U.S. businesswoman Arcuri refuses to answer questions about intimacy with Boris Johnson

[snoop1130]

U.S. businesswoman Arcuri refuses to answer questions about intimacy with Boris Johnson

By Guy Faulconbridge

 

Britain's Prime Minister Boris Johnson leaves Downing Street in London, Britain, October 3, 2019. REUTERS/Henry Nicholls

 

LONDON (Reuters) - U.S. businesswoman Jennifer Arcuri repeatedly refused to answer questions on Monday about whether she had an intimate relationship with British Prime Minister Boris Johnson when he was mayor of London.

 

The Sunday Times has reported that when Johnson was mayor he failed to declare close personal links to Arcuri, who received thousands of pounds in public business funding and places on official trade trips.

 

Speaking to ITV, Arcuri said she had bonded with Johnson, who was mayor of the British capital from 2008-2016, over classical literature, that they discussed French philosopher Voltaire and shared a love of William Shakespeare.

 

But asked repeatedly whether she had an affair with Johnson or intimate relations with him, she either sidestepped the question or openly refused to answer.

 

“I really am not going to answer that question,” Arcuri told ITV. “It’s really categorically no one’s business what private life we had or didn’t have.

 

“And categorically more important, Boris never ever gave me favouritism, never once did I ask him for a favour, never once did he write a letter of recommendation for me.”

 

Asked about the allegations, Johnson has said everything was done with full propriety and that there was no interest to declare.

 

The Greater London Authority (GLA) said last month it had referred Johnson to Britain’s police watchdog for potential investigation over allegations of misconduct involving Arcuri.

 

The GLA said the allegations were that Johnson had a friendship with Arcuri and as a result of that friendship allowed her to participate in trade missions and receive sponsorship.

 

The crime of misconduct in public office carries a maximum sentence of life imprisonment.

 

Arcuri told ITV that after they first bonded over literature and discussed venture capital for the technology sector, she and Johnson began sending text messages and then he would visit her office at her apartment in London, sometimes on his way home.

 

In her phone, she entered Johnson — whose first name is Alexander — as “Alex the Great”.

 

“There was plenty of office space for him to come visit,” Arcuri said. He visited around five or perhaps 10 times, she said. “I didn’t think it was awkward at all.”

 

She quipped that she once offered Johnson the chance to have a go on her dancing pole but he refused.

 

“He sat down with his tea and started muttering,” she said.

 

When asked again about the nature of their relationship she said: “Because the press have made me this objectified ex-model pole dancer model, I really am not going to answer that question.”

 

Asked if she loved him, she said: “I care about him deeply as a friend and do we share a very close bond. But I wish him well, I want him to be happy.”

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2019-10-07

Follow Thaivisa on LINE for breaking Thailand news and visa info

[Basil B]

42 minutes ago, snoop1130 said:

Speaking to ITV, Arcuri said she had bonded with Johnson,

Bonded ...as in Bondage??? ????

Quote

She quipped that she once offered Johnson the chance to have a go on her dancing pole but he refused.

The real question is did she have a go on his?

[from the home of CC]

I heard it reported that Arcuri was actually a man..

[metisdead]

Posts containing off topic trolling comments have been removed as well as the replies. 

[olfu]

She refuses to answer or her lawyer objected?

[soalbundy]

she's trying to forget it

[chrisinth]

13 hours ago, snoop1130 said:

But asked repeatedly whether she had an affair with Johnson or intimate relations with him, she either sidestepped the question or openly refused to answer.

 

“I really am not going to answer that question,” Arcuri told ITV. “It’s really categorically no one’s business what private life we had or didn’t have.

Kudos to her as well. I have no liking, or un-liking, of BJ or indeed Arcuri, but for interviewers to ask these sort of questions and her comments catapulted into clickbait for protecting her privacy is pure BS.

 

I honestly wish there were more people like her that tell the media to kiss off when asked these sort of questions. I don't care that the majority of people now-a-days feel they are entitled to know everything through the media, social or not, they aren't.

 

Categorically not.........................

[Thingamabob]

If Boris was as close to this woman as some are suggesting he lacks taste, never mind other issues.

[bristolboy]

25 minutes ago, Thingamabob said:

If Boris was as close to this woman as some are suggesting he lacks taste, never mind other issues.

Well, if you're going to go by looks, the same could said of any such interest she might have had in him.

[bristolboy]

2 hours ago, chrisinth said:

Kudos to her as well. I have no liking, or un-liking, of BJ or indeed Arcuri, but for interviewers to ask these sort of questions and her comments catapulted into clickbait for protecting her privacy is pure BS.

 

I honestly wish there were more people like her that tell the media to kiss off when asked these sort of questions. I don't care that the majority of people now-a-days feel they are entitled to know everything through the media, social or not, they aren't.

 

Categorically not.........................

Ya think when disbursement of public funds are involved, personal relationships are irrelevant?

[BobBKK]

She has every right not to answer questions like that in public. Is UK heading the same way as America?  trash politics?  looks like it.

[stevenl]

2 hours ago, chrisinth said:

Kudos to her as well. I have no liking, or un-liking, of BJ or indeed Arcuri, but for interviewers to ask these sort of questions and her comments catapulted into clickbait for protecting her privacy is pure BS.

 

I honestly wish there were more people like her that tell the media to kiss off when asked these sort of questions. I don't care that the majority of people now-a-days feel they are entitled to know everything through the media, social or not, they aren't.

 

Categorically not.........................

I fully understand her desire to try and keep out of this. Unfortunately for her this is not possible with the possible misuse of government funds by Boris, a misuse, if true, she profited from herself.

So the ship for her has sailed, although I don't believe there will remain much pressure on her, the main target is and will remain BJ.

[bristolboy]

17 minutes ago, BobBKK said:

She has every right not to answer questions like that in public. Is UK heading the same way as America?  trash politics?  looks like it.

She received public monies via Boris Johnson. Unless you think a romantic relationship between the two is irrelevant, why shouldn't she answer the question?

[tyga]

34 minutes ago, BobBKK said:

She has every right not to answer questions like that in public. Is UK heading the same way as America?  trash politics?  looks like it.

She could use this relationship to get financial benefit from him for her business so it is not like he shagged the housekeeper or some other irrelevant tabloid news. Needs to be fully investigated.

 

[soalbundy]

1 hour ago, Thingamabob said:

If Boris was as close to this woman as some are suggesting he lacks taste, never mind other issues.

so does she

[chrisinth]

43 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

Ya think when disbursement of public funds are involved, personal relationships are irrelevant?

If the questions came from a formal investigation, then yes most definitely. But from a media interviewer?

 

IMO she is well within her rights to not reveal anything. As I said earlier, it has turned into clickbait, winding those who think they are entitled to knowing this information up no end. A cauldron of opinions based on speculation. Such is social media.

[Baerboxer]

56 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

Ya think when disbursement of public funds are involved, personal relationships are irrelevant?

 

Not for cheapskate Tabloid gutter press so called journalists to question anyone about their personal lives.

 

Too much of this "trial" by media when much of the media is just gutter snipes willing to break the law for information or make it up.

 

Any accusations should be investigated by the appropriate authorities. 

[spiekerjozef]

49 minutes ago, BobBKK said:

trash politics?

Is there a difference between normal politics?

They're all saving their own ass. Do whatever it takes to keep that seat...

[Baerboxer]

35 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

She received public monies via Boris Johnson. Unless you think a romantic relationship between the two is irrelevant, why shouldn't she answer the question?

 

If a Sun reported turned up and started asking you or your missus who you'd been intimate with would you answer?

[Baerboxer]

19 minutes ago, tyga said:

She could use this relationship to get financial benefit from him for her business so it is not like he shagged the housekeeper or some other irrelevant tabloid news. Needs to be fully investigated.

 

 

But not by the gutter press looking for cheap sensationalism and flogging papers.

[CGW]

7 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

when much of the media is just gutter snipes willing to break the law for information or make it up.

With all due to respect, I believe you are trying to hard to be polite to the "media" they are repeaters, repeating what they are told to say or "investigating" someone because they are told to by someone higher up the food chain who has issues!

There are still a few good investigative reporters out there, what they report is labelled as "fake news" as it contradicts what the MSM wont's to feed us!

If you do want to try bypass the rubbish written by the paid for repeaters you used to be able to search for the truth, but no more! as anything that doesn't agree with the elite "silicone valley" google facebook view point does not come up in the search - kindly filtered out under the guise that it is "fake news"

The good old days, just a memory when we had freedom of the press & speech, they were our 'watchdogs" reporting when politicians were corrupt, now they are in the business of hiding the lies and deceit!

Sadly we are still relying on them to keep us informed! 

 

[champers]

The lady accepted an invitation to appear on the programme; probably paid; so no doubt expected being questioned the way she was. I hope it was worth her fee.

[Basil B]

1 hour ago, Thingamabob said:

If Boris was as close to this woman as some are suggesting he lacks taste, never mind other issues.

I was thinking "should have gone to SpecSavers"...

[bristolboy]

29 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

If a Sun reported turned up and started asking you or your missus who you'd been intimate with would you answer?

The validity of the questioning is one thing. Whether or not I'd answer is quite another.

[Basil B]

[Basil B]

18 hours ago, snoop1130 said:

The Greater London Authority (GLA) said last month it had referred Johnson to Britain’s police watchdog for potential investigation over allegations of misconduct involving Arcuri.

 

The GLA said the allegations were that Johnson had a friendship with Arcuri and as a result of that friendship allowed her to participate in trade missions and receive sponsorship.

Fact is that on her own admission Boris had visited her "office", so Boris had dealings with this Woman, whether they were professional interests or as a friend seems that Boris may have failed to declare an interest while holding the office of Lord Mayor of London.

 

The one question that she could have been asked which she was not, did her office feature a bed?  

[Mavideol]

she's only trying to cash in on the controversy

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

4 hours ago, chrisinth said:

I don't care that the majority of people now-a-days feel they are entitled to know everything through the media, social or not, they aren't.

 

Yes, people ought to be entitled to some privacy in their private lives...

 

UNLESS those private lives get involved in potential crimes and misuse of government positions, authority, funds, etc.

 

The authorities there apparently feel there's a legitimate case to investigate of whether BJ granted her government perks because of their personal relationship, and/or whether she leveraged her personal relationship with BJ to obtain those government perks.

 

Once you start swimming in that pond, there's not a lot of basis for claiming the private lives plea...

 

 

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

1 hour ago, chrisinth said:

As I said earlier, it has turned into clickbait, winding those who think they are entitled to knowing this information up no end. A cauldron of opinions based on speculation. Such is social media.

 

It's a fair bit more than social media, as the OP article makes clear:

 

Quote

 

The Greater London Authority (GLA) said last month it had referred Johnson to Britain’s police watchdog for potential investigation over allegations of misconduct involving Arcuri.

 

The GLA said the allegations were that Johnson had a friendship with Arcuri and as a result of that friendship allowed her to participate in trade missions and receive sponsorship.

 

 

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

All I want to know is....

 

1. does she have a valid visa, and if so what kind, to be legally staying in the U.K., and

2. is she up-to-date and in compliance with her 90-day report and TM30 filings.