Anybody see Lee Anderson questioning the Met Commissioner?

It goes without saying that 30p Lee is an @rse. But if you watch the whole thing, the person doing the most deflecting, the most answering questions that weren’t asked, the most politicians “they were in the past I want to talk about the future” bs, is the Met Commisioner. Especially in the middle part when grilled about his (apparently non-existent, or he doesn’t remember, or it was ok at the time, or a long time ago) personal experience of misogyny and racism in the force.

That’s the trouble wih idiot Tories. They let the really unacceptable off the hook.
 
But if you watch the whole thing, the person doing the most deflecting, the most answering questions that weren’t asked, the most politicians “they were in the past I want to talk about the future” bs, is the Met Commissioner
Not really. He has only been in the Met for IIRC six years. He's not there to answer accusations of racism etc in whatever force he used to be in. As he said unsurprisingly junior officers are on their best behaviour in the company of senior officers. Idiot Lee seems to think he is being clever. He looks what he is, a bully confronted with someone in possession of a brain cell unintimidated by his posturing he looks a fool.

He is an MP a disgrace to his office
 
It goes without saying that 30p Lee is an @rse. But if you watch the whole thing, the person doing the most deflecting, the most answering questions that weren’t asked, the most politicians “they were in the past I want to talk about the future” bs, is the Met Commisioner. Especially in the middle part when grilled about his (apparently non-existent, or he doesn’t remember, or it was ok at the time, or a long time ago) personal experience of misogyny and racism in the force.

That’s the trouble wih idiot Tories. They let the really unacceptable off the hook.
With respect, anyone who can turn this into an Anderson is good, Rowley is bad argument needs to re-examine what they're looking at.
 
Big difference between goading people and telling them what he thinks - rather than extracting how the Met Officer intends to proceed.
 
With respect, anyone who can turn this into an Anderson is good, Rowley is bad argument needs to re-examine what they're looking at.
How on earth you manage to characterise a post that starts “30p Lee is an @rse” as “Anderson is good” is beyond me.

But you can’t deny that Rowley’s deflection, excusing and surely pretended claims of absence of personal experience over historical racism and misogyny in the force in which he served but before he had significant leadership positions was exactly how a politician would respond. A simple condemnation of what was and is in no way excusable is the only acceptable response. A failure to give one suggests there’s still a culture of denial.
 
How on earth you manage to characterise a post that starts “30p Lee is an @rse” as “Anderson is good” is beyond me.

But you can’t deny that Rowley’s deflection, excusing and surely pretended claims of absence of personal experience over historical racism and misogyny in the force in which he served but before he had significant leadership positions was exactly how a politician would respond. A simple condemnation of what was and is in no way excusable is the only acceptable response. A failure to give one suggests there’s still a culture of denial.
I'm not sure that's true. Anderson was looking to personalise the argument. Rowley (a bobby but also a politician) didn't let him. It was fair enough. It's not about his individual experience but about a culture within an institution. He'll have plenty of stories to tell but that wasn't the arena for it.
 
If There isnt enough of the electorate to see through these clowns ie...Anderson,Gullis, Braverman,Truss,Coffey (this list could go on and on) at the next G.E, then we as a country are well and truly FKD !!!!
 
Back
Top