So, Rupert Murdoch, you now have
not one, but two, former Prime Ministers saying under oath that you lied under
oath. It's not looking good for you, is it?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Political prisoner, activist, journalist, hymn-writer, emerging thinktanker, aspiring novelist, "tribal elder", 2019 parliamentary candidate for North West Durham, Shadow Leader of the Opposition, "Speedboat", "The Cockroach", eagerly awaiting the second (or possibly third) attempt to murder me.
True. But one of those Prime Ministers has been accused by your newly beloved Ed Miliband of lying under oath during his evidence. So it's not that cut and dried, is it?
ReplyDeleteReally? Not that anyone has noticed.
ReplyDeleteEh? What? You haven't noticed? Ah well. Those in the know and all that I suppose. It's oly been on, well, every single newspaper and Tv news
ReplyDeleteNo, it hasn't. You just want it to have been. The story is plainly and simply this: Rupert Murdoch has been convicted of perjury in everything short of a bit of paperwork. At his age, he can expect to die in prison.
ReplyDeleteSo do you agree with Ed Miliband when he said Brown lied under oath or not?
ReplyDeletePS I have absolutely no love for Murdoch, by the way
ReplyDeleteHe didn't.
ReplyDeleteHa! Oh bless. He did as much as any of the other statements made by various people which you quote in support of your different positions. But when it's Miliband potentially defending Murdoch (at less by proxy in undermining one of his accusers), oh boy do you squirm
ReplyDeleteThat would not have been my reaction if such a thing had ever happened. More to the point, it would most definitely not have been certain other people's. Clearly, then, he didn't.
ReplyDeleteYou never took logic classes in any of your degrees, did you?
ReplyDeleteWhat I know about how politics works, I didn't learn out of a book.
ReplyDeleteEr, ok? I'm not sure what that has to do with being able to make reasoned arguments and conclusions. Still, you carry on. You're not doing anyone any harm pottering around here I suppose
ReplyDeleteNo, indeed...
ReplyDelete