• Welcome to PASOTI (Sponsored by GA Solictors and Lang & Potter)
  • Hello guests - don't forget that by registering and signing up for Pasoti you'll see less adverts plus receive extras like free match tickets, taking part in polls, joining in the chat room and more. Come and join us!

Will Cummings bring Johnson down?

I suggested on here two weeks ago that Johnson was unlikely to remain in office before the next election because a new scandal was always around the corner, and one of them could be his undoing.

On top of the last week’s sleaze and cronyism revelations, Dominic Grieve has just been interviewed on Radio 4 for his opinion on the latest Cummings attack on Johnson, and Grieves refers to a vacuum of integrity at number 10, and the worst example of inappropriate government conduct he has experienced in his political life. Cummings has apparently hinted at more to follow.

I’m getting the sense this is building.
 
Sep 25, 2010
2,715
134
Hopefully he will bring him down.

Just another thought, it has now been stated that N0.10, will now NOT have the American style daily press conference, in their new 2.5 million press room.

Is it because the new press secretary will be inundated with daily questions about Arcuri (Johnson’s former mistress), with questions that he fails to answer.
 
May 16, 2016
3,745
132
I think it depends if Cummings is still the lying charlatan he was when he worked for Boris and went for a drive. Nobody believed him then.
 
Nov 15, 2011
1,726
139
That’s the depths of immorality we’ve plunged to isn’t it, which lying charlatan do you believe?

I’ve never been so ashamed and embarrassed about my country, a teenage girl openly takes the mickey out of bunny hugger Johnson and the world just laughs at us.
 
themightykeithfear":38mdejn3 said:
That’s the depths of immorality we’ve plunged to isn’t it, which lying charlatan do you believe?

I’ve never been so ashamed and embarrassed about my country, a teenage girl openly takes the mickey out of bunny hugger Johnson and the world just laughs at us.

Agreed. I also think the removal of Trump from the daily scene makes matters worse, leaving Johnson exposed as the western world’s most incompetent and sleaze-laden leader.
 

MickyD

Pasoti Donor
Dec 30, 2004
3,225
26
Brighton
Speaking of Trump, the very first thing that came to mind when I heard about this was the Orange Ogre's shattered relationship with one-time inner circle confidant and brutal fixer Michael Cohen, who has all the dirt on Trump and has been singing like a canary to the Feds for a long time now.

Isn't it funny how things like this always come out when governments are run by people with absolutely no moral values who see everything through the lens of personal interest and personal gain, and who draw large numbers of third-raters and criminally inclined chancers into their orbit, thus ensuring that there's nobody competent or honest enough to challenge their autocratic inclinations?
 
Nov 15, 2011
1,726
139
It will fascinating to see the Tories reaction if after the vaccination bounce the sleaze starts hitting the party in the polls. Traditional Tories have been ruthless in axing a leader if they become an electoral liability, but Johnson (and Cummings) have shaped the Cabinet and chosen new MPs not for their ability or belief in Conservative values, but purely for their Brexit purity and loyalty to the dear leader. Will they be revolting? Or maybe more revolting.
 
MickyD":12ajac7s said:
Speaking of Trump, the very first thing that came to mind when I heard about this was the Orange Ogre's shattered relationship with one-time inner circle confidant and brutal fixer Michael Cohen, who has all the dirt on Trump and has been singing like a canary to the Feds for a long time now.

Isn't it funny how things like this always come out when governments are run by people with absolutely no moral values who see everything through the lens of personal interest and personal gain, and who draw large numbers of third-raters and criminally inclined chancers into their orbit, thus ensuring that there's nobody competent or honest enough to challenge their autocratic inclinations?

I think that’s the essential problem with cronyism. If you only give jobs and contracts on the basis of ‘you’ve scratched my back, so I’ll scratch yours’, you create a very unhealthy climate where obeisance to the leader becomes more critical than competence. Imagine the difference if Johnson’s cabinet contained Savid Javid, Jeremy Hunt, Dominic Grieve, Phillip Hammond, Justine Greening, Anna Soubry and Ken Clarke, (who reportedly didn’t really want to retire). Instead he opted for Cummings, Patel, Jenrick, Williamson, in key roles who are indeed third raters in terms of performance.
 
themightykeithfear":ui46p4us said:
It will fascinating to see the Tories reaction if after the vaccination bounce the sleaze starts hitting the party in the polls. Traditional Tories have been ruthless in axing a leader if they become an electoral liability, but Johnson (and Cummings) have shaped the Cabinet and chosen new MPs not for their ability or belief in Conservative values, but purely for their Brexit purity and loyalty to the dear leader. Will they be revolting? Or maybe more revolting.

This is the most depressing part TMKF. I have numerous Tory supporting friends whose approval of Johnson is totally unconditional, treating his misdemeanours as ‘just Boris’, in the same way Trump supporters gloss over his shortcomings. The current Tory opinion poll lead in Hartlepool suggests all the sleaze and incompetence news is not cutting through to the general public either. Strange times.
 
Oct 9, 2003
3,547
27
Aberdeen
Guiri Green":38yszc6u said:
I think it depends if Cummings is still the lying charlatan he was when he worked for Boris and went for a drive. Nobody believed him then.

This is key. Cummings is a damaged personality with the public so it will need some massive or completely evidential. But I don't think he has that, otherwise why would No.10 would go on the offensive against Cummings (re: the Dyson texts) if they believed he could harm Johnson?

I love the language being used though:

Cummings alleged: Mr Johnson had considered trying to block an inquiry into the leak in case it involved a friend of his fiancee Carrie Symonds.
No.10 says "The prime minister has never interfered in a government leak inquiry."
Which sounds like a rebuttal, but of course doesn't deny that he may have 'considered' it.

Cummings claimed: The prime minister once had a "possibly illegal" plan for donors to pay for renovations of his Downing Street flat.
No.10 says "At all times, the government and ministers have acted in accordance with the appropriate codes of conduct and electoral law. Cabinet Office officials have been engaged and informed throughout and official advice has been followed."
Which also sounds like a rebuttal, but of course doesn't discount the fact that he had a "plan".

I suspect it's just what you would expect with Johnson's character. He has no appreciation of the limits of his power or privilege. But, that doesn't mean any misdeeds were actually carried out - more like his brainwaves were thwarted by his advisors.
 
May 16, 2016
3,745
132
Frank_Butcher":2bugwq72 said:
Guiri Green":2bugwq72 said:
I think it depends if Cummings is still the lying charlatan he was when he worked for Boris and went for a drive. Nobody believed him then.

This is key. Cummings is a damaged personality with the public so it will need some massive or completely evidential. But I don't think he has that, otherwise why would No.10 would go on the offensive against Cummings (re: the Dyson texts) if they believed he could harm Johnson?

I love the language being used though:

Cummings alleged: Mr Johnson had considered trying to block an inquiry into the leak in case it involved a friend of his fiancee Carrie Symonds.
No.10 says "The prime minister has never interfered in a government leak inquiry."
Which sounds like a rebuttal, but of course doesn't deny that he may have 'considered' it.

Cummings claimed: The prime minister once had a "possibly illegal" plan for donors to pay for renovations of his Downing Street flat.
No.10 says "At all times, the government and ministers have acted in accordance with the appropriate codes of conduct and electoral law. Cabinet Office officials have been engaged and informed throughout and official advice has been followed."
Which also sounds like a rebuttal, but of course doesn't discount the fact that he had a "plan".

I suspect it's just what you would expect with Johnson's character. He has no appreciation of the limits of his power or privilege. But, that doesn't mean any misdeeds were actually carried out - more like his brainwaves were thwarted by his advisors.

It is strange how one side derided hand hounded him, but now he might be batting for them he's to be trusted.
 

MickyD

Pasoti Donor
Dec 30, 2004
3,225
26
Brighton
Guiri Green":289kn0v3 said:
It is strange how one side derided hand hounded him, but now he might be batting for them he's to be trusted.
That's a very simplistic way of looking at it; it's far more nuanced than that. Going back to the Michael Cohen situation: he was an utter scumbag, as he's freely admitted since, but it doesn't render all his testimony worthless. Tainted, for sure, and requiring of greater corroboration than your average witness; but exactly the same is true of, for instance, mafiosi who flip on their bosses. On the one hand their evidence needs to be backed up independently, but on the other it's extremely powerful through their having been "in the room".
 
Nov 15, 2011
1,726
139
Guiri Green":2rrhkmx3 said:
Frank_Butcher":2rrhkmx3 said:
Guiri Green":2rrhkmx3 said:
I think it depends if Cummings is still the lying charlatan he was when he worked for Boris and went for a drive. Nobody believed him then.

This is key. Cummings is a damaged personality with the public so it will need some massive or completely evidential. But I don't think he has that, otherwise why would No.10 would go on the offensive against Cummings (re: the Dyson texts) if they believed he could harm Johnson?

I love the language being used though:

Cummings alleged: Mr Johnson had considered trying to block an inquiry into the leak in case it involved a friend of his fiancee Carrie Symonds.
No.10 says "The prime minister has never interfered in a government leak inquiry."
Which sounds like a rebuttal, but of course doesn't deny that he may have 'considered' it.

Cummings claimed: The prime minister once had a "possibly illegal" plan for donors to pay for renovations of his Downing Street flat.
No.10 says "At all times, the government and ministers have acted in accordance with the appropriate codes of conduct and electoral law. Cabinet Office officials have been engaged and informed throughout and official advice has been followed."
Which also sounds like a rebuttal, but of course doesn't discount the fact that he had a "plan".

I suspect it's just what you would expect with Johnson's character. He has no appreciation of the limits of his power or privilege. But, that doesn't mean any misdeeds were actually carried out - more like his brainwaves were thwarted by his advisors.

It is strange how one side derided hand hounded him, but now he might be batting for them he's to be trusted.

Cummings isn't and never will be batting for me and he certainly can't be trusted. Ditto Bozo
 

MickyD

Pasoti Donor
Dec 30, 2004
3,225
26
Brighton
themightykeithfear":dvltv8jg said:
Cummings isn't and never will be batting for me and he certainly can't be trusted. Ditto Bozo
Yes,quite. I rejoice unabashedly in the unseemingly public disgrace that the Cohens/Trumps and Cummings/Bozos of this world manage to heap upon themselves through their vile behaviour (at least the tips of the dirty icebergs that occasionally come to light), and I hope that it all goes to help in their eventual downfall; but Cohen or Cummings batting for me? I wouldn't even lend them a box to protect their bollocks.
 

MickyD

Pasoti Donor
Dec 30, 2004
3,225
26
Brighton
Leafing through the pages of my favoured loony leftie rag, the Guardian, I've just read the lastest by the ever-acerbically witty Marina Hyde, whose praises I've sung a number of times on various Opinions threads. Today, unsurprisingly, she addresses this very subject, and ends:

As for where we go next with text-for-access, none of it will be good. Today’s Cummings angle may be intended to serve as a distraction, but it is increasingly hard to separate Johnson’s career lack of standards from his administration’s rapid shedding of them. Of COURSE someone as sexually incontinent as Johnson would lead a government as procedurally incontinent as his is, spaffing unmonitored access and promises of procurement favours up whatever wall it happens to be standing next to.

And yet, a lot of senior government figures seem to take genuine pleasure in pointing at the polls and excusing any amount of obviously questionable behaviour as “just Boris being Boris”. They’re seemingly incapable of grasping that the entire executive taking on the character of this amoral and discipline-free man will end very badly indeed. It is precisely Johnson’s lack of discipline and moral courage that has resulted in this country having both the highest Covid death toll in Europe and the most unnecessarily long economic shutdown and loss of essential freedoms. Gloating that the voters don’t think they deserve better will not be the recipe for a great British future.