Sleazy Levy Complains of "Trial by Media"
Levy's lawyers have just released a statement complaining, wait for it, of "trial by media".
Well perhaps he should stop ringing up political editors and briefing them in that case? All those unnamed "friends" quoted in the press are him, briefing...
UPDATE : 13:30 The Metropolitan Police have released a statement effectively accusing the Guardian of undermining their case.
Well perhaps he should stop ringing up political editors and briefing them in that case? All those unnamed "friends" quoted in the press are him, briefing...
UPDATE : 13:30 The Metropolitan Police have released a statement effectively accusing the Guardian of undermining their case.UPDATE : 14:00 "There has been a regular stream of leaks to the media during this year-long investigation, all of which have presented a prejudiced and distorted view" say Levy's lawyers. Of course Lord Levy's off-the-record briefings to journalists are not prejudiced or distorted in the slightest.
247 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 1 – 200 of 247 Newer› Newest»I think it's called 'getting your retaliation [against Ruthie] in first'...
Bless him, best use those 'friends' now as in a couple of weeks he won't have any - rats deserting a sinking ship!
MISSION ACCOMPLISHED
I claim my promised exclusive interview with Tony Blair
very sleazy.
I wish Blair well with PMQ's tomorrow as it looks more and more like it will be his last!
Journalistic integrity anyone?
http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/martin_kettle/2007/03/gagged_good.html
Right hand/left hand?
Just back from Switzerland, and worried that I'd missed all the action. Looks like we now have potetial for more conspiracy charges.
Nest of vipers, what?!!
Just back from Switzerland, and worried that I'd missed all the action. Looks like we now have potential for more conspiracy charges.
Nest of vipers, what?!!
This could go either way.
Maybe if we're really lucky someone will kill the lot of the bastards. They deserve to die more than Charles I ever did.
BBC: "Ms Turner said she was worried by Lord Levy's words and she believed the prime minister should be told about it. The BBC does not know whether the prime minister was told. "
I can see no reason why anyone can say that this leak can prejudice a fair trial, look at what we found out about Huntley's crimes before his trial?
But I accept it may well be the excuse that is used to brush this all under the carpet!
BBC: "Ms Turner said she was worried by Lord Levy's words and she believed the prime minister should be told about it. The BBC does not know whether the prime minister was told. "
If this is the case, she and Powell should be sacked because if TB wasn't told they weren't doing their job (which the taxpayer pays for) and if TB was told they clearly forgot to mention this to the police as TB would have then been interviewed under caution.
I don't think any prosecutions should take place.
It wouldn't be in the interests of justice to possibly attempt to hold a fair trial with someone who has been hanged by the media.
It should be buried in a file somewhere. File it next to 'Dave-Class 'A'.
Gary
The Tories' majority at the next election just increased , again.
Reminds me of all the "friends" Dave -just a working class lad from sheffield -Blunkett had during the kimberley quim affair
Gary, if that is your real name, I assume you are looking to represent Labour in the Sedgemoor seat at the next election - if not put your tongue away, with all that arse licking it is turning brown
The Met don't now want this to go the distance; they have personally been damaged too much by it already. The statement that their case has been / is being undermined is them jacking in their hand and throwing a 'Get Out Of Jail Free' card to Sleazy Levy and Tony's Cronies. Scandalous, but then when you are in power you can do it.
I'm not sure Blair is worth pursuing - he will be gone soon and people will make up their own mind about him. Brown will be up next and he is the now the real target.
There is no way this can undermine their case. If so every conviction obtained after a Crimewatch or Dispatches show would be null and void. If the police back down now it looks like collusion. Bring charges. The AG is no longer issuing injunctions, why? How could a description of evidence possibly preudice a trial? Think Archer, Aitken, you name it, evidence was discussed in the media pre-trial and not held to prejudice a damn thing.
Guido, update us on what your cps sources are saying. Are they trying to wiggle out of it now the Guardian did no.10 a solid?
But I guess this news would have leaked eventually - the key question is would the Met have been able to pounce this week on the assumption that legal restrictions might have kept this out of the papers until this coming Sunday ??
If not, and they needed another few weeks, then all this speculation is somewhat academic. However, now they are going to have to 'fish or cut bait' this week, whatever the papers and blogoshpere do or don't say this week.
don't think any prosecutions should take place
Bit premature that, surely that's a judgement for the CPS, and any possible court to make in due course.
Just preparing the ground for a lengthy and drawn out process at the CPS which will see a decision on prosecution put off until Our Dear Leader has flown the coop, Gordy has bitten his nails down to the armpit, and all co-conspiritors are safely beyond extradition in Israel.
The more people who read about this and decide "guilty as sin", the easier it will be for the CPS to rule out a trial.
So we should just shoot them.
True if TB does get prosecuted and a criminal record he won't be able to piss of to the States and do us all a favour, so Mr Plod do us all a favour, drop the case!!!
By the sounds of things the DPP was considering a border-line case for bringing charges against Levy for conspiracy.
These leaks have made the case for bringing charges more borderline (by giving him the predudice of the trial excuse).
This is a sad day for me. I am convinced that there is a conspiracy that went right to the top of No 10. That would only have come out if Levy was made to do a deal.
Robinson and the Guardian have got um all off.
There is a curse upon this land. Dark forces are afoot. Who will save us now?
Paul Myners (former Chairman of M&S, Gartmore) the Guardian Trust Chairman will get his K after all.
The met accuse the Gruniad of undermining their case.
Spot the obvious typo. The met accuse No.10 (who leaked to the BBC and the Gruniad) of undermining their case.
Looks really really bad. Conspiracy to pervert the course of justice anyone. Blair to be gone before the end of the week?
But I can't help thinking that Ruthie has another 'Fatal Attraction' style surprise twist-in-the-tail ending in store - the opera isn't over until the canary sings...
Anyone have a link to the police statement?
It begins to look as if justice will only be served if the people take it into their own hands.
I've been on the 'shoot 'em' or 'plenty of rope and plenty of lamp posts' side of things for some time now. Once meant in jest and caused by boiling frustration at the apathy of so many people and the unpardonable conduct of the media shills, now it's a bit more earnest.
The system is broken and will not fix itself. Expect nothing significantly better from the other lot. Give them a few years and they will find staring up their own arses far more important than principled, honest government.
History does have a habit of repeating itself and to believe we are past mass uprisings against our political classes in the western world would be naive.
Yuck.
where's "V" when you need him?
Lord Levy's lawyers also say
"Lord Levy respects the importance of maintaining the integrity of the police inquiry and so is unable to comment further at this time."
Apart from to the media if you are correct Guido.
If I were Ruth Kelly, I'd write a note to Jonathan Powell saying "that's Levy, he's telling a pack of lies you know!". Then I'd release it to the press.
But then I'm kind-of like that sometimes...
Anonymous (if that's your real name), the only way Lord Levy will get a fair trial is if it is held in Zimbabwe,Eritrea or the Helmand Province.
My tongue is turning Brown and is staying that way because David Milliband is refusing to run.
Sedgemoor have my details. I never fail.
Hope that answers everything.
Gary
There will quite rightly be a furore about who was behind the leaks. But it shouldn’t distract from the fact that the Met has put together what appears to be a remarkably weak case.
Even if no leaks had occurred, it seems the evidence against Levy rests on a single document recounting a private conversation which Levy could plausibly claim was a misunderstanding. If that is the extent of the evidence (and I hope it isn’t), then he would probably get off even if charges were brought. Meanwhile, there seems to be no case at all against Turner, Powell and Blair.
If the police really have spun the whole thing out for a year only to come up with this, then it’s an embarrassingly poor showing – leaks or no leaks.
The question now is whether this document is the tip of an iceberg of evidence, or whether it is the iceberg.
If it’s the latter, the Met are in trouble.
The allegation of cash for peerages was always tenuous at best, but £14 million off the Labour parties books and Brown stuff spending what amounted to a slush fund was not. Any company acting as such would and have been bounced.
Anon 2:32 is right. Unless there's more evidence then it's not much. Of course, we don't know what the interviews have uncovered.
Could be a double bluff by the police though.
umm, if there is an e-mail and it has something germain to the investigation in it, that is a stone cold irrefutable fact. Whether the press report its existence or not , is surely irrelevant ? Surely the worst it can do is let ruthie / pole / sleazy know it time to arrange for the neighbours to come in and feed the cat while they're away...for some time.
Of course the government leaked it. The police would hardly have leaked it then immediately applied for an injunction to prevent any part of it being published, indeed even to prevent knowledge of its existence from reaching the public. The CPS i.e. Goldsmith might have leaked it, but he IS part of the government. The CPS have agreed to the injunction but it seems they have been happy to bend the rules as much as possible so that the loyal Guardian can publish the whole story behind it thus ensuring a "trial by media" as complained about by the police. Why? Because they presumably aren't happy about the government leak being plugged by the timely intervention of the police. They probably suspect that most of the police evidence is circumstantial and by tainting public perceptions of the case they can have it thrown out of court.
I wouldn't underestimate the police case. Firstly Levy was probably told on record by the police not to discuss the facts of the "cash for honours" case with anyone else. The email may itself prove that he went ahead and ignored this. Secondly they probably interviewed Levy and Turner with neither of them knowing how many cards the police already held. They would have painted themselves as whiter than white and no doubt their stories no longer agreed. Then the fact of that contradiction of these stories is presented to Levy and Turner individually and the questions start again. Turner and Levy are then forced to either stick to their original story or recant to tell something more plausible. The innocent party is most likely to tell the whole truth at this point, rather than end up up to their neck in it. My guess is the police are after Levy and are putting as much pressure as possible on Turner to spill the beans. They certainly look like they mean business. One email and a lot of tall tales from the suspect(s) may be all the police need to convince a jury - but this will rely on the Judge allowing the jury to hear evidence that is circumstantial against a background of "trial by media" accusations. No wonder the astroturfers are on Guido's blog trying to trash the police evidence.
It wouldn't surprise me if this goes straight up to Tony Blair. The police willingness to delay looks to me that they are biding their time until Blair is out of office. It would be going a bit far to arrest a serving PM over something like this when Blair is very unlikely to do a runner. However, what is happening now may force the hand of the police.
But Levy was pleading the 5th thereby not giving the police any indication of what he did/didn't know and how it fitted with the other evidence.
So guido your against the printing of leaks, so you'll be shutting this site down soonest!
The deal is done; Bliar's boys & girls leak and leak some more so that Levy can evade a trial on the grounds of unfair media coverage prejudicing any such trial and in return he doesn't grass up his old tennis partner who is up to his neck in this particular pool of shit.
That's the New Labour way don'tcha know!
Never mind selling legislature seats, there's a lot of casual, not to say slovenly resources- use going on. If Peter Hain's SpaD is required to separate his activities why is the work of Leader of the Labour Party not separated from the work of Prime Minister? Do Blair ( or Turner) have offices and secretariats provided and paid for by the Labour Party? If they have they should be in them using them when conducting Labour party business.
And who did Turner think should be told of Levy's view, the Prime Minister or the Leader of the Labour Party? For, like Peter Goldsmith and the office of Attorney General, these are separate roles with separate agendas and answerabilities; though supposedly they too can be held by a single person and responsibly, appropriately and honestly exercised.
Undoubtedly the money was raised for and used by the Labour party while undoubtedly the award of Honours is a Prime Ministerial role. Yet all and both sides of this activity was going on in Downing Street; just as the activities of the Smith Institute and its networking and fundraising were going on in Downing Street, but next door.
Matt - I think you'll find both Blairs will be going down sooner than you think
If any prosecution that might be brought fails because of the Guardian how will their readership regard it?
ryan 4 [2.40 PM] There's nothing inherently weak about circumstantial evidence. It has sent many a man to the gallows.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,2027700,00.html?gusrc=rss&feed=11
Cameron doubles poll lead over Labour
An interesting analysis, Ryan 4.
I don't, however, agree that Blair is unlikely to do a runner. I have said for the past four or five months that I think the Blair's will do a moonlight flit.
Presumably they'd transfer the deeds to the property they have so lovingly acquired to Euan or someone.
One wonders if the Beeb and Guardian care about a fair trial or due process.
OR are they in cahoots to ensure that all the guilty parties can use the old herring of no fair trial as trial by media and no jury available which has not been influenced by the leaks etc etc,.
I trust that if Knacker of the Yard / Met are not guilty on the leaks, they will institute a further enquirym, aimed at discovering the leakers and leakees. Any journo standing on the old herring of not revealing sources, gets a contempt order and is jugged. Barlinnie comes to mind as an appropiate nick.
...a bit early to worry about the Guardian predudicing any trial which may be months away, most of their readers have memories like sieves anyway.
mitch ...
"But Levy was pleading the 5th".
What are you talking about? There is no Fifth Amendment in Britain!
Of course, in China the Gang of Four had a show trial. Now there's a thought ..
The normal police procedure for an enquiry like this would be to arrest Levy, Powell, Turner and Blair and keep them incommunicado at separate police stations. After about 72 hours the show of unanimity would begin to unravel...
landslide-the interesting thing is that if true it's only 8% and not 28% given all that's going on.
As far as Brown is concerned being a "non friend" of the Blair's will prove a major asset.
Dave doing a Blair 2 will prove wrong in the end.
With all these unstoppable leaks about his person, I hope that Lord Levy isn't planning any long sea-voyages in the immediate future, say to Israel to give a random example.
Penfold:
One wonders if the Beeb and Guardian care about a fair trial or due process.
Cease your sanctimony. The BBC's story was OK'd by its in-house lawyers before the original injunction was obtained. It's clearly in the public interest.
(Besides, if the Sun can run a front page saying HERE IS THE EVIL SUFFOLK STRANGLER after a man has been charged and not be thought to create a "substantial risk of serious prejudice" than I'm sure the BBC, all the papers, and all the bloggers remain in the clear now)
I seem to remember that nice Mr Blair answering a question to the House to the effect criminal trials should go ahead even if the defendant has been villified in the press (I think the context was a Mr Abu Hamza's trial).
Sauce for the goose anyone?
Verity - I know. What I'm saying is Levy answered 'No comment' to every question. He knew the police could have been told anything by others and didn't want to unwittingly incriminate himself either by confirming or denying that evidence.
http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/martin_kettle/2007
What was this article the Guardian deleted overnight?
Tuscan Tony 3.15
If he does go on a voyage I suggest he takes all his remaining friends with him & does not go via the Canary Islands lest a horrible and inexplicable accident occurs!
Mitch - But he wasn't "pleading the Fifth". We are talking legal niceties on this thread. There is no "Fifth" in British law.
Right, Guido, I totally sick of this shower now.
Get you and your gunpowder down to Downing Street and sort it for me, please. Report back when done.
"But Levy was pleading the 5th".
"What are you talking about? "
He was pleading the SITH
Re anonymous of 3.34
Guido make sure you have enough for #'s 10 & 11 please
Retreat - Ha ha ha ha ha!
anon @3.25:
http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/martin_kettle/2007/03/gagged_good.html
Guido can say what he likes on his blog without prejudicing a trial. During commital proceedings it will be up to the defence to determine if any jurors should not stand because they have access to the internet and may have read Guido's (or our) comments. The BBC spilling the beans is a different matter. Overmuch speculation by BBC pundits might conceivably prejudice a trial since it would be difficult to put together a jury that had not heard such speculation. No surprise, then, that first the Guardian and then the BBC were the ones to spill the beans. Another nail in the BBC's coffin I suspect, as well as the post of Attorney General. Meanwhile the police must be tearing their hair out that this injunction has basically failed within hours of being applied for. Exactly where was the public interest served by the CPS failing to maintain the injunction until the suspects were brought to trial? The Attorney General, BBC Guardian, Lord Levy are up to their necks in this latest conspiracy to derail justice. It seems a willingness to be corrupted is the value this gang of liars and thieves all share.
Still, the Cameroons know that the case has done them no harm at all -The Tory party has double the funds that NuLabour has flowing to it and we are three years from an election. No wonder NuLabour are desparately looking at capping party election expenditure.
Guido,
I thought this story deserved more prominence at the time. Now it is dynamite, given the last few days...
Tony Blair's judgment was called into question last night after it was revealed that he made a private and supportive phone call to Lord Levy just hours after the chief Labour fundraiser had been arrested and questioned about perverting the course of justice in the cash-for-honours investigation.
The call to Levy and his wife, confirmed to The Observer by a senior Whitehall source, was made at a time when the Prime Minister was keeping secret, at the request of police, the fact that he had been questioned for a second time by detectives. No minutes were made of the call.
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/politics/story/0,,2010646,00.html
John
I am very serious when I say that justice MUST be seen to done in this case.I care not who is elected next but if the public (bollox to the legal niceties) will have no power.
I have heard some truly communist nonsense in my time but Jack Straw in justifying HOL reform has declared a majority of the public want an elected upper chamber, its pitiful.
Tell him if turnout is above 30% ill eat my hat. what a bunch of liars, that is not an opinion; 'overwhelming demand from the public should drive this reform"
Shameful
now that truly is bollox
Forgive me for being thick , if this has been injuncted then the judges have are in control of what is said, if anybody says anything that is part of this injunction then they get done,if the judges extend this injunction that is up to them ,therefore to me as it's been under control of the judiciary they must think a fair trial is possible, I know Iam wrong ,but this lot should goto trial.
Reference John 4.03pm Blair alleged phonecall to Levy, I am surprised in this age of Big Brother, that all telecoms converstions and communications are not recorded . They were in the White House over 30 years ago!!!!,
Has Yates and co plumbed this aspect.
mitch & verity - 'pleading the fifth'; worth remembering that this bunch of bastards changed the law - courts are now allowed to draw conclusions if someone doesn't offer a defence when interviewed/charged, and cannot 'ambush' the prosecution at trial by suddenly coming up with a last-minute justification for their actions/silence.
I have difficulty believing that plod have kept this investigation trundling along for a year on the basis of a single email. No way. They've got more.
Ok, if he's already be tried by the media, let's just agree they're all guilty and see them on the end of a rope. The prospect of this bunch of sleazy, criminal scum bags getting let off is repulsive. Blair should stand trial for this and then be packed off to the Hague, make the detestable creature suffer.
On Blair's orders, Levy is being set up to be the fall guy. But he won't take the rap that easily.
It's a dangerous game being played by Blair, Turner, Powell, and co. Levy will take 'em all down rather than carry the can for the lot.
anonymous 4:15PM
..If Lord Levy and The Guardian managed to find a bent High Court Judge to sabotage the police case I don't think we can put too much faith in the judiciary.
Rusbridger on CiF trying to justify himself. Getting a right pasting on the comments
Or should I say Lord Rusbridger
I think we will find out in May if the public believe this lot.
The ultimate weapon is in the hands of the public.
His legacy can only be secured by vindication. If he is right about Iraq, if the health service turns out to have been saved by his reforms and if justice is seen to be done in this case he will go down as a PM hard done by......otherwise he will be judged by events.
It shows how sad the entire 10 year period has been, it has all boiled down to IF justice is seen to be done.
Bae/Saudi may produce an A level history question of the future;
Did the removal of the rule of law, after the Bae scandal, lead too the downfall of the Labour government in 2007? Discuss.
If you want to see how pathetic they have become just listen to jack straw justifying an elected HOL. A five year old child would demolish the clearly dishonest argument
BT 4:21
I'm with you on that. 11 months work and a handful of interviews there has got to be more. If this inquiry was going nowhere it would have been over months ago. Do not underestimate Mr.Yates.
How fitting that it was one of their lot who proposed continuous revolution; Blair will go down as the last socialist loser...........even China have seen the light
Unblieveable!
Also entitled email!!!!
http://www.downingstreetsays.org/archives/003825.html
Seems like the astro turfers back, and contorted facts and squealing might to signify that they are finding their Knicker elastic is too tight.
Knacker of the Yard is slowly twisting the their knackers
The sooner we get rid of the slime bags the better
Ratty and BT - I also think they've got more.
Levy has already indicated that he's not taking the hit for anyone. Levy is a very clever man. I've always said that Tony Blair is rather stupid. One of those stupid people who know how to act bright, how to give the impression of being bright, although they have no substance. In a fight between Levy and Blair, Levy will win.
In fact, I would advise Lord Levy not to go for any solitary walks in the woods.
Scenario:The police case turns out not to be as strong as speculated.Given this and the prejudicial nature of media intrusion, it is decided by Goldsmith not to proceed with a prosecution.Despite the strong smell of corruption and expediency,nobody involved gives a toss as they know it will all be 'buried'under the next big news story.Perhaps some of the minor players will get a slap on the wrist,and that will be that,a damp squib.God Knows, I hope I'm wrong.
Dontcha just hate hypocrites?
So much for a legal system that treats everyone equally. The more power and money you have, the more innocent you become. this stinks of someone trying to queer the deal.
Looking in detail at the BBC report, it seems it isn't a document detailing a discussion between Levy/Turner, it is a document written by Turner complaining that Levy has discussed the case with her and bent the truth in the process. In the document she "expressed concern Lord Levy put to her a version of his role in drawing up the honours list which she believed to be untrue" according to the BBC. Now why would she put something like that IN WRITING?
Imagine that she has been told by the police not to discuss the case with anyone. Levy will also have been told by the police not to discuss it with anyone. Then in a darkened corridor Levy sidles up to her and says "Ruthie, about this cash for honours business...". Turner thinks to herself "If it gets out that I had a discussion with Levy about this case I'm toast". So she immediately writes a formal letter to some Labour bigwig that says "That idiot Levy talked to me about cash for honours, asking me to change my evidence", signed and dated. She is now in the clear (ish) but she has by implication dumped Levy right in it if the document is discovered. Not only that she has shown a willingness to dump anyone in it if it keeps herself out of the poo. Look at what the BBC has said and what might have motivated Turner to put something like that in writing and you can see that Ms Turner has almost certainly fired the silver bullet.
Would love to believe that Yates bugged Levy's phone, but I guess that Goldsmith would have known about it surely? It would make sense for Yates to bug Levy's phone after stirring things up a bit. I bet they know who called Levy and who Levy spoke to though. That could have been enough if Levy's account of the phone conversation didn't match up with the other persons account.
If they all get away with it, Tony Blair, to prove that he is whiter than white, can have an enquiry. I wonder if Lord Hutton might be available.
Posted by Anonymous at 4.38
http://www.downingstreetsays.org/archives/003825.html
When did comical Ali get a work permit?
Parking the politics to one side, I have to say that for the Met to accuse the media of undermining a case really is stupendously rich, coming as it does from an organisation that regularly blows the gaffe on celebrity shenanigans.
If I had a penny for all the Met's leaks I'd be in a position to buy a peerage by now.
Lord Copper
Good thinking, Ryan 6. Of course, these developments could be part of Yates's plan. Frighten them, and then leave them to their own devices, to dwell on it, and wait for them to turn on one another.
zzzzzzzzz did someone say something? zzzzzzzzzz
MEMO
To: G. Fawkes
From: R. Turner
Subject: No. 10's Dirty Tricks Department
The department was officially renamed "The No. 10 FILTHY Tricks Department" yesterday at 8 p.m.
btw Where's Gordon Brown?
Number 10 officially confirms that it leaks!
"Any leak from No10 would not have contained those inaccuracies......"
http://www.pm.gov.uk/output/Page11177.asp
Cheneys henchman/hitman Scooter Libby has been nailed for obstruction of justice..will the Ides of March cross the Atlantic???
One thing is now beyond doubt, Tony Blair will not face any charges and neither, by the look of the so called evidence, will anyone in the government. Tony Blair has a degree of honesty and integrity that most of the posters on this board can only dream of.
Do you live in this world ,please take off your rose tinted glasses.
Anon 4.42
Can you scrub that conviction for GBH please, he hit me fgirst
w****r
We had all this wrong-headed speculation and mis-reporting over the Hutton enquiry. Thankfully, Lord Hutton applied the law of the land rather than the law of the mob and justice was done.
5:35 PM
Oh I see old laws and 3000 new laws don't apply to NuLabour why didn't you tell us that,then I'll go about my business then.
anon 5.29pm.
Another civil servant's day ends, then it's a quick toke on the crack-pipe to steady the nerves of said end-of-an-era-still-believer for his minute in the sun on Guido.....
5:44 PM
All the laws of the land apply to every member of the government, the problem for you is that none of them have been broken by any member of the government.
5:47 PM
I think it's up to the police and CPS to decide if a law is broken not me, I will wait on what they say.
Anonymous,
You are a true Blairite...
i.e. Talking to yourself, no-one listening.
Anonymoous 5:44 - somewhat inexplicably - wrote: "All the laws of the land apply to every member of the government, the problem for you is that none of them have been broken by any member of the government."
Prescott assaulting a member of the public on the hustings isn't against the law?
Jack Straw allowing his driver to drive at over 100 mph on the M1 isn't against the law?
Going through the Green Channel when you return to Britain loaded with tens of thousands of dollars' worth of free gifts, a la Cherie Blair - a serial offender - and John Prescott, is not against the law?
Lying on mortgage applications, a la the fragrant Mandelson, is not against the law?
Using ministerial influence to expedite passports for Filippina nannies for girlfriends, as David Blunkett was forced to admit to doing, is not against the law?
Failing to disclose to Parliament expensive gifts received is not against the law? How much were those Western clothes that John Prescott got from the Colorado multi-billionaire worth? From what I know of the cost of Western clothes, I'd say around $20,000.
Your problem is that Conservatives who broke the law or abused Parliamentary privilege were sacked or resigned. Labour self-seeking sleazeballs just shrug and carry on.
Tuscan Tony 5:46pm.
Funniest comment posted today!
Any chance you could ask your Italian neighbours for some hints and tips with regard to the stringing up of sleazy spivs and politicians 'Mussolini Style'?
verity
You are correct - none of those thing were against the law, if they were they would have been convicted like the sleazy tories were.
jrmoriarty said...
me 5:47 one anonymong having a chat
with 5:44 anonymong NuLabour
anon 6:02pm Save your rope. They won't need hanging at all if we follow the Italian lead on these matters - just let them get on with their interpretation of "democracy", then simply disregard their edicts. Civil disobedience on a grand scale - it works for the Tuscans!
I am guessing that the amount of anger, bitterness and resentment festering on this blog indicates that most people know that the inevitable outcome is all the 'usual suspects' walking free without being charged.
Hooray for Tony Blair !! Hooray for Lord Levy and his funding operation.
But most of all hoo-bloody-ray for the Guardian, riding to the rescue!
my mistake, so many anonymous sources and leaks etc. I can't keep up. I'm sure someone is briefing against themselves in this saga.
Anon at 5.47pm - "...... the problem for you is that none of them have been broken by any member of the government"
You seem to know a lot about every member of the Government - how come? Want to share with the rest of us? 'Cos if not, we might think you're just a NuLab stooge typing crap, as usual.
jrmoriarty said...
Understand ,I must give myself a CB name ,it does get weird.
Verity is in full flight so I am sitting back ,and reading what she say's.
To Anonymous 6:08PM
Just wait for the anger, bitterness and resentment to spill off the blogs and into the streets. Then we'll see who is gloating.
Now piss off back to the Civil Service Social Club - fecking Astro Turfer.
6:08
It's worst than that - most people on this blog KNOW that Tony Blair has done nothing wrong. The anger, bitterness and resentment is pure self-hatred because politically they can't touch Labour - their only hope is to lie, smear and spin against a successful government.
BBC 1 6 o'clock news.