On Sat 15 Jan at 11:07am Doug wrote:
Should Maria Caulfield send a letter of no confidence?
In light of the offensive lie and deny policy regarding No10 drinking and party activity.
Has the PM misled parliament?
Is he fit to run the country?
On Sat 15 Jan at 7:41pm David Stanley wrote:
Don't be so naive. The government had a realistic view of the dangers ( they didn't all die did they.?)
Obviously they don't want to tell the plebs anything that would stop them isolating.
You do realise they dont think of the public as people don't you?
On Sat 15 Jan at 10:18pm dairyman wrote:
I'm sure, in true Tory style, that Maria will sign the letter when it suits her.
On Sun 16 Jan at 9:28am Doug wrote:
I have sent 5 emails asking for her position regarding the events at NO 10.
Very quick tto respond about a grant for potholes ?
Has anyone else asked for her position regarding the PM misleading parliament ?
On Sun 16 Jan at 11:50am Green Sleeves wrote:
@ doug "Has anyone else asked for her position regarding the PM misleading parliament ?" - yeah, but which occasion are you referring to? You might want to narrow the PM's lies down so we can focus on one fib at a time.
On Tue 18 Jan at 10:01am Nevillman wrote:
To be fair to Maria caulfield I have just seen a statement from her in which she condemns the drinks parties and says she will her position on future action after the report on them.
I believe it is available on her website but ironically I saw it on the symes site. This is ironic as he has removed any other comments people have made about Johnson's parties from the site.
On Tue 18 Jan at 10:54am Green Sleeves wrote:
Its the default Tory response "i'll reserve judgement until the Sue Gray enquiry concludes" blah blah blah. They are just buying time. Even if Sue Gray does the right thing and condemns her boss in her report, I'm sure many other tories will continue to find a way of not making a big deal out of it.
Caulfield is just a typical self-interested tory and her voting record reflects that. She is totally in favour of cutting welfare for those that need it, but hugely in favour of corporate welfare and cutting taxes for the wealthiest in society. Shes also a brexiteer in a remain constituency. Just bring back Norman Baker already!
On Tue 18 Jan at 11:49am Tom Pain wrote:
As the really wealthy dont pay taxes and go offshore, its a drop in the ocean. If Labour did something about that it might be worth voting, but they obviously can't. The big question is why and you'll avoid that at all costs and continue the left right charade.
On Tue 18 Jan at 12:18pm Green Sleeves wrote:
Its not a charade....look at the voting record of tory mps, labour mps and lib dem mps, there are clearly many differences in various policies. This whole theory that they are "all the same" is intellectually lazy. Perhaps loopholes for the very wealthy 1% will always exist, but that doesn't make a difference to LGBT rights, or hospital and education funding and public services or many many other factors that involve running the country.
As for taxes, the only tax that the tories are willing to hike is national insurance, which disproportionately impacts the poorer far more than the wealthy or even middle class. The only progressive tax policy change the tories ever did was raise the base income tax threshold, a policy proposed by the liberal democrats during the coalition. That is, after the tories lowered the top rate of income tax and corporation tax post the Labour government.
On Tue 18 Jan at 7:57pm Doug wrote:
I have received a reply from Maria Caulfield
It is the same as in her website.
It has not answered my concern that evidence may go missing.
Part of operation save big dog place all the blame on officials only?
Dominic Cummings new evidence has been denied as lies.
But did the PM declare him as a man of great integrity when he went to the castle?
On Tue 18 Jan at 11:41pm Tom Pain wrote:
The 1% own some staggering amount of the world's wealth like 60% or something similar. Check them out for ABCDE rights. If you want to flex your intellectual muscles you could do worse than discovering how money is created, it would be of more service to you than studying voting records or making glib comments about reptiles and footballers.
On Wed 19 Jan at 11:03am Green Sleeves wrote:
Oh in that case i shall vote for the tories and their strong stance against the elites and their progressive policies on "ABCDE" rights. you are a broken record.
On Wed 19 Jan at 8:54pm Tom Pain wrote:
Well youve broken all records for closed minded, regressive obtuseness. Have you seen the president of Pfiser stating the two jibjabs offer limited protection, IF ANY? Talk about no confidence! Still trusting the science?
On Wed 19 Jan at 9:10pm Green Sleeves wrote:
I've had three pfizer "jib jabs", and I feel INVINCIBLEEEEEEE!
On Thu 20 Jan at 11:43pm Tom Pain wrote:
You would know better than the man who sells them.
On Sat 22 Jan at 11:27am Green Sleeves wrote:
I know better than to take your perspective on something as truth. Its often a misrepresentation of facts or words taken out of context, or just plain nonsense.
This link clears up your misleading claim. I don't need to remind people that its sensible to do a cursory fact-check on anything TP says.
Check it out here »
On Sat 22 Jan at 8:00pm Tom Pain wrote:
If the BBC says it- it must be true! Your faith in the Establishment and their spin is commendable, at least to forelock tugging progressives I suppose.... And of course their fearless fat chequers.
On Sat 22 Jan at 8:13pm Green Sleeves wrote:
You seem rattled TP, almost as if you actually read the article and it dawned on you that you have been duped, and not by the BBC this time. Its not a nice feeling being misled or lied to.