The big joke about all this is you have to edit his speeches, not to make him look bad, but because they're filled with barely coherent, dementia addled nonsense.
this post was submitted on 10 Nov 2025
12 points (100.0% liked)
UK Politics
4393 readers
95 users here now
General Discussion for politics in the UK.
Please don't post to both !uk_politics@feddit.uk and !unitedkingdom@feddit.uk .
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.
Posts should be related to UK-centric politics, and should be either a link to a reputable news source for news, or a text post on this community.
Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.
If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread. (These things should be publicly discussed)
Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.
Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I sincerely hope that BBC lawyers will refer him to "Arkell v. Pressdram" response.
And this is why there was no point in resigning in advance. It gets you nothing.
It was a pretext for Davie to resign. He’s been on the way to it for a while.
It's taken him six years to even realise his speech was edited? And even then only because it was on the news?