The journalists are too shit to hold him to account.Originally Posted by Lewis
They may actually be worse than our scientific advisers at their jobs.
The journalists are too shit to hold him to account.
They may actually be worse than our scientific advisers at their jobs.
Beth and her Essex drooling seethe can sod off.
Him and his wife hadn’t been tested and his son tested negative.
They can't hold him to account when he didn't do anything wrong. All they have it 'THIS LOOKS BAD', as if they haven't gone out of their way to make it look bad.
He went to work when his wife had symptoms for one.
‘Can the PM not do his job without you’ go on, Gary, lad
Isn't Barnard Castle a town? Half of Twitter seems to think it's a castle.
He's just admitted going to work when his wife had symptoms and taking a 60 mile round trip to test his eyesight.
I know you can't accept it and never will, but he broke the rules.
It's the town where the Castle is.
He said his wife had thrown up, not had symptoms, and what has the driving got to do with anything?
He must have unlimited petrol.
Driving is not staying at home.
The funniest thing of all of this is that it seems that the biggest piece of fake news seems to be his wife’s description of events where he was on deaths door while he’s testing out his eyesight with a trip to the local tourist spots.
He genuinely thinks all his supporters are either too partisan or too thick to care which is probably a correct assumption.
And fair enough on the throwing up. Does somewhat contradict the initial story about being worried about his wife and him getting it at the same time, thus necessitating the drive to Durham to get childcare. I'm not even sure where the latter fits now within this obvious bollocks.
He wanted to be in Durham, so he went to Durham. The rest of this is all absolutely absurd.
Someone should ask about his wife’s birthday
He's completely correct in that.
People that like you from afar only care about x% of what you say or do, the rest is completely irrelevant.
Can’t believe that there’s not widespread support that Lewis is being completely objective.
My eyesight was so dodgy I got in a vehicle with my wife and kids and drove them 60 miles is so, so much funnier than any excuse I could think of.
260 mile trip with a four year old child. Did he give him Melotonin?
Why couldn't he just get tested?
That's the best thing to get him on, but he could probably justify it as part of his work travel and whatever other safeguarding things there are (weird as it seems). Everything else is well covered.
Nah, didn’t fancy finding out whether staying at home was an option so just went elsewhere.
Wasn’t sure I was safe to drive so decided to find out, with my wife and kid in the car.
There’s definitely flaws, but I kind of understand what he’s done. Whether or not the public accept that or not I’m not sure.
I don't really have an issue with him driving his family to a spare house, under the circumstances. The lying about it and the way it's been handled is just a colossal lol.
Have you read the regulations yet as part of your own objective approach?
Finishing with a cough into the hand.
I can't believe this all went down in a garden. British politics is unreal sometimes.
Other than it being a load of bullshit though, right?
You've been really ill, you're still not feeling right and your eyesight is a bit dodgy, so you take your child for an hour round trip to test out whether it's safe to drive or not. Yeah, right.
Everything else being the whole trip up there, which is allowed within the rules. The eye test thing is a bit strange, but if that was all they had the story wouldn't have got off the ground with all of its original misrepresentations that have fed what is now apparently the story.
I'm only going by what he said now, which included an admission of breaking the rules once and some stuff that sounded like bullshit and makes one wonder how many more times he actually broke them.
Alistair Campbell
Originally it was broke the law in leaving, stayed with parents, spoke to somebody in the woods, attended a funeral, went back up there. All of that is false and has simply been ignored by the people originally pushing it. The driving test is all there is. What you think sounds like bullshit is irrelevant.
Wait, when did he supposedly attend a funeral and hang out in the woods?
Lmao holy shit. That's amazing. But whatever.
As I say I for one am happy with it as it signals lockdown is over. I've been out and about all day today seeing friends and family.
I don't care about what the people were originally pushing. All I'm saying is he broke the rules as he described. If you can't accept that without pissing and moaning about other people saying things that weren't true then, well, lol.
The original Guardian/Mirror timelines said he was spotted in the woods, without mentioning that they were part of the property he was staying on, and the New Statesman implied that he went up there because his uncle was on his way out (sorry, not funeral, although he mentioned a funeral, so it must have been mentioned somewhere I haven't seen). There was also the second trip that he claims never happened where he was again seen in woods and spoke to somebody.
The only possible rule breach is the eye test drive, but even that you could go either way. The rest of it is clear cut in not being. Have you actually read the relevant legislation, or are you still skim reading news stories and assuming whatever you want about the official publications?
You, or that journalist, should listen to that Radio 4 stats podcast I mentioned earlier, they've been saying this for (what seems like) weeks.
The media: "Dominic Cummings broke the rules"
Lewis: "No he didn't".
Dominic Cummings: "Yes I did"
Lewis: "No you didn't"
You can't accept that you were wrong. You've also accepted his account entirely at face value, so if something were to come out that disproves anything he said today you're going to look even more of a shill than you already do. If that's possible.
It's because Dom is his hero, the weirdo arch Libertarian. He couldn't ever accept he was anything but completely right.
Indeed. The reality is you could, if you were enough of a dickhead, use the childcare caveat to justify almost anything in regards to not actually breaking lockdown. Which isn't to say Cummings' lockdown crimes are that bad, or anything like it, but Lewis would be there, fighting the good fight for him, while flying the flag of objectivity, if they were.
I heard him repeatedly claim to have acted legally, so where did he admit to breaking the rules? I've accepted his explanation insofar as nothing disproves it (although I do take your intuition into account). If something comes out that does, I will accept that he had lied about it.
EDIT: Yes, 'use the childcare caveat'. That is, to follow the law.
1,625 new cases? Barbecue at Barnard Castle, lads.
Yeah, I'm done.
Like when Elth argued "who else was there?" when defending Man Utd appointing Moyes, after his sacking, this is pointless.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
