Quote: Mild Rover "I think it is a stretch to be honest, whether you use ‘new’ or ‘more’. But if they’d been upfront and included the caveat in bold and italics, then fair enough. So yes, I can understand the the slightly twisted logic. But I think it is a case of a half truth (being generous) being entirely dishonest because of the half that was forgotten (ha!) or withheld.
On the other hand, I think it is one of those things that is just about within the realms of normal political dishonesty. You can mount an, imo feeble, defence of it being technically correct with additional context. A lot of the poop that comes out of Johnson’s mouth is flat out and unequivocally false.'"
These are politicians they never give a straight answer and you have to be able to read through bull. It was like the £300k a day for the NHS - yes it was possible but very unlikely. Like Jess Phillips yesterday - yes you possibly might get a longer sentence for knocking down Winston Churchill than raping a woman but is it probable?