Good indepth report, sorry don't have any text to post.
https://youtu.be/VukaSbkW2VQ
Good indepth report, sorry don't have any text to post.
https://youtu.be/VukaSbkW2VQ
Pretty ridiculous imho. All of those statements are and exaggeration at best and on par with usual politics.
The do all lie. This one had been tested before with a complaint against an article written by Mr Johnston.
https://www.pressgazette.co.uk/ipso-...ly-inaccurate/
I think the 'Let's take back control' caveat may be the reason it was thrown out. As it could be argued that Mr Johnson was saying the UK should take back control of the money sent to the EU. We'll see
Good reading on this case:
https://thesecretbarrister.com/2019/...probably-know/
Link to the document: https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/...al.pdf?noembed
In the learn something new every file - the Judiciary.uk site runs on wordpress.
From the above article.No, no, no, no and no. No. Just no. And no again. No. The judgment can absolutely not be interpreted as any sort of vindication of Boris Johnson’s character. Indeed, the High Court judgment reads very much as if the judges were proceeding on the assumption that he certainly had lied, or misled, and the challenges to the District Judge’s decision by Boris Johnson’s own lawyers were not concerned with a defence of his character or conduct. Rather his case succeeded on the basis that he may well be a liar or a rotter or a charlatan, but such conduct does not of itself meet the legal criteria for misconduct in public office. So a victory, certainly. But hardly the glowing character reference his supporters might suggest.