Andrew Marr show today...

Watch it again! A terrible babble of sound.

So 2 people are dead - and you call that a 'mistake by the other' - after 10 years in gvt? Really. Oh my ...

Its not low; just political nonce. All Parties take advantage of mistakes by the other,

you perhaps should listen to it again- the only reason Marr interrupted is because Johnson did NOT answer the questions, and went on a pre-prepared rant and attack instead- which is designed to stop more questions being asked, that he does not want to be asked, or answered, for that matter.

yes, agreed. It would be hard to stoop lower than that.

I think a lot of people agree with this

dr Sarah Wollaston
@sarahwollaston
We have reached a new low when the Prime Minister stoops to deliberate falsehoods for political gain in the aftermath of a terrorist attack

I didn't see it that way. I thought Johnson was as expected and that Andrew Marr was disgruntled and constantly talked over. Pretty poor interview all round.
The big thing now of course is what difference the latest terrorist attack has on voters!

Varian, yes BJ did say right at the end of the appalling interview with Andrew Marr that he would be willing to be interviewed by any of the BBC staff whose name was Andrew. It has been said that BJ will make sure that if the interview does take place it will be after the cut off date for postal votes. It was one of the few things I could make out during the tirade of hot air coming from BJ’s mouth. I have seen bad interviews from many people during this election campaign but this was the worst by some margin. BJ’s advisers will be tearing their hair out after this performance.

Pity the Tories haven’t addressed the issue for a decade. Even after the last lot of attacks, May did not address the issue of sentencing

her hear Chestnut

I thought it was very moving when Jack Meritt's father spoke and said he didn't want this incident to mean sentences were longer for terrorist offences.
He may well feel that way in respect of his son but the early release of terrorists may result in many more deaths, so I don't think we can legislate with this in mind. We certainly don't want more such incidents.

what makes anyone assume that Andrew Marr is a Tory?

I thought it was very moving when Jack Meritt's father spoke and said he didn't want this incident to mean sentences were longer for terrorist offences. I know this is slightly off topic.

Andrew Neil was installed over BJ’s head when BJ was editing the Spectator to try and keep him on a lead. I understand there is absolutely no love lost between them. AN also had to deal with the fallout of BJ’s romancing of the Spectator’s staff.

Perhaps Marr won't be a Tory voter after this morning, or perhaps it was all an act to deflect accusations of making it easy for BJ.

My brain hurt from trying to disseminate the waffle from the piffle. He was like a mechanical toy and however hard Marr tried to bring him back on topic he veered off to blaming the LP far too much for the leader of a party which has been in power since 2010.

He sought to blame the tragic killing of innocent people in London on Friday on the early release from a prison sentence. He said it was all down to the early release scheme brought in by a ‘leftie government’ in 2008. He kept reminding the viewers that he has only been in power for 120+ days, as though the Tories weren't responsible for anything they did before him.

Marr reiterated repeatedly that the Tories have been in power for 10 years and had ample time to change what they didn’t agree with.

... the silence will speak for itself - and be deafening indeed

Shelmiss ''Or maybe they don’t and I just can’t hear what the questions are due to them talking (shouting) over each other.''

the only reason the interviewers have to do that- is that too many politicians are trained to do that. Don't answer the question, go off at a tangent attacking opponents or talking about what they want to instead. One of the best things that has happened recently- is that even interviewers who are clearly Tories, like Marr, like Kuensberg- will stop anyone if they do the above ... and I am sure Andrew Neil, who has been a Tory all his life in many official capacity- will do just the same ... if and when Johnson grows a pair ...

if he doesn't- then Andrew Neil should empty chair him and ask him all the questions he would have asked - and there will be NO shouting then.

Just managed to get part of the interview on FB - or OMG - what a disaster. Andrew Marr is a Tory, but he didn't let Johnson do what he always does- deflect, attack and just keep talking to fill the void of his non-answers.

www.facebook.com/TheDailyPolitik/videos/587902921963316/

I don’t think Andrew Neil needs to feed him the questions in advance as I think we all know what all the questions will be, simply because they seem to ask a derivative of the same question time and time again.

Or maybe they don’t and I just can’t hear what the questions are due to them talking (shouting) over each other.

Well Andrew Neil is a through and through Tory - and will probably feed him the questions in advance ...

Doubt it, Varian

Boris Johnson's performance was appalling but, unless I misheard him, he did mumble at one point that he was "willing to be interviewed by anyone called Andrew on the BBC" (or words to that effect)

Did anyone else hear that? If so does this mean he will be interviewed by Andrew Neil?

If it does happen, can we expect Neil to be as hard on his fellow Tory Johnson, as he would be on any other party leader?

And apologies for the rogue apostrophe in 'its veracity'

Boris is ready to revoke automatic halfway release for terrorists. (Brought in under Labour in 2008 so as Boris explained nothing could be done in this case).

Amazing how easily those lies go down, isn't it.

Is it just that Johnson has a) a short memory
or b) doesn't check that things are factual before he says them?

Automatic early release was not “established in 2008” - the Conservatives legislated for automatic early release in 1991

tweeted by a barrister (who, I suspect knows a little bit more about the law than does Johnson)

twitter.com/BarristerSecret/status/1200921805806034944

Barrister Secret has written a blog post about this rather complex area. Perhaps some might be interested in reading it:

thesecretbarrister.com/2019/11/30/10-thing-you-should-know-about-the-london-bridge-attacker-and-early-release/

Incidentally, Johnson posted a series of tweets about this matter that were actually copied from the SB's blogpost. What finer recommendation of it's veracity could there be?

The Prime Minister has basically copied and pasted my blogpost into a thread and passed it off as his own explanation.
A blogpost which I had to write to rebut the lies he spent yesterday spouting.

twitter.com/BarristerSecret/status/1201076439250087936

As always playing the blame game I’m afraid.