#ToryScum
#ToryScum
Jesus. And nanny wasn't there to deal with it.On Any Questions Jacob Rees-Mogg refutes the idea that stop-and-search disproportionately targets black people by citing the occasion when he himself was stopped on Pall Mall.
Wouldn't the provider have copies? No idea how long they keep them though.
Not with Whatapps, but it is normally backed up to your Google Drive account.Wouldn't the provider have copies? No idea how long they keep them though.
It's been 18hours since the last fuck up,
Now there is this:
This lot would be kicked out of village hall committee, let alone the country
#bitterimpotentleftie#ToryScum
So organising contracts over a non official channel is OK?#bitterimpotentleftie
So organising contracts over a non official channel is OK?
Why is Michael Ashcroft still allowed to use the "Lord" moniker? He resigned from the House six years ago, in all probability because they wanted fewer tax-dodging non-doms in there. He's certainly not one who inherited his title, so he's advertising himself as something he's not, or lying as others might call it.
#bitterimpotentleftie
It's been 18hours since the last fuck up,
Now there is this:
This lot would be kicked out of village hall committee, let alone the country
Thank you. I didn't expect the answer to be logical, because we're talking about the House of Lords here. Archer (liar and jailbird) and Ashcroft (liar and tax dodger) are but two amongst many wrong'uns in the HoL. Yet for some reason the idea that it's shite and ought to be changed never gains traction with an electorate who voted in vast numbers to get rid of the unelected elite in Brussels.Stopping being a working peer doesn't remove the title.
That is done by death, or IIRC a prison sentence of a certain length.
I don't seem to recall correctly.
On looking at Archer, he is still a life peer, there seems to be no automatic mechanism to remove a peer, it needs an act of parliament.
I was certain that post Archer a mechanism had been put in place, seems not.
Thank you. I didn't expect the answer to be logical, because we're talking about the House of Lords here. Archer (liar and jailbird) and Ashcroft (liar and tax dodger) are but two amongst many wrong'uns in the HoL. Yet for some reason the idea that it's shite and ought to be changed never gains traction with an electorate who voted in vast numbers to get rid of the unelected elite in Brussels.
Stopping being a working peer doesn't remove the title.
That is done by death, or IIRC a prison sentence of a certain length.
I don't seem to recall correctly.
On looking at Archer, he is still a life peer, there seems to be no automatic mechanism to remove a peer, it needs an act of parliament.
I was certain that post Archer a mechanism had been put in place, seems not.