I was thinking of posting something suitably facetious regarding this particular occurrence of police dishonesty/misconduct not mattering to some of the BBSers given that it happened to a senior Tory, so hats off to you sir for this fine example of said view. Just bear in mind that if they're prepared to behave in this way towards someone with Mitchell's profile, what hope is there for we plebs?
I've not read the latest but the last thing I did read was someone sayinbg not to assume that it was all made up? Or is this now the case? If so it is a complete and utter disgrace that this can happen. Just like Hillsborough and Orgreave.
So, we have to take the word of a policeman (who was allegedly lying) against a politician (who makes a career out of lying). It would be a definite sign of Armageddon if both were telling the truth!
But someone has been arrested in this case whereas no such action has taken place over Hillsboro or miner's strike
What goes round comes round. This government when they first came to power, asked for the public to become whistle blowers. They wanted people to tell them who were benefit cheating. This is still occurring and a lot of it is false information. Now they are bleating because a copper has set them up. Typical.
Let me get this right then - because the Government rightly encourage honest decent folk to shop those who are cheating the benefit system and therefore the taxpayer (without whom there'd be no benefits), individual members of the Government therefore deserve to have false accusations regarding their behaviour/language levelled against them by members of the police 'service', which in turn can ultimately cost them their jobs/reputations etc? That's some pretty twisted logic.
But surely the main point is he admits to swearing at the police. So he is at the very least guilty of that. He apparently has a reputation for arrogance in any case so it is not out of character. Yes the police may have fabricated the evidence and that needs investigating but it doesn't mean he is entirely innocent and is exonerated. Also just because the video evidence show a member of the public being a number of yards away, if it is later in the evening and the MP was having a swearing rant, who's to say his voice didn't carry enough to be heard. As is usual with MPs he will probably be welcomed back into the fold, like the minister who claimed expenses against her parents house and the 'independent' review ( a Tory commitee) found she was in the clear, despite a clear breach of the rules. Transparent and honest my ar*e!
You missed the point. A lot of the public were not honest and set people up . As far as MPs it has already being shown that there has been more taxpayers money being fiddled by them than Joe public. There is a Yorkshire saying Hear all See all Say nowt That is not a saying without substinance.
Certainly wouldn't disagree with the points re the issue of MPs fiddling their expenses, which is of course a cross-party problem (they've pretty much all got their snouts in the trough - enriching themselves at our expense) that has been going on for many years. Yet still the mugs go out every four/five years and keep voting for the same colour rosette time and again..... I'd have happily seen every single one of those MPs found to have been doing this booted out of office and straight into gaol, as it's obviously what they deserved for such despicable behaviour. Still is in fact. The Plebgate row is however an entirely different issue to that of fiddling expenses.
