Proper Tidy
Arsed
Probably had some Fiji water out of shot or something
Because there's a recording.
Not vouching for the source and not sure if much/of this is new.
REVEALED AT LAST: The Hunt-Bottomley link
Interesting read though
The point is there's a recording, which, ATM, the guardian doesn't feel justified in making public. But, as soon as Johnson makes a public characterisation of what happened, they have their justification: let people judge for themselves. That's why he can't just make light of it.That only demonstrates that there was a bit of a heated row, nothing more.
That only demonstrates that there was a bit of a heated row, nothing more.
This non-story is seriously pissing me off, there's so much to attack Johnson on, and we've got this sideshow of fucking nonsense, that will get forgotten in a few days.
Have you heard it?That only demonstrates that there was a bit of a heated row, nothing more.
Other neighbours have now corroborated that the row was very, very serious indeed. When you're talking about the UK's probable next PM, reporting such behaviour is most definitely is in the public interest.That only demonstrates that there was a bit of a heated row, nothing more.
This non-story is seriously pissing me off, there's so much to attack Johnson on, and we've got this sideshow of fucking nonsense, that will get forgotten in a few days.
Ach the old rascal. Commendable energy. Just the sort of vigour we need. Churchill was no saint, what?
Unless he actually hit her, and it sounds like he didn't otherwise we'd know already, this is a non-story.
'So long as you don't actually hit her' really isn't a great rule of thumb.Unless he actually hit her, and it sounds like he didn't otherwise we'd know already, this is a non-story.
Eh? I'm talking in terms of any damage this will cause him, not making a moral point.'So long as you don't actually hit her' really isn't a great rule of thumb.
Sorry, wasn't accusing you of a Victorian attitude to dv. But the damage it might cause him also isn't necessarily determined by whether she has bruises. If people determine or suspect he's an arsehole, that's damage.Eh? I'm talking in terms of any damage this will cause him, not making a moral point.
Well I was wrong about one thing. Cunt has taken it up.Sorry, wasn't accusing you of a Victorian attitude to dv. But the damage it might cause him also isn't necessarily determined by whether she has bruises. If people determine or suspect he's an arsehole, that's damage.
Trouble is a relative lack of Venn diagram crossover between people who would give a shit and people who have a vote. So you may have a point from that perspective.
Yeh we'd know Yeh rightAch the old rascal. Commendable energy. Just the sort of vigour we need. Churchill was no saint, what?
Unless he actually hit her, and it sounds like he didn't otherwise we'd know already, this is a non-story.
yeh but will the tory membership see it the way you do? you won't believe what happens next!I wonder if it’s been the plan all along to slip Hunt in.
Is it the old Tory trick of threaten you with something unpalatable and then slip in something less deplorable.
So the voters then believe the Tories aren’t that bad really!
Dominating headlines for three days now. Doesn’t matter whether we think it’s a big deal or not, it’s clearly being amplified by the media to damage his campaign for whatever their reasons (anti-brexit, not their particular man etc). Not sure he will shake this that easily.
At this stage probably better for Tory haters if he won, as he’ll be damaged before he even starts leading the party, makes a government collapse more likely.
Isn't he likely to try to brazen out calls for a GE? I think he might be, in which case we could have at least three years of him.yep -
The "sensible" faction of the establishment (much of big business/media/politicians/civil service) dont want Johnson, they want Hunt and they certainly do not want no deal. Hence the shit being flung at him.
But - like trump - Johnson can play on that as it being him being the maverick outsider etc - and much of the party faithful will lap it up.
But when he gets into downing street he will already be seriously weakened - not least by the fact that he has no democratic mandate from the voters.
He then has to come good on his breezy promises about brexit - which he cant. Whatever route he goes down - may's deal mark 2 having been told to fuck off by the EU - or pushing for a no deal - will be blocked by parliament and further inflame the tory civil war.
Politically his least shit option is to call a GE and go down fighting for "no deal" - that way he can keep his brexit standard barer credentials with the headbangers despite destroying the tory party and handing the key of no 10 to corbyn (who will have to go for a 2nd ref to ensure SNP and/or lib dem support )
If he tries to go for May mk2 - or anything less than full brexit - then the brexit party will eat the tory vote, you get the same result as above but he will despised for all time as charlatan and a brexit traitor.
The danger in this is if he goes "death or glory" then, even if he loses - he become a free wheeling, unrestrained cheerleader for toxic english nationalism - something which he would do with relish.
Isn't he likely to try to brazen out calls for a GE? I think he might be, in which case we could have at least three years of him.