Johnson's lies

If it's not Hastings related post it here! Politics, religion, whatever you like!
User avatar
ColinL
Posts: 439
Joined: Sat May 21, 2016 3:45 pm

Johnson's lies

Postby ColinL » Tue Dec 03, 2019 11:01 pm

Peter Oborne is a conservative journalist who normally writes in right wing magazines and papers. However as an old school conservative he had become shocked and appalled at many abusive, racist or offensive things Johnson has said. In particular he is concerned about the constant stream of lies he produces.

So much so he set up a website listing all the lies. He writes about it in an article in the Guardian (reproduced in JVL) which are not outlets he would be associated with.

https://www.jewishvoiceforlabour.org.uk ... eve-in-it/

User avatar
Richard
Posts: 2905
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2014 3:36 pm

Re: Johnson's lies

Postby Richard » Wed Dec 04, 2019 11:29 am

I think it taken as a given that all politicians 'lie' or put forward false arguments, based on shaky logic or partial fact, to some extent and it is not necessarily illegal except in certain cases.
To state something will be done, before it has happened, can often be excused if other factors result in a different outcome.
Lawyers of course put forward arguments that may be overruled or ignored if counter-arguments show them to be false or irrelevant or even misleading.
Nearly all politicians bend the truth in favour of their views or public audience and this 'lying' may even have some grain of truth.
The law, then, does not criminalise all 'political' lies and what goes on in the 'House' - which has rules of its own - is another matter.
Beside that partisan cases make bad law for reasons that should be self-evident.

However, The Parliamentary Witnesses Oaths Act of 1871 makes it possible for politicians to be found guilty of perjury if they lie under Parliamentary oath. The existing rules governing political behaviour in the UK are just designed with the self-serving aim of protecting parliament from a bad press – or, as the MP’s Code of Conduct puts it, ‘any action which would cause significant damage to the reputation and integrity of the House of Commons.’
The 1983 Representation of the People Act allows politicians to be punished for making false statements about a political candidate. Plus election campaigns are subject to fairly tight scrutiny thanks to the Electoral Commission and associated election courts.

Outside of elections and parliamentary oaths, politicians are pretty much free to bend the truth as they please. The MP’s Code of Conduct contains just a single sentence under the heading of ‘honesty,’ and that refers to the declaration of conflicts of interest. The House of Lords Code of Conduct has only seven words: ‘Holders of public office should be truthful.’ What’s more, on the rare occasions an MP is found to be in breach of these codes, the consequences are so half-hearted that they can hardly be classed as punishments. Misbehaving politicians can be asked ‘to apologise to the House’ (not the public) or suspended from parliament for a short time, although they may still be paid their full salary while suspended.

cbe
Posts: 558
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2014 7:29 pm

Re: Johnson's lies

Postby cbe » Wed Dec 04, 2019 2:11 pm

I find that the old adage 'How can you tell if a politician is lying' tobe accurate, especially when you read the final line 'because their lips are moving'

User avatar
seahermit
Posts: 709
Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2017 10:53 pm

Re: Johnson's lies

Postby seahermit » Wed Dec 04, 2019 2:46 pm

Does Corbyn lie, refuse to answer questions and bluster less than Johnson? Ha ha!

ColinL does not like Tories. Why not just say so straightforwardly, instead of the pretence that his sainted hero is more honest than other people's heros?

User avatar
Richard
Posts: 2905
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2014 3:36 pm

Re: Johnson's lies

Postby Richard » Wed Dec 04, 2019 3:52 pm

There is a famous quote, attributed to George Burns:
“Sincerity - if you can fake that, you've got it made.”
Politicians know this, we know this too, it’s not actually that complicated.
We admire those who stand their ground for what they believe in and we don’t admire those we see as fake or phony.
The sheer size of Labour's spending commitment makes people distrust it, the long, expensive laundry list of costly spending promises is seen to be suspect.
We know that Johnson's claim of an 'oven-ready' Brexit is far from the truth but at least some sort of Brexit is what people voted for and Labour are now offering another referendum as the only legally valid one, despite earlier when Jeremy said he would honour the vote of the original referendum.

cbe
Posts: 558
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2014 7:29 pm

Re: Johnson's lies

Postby cbe » Wed Dec 04, 2019 4:22 pm

That Burns' quote was tailor-made for Blair.

User avatar
Richard
Posts: 2905
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2014 3:36 pm

Re: Johnson's lies

Postby Richard » Wed Dec 04, 2019 7:48 pm

Blair and his wife, Cherie, were both trained in legal matters and acted as Barristers at one time.
It did not stop Blair from misleading Parliament with lies about the threat from Iraq.
Strange to think that death and mass-murder resulted from Blair's decisions, those of a supposedly intelligent and legally trained mind, and that terrorism has followed us around ever since!
Were we brain-washed or just unable to see the consequences?

northants1066
Posts: 47
Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 5:26 pm

Re: Johnson's lies

Postby northants1066 » Wed Dec 04, 2019 8:20 pm

I don't know if all that Corbyn says are lies but I do know who his friends are.

cbe
Posts: 558
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2014 7:29 pm

Re: Johnson's lies

Postby cbe » Wed Dec 04, 2019 10:17 pm

northants-indeed we do and he will never shake it off..... and nor should he be allowed to.

Richard - Blair's 'misdemeanours were many and varied and it is no coincidence
that the death penalty for treason was abolished by.........Tony Blair

User avatar
Richard
Posts: 2905
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2014 3:36 pm

Re: Johnson's lies

Postby Richard » Wed Dec 04, 2019 10:20 pm

When Party Political leaders over-reach their mandate (the authority on which they are elected to carry out their touted policy) they are judged accordingly, sooner or later.
So, on that basis, which Party in power would last longer, Labour's Jeremy, who promises many utopian things, yet to be realised, or the Tory's Boris, who seems more grounded in reality, with his flash of willingness to enact the people's will, as in a form of Brexit?
I doubt many seasoned voters will want to go back to re-visit old Labour, with its nationalisation programme, controlled by the Unions and their power, and the chance to hold yet another irksome Brexit referendum, but that is for the people to decide.


Return to “Non-Hastings Chat”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: MSN [Bot] and 2 guests