaigns of rubbishing each other will further compound this nations current political mess.
FWIW I have little or no political leaning any longer. Way too much stress involved which I can simply do without.
"So do you think the comparison to Stalin was valid? It actually beggars belief that you think it’s somehow unacceptable to call politicians out when they, or their party, comes out with something so utterly ridiculous. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" The new home secretary, Priti Patel, is facing allegations of breaching the ministerial code for the second time in her parliamentary career for accepting a lucrative position with a global communications firm before receiving the all-clear from an anti-corruption watchdog. Didn't take long for controversy to strike lol
Was she cleared ?
Of course she was.
This is just another fake news, more Guardian rhetoric to appease the haters.
And she wasn’t cleared as she wasn’t charged, they approved her appointment.
Fake news? So what did the Guardian actually misreport?
Any comment on Nadhim Zahawi’s ludicrous exchange with Andrew Neil, where he couldn’t say that wether or not Jeremy Corbyn would starve to death and shoot the rich.
I didn’t see it.
Was it 15 weeks ago like the comment you’ve resurrected?
()
The thread was current, and the most recent posts were only posted a few hours before mine.
To recap... some Tory compared Corbyn to Stalin. Zahawi appeared on Andrew Neil’s show and, without any hint of irony, seemed unsure whether or not Corbyn would shoot the rich. It was quite the interview, but it’s as though the Tories have been tripping over each other to say something even more ludicrous than the last howler.
I just watched it.
That odious pompous BBC excuse for a human being Andrew Neil asked him repeatedly whether he thought Corbyn would have done as Stalin did with the rich farmers. A typical childish exercise and I thought the Conservative guy was remarkably restrained in his response to such bullying tactics. He didn’t want to stoop to Neil’s level, so fair play to him.
Nothing more than I’ve come to expect from the BBC and Andrew Neil in particular.
These smears will dominate the media for the next few weeks, and it’s a sad state of affairs that these campaigns of rubbishing each other will further compound this nations current political mess.
FWIW I have little or no political leaning any longer. Way too much stress involved which I can simply do without.
""That odious pompous BBC excuse for a human being Andrew Neil" Is that the best you can do? Attacking the interviewer and channel for skewering a Tory sent out to defend to the indefensible. Realistically the conservatives would have known that Neil was going to town on whomever they sent out. When you say stoop to his level, all Andrew Neil was doing was make him defend what the conservatives have said. That is his job and the tory's sacrificed a pawn rather a knight. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
