Quote Originally Posted by Tito Fuente View Post
Let's say that Starmer (the leader of the opposition who has already been investigated but found to have not broken any laws) is guilty of breaking the law (the same thing that Johnson has already been guilty of on one occasion so far)...

If people think that is worse than Boris Johnson, the Prime Minister who made the laws in the first place, consistently lied in Parliament about knowing that these parties took place, then lied in Parliament again to say that they did happen but no rules were broken and then refused to resign...

Well, that would just signify that they don't care about what Johnson did and it's, what do keep referring to... Playing politics.

If Starmer is ever found guilty of breaking any laws, at least you can be pretty sure that he would resign (and so he should).

The fact that you're even contemplating that these two are comparable when one of the two is literally the Prime Minister is beyond parody.

You're legendary balance needs a top-up on one side methinks.
What I'm saying is that I think Starmers beer event probably, in reality was as bad as Johnsons cake event. Actually I genuinely think it was worse as at least Johnson was in the office. However, thats by the by.

I have already said taking it all into account, Johnsons (and the Tories) behaviour was worse, and whats more it's proven, so thats not in question.

The issue now is that Labour made a huge deal of this - claimed the moral high ground, talked endlessly about it, and it may well be the case that actually they were involved in something similar.

I don't see how it's different. A cake at the end of a meeting, or a beer and curry? Thats what I'm saying.

Starmer should welcome an investigation to be able to clear his name.