Cummings dishes the dirt

[albie]

Over on his blog, DC has started posting his evidence from the Bozo clusterf..k;
https://dominiccummings.substack.com/p/the-pm-on-hancock-totally-f**king

The FT has coverage, but it might be paywalled;
https://www.ft.com/content/54fe6f07-1b17-4674-9e6c-e48d88538edd

Here we go!

[SydneyRover]

So we are getting what should have come out from questions

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-57498845

[BillyStubbsTears]

Over on his blog, DC has started posting his evidence from the Bozo clusterf..k;
https://dominiccummings.substack.com/p/the-pm-on-hancock-totally-f**king

The FT has coverage, but it might be paywalled;
https://www.ft.com/content/54fe6f07-1b17-4674-9e6c-e48d88538edd

Here we go!

Only a matter of time before he went into full meltdown mode.

This is where he detonates and tries to bring the whole house down.

[SydneyRover]

Will there be repercussions for hancock lying to the science and technology committee?

[Ldr]

You’d hope so

[SydneyRover]

the Guardian 'live' has started to publish screen grabs from cummings blog

[Ldr]

Anything tasty Syd?

[River Don]

Hancock not resigned yet?

I suppose in this age it will be no surprise if he tries to brazen it out after revelations his boss thinks he's f***ing hopeless.

It just shows how far standards have fallen.

[Metalmicky]

Cummings is a nasty piece of work and he is manoeuvring himself into practically unemployable mode with this latest rant - however amusing it may be to view...

[BillyStubbsTears]

MM. Been saying it for years. Cummings is a maniac with a very nasty streak. But that's irrelevant to the question of whether the substantive aspects of what he is talking about are genuine or not. Unless he's absolutely batshit and is forging WhatsApp exchanges, it looks like he has been telling the truth on this and Johnson & Hancock have been lying.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Just thought!

I was wondering why Hancock was fiddling the testing numbers to imply that he'd hit 100k per day by the end of April. We hadn't actually got anywhere near that of course, but there was a sudden spike at the end of April so that he could claim we had the CAPACITY to do 100k tests per day. It seemed a bizarre thing to be obsessing about hitting an arbitrary number on an arbitrary day. Now it's clear why. It's because Cummings had been chewing his b*llocks for a month on the topic.

https://twitter.com/Dominic2306/status/1405112267729952770

[Janso]

MM. Been saying it for years. Cummings is a maniac with a very nasty streak. But that's irrelevant to the question of whether the substantive aspects of what he is talking about are genuine or not. Unless he's absolutely batshit and is forging WhatsApp exchanges, it looks like he has been telling the truth on this and Johnson & Hancock have been lying.

If he is forging them, then he's going to land himself in hot water legally.

[idler]

Surely nobody is that stupid to forge something that could easily be disproved very quickly.

[SydneyRover]

Anything tasty Syd?

went to bed

[SydneyRover]

''are you hopeless'' the reporter asked ........

''I don't think sooooooooooooooooooooo''

[BillyStubbsTears]

Surely nobody is that stupid to forge something that could easily be disproved very quickly.

No of course he hasn't forged them. And this is the point I was making a few weeks ago. Whatever a man's reputation, if he says something and has irrefutable evidence to support it, he's telling the truth. Whatever Cummings's motive is for putting this out, the fact is that at the height of the first wave, Johnson thought his Health Secretary was "totally f**king hopeless". But he didn't replace him.

[SydneyRover]

Fly + wall

Hi, erm argh, cum in cum in, sit down err hope .. erm argh Matt, well argh, how's it going erm old chum .............

[Donnywolf]

MM. Been saying it for years. Cummings is a maniac with a very nasty streak. But that's irrelevant to the question of whether the substantive aspects of what he is talking about are genuine or not. Unless he's absolutely batshit and is forging WhatsApp exchanges, it looks like he has been telling the truth on this and Johnson & Hancock have been lying.

If he is forging them, then he's going to land himself in hot water legally.

He would be ... and he is aware of that - and the "telling sign" for me is Johnson / Number 10 have made no attempt to deny the accusations - because they KNOW the WhatsApp stuff is genuine and I suspect they know / fear there are more - probably many more to come

[Bentley Bullet]

If somone let the cat out of the bag about everything we'd said in private we wouldn't have a friend on earth. I haven't got a friend or workmate that I haven't called totally f**king hopeless or words to that effect.

Cummings is totally f**king hopeless.

[selby]

 His biggest failure is not being hard enough to complete the shake out of the people he was put into the job to get rid of them.
  At the top of the civil service there are some right dead wood just jogging along living off the rest of us, they are the people he wants to open the book on.

[Filo]

When he made these allegations some asked for proof, now he’s published proof, some think he’s a Kitson for doing so, I just think he’s a Kitson full stop

[belton rover]

As with anything, context is key.

1. Anyone who believes that the type of person Cummings is in all this is irrelevant, are going to be very disappointed with the outcome. It's all about public opinion. Much public opinion is that Cummings is a dishonest, slimy toad. Does that mean he is lying? Of course not. But, as his credibility is below zero, his comments and 'proof' will not have the impact they could, or should.
It's like Ian Brady offering proof that his human rights were being neglected in Broadmoor. Everybody believes in equal human rights, but not when Ian f**king Brady's banging on about it.

2. WhatsApp messages. How many times have you (anyone) shouted 'f**king useless ref' to someone who is actually very good at their job?
How many times have you moaned about someone (in private) to another colleague/friend who you regard as a confidante? Even if that someone is actually, most of the time, a good friend/good at their job?
Does anyone really, REALLY believe that a private 'totally useless' comment to a bitter, narcissist scorned, about a specific incident, is proof that Johnson thinks/thought that Hancock is 'totally f**king useless' at his job as Health Minister?

[Glyn_Wigley]

Whataboutery is all very well, but irrelevant, because none of the people you say 'whatabout' are running this country for the rest of us.

[belton rover]

What whataboutery, Glyn?

Let’s put the ‘irrelevant’ argument aside for a second:

Do YOU believe that the private WhatsApp comment is definitive ‘proof’ that Johnson (not you, or anyone else) thinks, and has thought for a long time, that Hancock is ‘totally f**king useless’ at his Job as Health Minister?

[albie]

What Johnson thinks about Hancock is beside the point, and utterly immaterial.
So too is whether you think Cummings is trustworthy.

The issue is whether Johnson and Hancock have breached ministerial rules, and sought to mislead the HoC and the public with deliberate misinformation.

Cummings is showing that at key stages in the decision making process, Johnson and Hancock misled their own colleagues, and in doing so promoted policy choices which cost lives.

They placed management of their image above the public interest.
This is unforgivable, and potentially could lead to criminal action at a later date.

Anyone who cannot see the importance of this from senior elected government personnel should give some consideration to the implications of allowing it to go unchecked.

[Glyn_Wigley]

What whataboutery, Glyn?

Let’s put the ‘irrelevant’ argument aside for a second:

Do YOU believe that the private WhatsApp comment is definitive ‘proof’ that Johnson (not you, or anyone else) thinks, and has thought for a long time, that Hancock is ‘totally f**king useless’ at his Job as Health Minister?

If that message is genuine it means one of two things.

Johnson did think Hancock was useless, but he was too weak to remove someone useless from an office of state - at a time of national crisis, no less.

Or Johnson didn't think Hancock was useless, in which case he is an indiscreet, abusive blowhard.

Neither scenario shows him to be acting how a Prime Minister should.

That's what I think.

[belton rover]

I don’t disagree with that Glyn.
But you never answered my question.

[Glyn_Wigley]

I don’t disagree with that Glyn.
But you never answered my question.

Becuase it doesn't need answering, it doesn't matter if I think it proves what Johnson was thinking when he wrote it because either way one of those two scenarios apply.

What I think it proves is that Johnson wrote it, and that's all it needs to prove.

[albie]

Intelligent piece by Prof Bill Hanage on the management of care homes by Hancock, signed off by Bozo;
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/jun/17/hancock-care-homes-health-secretary

The real value of Cummings input is throwing some clarity by way of explanation on the posturing of the key players.

Did some people die because of the misleading presentation of information by the corrupt crooks in the driving seat?

[SydneyRover]

If somone let the cat out of the bag about everything we'd said in private we wouldn't have a friend on earth. I haven't got a friend or workmate that I haven't called totally f**king hopeless or words to that effect.

Cummings is totally f**king hopeless.

A/ that doesn't surprise anyone that reads your comments &
B/ neither you or your mate were running the country when thousands of lives were in the balance