Simon Clarke defending Boris Johnson

Laughing said:
That's a very good point Mart. He also acted very quickly. Also, I think he had been in post a couple of months when the CPS decided not to prosecute Saville.
Click to expand...
Not many people understand how decisions to prosecute work in this country.....particularly our MPs....who are also the first to complain about wasting time and money the other way round. They can't have it both ways. You have to have a threshold based on the evidence at the time otherwise there's no consistency. Starmer could only be held accountable for failure of process, which as said he reviewed then changed and apologised for.
 
To take an extreme example in 2019 German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier apologised to Poland for the actions of Germany in World War 2 that apology doesn't make him culpable for the Holocaust.

The four complaints to Surrey and Sussex police were made in late 2007 and early 2008, Starmer was not DPP until November 2008, at the time the Police failed to inform the complainants that other allegations had been made about Savile and each of them said they were reluctant to go to court, in 2009 the police in Sussex reviewed the allegations, in part, on the back of Starmer's introduction of methods to protect victims of sexual assault and rape, they got in touch with CPS South East for guidance on what evidence they would need to prosecute Savile and based on the advice given by a CPS lawyer in Brighton Sussex police decided not to pursue the case further due to the timeframe, the difficulty of garnering further evidence, and, at the time, the rarity of getting a conviction for historical sexual abuse, the decision not to prosecute was not taken by any member of the CPS as no prosecution file was ever submitted to them for consideration.

Starmer's apology, like Steinmeier's, was based on regret of historical mistakes from the position he represented rather than through any personal responsibility, I can't get my head around the muddled thinking of claiming Starmer is culpable for anything that happened during his tenure as DPP and head of the CPS, yet exonerating Johnson from any blame in the Partygate scandal, surely if you hold Starmer to account for any failings by the CPS in 2009 you have to hold Johnson to the same account as Prime Minister.

Blaming someone for an incident they had no involvement with but defending someone who has admitted their own involvement in another really is perverse logic.
 
Last edited:
I sent him an email with a concern over a week ago - no response. He is more interested in defending Johnsons lies and behaviour then dealing with one of his constituents, clearly. It is obvious what is more important to him? How these people can keep defending the indefensible is beyond me.
 
Mountain Climber said:
I sent him an email with a concern over a week ago - no response. He is more interested in defending Johnsons lies and behaviour then dealing with one of his constituents, clearly. It is obvious what is more important to him? How these people can keep defending the indefensible is beyond me.
Click to expand...
They defend the indefensible because it's the only avenue they have to stay in power.
It is exactly the same as the GOP in the US who know fine well that the election wasn't stolen, but can't say so because it'll turn Trump against them and they'll be out of a job.
Johnson and his cabal might not be as authoritarian as Trump, but the mechanics of existing within their political orbit are very similar. The only ray of light us that we at least have some Tories who are prepared to voice their objections.
 
dooderooni said:
They defend the indefensible because it's the only avenue they have to stay in power.
It is exactly the same as the GOP in the US who know fine well that the election wasn't stolen, but can't say so because it'll turn Trump against them and they'll be out of a job.
Johnson and his cabal might not be as authoritarian as Trump, but the mechanics of existing within their political orbit are very similar. The only ray of light us that we at least have some Tories who are prepared to voice their objections.
Click to expand...
The One Nation Conservatives might wake up to what the more socially liberal Republicans failed to do before their party disappeared. If they don't they might never win power again after this stint?
 
Last edited:
The Tories are just throwing dead cat after dead cat to divert people from the reality.
 
Ambie said:
Whereas the other Teesside Tory MPs (Vickers and Young) just come across as idiots, there is something very sinister about Clarke.
Click to expand...
Vickers and Young are obvious simpletons whereas Clarke is a glib and shameless liar. He is both articulate and unembarrassable, hence invaluable to the government at the moment. He is prepared to take to the airwaves and lie without fear. When the usual suspects are taking shelter Clarke is always available. He is absolutely loving his moment in the sun.
 
I did mention on the other thread that Johnson would do more harm than good with his statement and, not surprisingly, that seems to be the case.
 
This lanky streak of p155

Tory front bench laughing at Labour describing the hardship people are going to experience.
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20220204-195649_Twitter.jpg
    Screenshot_20220204-195649_Twitter.jpg
    224.5 KB · Views: 9
Mountain Climber said:
I sent him an email with a concern over a week ago - no response. He is more interested in defending Johnsons lies and behaviour then dealing with one of his constituents, clearly. It is obvious what is more important to him? How these people can keep defending the indefensible is beyond me.
Click to expand...
He took nearly two months to reply to my last email. Clearly, it has taken him a long time to write down what Johnson wanted him to say. He is incapable of independent thought and, as if there was any doubt before his hideous defence of Johnson's comment, is morally bankrupt.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top