Don't Miss
Most Read
Trending on GB News
Tomorrow a kangaroo court that threatens to undermine British parliamentary democracy will take place at Westminster and the MSM will sit on the sidelines cheering on this dangerous farce because it suits their agenda.
The Privileges Committee, with a Labour chairwoman Harriet Harman who pre-judged the outcome before hearing any evidence, will sit as the judge, jury and executioner in deciding the future political career of the former Prime Minister Boris Johnson.
The so-called crime, which could result in Boris being suspended from parliament and facing a recall petition, effectively ending his hopes of returning to Number 10, hangs on whether he “knowingly or recklessly” misled parliament when answering questions about Partygate, where he – as all Prime Ministers do – relied on assurances provided to him by civil servants and advisers.
But there’s nothing normal about this Westminster witch hunt.
There is no precedent for such a stitch up.
Who decides if Boris recklessly intended to do anything?
Why has the Committee only released selective evidence, with statements seemingly deliberately taken out of context?
And aren’t they aware of the chilling effect such an approach will have on future Prime Ministers answering questions in the House of Commons?
And today the Committee finally released the 52-page defence dossier from Boris himself.
In my mind, it categorically proves he neither knowingly or recklessly misled Parliament, while also making a mockery of his government’s own Covid regulations and guidelines that blighted and destroyed so many lives three years ago, which he should never have agreed to implement.
But the fact it is just being accepted that this Committee has shape shifted in a bid to end the prime ministerial ambitions of the man elected in an 80-seat landside less than four years ago is a disgrace.
Here are the key parts of the evidence today…
First , Boris slams the Committee listening to his proven enemy Dominic Cummings, writing…
'There is no evidence at all that supports an allegation that I intentionally or recklessly misled the House. The only exception is the assertions of the discredited Dominic Cummings, which are not supported by any documentation.'
He goes on…
'It is no secret that Dominic Cummings bears an animus towards me, having publicly stated on multiple occasions that he wanted to do everything that he could to remove me “from power”. He cannot be treated as a credible witness.'
Boris goes on to slam the “profound and debilitating implications for the future of debate in the House” if it is considered “reckless” for a PM to rely on assurances from trusted advisers, writing…
That allegation is unprecedented and absurd. I was the Prime Minister of the country, working day and night to manage the Government's response to the Covid-19 pandemic.
And other than the Sue Gray report, which should surely be discredited now she is Keir Starmer’s choice to be his new Chief of Staff, the so-called “rigorous and thorough” investigation has uncovered no smoking guns.
Boris writes…
"The Committee did not identify a single document which suggested that I was informed or warned by anyone that any event at Number Ten was contrary to the Rules or Guidance.
"It fails to refer to the fact that a significant number of witnesses gave evidence that I had in fact received assurances that the Rules were complied with at No. 10; and it fails to refer to the fact that the view of many other officials working at No. 10 was that the Rules and Guidance were being complied with."