Under parliamentary privilege she told a deliberate lie designed to discredit an organisation, Channel 4, whilst she was leading the efforts to privatise said organisation.So having a quick read she lied that a family she stayed with o a reality tv show were actually paid actors. What I’m confused by and can’t find any details is why that would be investigated by the privileges committee. Or is it another lie she’s told that the guy is talking about?
Bear with me.so if she had told that lie under any other circumstances it woul still be a lie, what I don’t understand is why they were discussing her appearance on a reality show 12 years ago - what relevance does that have to anything?Under parliamentary privilege she told a deliberate lie designed to discredit an organisation, Channel 4, whilst she was leading the efforts to privatise said organisation.
Forget about what the subject matter is and when it happenedBear with me.so if she had told that lie under any other circumstances it woul still be a lie, what I don’t understand is why they were discussing her appearance on a reality show 12 years ago - what relevance does that have to anything?
Methinks FatCat is being deliberately obtuse. Dorries was trying to make the case to privatise C4 so she lied about them to smear their reputation and to portray them as woke, tofu eating, lefty degenerates. This is how low the tories have reduced politics in this country.Forget about what the subject matter is and when it happened
And focus on the bit that is a lie under parliamentary privilege
I was just trying to work out the relevance of her being on a reality tv show 12 years ago and then lieing about it.Methinks FatCat is being deliberately obtuse. Dorries was trying to make the case to privatise C4 so she lied about them to smear their reputation and to portray them as woke, tofu eating, lefty degenerates. This is how low the tories have reduced politics in this country.
More or less. Not C4's financial value, rather it's integrity as a public service broadcaster.I was just trying to work out the relevance of her being on a reality tv show 12 years ago and then lieing about it.
So she was making the case at a hearing to privatise channel 4 and made this accusation that they use actors instead of real people to undermine the value of channel 4?
No one mentioned it until you did. It matters not what the lie was about merely that it was told and to a select committee to try to influence them.Bear with me.so if she had told that lie under any other circumstances it woul still be a lie, what I don’t understand is why they were discussing her appearance on a reality show 12 years ago - what relevance does that have to anything?
Well that’s the crux of the point though - the op video doesn’t mention it so it’s a bit hard to judge when there is such little detail. Anyway it’s all cleared up now thanks.No one mentioned it until you did. It matters not what the lie was about merely that it was told and to a select committee to try to influence them.