Brexit is wonderful. It’s just that Rees-Mogg is too dim to understand. I can already list a huge benefit of Brexit. Before Brexit happened, there was a vague sense in Westminster that Rees-Mogg, a staunch critic of the Cameron government, was a serious man who was usually worth listening to. Now that Brexit has taken place, putting Rees-Mogg on the cabinet could not prevent himself from revealing his own stupidity. Without Brexit, this would never have happened. (Okay, so it’s not much of a benefit, but it’s better than anything Rees-Mogg managed to find himself – thus proving the point.) If you want further proof, you do not need to look for more than, yes, the next 10 seconds of Rees-Mogg’s LBC phone input. In the coming days, he will clarify whether the prime minister was found to have violated his own laws for Covid, by illegally attending parties both at the Downing Street 10 office and at his place of residence. No one is sure if he will be fined, but it is not well predicted that the best members of the cabinet’s defense at the moment are that the public has “advanced”. And it is especially not good if these members of the cabinet, e.g. Reese-Mogg, are really stupid enough to try it on a phone show on the radio. Because what happens in a telephone broadcast on the radio is that members of the public telephone enter, so it quickly becomes clear whether they have “advanced” or not. And they have not. You will not be overly shocked to learn that, having been informed by Rees-Mogg that they were “continuing”, there were no calls from members of the public to say: “Yes, what was this party? I have completely progressed “. And, even more so, if there is anyone alive out there who has “advanced”, Rees-Mogg should hope that none of them listened to his radio phone on LBC, which he undoubtedly would have done right. behind wherever they have gone, as a direct consequence of Rees-Mogg expecting to be foolish enough to believe the words coming out of his mouth. It is clear that some believe that Boris Johnson will be fined, which is why the precautionary defense currently being used by Reese Witherspoon and others does not imply a denial of any wrongdoing. It is rather a denial that Johnson deliberately misled the House of Commons when he told Members, in many cases, that there had been no party and then that he had not attended any of the parties, and then, okay, that he had gone to one of the these but did not know it was a party. For all the latest views and comments, sign up for the free weekly Voices Dispatches newsletter by clicking here “If the prime minister receives information that is incorrect and passes it on, he has not made a deliberate attempt to mislead,” Reese-Mogg explained gently to an audience member who had called to ask about Partygate despite having already proceeded. And yes, it was at this point that the mobilizers turned and immediately ran back to where they had gone, especially to ask, “Jacob, are you taking the bun or what?” If the Prime Minister receives information that is inaccurate and transmits this information, then he has not made a deliberate attempt to mislead. Which is somewhat true, apart from this embarrassingly embarrassing fact that the misinformation he “transmitted” was that they had not been partying, even though he had attended them. It’s a strange thought experiment, which some people have flattering described as “sophistry”, but in reality they are just extremely clumsy bulls ***. If Johnson is fined for violating the lockdown rules, he is, of course, entitled to appeal, just as all recipients of penalty notices have. We look forward to making the form public. “Dear Metropolitan Police, thank you for sending me this photo of myself, topless, with a round head tied, pouring three bottles of wine directly from a suitcase. “But I asked one of my staff and they told me it did not happen, so I’m sure we can agree that this is the end of the matter.” To which the police will surely respond: “Sorry. What exactly is this about? “Everyone went ahead.”
title: “Brexit Has Laid Bare The Towering Idiocy Of Jacob Rees Mogg That S A Benefit Right There " ShowToc: true date: “2022-10-26” author: “Barry Webster”
Brexit is wonderful. It’s just that Rees-Mogg is too dim to understand. I can already list a huge benefit of Brexit. Before Brexit happened, there was a vague sense in Westminster that Rees-Mogg, a staunch critic of the Cameron government, was a serious man who was usually worth listening to. Now that Brexit has taken place, putting Rees-Mogg on the cabinet could not prevent himself from revealing his own stupidity. Without Brexit, this would never have happened. (Okay, so it’s not much of a benefit, but it’s better than anything Rees-Mogg managed to find himself – thus proving the point.) If you want further proof, you do not need to look for more than, yes, the next 10 seconds of Rees-Mogg’s LBC phone input. In the coming days, he will clarify whether the prime minister was found to have violated his own laws for Covid, by illegally attending parties both at the Downing Street 10 office and at his place of residence. No one is sure if he will be fined, but it is not good that the best members of the cabinet have at the moment is that the public has “advanced”. And it is especially not good if these members of the cabinet, e.g. Rees-Mogg, are really stupid enough to try it on a phone show on the radio. Because what happens in a telephone broadcast on the radio is that members of the public telephone enter, so it quickly becomes clear whether they have “advanced” or not. And they have not. You will not be overly shocked to learn that, having been informed by Rees-Mogg that they were “continuing”, there were no calls from members of the public to say: “Yes, what was this party? I have completely progressed “. And, even more so, if there is anyone alive out there who has “advanced”, Rees-Mogg should hope that none of them listened to his radio phone on LBC, which he undoubtedly would have done right. behind wherever they have gone, as a direct consequence of which Reese-Mogg expects to be foolish enough to believe the words that come out of his mouth. It is clear that some believe that Boris Johnson will be fined, which is why the precautionary defense currently being used by Reese Witherspoon and others does not imply a denial of any wrongdoing. It is rather a denial that Johnson deliberately misled the House of Commons when he told Members, in many cases, that there had been no party and then that he had not attended any of the parties, and then, okay, that he had gone to one of the these but did not know it was a party. For all the latest views and comments, sign up for the free weekly Voices Dispatches newsletter by clicking here “If the prime minister receives information that is incorrect and transmits that information, he has not made a deliberate attempt to mislead,” Rees-Mogg explained gently to an audience member who had called to ask about Partygate even though he had already moved on. And yes, it was at this point that the mobilizers turned and immediately ran back to where they had gone, especially to ask, “Jacob, are you taking the bun or what?” If the Prime Minister receives information that is inaccurate and transmits this information, then he has not made a deliberate attempt to mislead. Which is somewhat true, apart from this embarrassingly embarrassing fact that the misinformation he “transmitted” was that they had not been partying, even though he had attended them. It’s a strange thought experiment, which some people have flattering described as “sophistry”, but in reality they are just extremely clumsy bulls ***. If Johnson is fined for violating the lockdown rules, he is, of course, entitled to appeal, just as all recipients of penalty notices have. We look forward to making the form public. “Dear Metropolitan Police, thank you for sending me this photo of myself, topless, tied with a round head, pouring three bottles of wine directly from a suitcase. “But I asked one of my staff and they told me it did not happen, so I’m sure we can agree that this is the end of the matter.” To which the police will surely respond: “Sorry. What exactly is this about? “Everyone went ahead.”
