Page 40 of 52

Re: Suella Braverman

Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2023 5:24 pm
by Crabcakes
Fucking hell. There’s more whine there than engine tune-up day at Heathrow.

I think this is going to backfire for her, as she’s bought into her own hype. It just reeks of foot stamping that she wasn’t allowed to do everything just short of making it illegal to be anyone she doesn’t like.

Re: Suella Braverman

Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2023 5:42 pm
by Andy McDandy
And yeah, Sue, you were the one warning that the Rwanda plan might be turned down in the courts. Chinny reckon.

Re: Suella Braverman

Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2023 5:45 pm
by Oboogie
Tubby Isaacs wrote: Tue Nov 14, 2023 5:22 pm
On the PM programme Chris Mason, the BBC’s political editor, says he has asked Braverman’s team if he can see the document she writes about setting out the conditions he agreed to when she promised to support him. Mason says he was told that was “not for today” – implying she is planning to release it in due course.
She might be talking bollocks, but I'd like to see Sunak put on the spot about this.
I heard that and took "not for today" to mean "we've not finished writing it yet".

Re: Suella Braverman

Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2023 5:57 pm
by davidjay
If she's thinking she's going to be queen over the water, she'll soon find out how quickly the Tory party closes ranks once you exile yourself.

Re: Suella Braverman

Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2023 5:58 pm
by Abernathy
Here is the missing final page :

Re: Suella Braverman

Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2023 6:19 pm
by Youngian
When Cameron’s hubris blew himself up he had the good sense to walk away quietly and not blame everyone else. ERG types are too stupid, too blinkered and are just amateur hour zealot trash. Good riddance.

Re: Suella Braverman

Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2023 6:45 pm
by Tubby Isaacs
Ha ha.


Re: Suella Braverman

Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2023 7:17 pm
by kreuzberger
With bated breath, I await Mister Armsteen's brief summary...

Re: Suella Braverman

Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2023 7:27 pm
by RandomElement
Tubby Isaacs wrote: Tue Nov 14, 2023 6:45 pm Ha ha.

The amount of copium* in the replies is something truly something to behold.


*Lying to yourself in order to cope with something. M'lud

Re: Suella Braverman

Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2023 7:33 pm
by Watchman
There’s something really disgusting about all these Tory “resignation” letters, the total lack of awareness, no acceptance of responsibility, simply a statement of how wonderful they are and such genius not recognised. It all everyone else’s fault. Every letter pretty well the same, no self-awareness in any shape or form

Re: Suella Braverman

Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2023 8:06 pm
by kreuzberger
Whatever the Machiavellian machinations, claims, and counter-claims, the stand-out stinger must surely be the accusation of weakness with a side order of Sunak's implied inaction.

That is not a good look for a PM and let's hope that that point is rammed home at tomorrow's PMQs.

Re: Suella Braverman

Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2023 8:27 pm
by Youngian
RandomElement wrote: Tue Nov 14, 2023 7:27 pm
Tubby Isaacs wrote: Tue Nov 14, 2023 6:45 pm Ha ha.

The amount of copium* in the replies is something truly something to behold.
Woebetide Tracey Ullman if she does a Suella impression :lol:

Re: Suella Braverman

Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2023 8:28 pm
by Abernathy
Watchman wrote: Tue Nov 14, 2023 7:33 pm There’s something really disgusting about all these Tory “resignation” letters, the total lack of awareness, no acceptance of responsibility, simply a statement of how wonderful they are and such genius not recognised. It all everyone else’s fault. Every letter pretty well the same, no self-awareness in any shape or form
There must be a standard proforma that always starts : “It has been the greatest privilege of my life to ……..”

Re: Suella Braverman

Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2023 8:29 pm
by Rosvanian
Braverman is an absolute piece of shit. How is it possible for such a person to rise to such a high office.

Re: Suella Braverman

Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2023 9:14 pm
by Andy McDandy
If the vast majority of people in this country support the government, then why are they so fucked in the polls? And if it's because they're not hard right enough, then how come Reform/Reclaim/Refuse aren't polling higher?

Re: Suella Braverman

Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2023 9:27 pm
by Crabcakes
Rosvanian wrote: Tue Nov 14, 2023 8:29 pm Braverman is an absolute piece of shit. How is it possible for such a person to rise to such a high office.
It’s because she’s as stupid as she is unpleasant. She got in as AG because she’d happily break the law for Johnson. She got in as HS because she’d happily break the law for Truss. Sunak kept her in a deal for leadership backing. She hasn’t risen. Everyone around her sank.

Re: Suella Braverman

Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2023 9:45 pm
by satnav
I'm still puzzled as to why Rishi thought he needed to strike some kind of agreement with Suella in the leadership contest. In the contest earlier in the year she only mustered 27 votes so she really was a bit part player in the second contest. If her supporters didn't back Rishi where else would they have gone. Penny Mordaunt was the only credible alternative to Rishi and I don't think many supporters of Suella would have backed Mordaunt. Badenoch did a lot better that Suella in the leadership contest which Truss eventually won. If Rishi was going to do a deal with anybody it would either have been with Mordaunt or Badenoch.

Re: Suella Braverman

Posted: Wed Nov 15, 2023 1:51 am
by Bones McCoy
Rosvanian wrote: Tue Nov 14, 2023 8:29 pm Braverman is an absolute piece of shit. How is it possible for such a person to rise to such a high office.
A tory government - simples.

Re: Suella Braverman

Posted: Wed Nov 15, 2023 2:53 am
by mattomac
Let’s be honest let’s not say this makes Sunak look good, because he appointed her after she had been sacked by Truss a few weeks earlier.

Re: Suella Braverman

Posted: Wed Nov 15, 2023 8:11 am
by soulboy
She refers to a document that he agreed to and numerous follow up letters. To date, no such documents have been produced. Is she bluffing or does something with his signature on agree to supporting her more extreme policies?

I wonder how they will wriggle out of all the FOI requests. Will they try stating that it was purely party politics rather than government?