Boris Johnson to appear in Crown Court for lying

[Damo]

Good use of the word “some” - well done.

No need for the inverted commas, though, and I’ve literally no idea what makes you think that I’m saying that - I’d be interested to find out which post of mine you’re referring to.

As far as I’m aware, the only post I’ve made on this thread so far was to query dsr’s definition and use of the word “hyperbole” (as is my wont). Maybe I’ve forgotten a different post I made, though.

That's the (perfectly rational) conclusion, that I have taken from your post.
You insinuated hyperbole is not allowed, or that it equates to lying.

[Greenmile]

That's the (perfectly rational) conclusion, that I have taken from your post.
You insinuated hyperbole is not allowed, or that it equates to lying.

So I queried whether dsr would consider a claim that Chelsea won 8-1 last night to be hyperbole, or a lie, and from that you drew the conclusion that I believe that...

“we get absolutely nothing financially from the EU. They dont actually pay for anything on these shores. Nothing to the public or private sector? No regeneration schemes in northern towns. Absolutely nothing?”

That’s a hell of a leap.

My only insinuation was that dsr doesn’t really know what hyperbole is.

[Damo]

But thats not a lie. As far as I know, the EU don't claim they don't get their funding from member states.

I haven't accessed this case at all so I don't know anymore than what I've read on here (which is mental really, as most of the stuff on here isn't backed up!) but a judge has decided there is enough here for it to go to court.

It's just as much of a lie as the one Boris is being accused of by the independent and the guardian.
If we dont give £350 million per week to the EU, then we the EU gives us absolutely nothing back.
If what they give us is deducted from what we pay them, then by the same rules that this court action is operating on, they dont actually give us anything. They never send a penny. Yet they claim to fund all sorts of things in the UK

[Lancasterclaret]

It's just as much of a lie as the one Boris is being accused of by the independent and the guardian.
If we dont give £350 million per week to the EU, then we the EU gives us absolutely nothing back.
If what they give us is deducted from what we pay them, then by the same rules that this court action is operating on, they dont actually give us anything. They never send a penny. Yet they claim to fund all sorts of things in the UK

Its not though is it?

Two senior civil servants wrote to Boris officially to warn him that he was misusing official uk statistics. I think that is the reason this case has got as far as it has.

[If it be your will]

.

[Lancasterclaret]

I gather George Galloway is enquiring with his lawyers about exactly that!

Well, he'll need funding and good lawyers, and one thing Galloway has got is good lawyers. He's needed them often enough.

[TVC15]

It's just as much of a lie as the one Boris is being accused of by the independent and the guardian.
If we dont give £350 million per week to the EU, then we the EU gives us absolutely nothing back.
If what they give us is deducted from what we pay them, then by the same rules that this court action is operating on, they dont actually give us anything. They never send a penny. Yet they claim to fund all sorts of things in the UK

That is not how it works at all.
We have a net amount that we contribute / send - whatever word you care to use - it’s what it costs us as a government. The rebate is deducted from the gross contribution and we pay the difference.

In terms of funding lots of other projects in the UK that is correct - there are thousands of projects that have been funded by EU grants directly. Locally look at things like Lancashire Boost for small businesses - it’s all EU funded and it will cease if we leave. Those monies don’t suddenly become available to use elsewhere - they are provided for specific reasons and if as a country we decide that we would like to fund something the same or similar after we leave then the central gov or local authorities would have to find the additional monies

[Greenmile]

It's just as much of a lie as the one Boris is being accused of by the independent and the guardian.
If we dont give £350 million per week to the EU, then we the EU gives us absolutely nothing back.
If what they give us is deducted from what we pay them, then by the same rules that this court action is operating on, they dont actually give us anything. They never send a penny. Yet they claim to fund all sorts of things in the UK

The stuff they fund in the UK is ultimately funded by contributions from the member states (inc the UK).

The rebate (the bit which most obviously makes Johnson’s claim a lie) has nothing to do with this.

I’d expect folk to know this by now, but maybe my expectations are unrealistic.

[Lancasterclaret]

I would have thought by now the concept that our relationship is very complex and interwoven into pretty much everything we do would be common knowledge by now, but 5 million plus still think its just a matter of leaving and its all done.

[RingoMcCartney]

Teresa May " No Deal is better than a bad deal"

Yvette Cooper " I will not vote to stop Brexit " prior to 2017 general election.

Yvette Cooper " even if it means no deal, we have to respect the referendum result " prior to the 2107 general election.

Send 'em down......

[nil_desperandum]

Well how about this for a turn up for the books!

Both the papers who have chosen to lead with this story (the Guardian and the Mirror) have chosen to place the word lies in inverted commas.

Wonder why that is??????

Rolls, you're usually better than that.
You know full well why it has to be in inverted commas.
Describing them as lies might be considered prejudicial to the case and put them in contempt.
It has been judged yet so the press have to tread a careful line.

[RingoMcCartney]

“You’ve done a very good campaign, your social media’s been brilliant, your events have been good, you’ve had all the rubles coming in, you’ve done very, very well – hats off,”

Alistair Campbell , May 2019

Proof?



Send him down.

[bob-the-scutter]

The very essence of why many were duped and voted to leave.

No, the very essence of why all the thicko's who are easily duped voted to leave. No one ever said all that money would go to the health service, it was inferred over and over so much it's become "fact"

An MP lying? My goodness.... shock horror!

[aggi]

“You’ve done a very good campaign, your social media’s been brilliant, your events have been good, you’ve had all the rubles coming in, you’ve done very, very well – hats off,”

Alistair Campbell , May 2019

Proof?



Send him down.

Which public office does Alastair Campbell hold?

[aggi]

The sad thing about all of this is how many responses are along the lines of "they're MPs, we expect them to lie".

We really shouldn't.

[ecc]

Hi Dark Cloud

"If people could be up in court for everything they said at "the hustings" and in a "manifesto" then Boris and his case would simply be at the head of a very,very long queue, I'd suggest."

I cannot bear Johnson but you are, in my humble opinion, absolutely right.

[PaintYorkClaretnBlue]

No, the very essence of why all the thicko's who are easily duped voted to leave. No one ever said all that money would go to the health service, it was inferred over and over so much it's become "fact"

An MP lying? My goodness.... shock horror!

Just like the thickos who voted to remain because Osbourne said there would need to be an emergency budget if we voted to leave. I imagine there will have been quite a lot who were swayed by that.

[RingoMcCartney]

Which public office does Alastair Campbell hold?

He doesn't. He's a very prominent public figure.

Does somebody need to hold a public office to be sued for liable?

Yes Or No?

[Tall Paul]

lol Ringo

[Burnley Ace]

Except on the bus it said "the EU TAKES every week", which it demonstrably doesn't.
On the 17th of Sept 2017, whilst Foreign Secretary Johnson was actually officially rebuked in writing by The Chair of the UK Official Statistics Authority, Sir David Norwood for repeating the £350 million figure, describing it as "clear misuse of public statistics". But he still continued to do it. This will be the crux of the case I think.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DJ7RXwcWsAAiJqR.jpg:large" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The more informative letter is the one referenced from Dilnot to Lamb.

[aggi]

He doesn't. He's a very prominent public figure.

Does somebody need to hold a public office to be sued for liable?

Yes Or No?

Well for starters it would be slander, not "liable", and slander is a civil matter so no-one would be "sent down".

It would be an interesting one, I'm not sure how keen the Brexit Party would be to go through discovery so I suspect they may not take this to the courts.

[Lancasterclaret]

The Brexit Party haven't taken that SNP MP who alleges their funding isn't great to court, and its not hard to work out why.

[ŽižkovClaret]

Feels like something similar to the convention of players generally not being prosecuted for things which off the pitch might well be.

Is it not almost accepted that politicians will spout half truths?

[RingoMcCartney]

Well for starters it would be slander, not "liable", and slander is a civil matter so no-one would be "sent down".

It would be an interesting one, I'm not sure how keen the Brexit Party would be to go through discovery so I suspect they may not take this to the courts.

Does somebody need to hold a public office to be sued for liable?

Yes Or No?

[ŽižkovClaret]

Does somebody need to hold a public office to be sued for liable?

Yes Or No?

Liable for what? Lack of a proof reader?

[AndrewJB]

It's interesting to see all the wagons circled around Boris. All the usual papers either ignoring the story, or as with the Mail, casting aspersions over the man who crowdfunded the whole thing. Also interesting to see people who have in the past complained about how politicians lie standing up for Boris' right to lie.

Whereas I can see the problems that might arise out of this kind of case, it's also true that politicians like Johnson have been able to get away with telling outright whoppers that get amplified by a supportive media. If you only read one newspaper, you'd be forgiven for not knowing a particular politician has lied, and therefore unable to make an informed decision on that politician or an issue. Perhaps if the onus were on the media to fact check statements made by politicians when reporting their words, and attach the fact check to the article?

[RingoMcCartney]

Liable for what? Lack of a proof reader?

I was asked a very straight forward question-

"Which public office does Alastair Campbell hold?"

I replied and said "he doesn't."

I then asked a very straight forward question in return.

Does somebody need to hold a public office to be sued for liable?

Yes Or No?

As yet, I've not had a yes or no answer.

You have a go.....

[ŽižkovClaret]

I was asked a very straight forward question-

"Which public office does Alastair Campbell hold?"

I replied and said "he doesn't."

I then asked a very straight forward question in return.

Does somebody need to hold a public office to be sued for liable?

Yes Or No?

As yet, I've not had a yes or no answer.

You have a go.....

Let me help you, do you mean libel?

[Bordeauxclaret]

Classic Ringo.

[dsr]

No-one can be sued for liable. Anyone, public office holder or not, can be sued for libel.

[RingoMcCartney]

Let me help you, do you mean libel?

You've made an assumption.

That when I asked "Does somebody need to hold a public office to be sued for liable?

Yes Or No?

I was referring to my previous post regards alisatir campbell.

You were wrong to make the link.

I'll asked you once again-

"Does somebody need to hold a public office to be sued for liable?

Yes Or No?

[aggi]

Does somebody need to hold a public office to be sued for liable?

Yes Or No?

No. (I'm assuming you mean libel here.)

My turn for an entirely irrelevant question now. What is the airspeed velocity of an unladen swallow?

[ŽižkovClaret]

You've made an assumption.

That when I asked "Does somebody need to hold a public office to be sued for liable?

Yes Or No?

I was referring to my previous post regards alisatir campbell.

You were wrong to make the link.

I'll asked you once again-

"Does somebody need to hold a public office to be sued for liable?

Yes Or No?

Regarding who?

[RingoMcCartney]

Regarding who?

One last try


Does somebody need to hold a public office to be sued for liable?

Yes Or No?

[TVC15]

Wrongo - the answer is that you cannot be sued for liable whether you hold public office or not.

[ŽižkovClaret]

One last try


Does somebody need to hold a public office to be sued for liable?

Yes Or No?

No. Good luck with it though, and best not to ask why the solicitor is on the floor laughing as you pick up their invoice

[SussexDon1inIreland]

Who is going to sue Corbyn for his lie that he would forgive all student debt?

What if the final figure is £350m that would be a great outcome for Brexit argument although if it was a much lower figure like £50m it’s still too much, as is what we send out in Foreign Aid

UTC

[ŽižkovClaret]

No. (I'm assuming you mean libel here.)

My turn for an entirely irrelevant question now. What is the airspeed velocity of an unladen swallow?

[Greenmile]

If ever evidence was needed that Ringo doesn’t read the replies to his posts, his insistence on banging on about “liable” would suffice.

[ŽižkovClaret]

Who is going to sue Corbyn for his lie that he would forgive all student debt?

What if the final figure is £350m that would be a great outcome for Brexit argument although if it was a much lower figure like £50m it’s still too much, as is what we send out in Foreign Aid

UTC

I'd imagine that it only becomes a lie once that side "wins" and therefore might in some way introduce actual policy. Until such point, it would merely be an unfulfilled promise.

One might suggest that is how the Lib Dems got caught out over tuition fees. They had never expected to be in a position where they would actually be called on it

[RingoMcCartney]

No. (I'm assuming you mean libel here.)

My turn for an entirely irrelevant question now. What is the airspeed velocity of an unladen swallow?

Slander/libel couldn't care less. Least you answered, for once.

It's funny isn't it, if somebody makes a quip in the spirit it was meant to be, but it's against one of the biggest bullsh1ters this country has seen. All of a sudden the usual gaggle of democracy denying europhiles come out the woodwork and want to treat what posters put on here as though it was a court of law!!!

Even more ironic that the main cheer leader was put in his place by my , only the other day for coming out with the claim -

"The government opted to bail out the banks first and deal with the repercussions later."

Taken from the left wing w3bsite, Labour Heartlands, that you've clearly ignored 

https://labourheartlands.com/british-st" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; ... o-save-it/

Would it be against EU regulations to provide funding to British Steel in a time of need?

Unfortunately, yes. The fact that all the economic factors go against the UK steel industry is not relevant, nor is the potentially devastating impact on the wider local economy were it to close. The EU has already ruled on this: in January 2016 the competition commissioner ruled that the Belgian government had illegally provided €211m to steel companies in one of its depressed regions, and ordered that the money be repaid. She also announced an investigation into €2bn of similar aid given by the Italian government to support its steel industry.

So how come the banks were bailed out?

There is a fundamental difference between banks and steel. If the UK, or Belgian, or Italian steel industry has to shut down, then other steel companies will pick up their contracts. Such commercial competition is the thrust behind most of the legislation: saving any of the ailing companies would adversely affect the other steel providers, who would not be able to take those contracts. In the case of the banks, their mutual interdependence made that impossible. Because they had all lent to each other, the collapse of any of the banks would have led to the collapse of the whole financial system. So, saving the banks was not anti-competitive, it was in fact supporting the market economy.


Then the EU bent the rules for the banks?

No, it did not bend the rules, it used provisions in the Rescue and Restructuring Guidelines which enable State aid in certain very limited circumstances. Unfortunately, this would be difficult to apply to steel.

So you were spouting "outright lies " aggi !!!!The labour government did not "opt to bail out the banks first and deal with the repercussions later."

An "outright liar " losing an argument about liable/ slander

You couldn't make it up!

[RingoMcCartney]

If ever evidence was needed that Ringo doesn’t read the replies to his posts, his insistence on banging on about “liable” would suffice.

If ever proof was needed that people didn't make schoolboy errors and make assumptions about linking independently asked questions to previous remarks I'd made. This was it.

[timshorts]

No. (I'm assuming you mean libel here.)

My turn for an entirely irrelevant question now. What is the airspeed velocity of an unladen swallow?

If it is dead and starting from a static airborne start, then it will be g x t where g = gravitational pull and t = the time it took to reach the point at which the airspeed velocity is measured. Otherwise, it depends on the characteristics of the swallow in much the same way that a live Boris Johnson would not have the same track speed as, say a live Dwight McNeill.

Anyway, lots of politicians said things that they believed to be true, (Nick Clegg above) for example. I'm even prepared to believe that Tony Blair thought that there were weapons of mass destruction because I rather suspect that he was told that via US intelligence and he thought it was correct.

However, we know that Boris knew that the stuff on the bus was (at best) intentionally misleading (with a view to gaining votes) because there was a tv film of him going round the country on his nobbuss in which this was pointed out to him and he just pooh-poohed it as if it didn't matter, and he didn't give a fwck. Strangely, I've not seen that again since it was originally aired, but I'm sure that it is out there somewhere. Blair was pretty negligent. This guy was worse than reckless.

Politicians already have the benefit of being able to talk bo11ocks in parliament without being subjected to prosecution, but that doesn't extend to their actions outside the House. It's about time somebody got prosecuted - even if it is just as an example/warning to the rest of them, and this guy would appear to have stepped just too far over the line.

[AndrewJB]

Who is going to sue Corbyn for his lie that he would forgive all student debt?

What if the final figure is £350m that would be a great outcome for Brexit argument although if it was a much lower figure like £50m it’s still too much, as is what we send out in Foreign Aid

UTC

Corbyn didn't promise to forgive all student debt. Labour's policy is to end tuition fees. During an interview Corbyn was asked what Labour's position was on existing student debt, and he agreed that it was an important issue and said Labour would look at ways of dealing with it: https://fullfact.org/education/student- ... abour-say/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

As for what we pay the EU; the CBI in 2016 estimated that our net benefit of being in the EU was worth between £62 Billion and £78 Billion. Looking at what we pay in without considering what we get out is unhelpful. Rather like looking at the cost of travel to and from work, without considering what you get paid.

[RingoMcCartney]

Wrongo - the answer is that you cannot be sued for liable whether you hold public office or not.

"If you meet the requirements for a civil action, you can sue someone for defamation, whether libel or slander, if they have written or said something bad about you. However, you must be able to prove the necessary elements of a defamation suit if you wish to collect damages."

https://injury-law.freeadvice.com/injur ... ements.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Tall Paul]

No. (I'm assuming you mean libel here.)

My turn for an entirely irrelevant question now. What is the airspeed velocity of an unladen swallow?

African or European?

And lol Ringo.

[TVC15]

Wrongo is becoming a real libelity
He’s libel to get a bit agitated on these threads

As he said whether it’s slunder or liable both parties are gulty...

[RingoMcCartney]

Wrongo is becoming a real libelity
He’s libel to get a bit agitated on these threads

As he said whether it’s slunder or liable both parties are gulty...

TVC15 wrote:"Wrongo - the answer is that you cannot be sued for liable whether you hold public office or not."

If you meet the requirements for a civil action, you can sue someone for defamation, whether libel or slander, if they have written or said something bad about you. However, you must be able to prove the necessary elements of a defamation suit if you wish to collect damages.


https://injury-law.freeadvice.com/injur ... ements.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[TVC15]

"If you meet the requirements for a civil action, you can sue someone for defamation, whether libel or slander, if they have written or said something bad about you. However, you must be able to prove the necessary elements of a defamation suit if you wish to collect damages."

https://injury-law.freeadvice.com/injur ... ements.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Yes that is correct.
But you are wrong that anyone can be sued for what you said.

We could play this all day long and it would never stop being funny !

[RingoMcCartney]

Yes that is correct.
But you are wrong that anyone can be sued for what you said.

We could play this all day long and it would never stop being funny !

So now you admit you were wrong. Good.

Now my original post was a quip said in jest. Instead aggi wanted to take it to an entirely different level and treat it , as if we were in a court of law instead of a football message board.

It prompted a question " what public office does he hold"?

I answered - "None"

That when I asked "Does somebody need to hold a public office to be sued for liable?

Yes Or No?

And if you or him wanted to get legalistic then you were wrong to assume there was a link to my previous quote instead of treating it as an entirely independent question. Two can play that game.

I'm signing off now. But must remember to try not to make a joke about ickle Alistair. There are too many thin skinned Remoaners on here who only to happy to get on their high horse and rush to protect him!

Enjoyed forcing you to admit you got it wrong though!!

Nice one!