Why those parties have made me angry

[Good old]

Not sure that applies in the HofC. If there was something wrong with it the Speaker would have been on his feet.

Yes ,it would seem you can spread a lie. But actually confront someone with the truth and you have to withdraw.

[T00ts]

It does apply:-

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/feb/01/boris-johnson-keir-starmer-jimmy-savile-smear-julian-smith

Speaker rebukes Boris Johnson for remarks about Starmer and Savile

Lindsay Hoyle criticises PM's comments but does not demand apology, after former Tory chief whip condemned the 'smear'


The Commons Speaker has rebuked Boris Johnson for making a false insinuation that Keir Starmer refused to prosecute the serial sex offender Jimmy Savile, but stopped short of demanding an apology.
Lindsay Hoyle's intervention came after the Tory former chief whip Julian Smith became the most senior Conservative to urge Johnson to withdraw the insinuation about Starmer.

After Starmer responded in the Commons to Sue Gray's report on alleged Covid rule-breaking in Downing Street, Johnson called him "a former director of public prosecutions, who spent more time prosecuting journalists and failing to prosecute Jimmy Savile".
Smith, the former Conservative Northern Ireland secretary and chief whip, said Johnson's comments about the child sexual abuser were unacceptable. The claim has been promoted by far-right conspiracist Facebook groups.
"The smear made against Keir Starmer relating to Jimmy Savile yesterday is wrong and cannot be defended," he tweeted. "It should be withdrawn. False and baseless personal slurs are dangerous, corrode trust and can't just be accepted as part of the cut and thrust of parliamentary debate."

I don't trust the Guardian - I didn't think you trusted anything parliamentary except Hansard.

[Good old]

Something else that I was not made much of yesterday ,was Johnson and his henchman Raab, sniggering like schoolboys , at Blackford onslaught. They couldn't care less. It's not just Blackford they laugh at . it's anyone of basic decency.

[Good old]

Boris dug a very big hole in Parliament yesterday, slandered a QC.

Blackford, left the chamber after telling the truth. Boris, throws a completely untrue slur. Regarding Jimmy Savile, and no response of any sort from the speaker. His accusation has been proved beyond any doubt to not be true.
Yet the scum bag  gets a free ride.

[papasmurf]

  More worrying now is how diplomatic are the police going to be.?

With the Tory record of attacking the police over the last few years not very.

[papasmurf]

Not sure that applies in the HofC. If there was something wrong with it the Speaker would have been on his feet.

It does apply:-

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/feb/01/boris-johnson-keir-starmer-jimmy-savile-smear-julian-smith

Speaker rebukes Boris Johnson for remarks about Starmer and Savile

Lindsay Hoyle criticises PM's comments but does not demand apology, after former Tory chief whip condemned the 'smear'


The Commons Speaker has rebuked Boris Johnson for making a false insinuation that Keir Starmer refused to prosecute the serial sex offender Jimmy Savile, but stopped short of demanding an apology.
Lindsay Hoyle's intervention came after the Tory former chief whip Julian Smith became the most senior Conservative to urge Johnson to withdraw the insinuation about Starmer.

After Starmer responded in the Commons to Sue Gray's report on alleged Covid rule-breaking in Downing Street, Johnson called him "a former director of public prosecutions, who spent more time prosecuting journalists and failing to prosecute Jimmy Savile".
Smith, the former Conservative Northern Ireland secretary and chief whip, said Johnson's comments about the child sexual abuser were unacceptable. The claim has been promoted by far-right conspiracist Facebook groups.
"The smear made against Keir Starmer relating to Jimmy Savile yesterday is wrong and cannot be defended," he tweeted. "It should be withdrawn. False and baseless personal slurs are dangerous, corrode trust and can't just be accepted as part of the cut and thrust of parliamentary debate."

[Good old]

Theresa May asked him this:

The Covid regulations imposed significant restrictions on the freedoms of members of the public. They had a right to expect their Prime Minister to have read the rules, to understand the meaning of the rules—and, indeed, those around them him to have done so, too - and to set an example in following those rules. What the Gray report does show is that No. 10 Downing Street was not observing the regulations they had imposed on members of the public, so either my right hon. Friend had not read the rules, or did not understand what they meant - and others around him - or they did not think the rules applied to No. 10. Which was it?

To which BJ replied:

No, that is not what the Gray report says. [Interruption.] It is not what the Gray report says, but I suggest that my right hon. Friend waits to see the conclusion of the inquiry. (Hansard)

He couldn't answer her question, of course. He needs to learn some self reflection, as he seems incapable of knowing right from .

when Sue Grey says ," difficult to defend", that in its self for Boris, is not a rebuke, but a challenge. Difficult ,but not impossible. The report so far is clear to Joe Soap. But it's diplomatic talk. Even any talk of leadership, he disputes, and that's why he was always happy to lean on any report.  More worrying now is how diplomatic are the police going to be.?

[T00ts]

Boris dug a very big hole in Parliament yesterday, slandered a QC.

Not sure that applies in the HofC. If there was something wrong with it the Speaker would have been on his feet.

[papasmurf]

 Boris, digs a deeper and deeper hole.

Boris dug a very big hole in Parliament yesterday, slandered a QC.

[Good old]

Nov 2021 ?

So why does it have a legend 17/01/22 on the rightmost point if the X axis. Did you actually read what you posted ??

Nothing sinister, John , though who knows. If you put your finger on any date it gives a percentage.  I had posted that when I had put my finger on the line  on 22 Nov 21. It stood at 64% as you say on the 17 01 22  it reads 73%  I posted yesterday30 01 22  and I merely ask what would it show now. After Boris, digs a deeper and deeper hole.

[johnofgwent]

We know polls are not totally reliable but this was Nov 2021. Before the party gate really got going.
One can only wonder how the chart looks now. It would seem three quarters of folk were in the picture then how many now.

https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/trackers/boris-johnson-approval-rating

Nov 2021 ?

So why does it have a legend 17/01/22 on the rightmost point if the X axis. Did you actually read what you posted ??

[T00ts]

Theresa May asked him this:

The Covid regulations imposed significant restrictions on the freedoms of members of the public. They had a right to expect their Prime Minister to have read the rules, to understand the meaning of the rules—and, indeed, those around them him to have done so, too - and to set an example in following those rules. What the Gray report does show is that No. 10 Downing Street was not observing the regulations they had imposed on members of the public, so either my right hon. Friend had not read the rules, or did not understand what they meant - and others around him - or they did not think the rules applied to No. 10. Which was it?

To which BJ replied:

No, that is not what the Gray report says. [Interruption.] It is not what the Gray report says, but I suggest that my right hon. Friend waits to see the conclusion of the inquiry. (Hansard)

He couldn't answer her question, of course. He needs to learn some self reflection, as he seems incapable of knowing right from wrong.

He took the line all through that gruelling meeting that he couldn't answer anything more because of the police investigation. It made him look weak etc but having taken that line - for good or evil - he wasn't going to deviate. After all May has taken that seat almost immediately behind BJ with one goal. Yesterday she delivered it in her own mind, but actually it cheapened her. She has had a miserable face ever since she was dethroned and it wouldn't have mattered who had taken her place. There is so much more to all this than is evident. The blame is all aimed at BJ but actually there is much more going on here.

[Sheepy]

Theresa May asked him this:

The Covid regulations imposed significant restrictions on the freedoms of members of the public. They had a right to expect their Prime Minister to have read the rules, to understand the meaning of the rules—and, indeed, those around them him to have done so, too - and to set an example in following those rules. What the Gray report does show is that No. 10 Downing Street was not observing the regulations they had imposed on members of the public, so either my right hon. Friend had not read the rules, or did not understand what they meant - and others around him - or they did not think the rules applied to No. 10. Which was it?

To which BJ replied:

No, that is not what the Gray report says. [Interruption.] It is not what the Gray report says, but I suggest that my right hon. Friend waits to see the conclusion of the inquiry. (Hansard)

He couldn't answer her question, of course. He needs to learn some self reflection, as he seems incapable of knowing right from wrong.

Well there you go, I said I wasn't playing along from the start but Boris said he was, although I am not sure exactly who he was playing along with because of the number of fingers in the pie, naughty Boris locked people up while him and his partied and avoided doing anything he said he would. 

[Barry]

Theresa May asked him this:

The Covid regulations imposed significant restrictions on the freedoms of members of the public. They had a right to expect their Prime Minister to have read the rules, to understand the meaning of the rules—and, indeed, those around them him to have done so, too - and to set an example in following those rules. What the Gray report does show is that No. 10 Downing Street was not observing the regulations they had imposed on members of the public, so either my right hon. Friend had not read the rules, or did not understand what they meant - and others around him - or they did not think the rules applied to No. 10. Which was it?

To which BJ replied:

No, that is not what the Gray report says. [Interruption.] It is not what the Gray report says, but I suggest that my right hon. Friend waits to see the conclusion of the inquiry. (Hansard)

He couldn't answer her question, of course. He needs to learn some self reflection, as he seems incapable of knowing right from wrong.

[papasmurf]

 No one on this earth has ever come up with a fail safe system of government of the plebs . 

The problem being to the Tories we are the plebs, which is a very nasty attitude.