Muahahaha wrote: » Yeah Leo is after dodging a bullet there by leaving Fitzgerald off the ticket. She can get back in her box now that she is not even getting nominated, I guess the government didnt have confidence in her and its not difficult to see why after that disastrous stint she had in Justice. Have any of the Fine Gael lads managed to find that bit of the Charleton report that exonerated her for misleading the Dail? Its been a couple of days now, I thought they would be back with the links by now.
blanch152 wrote: » The real question is whether she would have resigned if the findings of the Charleton Report were known at the time of her resignation.
blanch152 wrote: » Except that wasn't the point being made, as has been repeatedly pointed out. SF Poster: Did the Charleton Report exonerate Frances Fitzgerald? Others: Would she have resigned if its contents were known at that time? SF Poster: Did the Charleton Report exonerate Frances Fitzgerald? Others: Would she have resigned if its contents were known at that time? They are overlapping but distinctive questions, for both of which the answer may be no, but ending up with a remaining unanswered question for which opinions may validly differ over whether she was harshly treated.
Brendan Bendar wrote: » Is this serious pandemic still going on, can anyone say ? Seems there are more pressing issues at bay? Uhmmm.........
JohnnyFlash wrote: » We can all refer to reports, Brendan. Like the report that says that SF is still ruled from the top by the Army Council of the Provisional IRA. I wonder who will be replacing Bobby Storey on that? :eek:
Brendan Bendar wrote: » Hard to know John, some gimp with a big ‘ bouncer’ head on him, and a gob like a bottle opener,I suspect. Who’s the finance guy up north, that lad might fit the bill. Uhmm.....
JohnnyFlash wrote: » And a leather jacket from the final reductions rail in Mr. Big 'N' Tall.
McMurphy wrote: » Blanch being careless with the truth shocker.... The Charleton report was brought up by yourself or marko in a response to some of us stating that her disastrous tenure as justice minister was reason enough for her not to be considered for big Philos job.... "But the Charleston report exonerated her" Really? Where in the report was she exonerated for misleading the Dail, and Leo, and have the government all but a fanny hair away from collapsing? "Links to report" Yeah I read that - where does it exonerate her for misleading the Dail, Leo, and nearly collapsing the government? **Tumbleweed** In comes blanch with a "would she have ever needed to step down if the Charleton..... When that got knocked back..... "Anyways, what about homeless numbers" :cool:
blanch152 wrote: » Won’t be Mary-Lou, that’s for sure. Anyone else think that the woman is still suffering from post-Covid syndrome as it is being called? Her performances in recent weeks have been very flat.
JohnnyFlash wrote: » Respect your posts in general, Blanch, but wouldn't like to mark Mary's card just because she had Covid. Better than that. If we were to be critical of SF in opposition then we'd look at: 1) Hundreds of people (mostly fat men) being sent up by bus to the fake funeral of a member of the army council of the PIRA. Sinister. During lockdown. They even made poor auld Pearse go. Standing at the back with his ashamed auld head on him. 2) Davey Boy 'Free State Bastards' Cullinane being the spokesperson for Health. Over O'Reilly? What did she do that caused that demotion? 3) The hero worship of Psycho Adams. Evil is a strange word, but you could legitimately use it towards him. 4) One of their TD's getting a free house and not paying any rent on that because they made a decision not to do so. 5) 50 properties and 200 employees. 6) The Army Council. The Green Book allowed for a few members of the political wing to sit on the fringes of the Army Council. Has that changed?
smurgen wrote: » This Neale Richmond lad would want to give Twitter a break. He's having a howler.https://twitter.com/AranFitzpatrick/status/1302244406976802817?s=19
McMurphy wrote: » Is he the fella that got the piss torn out of him over the baby box tweets?
smurgen wrote: » Fine Gael after seriously undermining Ireland's status at the EU. Why should they be allowed be nominate their two candidates again? A total political non entity at this stage. What do they actually stand for? What do they believe?
smurgen wrote: » Varadkar would want to wake up and do less time with the photoshoots.https://twitter.com/RuthCoppingerSP/status/1303653325993369600?s=19
Muahahaha wrote: » Debenhams is just iike Clearys all over again. And just like Clearys we have FG politicians doing their hand wringing and saying isnt it terrible. Ss if they didnt have the power to prevent companies shafting their employees in the first place.
blanch152 wrote: » Poor Ruth, reduced to meaningless rants on Twitter. I see she has finally decided to convert her office back to housing having spent years denying people the opportunity to use it for what it was built for while at the same time hypocritically whinging about the homeless.
dundalkfc10 wrote: » This has nothing to do with Ruth. Its got to do with Leo not giving a **** what happens the Debenhams workers.
Truthvader wrote: » Grow TF up. Debenhams went bust, They couldn't pay their rent. What is your solution? Force the owners of shops to give them away to Debenhams for free? Pay the workers forever even though the business is gone. Take money rightfully due to other creditors and give it to the workers? Business's fail. The backers, bankers and investors lose their money. The workers lose their jobs. Its a sh1t situation for all. The workers are already entitled to statutory redundancy and should be using that time and money to look for another job (or become a capitalist because apparently its really easy and you get loadsa money forever). Lightweight agitators like Coppinger do no-one any favours by persuading them they are entitled to money they are not entitled to. Just using them for personal publicity
