FabSwingers.com mobile

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

John Major

Jump to newest
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

Is a total hypocrite has he forgot a little thing such as cash for questions did he not close down parliament x

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *mmabluTV/TS
over a year ago

upton wirral


"Is a total hypocrite has he forgot a little thing such as cash for questions did he not close down parliament x"
Just another two faced remainer

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Is a total hypocrite has he forgot a little thing such as cash for questions did he not close down parliament x Just another two faced remainer"

He learned it from your idols

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *illwill69uMan
over a year ago

moston


"Is a total hypocrite has he forgot a little thing such as cash for questions did he not close down parliament x Just another two faced Tory"

How right you are.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ophieslutTV/TS
over a year ago

Central

It's been good to see the evidence and arguments in court this week. The PM didn't submit a statement, as he's clearly lied. Others are willing to speak the truth, to sustain parliamentary sovereignty during this period of major transition, via a PMwho is out of control.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *nleashedCrakenMan
over a year ago

Widnes


"Is a total hypocrite has he forgot a little thing such as cash for questions did he not close down parliament x"

Except that that does not really stand up to any rigorous enquiry.

John Major did prorogue Parliament for 3 weeks in 1997 in the run up to the General Election. The allegation is that he did this in order to avoid a report on "Cash for Questions" being debated in Parliament because it might embarrass a Tory MP. However when the report was actually published just after the General Election it actually cleared the Tory MP of the charges.

The Tory MP in question was later found guilty of having received other bribes but on the "Cash for Questions" issue he was cleared.

As an additional point of information the Tory MP in question was none other than the leading BREXITER Neil Hamilton who now sits as a UKIP member in the Welsh Assembly. People can decide for themselves where the real dishonesty and hypocrisy is in this thread.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ostafunMan
over a year ago

near ipswich


"It's been good to see the evidence and arguments in court this week. The PM didn't submit a statement, as he's clearly lied. Others are willing to speak the truth, to sustain parliamentary sovereignty during this period of major transition, via a PMwho is out of control."
Clearly lied? if there was any evidence of that i think it would have been brought up in court.Just because you choose to believe something does not make it true.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *iscreet_divorced_guyMan
over a year ago

central


"It's been good to see the evidence and arguments in court this week. The PM didn't submit a statement, as he's clearly lied. Others are willing to speak the truth, to sustain parliamentary sovereignty during this period of major transition, via a PMwho is out of control.Clearly lied? if there was any evidence of that i think it would have been brought up in court.Just because you choose to believe something does not make it true."

Someone has been watching too many American legal fiction!! Matlock, Maybe??

It’s not a trial, it’s a Supreme Court hearing, the evidence is established, so the arguments are on points of law! There is/was nothing new to be brought up in the hearing!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ostafunMan
over a year ago

near ipswich


"It's been good to see the evidence and arguments in court this week. The PM didn't submit a statement, as he's clearly lied. Others are willing to speak the truth, to sustain parliamentary sovereignty during this period of major transition, via a PMwho is out of control.Clearly lied? if there was any evidence of that i think it would have been brought up in court.Just because you choose to believe something does not make it true.

Someone has been watching too many American legal fiction!! Matlock, Maybe??

It’s not a trial, it’s a Supreme Court hearing, the evidence is established, so the arguments are on points of law! There is/was nothing new to be brought up in the hearing! "
And no evidence that he lied which was my point.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"It's been good to see the evidence and arguments in court this week. The PM didn't submit a statement, as he's clearly lied. Others are willing to speak the truth, to sustain parliamentary sovereignty during this period of major transition, via a PMwho is out of control.Clearly lied? if there was any evidence of that i think it would have been brought up in court.Just because you choose to believe something does not make it true.

Someone has been watching too many American legal fiction!! Matlock, Maybe??

It’s not a trial, it’s a Supreme Court hearing, the evidence is established, so the arguments are on points of law! There is/was nothing new to be brought up in the hearing! And no evidence that he lied which was my point."

No evidence lol every time his lips move he lies lol x

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *eakcoupleCouple
over a year ago

peak district

Major has never accepted the results of the Brexit referendum. He's another of these politicians who think their own opinion trumps the opinion of the majority of the public - like Grieve, Watson, Benn, 'Fatty' Clarke, etc etc etc.

I do hope he's paying for his 'day in court' and that he and that dreadful woman lose.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ophieslutTV/TS
over a year ago

Central

The Scottish court did find that Johnson and others had lied about the reason for prorogation and it's telling that he's made no witness statement, whilst his legal representatives have not not managed to provide a fully complete and accurate representation of the communications and planning leading to this event.

I'm not fully expecting the appropriate outcome from this hearing, though it's possible, due to the strength of the legal team's argument against the government's team. It would certainly be good for the country to have a ruling that finds against them, to help to prevent potential future abuses.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *nleashedCrakenMan
over a year ago

Widnes


"It's been good to see the evidence and arguments in court this week. The PM didn't submit a statement, as he's clearly lied. Others are willing to speak the truth, to sustain parliamentary sovereignty during this period of major transition, via a PMwho is out of control.Clearly lied? if there was any evidence of that i think it would have been brought up in court.Just because you choose to believe something does not make it true.

Someone has been watching too many American legal fiction!! Matlock, Maybe??

It’s not a trial, it’s a Supreme Court hearing, the evidence is established, so the arguments are on points of law! There is/was nothing new to be brought up in the hearing! And no evidence that he lied which was my point."

But The Court of Session in Scotland has already found that Johnson mislead the Queen and that his main reason for suspending Parliament was not the one he told either Parliament or the Queen. That finding is part of the evidence the Supreme Court is looking at. So there is not only evidence being put before the court but an actual finding of lying. That finding could well still stand even if the Supreme Court rules that the matter is not judiciable.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Major has never accepted the results of the Brexit referendum. He's another of these politicians who think their own opinion trumps the opinion of the majority of the public - like Grieve, Watson, Benn, 'Fatty' Clarke, etc etc etc.

I do hope he's paying for his 'day in court' and that he and that dreadful woman lose. "

They have got you rattled?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
Post new Message to Thread
back to top