As a fan of Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid who confessed his love, there was no chance for Boris Johnson to leave quietly.
Faced with an inevitable hail of gunfire, the former prime minister decided to fall in the flames of glory, drastically crushing the committee on privileges.
It was section 17 of the Privilege Act. The «Conduct of the Honorable Boris Johnson» report that drew the most outrage was not only the conclusion that «Big Dog» «deliberately misled the House» but also found him guilty of «deliberately misleading the committee, breaching confidentiality, challenging the committee «. and «thereby undermining the democratic process of the House of Representatives» and, if that is not enough: «involvement in a campaign of abuse and attempts to intimidate the committee.»
In addition to recommending «he should be suspended from service in the House of Representatives for 90 days for repeated contempt of court and attempts to undermine the parliamentary process», the committee even went so far as to suggest that «he should not be entitled to the former Membership Passport».
The proposed sanction overshadows the discussed 10-day suspension and makes Mr. Johnson one of five MPs to receive a ban for more than 30 days, also known as Kita Waza territory. And removing his seat would put him on a par with another House of Commons scourge, Vase's best friend, former Speaker John Bercow. />
Mr Johnson told the Daily Express on Sunday: «I'll be back.» But it was Terminator 2: Judgment Day, on steroids the size of Arnie. Hasta la vista, baby, and some more.
No wonder Westminster's own wrecking ball had nothing of the kind. As Guto Harri, his former communications chief, later told LBC, Boris chose not a worthy exit, but Dignitas. «He went for a quick euthanasia, not a slow lynch.»
However, when he donned the political suicide belt, it was unmistakable that his fury fell on the committee and its members on a provisional basis. a 1,679-word prepared statement released after the damned 106-page report hit the Internet.
A combination of barely concealed anger and rampant disbelief at the committee's devastating conclusions, the salvo pointed the finger of blame emphatically at Harriet Harman and Bernard Jenkin like the Skippy and Hippet Hoppers of this «kangaroo court».
In accusing the committee of worshiping «some sort of waste of time by a procedural trick on the part of the Labor Party», the implied comparison was clear: it was a set-up against Boris, akin to the embarrassing impeachments we've witnessed across the ocean. The committee was not just «crazy» and spoke «nonsense», concluding that it «deliberately concealed from the Chamber my knowledge of illegal events». It was a «lie».
It remains to be seen whether Trump's Britain's impression of his blond Yankee counterpart will help or hinder any future political ambitions. moreover, it has emboldened his Make America Great Again (MAGA) fanbase.
However, while the 90-day ban may seem excessive to some and could lead to martyrdom of Mr. -on Johnson, others will question the wisdom of someone they consider a liar so arrogant as to accuse others of being dishonest. After all, you can't fool a liar.
And while supporters may agree that the police have already «completely» cleared him of any wrongdoing beyond the fixed fine notice that Rishi Sunak also received — even the most diehard of Boris's supporters cannot deny that he committed the ultimate crime of squandering 80 -local majority and perhaps helping to reduce conservatism to a dump. for a generation.
Clearly written referring to those outside the Westminster Bubble, as Mr. Johnson occasionally used colloquial language to further convey his point that according to the «Mystic Meg» of the committee's rules, no event at all could have happened. , even those that are “reasonably necessary for work purposes.”
“I thought we were working, and we were: basically talking about nothing but work, mostly Covid. Why did I have to hide my knowledge of something illegal in the Chamber, if this report could be so easily refuted by others?
“Why did we have an official photographer if we thought we were breaking the law?”
Summarizing not only the thinking process of the committee, but perhaps the country, he resented: “Their argument can be summarized as follows: “ Look at this photo — it's Boris Johnson with a glass in his hand. He should have known that the event was illegal. So he lied.”
“This is complete nonsense. In this photo, I was at my workplace trying to cheer and thank my officials in a way that I felt was crucial to the government and the country as a whole, and in a way that I felt was completely within the rules. .”
Boris Johnson would have been suspended for 90 days if he hadn't resigned as an MP, said privileges committeeCalling it «ridiculous» that the committee now declares such events illegal, he went on to expose his former Conservative colleague, accusing Sir Bernard of attending a similar alleged «birthday event» on December 8, 2020.
«Hypocrisy disgusting,” he said indignantly. «Like Harriet Harman, he should have dropped the investigation as he is clearly in conflict.»
A fair point, but one that may well be overlooked by a disgruntled electorate who not only still accuse Mr Johnson of imposing the Covid rules that turned out to be his own downfall, but have done so ever since. with patigate. They don't see cake because of a glass of champagne at a distance from society.
Declaring it «a terrible day for MPs and for democracy,» Mr. Johnson concluded that the committee had plunged the last knife into » protracted political assassination,» as the man himself is likely to share opinion.
This is not the first time Johnson has been the victim of such a brutal parliamentary stabbing. Historically, the optimistic former prime minister is now dead, but far from buried.
Свежие комментарии