Evil Knievil: Cummings must stay

1 mins. to read
Evil Knievil: Cummings must stay

The Daily Mail has run a campaign trying to see Dominic Cummings ejected from 10 Downing Street. This would come as a surprise to some given that Cummings was a powerful force to achieve Brexit, a cause espoused by the Daily Mail. However, the reason is that the Daily Mail decided that if they were to take their stance on Cummings, they could develop a daily hate which was one of Lord Northcliffe’s targets when he founded the Daily Mail perhaps one hundred years ago.

As a result, page after page of the Daily Mail has seen several of their top writers issuing tons of deceitful drivel. They have therefore degraded themselves along of course with their editor and the proprietor.

BBC TV news last night featured a BBC reporter, a Mark Easton, who put up twelve voters and asked those who agreed with the eject Cummings crew to put up their hands. About seven raised their hands. Easton was of course trying to show that a majority wanted Cummings ejected – and it was Easton who had selected the twelve!

I did not check the Channel 4 news since they are irredeemably committed to the Remain cause and therefore it is pointless for them to consider the truth relating to Cummings.

Over at the Labour Party Sir Keir Starmer said that he would sack Cummings. Well, there’s a surprise.

Elsewhere, lots of sillies have been squawking away. For instance, there are the forty Conservative MPs who feel that their majorities can be attacked and therefore they have dreamt up a basis (still not clear to me) whereby Cummings should go. Fortunately, so far, BoJo is standing his ground.

And then there are the bishops. There are so many silly bishops warbling out here that I see no point in listing them. However, I am reminded of Lord Hailsham’s view (of fifty+ years ago) that priests and politics should be kept apart. The reason is that priests simply are not up to the challenge of considering the difference between religious and political views.

Finally, in case they do not, readers ought to know that Cummings’ father, he of the north eastern farm, is a retired Lord Justice of Appeal. The chances of Cummings not having had first class advice are zero.

Comments (16)

  • ODC says:

    Speaking of drivel ahem…

  • Andrew Somerville says:

    His father is a retired oil company executive.
    His uncle who WAS a retired Justice of Appeal died last month so I think it improbable that he provided any advice.

  • Bobuk says:

    News Night made itself totally ridiculous devoting an entire show to something so utterly trivial.
    Is there really nothing in the world that is more important and news worthy?

  • Tony says:

    And amid all the kerfuffle, not one of the sanctimonious critics stops to ask: as both parents realised they might be coming down with Covid-19 infection, what was the best solution for the good of the Cummings’ little 4-year old boy? Answer, given the lack of childcare options in London: go to a safe location where the parents can self-isolate at minimal risk to anyone else, close to other family members who can look after the child if the worst happens and both parents have to go to hospital. What else were the Cummings meant to do? Lie there and die at home, and leave the child to fend for itself? Oh well, at least they obeyed the Lockdown advice.

  • John Regan says:

    What is the difference to his wages if he pulls out hiself or Boris sacks him

  • John Atkinson says:

    If Cummings was showing symptoms, he should have stayed put. Illnesses of any kind are best treated by rest, keeping warm and plenty of fluids. I doubt if C. took advice from his father. He should go.

  • Pete Smith says:

    I think the point you miss (or ignore) is that Boris and the Tories were elected by a large majority because the electorate felt that they were more in touch with their views than the loony left – the ‘we are all in this together feeling’.
    The fact that Cummings made this road trip when and where he did is bad enough but his inability to be humble or apologise for the double standards is particularly damaging to the Tory ‘we are all in this together feeling’.
    At the same time, the loony left are being squashed by a rising, more centrist labour party.
    Thankfully, there is likely to be sufficient time before another election is held in which the public can voice their frustration with the Tories, and much of the detail here will be forgotten, but if this is a precursor of how the Tories behave to the newly won voters, their majority could be another one term wonder.

  • Peter G McGinty says:

    Nice one Evil.
    Humour can overcome the brainwashed!

  • Roy Leggate says:

    I have three local Guardian reading friends, who all hate DC but who regularly have friends round for drinks in their gardens and one who has just driven 200 miles and stayed the night to see his girlfriend. They somehow do not see their hypocrisy.

  • Angus Davidson says:

    I totally agree Cummings MUST stay. All these sanctimonious critics – I just wonder if they were in the same position, I bet they would have done. The same.

  • Peter Morrison says:

    I subscribe to MI for investment ideas – not poorly informed and opinionated political rants.
    That said – even though his father was nothing of the sort alleged by the author, it would take a pretty drunk or corrupted Lord Justice of Appeal to read the very simple wording of the statute and then find that what DC did was permitted anywhere in Section 6.(2) – childcare, or no childcare.
    BoJo, Gove etc all choose their words carefully – keeping away from the statute – in saying they felt it was “within guidance”: – such crap and waffle, avoiding anything meaningful and maximising wiggle room, while they know it was contrary to the statute.

    The point is that DC and they think he’s entitled to exercise his instinct when all lowly people were expected to comply and fined if they didn’t. And the above contributor thinks DC specially should have been permitted his instinct – more irrelevant opinionation when the statute doesn’t permit instinct either. Then we’re asked to agree that going for a drive is an appropriate way to test whether our eyesight is good enough to drive. (More drunk Lord Justices of Appeal ?)

    Whether he should be removed from post is another subject. Equal treatment, so long as we don’t find he lied and if he had the humility to say sorry, would suggest a fine – not loosing his job.

    But why are we discussing this here?

  • philip baker says:

    A trivial matter.
    Yet no one asks ‘Did we need lockdown’?
    Did we need to destroy our economy and borrow billions?
    Could we have gotten by with a little social distancing and face mask for all?
    Where are the real questions?
    Everyone seems to believe lockdown was a given!

  • Pete Smith says:

    As we have seen in recent days/weeks, the public simply do not understand what ‘a little social distancing’ means.
    The purpose of lockdown was not to limit the number of people who will get covid, it was to delay the spread of the virus to provide time for the NHS to gearing up to deal with it.
    Perhaps think of it as more along the lines of Chamberlain’s appeasement, we all knew the direction of travel, but we desperately needed more time to get ready.
    Yes the economy has been damaged, and hastened the recession that was due anyway, but given that the UK no longer really makes or export anything, has the money been lost – or has it just stopped circulating for a bit ?

  • Mark Lyndon says:

    You don’t know what’s going on
    You’ve been away for far too long
    You can’t come back and think you are still mine
    You’re out of touch, my baby
    My poor discarded baby
    I said, baby, baby, baby, you’re out of timeWell, baby, baby, baby, you’re out of time
    I said, baby, baby, baby, you’re out of time
    You are all left out
    Out of there without a doubt
    ‘Cause baby, baby, baby, you’re out of time

  • TCB says:

    The country don’t deserve people of his talent and the BBC will only tolerate people with negative, destructive views

  • James Hipwell says:

    Why would anyone believe a word Cummings says? I thought this unelected and unaccountable adviser had previously shown himself to be a skilful liar (350m to the NHS, Turkish EU membership etc) but the utterly implausible Barnard Castle eye test ruse shows that arrogance and hubris have taken over. The fact he was prepared to use his son to get him out of the scrape shows he will stoop to any level to retain his coveted, and very powerful, role. He is a disgrace and his reputation, such as it is, will never recover. It is an impossibility and he is fatally wounded. His removal from office is imminent.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *