/ Kim Darroch Resigns

Please Register as a New User in order to reply to this topic.
MonkeyPuzzle 10 Jul 2019

Apparently after Johnson refused to back him in last night's TV debate. Good to get a window into what kind of relationship we can expect with the Trump administration under a Johnson government.

Pathetic and disgusting. We slip yet further.

Report
Bob Kemp 10 Jul 2019
In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

Taking back control and handing it to the US.

Report
thomasadixon 10 Jul 2019
In reply to Bob Kemp:

Not his fault but as soon as this stuff was released he wasn’t going to be able to remain in post.  There’s no point sending a diplomat to someone who won’t talk to him.

Report
Cú Chullain 10 Jul 2019
In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

It is quite a feat to ensure that no civil servant will every trust you again.

Report
tom_in_edinburgh 10 Jul 2019
In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

It had to happen.  An ambassador that the US administration won't talk to is pointless.   Presumably he will have negotiated a nice retirement package since he did nothing wrong. 

The next step is for Boris to become PM, put his own guy into the Foreign Office and makes sure the investigation into who leaked goes nowhere. 

Report
fred99 10 Jul 2019
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:

Followed by a vote of no confidence in the government, a general election, and whoever gets in sacking whichever poodle Johnson has put in as the first act - followed by revoking A50.

The only problem is we could do with someone else at the helm in the Labour Party.

(Although a LibDem/SNP/Green coalition would do nicely).

Report
MonkeyPuzzle 10 Jul 2019
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:

> It had to happen.  An ambassador that the US administration won't talk to is pointless.  

Maybe, but the probable (Oh my god) next PM *has* to publicly back them, and in doing so back the entire principle of an impartial diplomatic service. Whether we then quietly then shuffle the deck with a new ambassador, but not acknowledging it's because of the Twitter tantrums of a capricious, thin-skinned anti-diplomat, is then up to our government.

> The next step is for Boris to become PM, put his own guy into the Foreign Office and makes sure the investigation into who leaked goes nowhere. 

I want to cry. Is it okay if I cry?

Report
In reply to Cú Chullain:

It may be an impressive feat, but I suspect Johnson achieved it long ago.

jcm

Post edited at 14:23
Report
pasbury 10 Jul 2019
In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

> Apparently after Johnson refused to back him in last night's TV debate. Good to get a window into what kind of relationship we can expect with the Trump administration under a Johnson government.

One involving tongues and arses I think.

Report
pasbury 10 Jul 2019
In reply to fred99:

Have a read of this:

https://unherd.com/2019/07/how-the-lib-dems-could-seize-power/

I have zero confidence anything like it will ever happen but it's quite amusing.

Report
dread-i 10 Jul 2019
In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

Trump's just tweeted:

"Never liked that Kim guy, glad he's gone. He called me dysfunctional and inept. And I even went to Korea to talk to him."

Report
Pete Pozman 10 Jul 2019
In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

This really feels like "Empire 2" doesn't it?

This is just an aperitif to get us ready for what is to come. "Take back control"! I suppose the fools who voted for this debacle will have a way of making it look good to themselves. What have we become? Our next prime minister a mini me of Trump even to the extent of looking like him. Looking forward to all those lip smackin' hormones...

Post edited at 16:35
Report
MonkeyPuzzle 10 Jul 2019
In reply to Pete Pozman:

Johnson making the wants of Trump of Farage a reality, even before he's begun the job. It's quite something isn't it?

Report
stevieb 10 Jul 2019
In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

Apparently this is the first time in memory that a friendly country has ever refused to work with our diplomats. 

In some ways Johnson's response was reassuring. The conservatives had been remarkably supportive of Darroch. Theresa May and Jeremy Hunt had backed him. Even the arch right wing Atlanticist Liam Fox had said the right thing. So it was good to know we can still rely on Johnson to cravenly throw our man under a bus for short term advantage. 

Report
In reply to stevieb:

I could have told you a long time ago you could always rely on Johnson for that.

A bigger **** I’ve never met.

jcm

Report
birdie num num 10 Jul 2019
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

You haven’t met me yet.

As for Darroch, well...he should have taken responsibility for his own comments and fallen on his sword immediately the story broke.

Report
MonkeyPuzzle 10 Jul 2019
In reply to birdie num num:

> You haven’t met me yet.

> As for Darroch, well...he should have taken responsibility for his own comments and fallen on his sword immediately the story broke.

"I'm sorry for honestly reporting back in plain language like I'm employed to do, therefore I'm handing in my resignation."

Report
birdie num num 10 Jul 2019
In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

Yep. That kind of thing.

Report
wintertree 10 Jul 2019
In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

The leaker needs to be identified as do their puppet masters.  Unbelievably damaging behaviour on so many levels.

Report
baron 10 Jul 2019
In reply to wintertree:

> The leaker needs to be identified as do their puppet masters.  Unbelievably damaging behaviour on so many levels.

Was there not a similar leak in 2016?

Report
Postmanpat 10 Jul 2019
In reply to stevieb:

So it was good to know we can still rely on Johnson to cravenly throw our man under a bus for short term advantage. 

>

  Too late. Most of the members have probably voted. I think this might actually have changed a few minds.

Report
Eric9Points 10 Jul 2019
In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

Well I doubt very much it has anything to do with Boris. After the leak he couldn't do his job and no doubt will get another posting to somewhere else when one becomes available.

What puzzles me is who leaked it and why. It's not in the national interest and no one has anything to gain politically from it. If Boris wants a new US ambassador when he's anointed he can just replace him.

Presumably it comes down to money or spite.

Report
wercat 10 Jul 2019
In reply to stevieb:

I can't think of Trump's America as any more friendly than Vlad's Russia.  Better Together with Europe

Johnson's only interest is Self Service not Public Service

Post edited at 19:47
Report
Pete Pozman 10 Jul 2019
In reply to birdie num num:

> You haven’t met me yet.

> As for Darroch, well...he should have taken responsibility for his own comments and fallen on his sword immediately the story broke.

Should'nt he have waited for Trump to tweet  his opinions first? 

Post edited at 19:51
Report
MonkeyPuzzle 10 Jul 2019
In reply to Eric9Points:

> Well I doubt very much it has anything to do with Boris. After the leak he couldn't do his job and no doubt will get another posting to somewhere else when one becomes available.

Whether he could have practically continued is one thing, but for the likely PM-in-waiting to refuse to back arguably the most respected ambassador we have in the diplomatic service for literally doing his job is slightly concerning, wouldn't you say?

> What puzzles me is who leaked it and why. It's not in the national interest and no one has anything to gain politically from it. If Boris wants a new US ambassador when he's anointed he can just replace him.

> Presumably it comes down to money or spite.

There's always something to be gained politically by someone.

Report
Pete Pozman 10 Jul 2019
In reply to Eric9Points:

Johnson thinks he's gained politically. We might be in for a surprise though; there might be one or two Tories who retain a notion of honour and recognise he has shown none. 

I'm not holding my breath...

Report
summo 10 Jul 2019
In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

What it does show is no communication is secure and the embassy must up its game with both IT systems and staff vetting. 

Report
thomasadixon 10 Jul 2019
In reply to Postmanpat:

I've not seen the debate to be fair but I get the impression he just refused to say that he would back him to stay in post.  Should he have really?  What would be gained by that?  He'd then have to start his term having soured any chance at a relationship with Trump, and there was never any chance Darroch was going to stay in post whatever Boris said.  Wasn't he just being sensibly diplomatic?  Edit - I have seen his comments today, which are Darroch's great and did a good job and the cables should not have been leaked, which all seems reasonable.

It all just seems like politicking to me...

Post edited at 20:05
Report
stevieb 10 Jul 2019
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

> I could have told you a long time ago you could always rely on Johnson for that.

yes, Johnson delivered. But Fox really surprised me. I really don't like or rate him, but I thought he stood up for Darroch, and Britain's right to choose our own diplomats, pretty well. 

Report
birdie num num 10 Jul 2019
In reply to Pete Pozman:

Why? The damage was already done. Do you think Trump would have been magnanimous or something?

No use trying to hang on in there while political folk bleat a bit of support.

Christ knows what folk here think BJ had to do with any of this. He took the pragmatic view. 

Report
DerwentDiluted 10 Jul 2019
In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

Why do I feel like we are living through an episode of The Day Today??

I want to wake up and find this is all a figment of Chris Morris' imagination;

Post edited at 20:46
Report
MG 10 Jul 2019
In reply to birdie num num:

Yes, I'm sure Trump Putin etc will see it that way and not infer that it is now possible to bully the UK into changing diplomats if they shout loud enough at our politicians. 

Report
MonkeyPuzzle 10 Jul 2019
In reply to birdie num num:

> Why? The damage was already done. Do you think Trump would have been magnanimous or something?

> No use trying to hang on in there while political folk bleat a bit of support.

> Christ knows what folk here think BJ had to do with any of this. He took the pragmatic view. 

Maybe bleating that an absolutely unprecedented personal insult against a UK diplomat doing their job is what's unacceptable in this situation, rather than refusing to show any solidarity whatsoever with them. Johnson took the easy view. I thought Corbyn was the one who wasn't going to stand up for British interests?

Report
pasbury 10 Jul 2019
In reply to birdie num num:

> Why? The damage was already done. Do you think Trump would have been magnanimous or something?

> No use trying to hang on in there while political folk bleat a bit of support.

> Christ knows what folk here think BJ had to do with any of this. He took the pragmatic view. 

You really are full of shit. Pragmatic view my arse.

Report
pasbury 10 Jul 2019
In reply to summo:

And not bother trying to find someone who probably broke the law?

Report
HansStuttgart 10 Jul 2019
In reply to summo:

> What it does show is no communication is secure and the embassy must up its game with both IT systems and staff vetting. 


With staff vetting you mean Theresa May going with a broom through the higher regions of the Tory party? Would be fun for a change....

Report
summo 10 Jul 2019
In reply to pasbury:

> And not bother trying to find someone who probably broke the law?

Of course not. They should be able to easily solve that too. 

Report
jcw 10 Jul 2019
In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

Well, what I hope is that Theresa as a final fling appoints the new Ambassador, before that unspeakable ... Well what terms shall I use ?coward? takes over hold of government. What a nauseating pillock  managed by that shit IDS. 

Report
Tyler 10 Jul 2019
In reply to Postmanpat:

>   Too late. Most of the members have probably voted. I think this might actually have changed a few minds.

Not, presumably, any of the 54% of Tory party members who think Trump would make a good PM! F*ck me the Tories are an odious bunch, aren't they? 

Report
Tyler 10 Jul 2019
In reply to summo:

> What it does show is no communication is secure and the embassy must up its game with both IT systems and staff vetting. 

Well which is it? Lax IT or a leak? I'm  sure you're an expert but in my inexpert view I doubt this has anything to do with IT and everything to do with a senior civil servant or a politician. Good luck finding a vetting process that weeds out self-serving careerists who would throw someone under a bus for personal gain from that lot. There'd be no one left to run the country, then what sort of a mess would we be in?

Post edited at 21:58
Report
pasbury 10 Jul 2019
In reply to summo:

> Of course not. They should be able to easily solve that too. 

I'm sure it's going to be Boris' absolute top priority.

Report
Tyler 10 Jul 2019
In reply to thomasadixon:

> I've not seen the debate to be fair but I get the impression he just refused to say that he would back him to stay in post.  Should he have really?  What would be gained by that?  

A bit of self respect for him and the country? This is the poster boy for a mob who thinks it's ok to plunge the country into a recession to 'stand up to Brussels' but  are  happy to see him bend over for a clown who has been no friend of the UK. 

It's depressing that we've sunk so low that so many people can't countenance the idea of the UK PM doing something because it's the right thing to do rather than because he stands to gain personally. FFS Macron managed to stand up to Trump.

Post edited at 22:00
Report
birdie num num 10 Jul 2019
In reply to pasbury:

You should really try breathing into a paper bag

Report
pasbury 10 Jul 2019
In reply to birdie num num:

Why? Are you hinting that you were trying to be funny or ironic or something, perhaps playing devil's advocate?

I think you've failed in all cases.

Report
Rog Wilko 10 Jul 2019
In reply to pasbury:

> And not bother trying to find someone who probably broke the law?

Shouldn't be too hard. Unless I'm mistaken the emails are several years old and were sent when Johnson was Foreign Sec. They could quite easily have have found their way to the odious Isabel Oakeshott as and when required. Isn't she just vile? 

Report
summo 10 Jul 2019
In reply to Tyler:

> Well which is it? Lax IT or a leak? I'm  sure you're an expert but in my inexpert view I doubt this has anything to do with IT and everything to do with a senior civil servant or a politician. Good luck finding a vetting process that weeds out self-serving careerists who would throw someone under a bus for personal gain from that lot. There'd be no one left to run the country, then what sort of a mess would we be in?

I've no idea what it who, but if hasn't been hacked then a good IT system should show who is the dishonest civil servant. 

Report
pasbury 10 Jul 2019
In reply to Rog Wilko:

Yes isn't it odd that she, of all people, gets the scoop?

Report
pasbury 10 Jul 2019
In reply to summo:

> I've no idea what it who, but if hasn't been hacked then a good IT system should show who is the dishonest civil servant. 

On the other hand there are always weaknesses in any system of communication otherwise nothing can be communicated.

Blaming IT weaknesses is like blaming trees for the weaknesses in a stable door after the horse has bolted.

Report
summo 10 Jul 2019
In reply to pasbury:

> On the other hand there are always weaknesses in any system of communication otherwise nothing can be communicated.

> Blaming IT weaknesses is like blaming trees for the weaknesses in a stable door after the horse has bolted.

That would depend how access levels are managed, the ability to transfer data externally etc. Beside I don't know, but I bet there are geeks in gchq who already do.  

Report
Postmanpat 10 Jul 2019
In reply to thomasadixon:

   He should have said what Hunt said, but if he wished to could have disassociated himself from Darroch’s view.

  Interestingly, Peston thinks Boris is messaging not Trump but civil servants; that he’ll call the shots eg. on brexit.

  

Post edited at 22:59
Report
Pete Pozman 10 Jul 2019
In reply to birdie num num:

> Why? The damage was already done. Do you think Trump would have been magnanimous or something?

I was being sarcastic. 

You're quite right though Trump is not capable of magnanimity, or, when you come to think of it, any kind of behaviour that is remotely normal. And the damage is only just beginning to be done. 

Start saying goodbye to everything you thought was permanent and normal. Like "British values" which Johnson has just debased. 

Report
birdie num num 10 Jul 2019
In reply to pasbury:

> Why? Are you hinting that you were trying to be funny or ironic or something, perhaps playing devil's advocate?

> I think you've failed in all cases.

It’s probably because I really am full of shit. 

Report
thomasadixon 11 Jul 2019
In reply to Postmanpat:

>    He should have said what Hunt said, but if he wished to could have disassociated himself from Darroch’s view.

Hunt is foreign secretary and had to speak out backing him, Boris isn’t.  He said (from clips) that he’d keep Darroch in position, but he knows full well Darroch will be gone.  Other countries can’t pick ambassadors, of course, but they can practically veto and Trump being who he is means he’s vetoed.  Hunt won’t be calling for his reinstatement if he wins, he won’t keep him in place until the end of the year.  Hunt’s answer was dishonest.

Boris said that Darroch did nothing wrong, that he’s a great guy, and he probably agrees with him.  He said we should go after the leaker.  He refused to say he’d do something neither of them will do.  He gave a politicians answer to a highly unlikely hypothetical choice.

I don’t see why Hunt’s answer is better, it risks extending a pointless spat (Trump’s already bashing May, he’d attack Hunt too I’m sure) and gains nothing.  Or it can be quietly over when May leaves.

>   Interestingly, Peston thinks Boris is messaging not Trump but civil servants; that he’ll call the shots eg. on brexit.

With the line about him being the one to choose?  He would be if he was Prime Minister, I think his point was he chooses not Trump.

Report
wercat 11 Jul 2019
In reply to thomasadixon:

Pop! You just burst yourself

> I've not seen the debate to be fair but I get the impression he just refused to say that he would back him to stay in post.  Should he have really?  What would be gained by that?  He'd then have to start his term having soured any chance at a relationship with Trump, and there was never any chance Darroch was going to stay in post whatever Boris said.  Wasn't he just being sensibly diplomatic?  Edit - I have seen his comments today, which are Darroch's great and did a good job and the cables should not have been leaked, which all seems reasonable.

> It all just seems like politicking to me...

Report
summo 11 Jul 2019
In reply to thomasadixon:

Is it not standard procedure that each new PM appoints 'their' ambassadors. Often nothing changes dramatically and posts are shuffled slow time. So it's not impossible that this guy knew he could never work with Boris as they had clashed when he was foreign secretary. There could easily be more personal politics behind the scenes. 

Report
Rog Wilko 11 Jul 2019
In reply to summo:

> I've no idea what it who, but if hasn't been hacked then a good IT system should show who is the dishonest civil servant. 

..... or scheming politician.

Report
MargieB 11 Jul 2019
In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

Absolutely right that you point out that there is an essential separation of powers/responsibilities in our democracy.

Add onto my dummies guide  to autocracy the idea of  removing the  independence  of the diplomatic and intelligence service  to objectively analyse and present these analyses to government to assess and act upon .

These analyses are  presented to our government of the day to act upon. Remove objectivity, weaken analysis, you get distorted politics and uninformed governmental decisions. Trump doesn't like extra analysis- he thinks he knows it all. But a huge ego like his would.Everything becomes dependent on one man. It is not in our democratic electoral interests to see our civil service undermined by the tantrums of such a man who is undermining the objective mechanisms of his own democracy and is now starting on ours, by demanding we remove a man who did his job. He was part of the checks and balances of our democratic system that give complexity to governmental decision making- and we need that. 

Hunt reiterated this essential fact of our system, Boris did not.

Post edited at 09:27
Report
dh73 11 Jul 2019
In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

both Trump and Boris are a*seholes of the highest degree, but in fairness, surely international diplomacy is all about "face"?

once Darroch's comments were made public was it really tenable for him to continue in post? Would we really expect any leader, particularly one so petulant as Trump to ignore such a public slight? that would make him and the US look exceptionally weak. what would we do if for example the French ambassador made a similar comment about us? probably not issue childish tweets, but our basic response may well be fundamentally the same?

is it not in our country's best interests to have an ambassador that Trump will speak to? if that means Darroch has to go, so be it. I am sure that he is well aware of the "rules" of the world in which he operates. not a pleasant world to be sure, but live by the sword...

Report
MargieB 11 Jul 2019
In reply to dh73:

Your missing the diplomat's essential reason for resigning- not that it is now awkward but he specifically resigned because a future PM, Boris, did not reiterate this essential aspect of our democracy. This diplomat said the Boris/Hunt debate directly affected his decision. He had till only the end of the year and he was retiring anyway- any government could have rode this out, pointing to his imminent retirement. No,he is making a very specific point about Boris and the fact the man won't stand up to Trump because Boris' political position has made him dependent upon trump because he says he is prepared to perilously throw this country onto the economic mercies of America in a default No deal, whereby we scramble for any economic deals in the face of a huge economic drop.Boris is prepared to compromise an essential part of our system and that is not good in a PM.

Post edited at 09:45
Report
MonkeyPuzzle 11 Jul 2019
In reply to dh73:

> both Trump and Boris are a*seholes of the highest degree, but in fairness, surely international diplomacy is all about "face"?

Exactly why Johnson should have publicly unequivocally supported Darroch and at least left any practical capitulation to the orange man-baby for behind the scenes with a publicly defensible excuse, not just chucked him to the wolves.

> once Darroch's comments were made public was it really tenable for him to continue in post? Would we really expect any leader, particularly one so petulant as Trump to ignore such a public slight? that would make him and the US look exceptionally weak. what would we do if for example the French ambassador made a similar comment about us? probably not issue childish tweets, but our basic response may well be fundamentally the same?

No we wouldn't. We would have made a statement saying the leaks were concerning but that our relationship remains as strong as ever, possibly with a face-to-face bollocking out of the public gaze. This kind of attack and then refusal to work with a supposed close ally is unprecedented.

> is it not in our country's best interests to have an ambassador that Trump will speak to? if that means Darroch has to go, so be it. I am sure that he is well aware of the "rules" of the world in which he operates. not a pleasant world to be sure, but live by the sword...

Maybe practically he would have had to shuffle off, but it's the *public* display of subservience to Trump's tantrums that are the issue.

Report
TobyA 11 Jul 2019
In reply to summo:

> Is it not standard procedure that each new PM appoints 'their' ambassadors.

Not really, and definitely not anything like the US system.

Report
MargieB 11 Jul 2019
In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

Too Right!!!

There is a logic to Boris' actions but his premise of a default No Deal is the underlying cause of his inaction. He is driving his own choices. Change this/him and we are driven towards a different set of decisions. I have no confidence in Boris to lead this country in his decision making.

Post edited at 10:04
Report
TobyA 11 Jul 2019
In reply to dh73:

>  what would we do if for example the French ambassador made a similar comment about us? probably not issue childish tweets, but our basic response may well be fundamentally the same?

I'm sure the French ambassador to the Court of St James is saying a lot worse about our government currently, and I suspect our government knows much of what is being said (as well as actual spying on each other, diplomats literally just tell each other and their host governments what they are saying as a way of exerting influence)! What Trump did is very very different from normal.

Report
John2 11 Jul 2019
In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

'possibly with a face-to-face bollocking out of the public gaze'

No bollocking required. The only person who should receive a bollocking (or worse) is the person who leaked the messages, if they were leaked rather than hacked.

Report
fred99 11 Jul 2019
In reply to pasbury:

> Have a read of this:

> I have zero confidence anything like it will ever happen but it's quite amusing.


Well found. I have to admit that would be my preferred result, including proportional representation in future - we can but dream.

Report
fred99 11 Jul 2019
In reply to wintertree:

> The leaker needs to be identified as do their puppet masters.  Unbelievably damaging behaviour on so many levels.


Precisely. Could this act be interpreted as Treason - after all it has affected security due to our "special relationship" with the USA.

Report
jcw 11 Jul 2019
In reply to MargieB:

Although a bit tangential to the main theme I would add to you remarks that my own reading of the general line of Johnson’s tactics is quite straightforward:

He has every intention of remaining PM after the deadline date

He knows perfectly well he can’t get a new deal, though he will use his usual bluster and diplomatic ineptitude to try and show it is the EU’s intransigence

All Parliamentary and other manoeuvres are therefore welcome so long as they can be shown to be deliberately aimed at frustrating his avowed aim of getting out of the EU, come what may

Report
elsewhere 11 Jul 2019
In reply to fred99:

I'll be surprised if the leaker is ever publicly identified. The journalist will protect their source and there are probably many possible sources of the leak. There will be loads of bits government (foreign office, trade, agriculture, defence, health etc) with a legitimate interest in post brexit us relations who will have seen it.

Post edited at 12:47
Report
The Wild Scallion 11 Jul 2019
SDM 11 Jul 2019
In reply to MargieB:

> Your missing the diplomat's essential reason for resigning- not that it is now awkward but he specifically resigned because a future PM, Boris, did not reiterate this essential aspect of our democracy. This diplomat said the Boris/Hunt debate directly affected his decision. He had till only the end of the year and he was retiring anyway- any government could have rode this out, pointing to his imminent retirement. 

He may have said that the debate influenced his decision but his position became untenable as soon as Trump spoke out on the issue. 

He couldn't continue his role as the ambassador to the US when it had been made clear he would no longer have access to the president of the US or anyone in his team. 

Johnson's lack of support may have changed the timing of his resignation but his resignation was already inevitable before the debate. 

Report
MargieB 12 Jul 2019
In reply to SDM:

I'm afraid I disagree that his resignation was inevitable because Trump said he would not work with him. Trump is quite used to rubbing up people the wrong way and if they criticise him, he has in the past been able to meet them and continue doing "business" as he narrowly sees politics.- he tries this on all the time and sometimes wins out but it is a ruse that can be ignored. It was entirely up to the British to ride this through with principle at its core- entirely possible to have faith that Trump would capitulate  and do business with anyone he has to, especially as he not quite a lone ruler in the White House and would have others around him pressurizing him to do  business with the UK. This is done all the time in politics. But Trump is treating other people's political systems like his own business where loyalty  to him and him alone is the norm- we should never allow these business rules to become the rules of democracies- and we should show Trump his ignorance of democratic standards by standing up to him.

And Boris did not do that.

Post edited at 09:50
Report
MargieB 12 Jul 2019
In reply to SDM:

It does concern me that the public  understands the ambassador's resignation as a commentary on Boris . The ambassador has shouted it loud and clear. I hope the way you are seeing it  does not fix itself into the public mind because it is an interpretation of his resignation as "inevitable" { pushed out}  whereas the ambassador voluntarily  acted and timed his action to uphold principle.PM May did not force a resignation. Maybe the ambassador is too subtle for general consumption to get his point across but maybe not. We'll see how that goes.

I hope the ambassador has managed to expose for general consumption the finer points of our democracy.

It also depends upon the standard of our journalism in reporting these events.

Post edited at 10:24
Report
wercat 12 Jul 2019
In reply to MargieB:

Well said.   If Boris becomes PM I will have lost any contact or belief in our society as it exists at present.  This Brexit and its proponents gaining power is like a living nightmare coming true.   I will have no capital investid in the system and perhaps it is time to become an anarchist till we either capsize or get back our sanity

I might be understating my feelings of despair and anger

Post edited at 10:42
Report
MargieB 12 Jul 2019
In reply to wercat:

It is a living nightmare!Yes.

putting trump into power in the first place started a trajectory

Boris is another but better at it, strategist; jcw above seems to have got his strategy well understood whereby Boris contorts everything to maintain power and offload blame onto everyone else but himself to maintain his authority and scramble through the problem of Brexit.

But there is Parliament. There maybe  processes to fall back on that get us out of this tangle. And there has to be the underlying veracity and workability in the arguments as to what eventually best suits economic and social justice issues in the UK.

We've got to live in hope.

Post edited at 10:55
Report
pasbury 12 Jul 2019
In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:

The met have now launched a criminal investigation to find the culprit. I hope they are successful.

Report
MonkeyPuzzle 12 Jul 2019
In reply to pasbury:

And the people pulling the strings. It absolutely stinks.

Report
HansStuttgart 12 Jul 2019
In reply to SDM:

> He may have said that the debate influenced his decision but his position became untenable as soon as Trump spoke out on the issue. 

> He couldn't continue his role as the ambassador to the US when it had been made clear he would no longer have access to the president of the US or anyone in his team. 

> Johnson's lack of support may have changed the timing of his resignation but his resignation was already inevitable before the debate. 


Do you think the same if it hadn't been Trump but Rouhani of Iran?

Report
Pete Pozman 16 Jul 2019
In reply to MargieB:

Brexit started the trajectory. And it is to this country's eternal shame. 

I really believe Trump wouldn't  have scraped his election victory without the destabilising example set by this country's Brexit voters. They have shown the rest of the world that even Britain's notoriously unexcitable voters can be captured by extreme right wing demagoguery. Who'd a thought it? 

Post edited at 09:59
Report
FactorXXX 16 Jul 2019
In reply to Pete Pozman:

> Brexit started the trajectory. And it is to this country's eternal shame. 
> I really believe Trump wouldn't  have scraped his election victory without the destabilising example set by this country's Brexit voters. They have shown the rest of the world that even Britain's notoriously unexcitable voters can be captured by extreme right wing demagoguery. Who'd a thought it? 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h2QZprRgxDc

Report
Pete Pozman 12:43 Tue
In reply to FactorXXX:

What's this got to do with?

Find the "I can't believe Ronald Reagan is president" clip. Perhaps more apposite? Except the current situation is far more bizarre. 

Report
L Kaybee 16:54 Thu

It had to happen.

Report

Please Register as a New User in order to reply to this topic.