The second appointee (after the first one had to recuse himself) is employed by the government she sends the report to de Pfeffel and he decides if anyone has broken the rules. The fact that de Pfeffel and the rest of his cronies are pushing to make the report the defining factor clearly indicates that the restrictions placed on the civil servant and what she can offer for conclusions will if not entirely clear de Pfeffel it will not say he broke the rules.
The de Pfeffel supporters will I am sure breathe a sigh of relief and look to move on. The problem is that the public are not so forgiving and it is finally dawning on many the actual type of person he is
The question is was Sunak in residence and if so why did he not stop any of the parties and when these were taking place what were the Police doing did they not realise it was against the law that applied at the time.

Rewind twelve months https://twitter.com/pritipatel/status/1 ... 63904?s=21

Rewind twelve months https://twitter.com/pritipatel/status/1 ... 63904?s=21

Willzay wrote:Rewind twelve months https://twitter.com/pritipatel/status/1 ... 63904?s=21 Probably not too many Tories there Wilzay so, it's easy pickings for the Met.

Willzay wrote:Rewind twelve months https://twitter.com/pritipatel/status/1 ... 63904?s=21 Probably not too many Tories there Wilzay so, it's easy pickings for the Met.

Willzay wrote:Rewind twelve months https://twitter.com/pritipatel/status/1 ... 63904?s=21 Probably not too many Tories there Wilzay so, it's easy pickings for the Met.

Willzay wrote:Rewind twelve months https://twitter.com/pritipatel/status/1 ... 63904?s=21 Probably not too many Tories there Wilzay so, it's easy pickings for the Met.

Of the 17/18 Tory party’s reported now, only one is being investigated by the Met Police.....

The one held for the Black man.......... Shaun Bailey.

Get it.... .

Surely not https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... staff.html

Surely not https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... staff.html

It’s not this was dealt with last year because unlike de Pfeffel this was work but desperation results in the Mail regurgitating all sorts of old rubbish. It was confirmed that it was a work meeting prior to the Hartlepool by-election rather than what de Pfeffel considers a work meeting to be.

Meanwhile back at the Party’s, here’s Carrie, trashing all the Covid rules to get her leg across her mate in a Private Club https://uk.yahoo.com/news/carrie-johnson-pictured-breaking-covid-175530622.html

Meanwhile back at the Party’s, here’s Carrie, trashing all the Covid rules to get her leg across her mate in a Private Club https://uk.yahoo.com/news/carrie-johnson-pictured-breaking-covid-175530622.html

wire-quin wrote:Surely not https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... staff.html Desperate times for the Mail and Tory apologists. Even some of the usual most pro Tory suspects have steered clear of trying to pretend that's even vaguely similar. Not you though

wire-quin wrote:Surely not https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... staff.html Desperate times for the Mail and Tory apologists. Even some of the usual most pro Tory suspects have steered clear of trying to pretend that's even vaguely similar. Not you though

wire-quin wrote:Surely not https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... staff.html How desperate are you. At least Starmer fronted up and said why he was there and what was happening, as opposed to lies or hiding behind a dodgy report. Also, if you are suggesting that he was in the wrong, what the hell does that say about Boris Lyin' Johnson

wire-quin wrote:Surely not https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... staff.html How desperate are you. At least Starmer fronted up and said why he was there and what was happening, as opposed to lies or hiding behind a dodgy report. Also, if you are suggesting that he was in the wrong, what the hell does that say about Boris Lyin' Johnson