rulefan
Tour Winner
So when he said he drove to Durham rather than taking the train, you don't believe that either? Everything he says is a lie? Guilty until proved innocent>
Coronavirus - political views - supporting or otherwise...
- Thread starter AmandaJR
- Start date
- Status
i don't for one moment believe he didn't have contact with his parents, you think what you like, but i will kep my own council thanks.
just like he didn't visit BC ..or remember where he filled up with fuel.. or stop
looked up the rules yet?
D
Deleted member 18588
Guest
I have and can't find the relevant section to which your friend refers.
could you find doms get out clause? its the same one the reason why its there not for some to do as they pleased
D
Deleted member 18588
Guest
Certainly there's an acknowledgement that it may not always be possible to strictly adhere to the guidelines/rules when there are childcare concerns.
It doesn't appear to be as clear as your friend suggests.
D
Deleted member 18588
Guest
I believe he did suffer from a high level of "doorstepping" in much the same way as Corbyn did.
After all the press must have obtained their extensive knowledge of his interior design issues as quoted on here.?
D
Deleted member 21258
Guest
I wonder if DC would take a lie detector test, that would be interesting and help to clear up any mis-understanding that the media or public have.
those guildlines refer to child abuse issues... the reason they are there in so children didn't ahve to stay in abusive situations, be it domestic or child abuse, not a trip to a holiday home..
D
Deleted member 18588
Guest
I have read them again and cannot see where they specifically refer to children at risk.
spongebob59
Journeyman Pro
She's back ??
but you see the bit where it says drive 270 miles to a holiday home, then go for a picnic 30 miles away though?
Mudball
Assistant Pro
While he was on air.. Twitterati was talking about the trip to the Castle coinciding with his wife's birthday. Surprisingly no reporter asked that.. (or did i miss it)
D
Deleted member 18588
Guest
I definitely don't think that what he did was right.
Equally, however, I see no reason to twist the details to suit my disapproval. You obviously don't have the same concerns.
D
Deleted member 21258
Guest
Why is he driving if eyesight dodgy, thought that was an offence under traffic law?
Why do such a long journey to test eyesight and with everyone and then stop and so on?
Didn't he say he rushed home after wife thought she had it and then went back to work? He should have gone into lockdown(will listen to the statement again)
He and the PM spoke about it, but neither can remember when or really what about ?
He cant remember if he filled up his petrol on the way back or when he did?
So many unanswered questions.
And he hadn't even considered that he should resign, that really surprised me with that answer. How could you not of even considered it, for the good of the cause(irrelevant if you are right or wrong). How could you not have even considered it(I understand why you may decide yes or no, but not to even consider it)?
So many unanswered questions, certainly leaves a certain feeling, I hope the story continues to rumble on.
Why do such a long journey to test eyesight and with everyone and then stop and so on?
Didn't he say he rushed home after wife thought she had it and then went back to work? He should have gone into lockdown(will listen to the statement again)
He and the PM spoke about it, but neither can remember when or really what about ?
He cant remember if he filled up his petrol on the way back or when he did?
So many unanswered questions.
And he hadn't even considered that he should resign, that really surprised me with that answer. How could you not of even considered it, for the good of the cause(irrelevant if you are right or wrong). How could you not have even considered it(I understand why you may decide yes or no, but not to even consider it)?
So many unanswered questions, certainly leaves a certain feeling, I hope the story continues to rumble on.
ColchesterFC
Journeyman Pro
ColchesterFC
Journeyman Pro
Yes I know it should be child not children but I still found it funny.......
who's twisting anything, you are Obv looking for reasons for him to excuse what he did, up to you, i'm saying what he did wasn't within the rules and is just abusing the guidence that didn't apply to him
D
Deleted member 18588
Guest
Where and if he filled up with fuel on his return journey is surely one of the irrelevant issues as he would by then have been out of "self isolation".
D
Deleted member 18588
Guest
You have done little but twist it with reference to holiday homes, references to regulations that don't seem to exist and harping on about his transport.
My point is that rather than strengthening the case the reverse is likely to be the case.
oh really
if you have read the section he's using as his excuse thats what was included to cover abuse... but you carry on defllect deflect deflect... who'd have thought- Status
Similar threads
