advertisement


Priti Patel

“A reminder:

Bullying is fine if it’s unintentional

Breaking the law is fine if it’s in a limited and specific way

Helping a Tory donor save £40m on planning is fine if it’s “natural justice”

Breaking lockdown rules is fine if you’re following your instincts”

David Schneider (Twitter).
 
Patel: Yeah I’m a bully, sometimes you need to crack heads to get the job done, government is no job for the faint hearted.

Johnson: Matter closed. (Plus juvenile aphorism)
 
An entitled bully finding nothing wrong in law breaking was never going to have any problem with breaking ministerial codes (value now less than a few beans), second offence too. Laughable.

Just as with the Trump, the disturbing factor isn’t that this tool would try that - it’s the wider support for him as the Tory party apes Republicans and just fall into line.
 
I was reading somewhere that the reason Boris a) didn't sack Cummings at the time of the Barnard's Castle eyesight test-drive and b) finally did sack him over Princess Nut Nut-Gate was that he 'hates bullies'. In a) Cummings was being bullied by the press, whereas in b) Cummings was the bully. Maybe someone can lure Priti Patel into slagging off Carrie.
 
Vinny said:
she is due a big fall from grace, hopefully never to return to any public office of any kind.
Click to expand...
Agreed, but I don't think public office is the prize; the money she'll earn in the corporate/banking sector once she's done in politics is.
 
maxflinn said:
Agreed, but I don't think public office is the prize; the money she'll earn in the corporate/banking sector once she's done in politics is.
Click to expand...

Just so long as she is out of public office, that suits me, let some other glutton for punishmment take her on.

Sad to tell, she has the same effect on me as Farage, both intensely arrogant, intensely annoying *********
 
Ever since I became aware of her I always felt there was a mismatch between her name and her actions.
 
Classic Johnson- never apologise, never back down because it would be a sign of weakness. If he did sack her he’d have to resign over his own conduct. The style of operating is set from the top in this government.
 
Johnson wants to keep his enemies close. That's why Slithy Gove, Patel and Raaaab are in the cabinet. He can't afford having them scheming on the back benches. Alex Allan is just affordable collateral damage.
 
TheDecameron said:
Classic Johnson- never apologise, never back down because it would be a sign of weakness. If he did sack her he’d have to resign over his own conduct. The style of operating is set from the top in this government.
Click to expand...

To be honest I wouldn't even call them a government. They have to meet the definition of 'govern' first:

"conduct the policy, actions, and affairs of (a state, organization, or people) with authority."

They can't even do that.
 
Johnson needs to take a leaf out of Starmer's book. Sack thoroughly unpleasant characters and if he's is feeling especially vengeful then allow said characters back into the club in shackles to see how it is improving.
 
She was always a loose cannon, the Israel trip etc.

People like her never lose & if she goes another evil toad will replace her.

Only chance of coming out of this cycle is a Labour govt but that won’t happen.
 
TheDecameron said:
Classic Johnson- never apologise, never back down because it would be a sign of weakness. If he did sack her he’d have to resign over his own conduct. The style of operating is set from the top in this government.
Click to expand...
That's it isn't it. Given his own conduct and later tolerating Dom's eye test drive he doesn't really have a leg to stand on.

Any attempt to take the moral high ground is laughable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top