Parliamentary inquiry has concluded that Boris Johnson knowingly misled parliament multiple times

[Social Media]

 

[Chomper Higgot]

In plain English, “He knowingly, deliberately and continuously lied to Parliament”

 

No surprises there.

 

Let’s have no more objections to members calling Johnson a liar, or even an habitual liar.

 

 

[Kwasaki]

I object it was a meeting at No.10 not a party.

[placeholder]

55 minutes ago, Kwasaki said:

I object it was a meeting at No.10 not a party.

Right. It was a birthday meeting meant to investigate whether or not Johnson's mother was a virgin.

[Kwasaki]

48 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Right. It was a birthday meeting meant to investigate whether or not Johnson's mother was a virgin.

Sunak was fine the same BoJo so why isn't the Conservative members and the media vilifing him.

 

[Chomper Higgot]

1 hour ago, Kwasaki said:

Sunak was fine the same BoJo so why isn't the Conservative members and the media vilifing him.

 

Somebody else who hasn’t yet grasped or refuses to grasp the purpose and findings of the inquiry.

 

The inquiry was not looking into Johnson’s attendance at lockdown parties, it was examining his statements to parliament about his attendance at lockdown parties.

 

Johnson lied to Parliament, as stated, “He knowingly, deliberately and continuously lied to Parliament”

 

 

 

 

[Kwasaki]

36 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Somebody else who hasn’t yet grasped or refuses to grasp the purpose and findings of the inquiry.

 

The inquiry was not looking into Johnson’s attendance at lockdown parties, it was examining his statements to parliament about his attendance at lockdown parties.

 

Johnson lied to Parliament, as stated, “He knowingly, deliberately and continuously lied to Parliament”

 

 

Disagree, they just want him out the way, bad idea.

[Chomper Higgot]

1 minute ago, Kwasaki said:

Disagree, they just want him out the way, bad idea.

You can disagree all you like, but you need to provide evidence of claims you make.

 

 

[Kwasaki]

23 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

You can disagree all you like, but you need to provide evidence of claims you make.

 

I think the Daily Express explains it well enough for me.

[Chomper Higgot]

27 minutes ago, Kwasaki said:

I think the Daily Express explains it well enough for me.

That doesn’t surprise me in the least.

 

I’ll go with the actual Commons Committee Report.

[youreavinalaff]

2 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Johnson lied to Parliament, as stated, “He knowingly, deliberately and continuously lied to Parliament”

An opinion of the committee.

 

No one will ever actually know for a fact if their opinion is correct.

 

1 hour ago, Kwasaki said:

Disagree, they just want him out the way, bad idea.

That is another opinion. Again, something no one can call as correct or not.

 

1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

You can disagree all you like, but you need to provide evidence of claims you make.

 

 

Do you have evidence to the contrary? 

[Chomper Higgot]

9 minutes ago, youreavinalaff said:

An opinion of the committee.

 

No one will ever actually know for a fact if their opinion is correct.

 

That is another opinion. Again, something no one can call as correct or not.

 

Do you have evidence to the contrary? 

The findings of the committee established by Parliament to examine the facts.

 

 

 

 

[youreavinalaff]

7 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The findings of the committee established by Parliament to examine the facts.

 

 

 

 

Indeed. Based on their opinions.

 

Still waiting gor you evidence as requesting in my previous post.

[placeholder]

9 minutes ago, youreavinalaff said:

Indeed. Based on their opinions.

 

Still waiting gor you evidence as requesting in my previous post.

Here ya go:

https://committees.parliament.uk/publications/40412/documents/197199/default/

[youreavinalaff]

1 minute ago, placeholder said:

Here ya go:

https://committees.parliament.uk/publications/40412/documents/197199/default/

What? I've already seen it.

 

That still does not prove, nor disprove  any bias either way. It's still based on the opinions of the committee.

 

 

[placeholder]

10 minutes ago, youreavinalaff said:

What? I've already seen it.

 

That still does not prove, nor disprove  any bias either way. It's still based on the opinions of the committee.

 

 

Did you just look at the cover? So, no evidence in that report huh?  Just opinions? You really want to go with that?

[youreavinalaff]

17 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Did you just look at the cover? So, no evidence in that report huh?  Just opinions? You really want to go with that?

Yes, if you interpret what I said correctly and not twist it.

 

Let's face it, if things had gone the other way you'd have been all over the idea he was let off by bias in his favour.

 

Myself, from a neutral point of view, am saying bias cannot be proved or disproved. Opinions are just that. Put the evidence in front of supporters of Boris, a different result would have occurred. That's politics. Plain and simple.

[Chomper Higgot]

1 hour ago, youreavinalaff said:

Indeed. Based on their opinions.

 

Still waiting gor you evidence as requesting in my previous post.

The Parliamentary Committee based their findings on the evidence of multiple sworn testimonies from people who were witnesses to the events.

 

Giving false testimony to the committee is the crime of Perjury.

 

The committee hasn’t reported opinions, it has reported fact and evidence based findings.

 

Wriggle way.

 

 

[placeholder]

36 minutes ago, youreavinalaff said:

Yes, if you interpret what I said correctly and not twist it.

 

Let's face it, if things had gone the other way you'd have been all over the idea he was let off by bias in his favour.

 

Myself, from a neutral point of view, am saying bias cannot be proved or disproved. Opinions are just that. Put the evidence in front of supporters of Boris, a different result would have occurred. That's politics. Plain and simple.

A neutral point of view? That is to laugh. In fact, the report offers a huge amount of evidence that would demand a huge aerobic effort to be dismissed as biased. Die-hard supporters of Johnson must be exhausted from it.

[Chomper Higgot]

31 minutes ago, youreavinalaff said:

Yes, if you interpret what I said correctly and not twist it.

 

Let's face it, if things had gone the other way you'd have been all over the idea he was let off by bias in his favour.

 

Myself, from a neutral point of view, am saying bias cannot be proved or disproved. Opinions are just that. Put the evidence in front of supporters of Boris, a different result would have occurred. That's politics. Plain and simple.

The majority of on the committee were Tories, Sir Bernard Jenkin in particular has a history of being very pro-Johnson.

 

 

[placeholder]

41 minutes ago, youreavinalaff said:

Yes, if you interpret what I said correctly and not twist it.

 

Let's face it, if things had gone the other way you'd have been all over the idea he was let off by bias in his favour.

 

Myself, from a neutral point of view, am saying bias cannot be proved or disproved. Opinions are just that. Put the evidence in front of supporters of Boris, a different result would have occurred. That's politics. Plain and simple.

By your ridiculous criteria nothing could ever be proved. And here's your question once again that you directed at Chomper Higgot:

"Do you have evidence to the contrary?"

That report is chockful of evidence to the contrary. One would have to believe that Johnson is a mooncalf not to have understand that he was being dishonest.

And finally, there's this perceptive comment from a teacher of Johnson's at his public school that explains so much about his conduct:

 

He wrote: "Boris really has adopted a disgracefully cavalier attitude to his classical studies. [He] sometimes seems affronted when criticised for what amounts to a gross failure of responsibility (and surprised at the same time that he was not appointed Captain of the school for the next half).

"I think he honestly believes that it is churlish of us not to regard him as an exception, one who should be free of the network of obligation that binds everyone else."

https://www.thenational.scot/news/19858214.boris-johnson-school-letter-eton-teacher-despairs-pms-effortless-superiority/

[youreavinalaff]

1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The Parliamentary Committee based their findings on the evidence of multiple sworn testimonies from people who were witnesses to the events.

 

Giving false testimony to the committee is the crime of Perjury.

 

The committee hasn’t reported opinions, it has reported fact and evidence based findings.

 

Wriggle way.

 

 

Commitees have opinions.

[youreavinalaff]

1 hour ago, placeholder said:

By your ridiculous criteria nothing could ever be proved. And here's your question once again that you directed at Chomper Higgot:

"Do you have evidence to the contrary?"

That report is chockful of evidence to the contrary. One would have to believe that Johnson is a mooncalf not to have understand that he was being dishonest.

And finally, there's this perceptive comment from a teacher of Johnson's at his public school that explains so much about his conduct:

 

He wrote: "Boris really has adopted a disgracefully cavalier attitude to his classical studies. [He] sometimes seems affronted when criticised for what amounts to a gross failure of responsibility (and surprised at the same time that he was not appointed Captain of the school for the next half).

"I think he honestly believes that it is churlish of us not to regard him as an exception, one who should be free of the network of obligation that binds everyone else."

https://www.thenational.scot/news/19858214.boris-johnson-school-letter-eton-teacher-despairs-pms-effortless-superiority/

Exactly. Look at the Jury system, for example.

[pegman]

Mophead Boris has been hired by the Daily Mail so he can continue deceiving the public. 

[Chomper Higgot]

11 hours ago, youreavinalaff said:

Commitees have opinions.

Everyone has opinions, but the committee also has facts, evidence and sworn testimony.

 

[placeholder]

On 6/17/2023 at 12:57 AM, youreavinalaff said:

Exactly. Look at the Jury system, for example.

The jury system exists in criminal cases to protect the individual against the enormous powers of the government including the power to derive a defendant of their liberty. No rational system of government can investigate by adopting such stringent criteria. Johnson isn't being packed off to prison. Essentially, all that happened is he got dismissed.