46 thoughts on “Julia Brouhaha ha ha ha …”

  1. Is this the same Julia Hartley-Brewer who shared with us on social media her arrival in Antigua for a holiday over the festive season? Apparently, she just escaped the London lockdown by hours. And no, I’m not sour that she can afford it, or had the inside track… I’m merely making the point that such a lack of grace is vulgar in the extreme.

    Liked by 4 people

  2. How far apart are the two statements? M0nths, hours? Can’t see any time or date on the messages and I don’t do Twitter so don’t know how to check. The seven-mile cyclist mentioned twice suggests the first refers to doris but not named. Or was that one from much earlier and the seven miles just a figure thrown out at random to illustrate her point?

    Even if they are six months apart (or more), you’d think she’d remember going public with such a definitive judgment, even if drink had been taken at the time. Who is she anyway? (Her fame, if any,has yet to reach Bulgaria.) And does this mean she now has got herself a life, with carnal knowledge as a free extra?

    Liked by 2 people

    1. It appears that when harvested, the first tweet shown was 2 hours old and the second was 6 hours old.

      Presumably she was outraged 6 hours ago about the cyclist, then she saw someone else who criticised her Boris and had a go at some women, and decided to become outraged about the outraged person…

      She’s a right wing rubbish radio presenter on a London station, I think.


      1. The’s on Talk Radio.

        I’m actually amazed that Talk Radio has a license to operate. Aren’t UK radio licenses contingent on fair and balanced news reporting? I don’t see any balance in their output at all. It’s fine to employ the odd shock jock but they have nothing but shock jocks who deny Covid and bang on about Remoaners.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. I thought that they had to have a balance of opinions too.

          I’ve never listened to it, of course, but if they are all like her, I don’t see any balance.

          Another toothless watchdog running broadcasting.


          1. It’s pretty bad. Just looking at their website.

            There’s a guy called Mike Graham who is as gammony as you could imagine. And JHB. And someone called Mark Dolan who is a serial covidiot and cut up his mask on air. And let’s not forget Ian Collins, who is not as bad as the others but he is hardly a balance unless the balance point hovers around Nigel Farage. On the other hand, I have no issue with Paul Ross completing their daily lineup.

            Mike Graham once told me “Get lost MacPlank” on twitter and said I was “nasty”. He sprays this stuff around every single day to someone or other.

            I think Talk Radio is a real problem. It’s a national broadcaster and there should be expectations about their how their broadcasters behave on air but also off air, especially if they are doing it under the Talk Radio banner that they all have in their twitter bio.

            Liked by 1 person

            1. Just had a look at their website.

              Yep… you’re right. Mr Graham looks as gammony as gammon could be… and James Whale who used to do shows when my granny was a bairn.

              MacPlank? Oh what a witty fellow. I must remember to invite him to Munguin’s next society dinner party.

              We could all laugh a his sparkling repartee and amusing bons mots.

              Were you being nasty to him? awwww.

              I don’t know what the rules are about broadcasters and balance.

              I suspect there must be some guidelines, but I’m not sure how strict they could be.

              LBC has views from a wide range of people, Farage had a show at one time (coz obviously being an MEP was only a part time job, and if you miss most of your committee meetings it’s easy to make a daily radio programme in your spare time between the pub and the pub toilet). But they also had James O’Brien, who is pretty much the opposite.

              Anyway, Munguin says that you aren’t nasty and if Gammony Graham says it again, he’ll have to deal with Munguin’s ire. And he won’t like them apples!


  3. Hm. Ms. Hartley-Brewer – is she some sort of big cheese in the jam- and beer-making worlds? – is evidently not the brightest ornament in the firmament of the Metropolitan chattering classes.

    After mature consideration – i.e., two nanoseconds rather than one – I have decided not to follow Ms. Hampstead-Brewery on Twitter, and will gladly and graciously abrogate to Tris the responsibility of shining the blinding light of public scruti[Laying it on a bit thick, aren’t you? Tone it down a bit, there’s a good lad-Ed.] ny the arrant hypocrisy so rife among the ranks of the London commentariat. Not that any of them can pronounce their Rs properly.

    Liked by 2 people

      1. Musical poker to start the morning? Can we ow see Ed covering the raise and upping the pot with his own? Maybe Ulster Arlene, the other brewery heiress, and a hearty rendering of the old DUP and allied sashers’ favourite ‘The cry is no surrender!’ with full flute and lambeg accompaniment. Very appropriate, considering the outgoing POTUS sentiment and sympathetic colouring.

        Great stuff, guys. Keep it up and I’ll carry on kibbitzing.

        Liked by 2 people

        1. Happy to ease your wee hours kibbitzing (it’s just 10:15 p.m. over by here)!

          If the DUP had made us an offer 10 days ago, we would’ve traded him for a distillery’s dregs. Too late now; we’re gonna indict and convict the bloated bastard. Just be sure to send Janey Godley over to cover the proceedings, that’ll be comedy gold!

          Liked by 2 people

          1. Wee sma oors gone now and a sensible early afyernoon here in Bulgaria. Wee sma oors now at your end, Jon, and I’d hoped that yo too would have musical encouragement should you go for similar nocturnal prowls and visit MNR. But Ed has folded! Been listening to Kenny Rogers, obviously.

            In which case, he’ll know when to it’s his misdeal, know when to drop appeal, know when to walk away, know when to go… or something like that.

            Justin case the Orange On is reading MNR (no Twitter, so what better alternative?) he’d find such listening good advice. So – Jon to cut, and dealer’s choice for Ed. Any straight, knaves wild. Pass for POTUS on the first, straight is a hand he’s never known, but holding all the wild knaves he can still up the ante before being royally flushed out.

            C’mon guys. Don’t do a Stanley Elkin on me. This kibbitzer doesn’t want to be a crier as well.

            Liked by 1 person

              1. LOL.

                Well fair enough, Jon, but yellow is the colour of cowardice… and he’s erm… bright orange.

                One thing for sure, the future is surely not orange any more.


        1. (Bows)

          Rocky Mountain Mike is the best we’ve had here since Tom Lehrer and Stan Freberg. A trip through his YouTube videos page is well worth the time.

          Liked by 2 people

    1. I think they were due to have a hearing yesterday / Tuesday on the Keating case, but I can’t find the source of that information, unfortunately. I’m sure we won’t hear the outcome of it for a while yet, though, whether there was a hearing yesterday or not.

      Here’s a link to a copy of Keating’s Note of Argument, in case anyone wants to bash their brains out on Scottish legalese: https://is.gd/YEoQ5y/.

      Thanks for your attempts to warn us about various things, Kanga: whether we believe your warnings or not, I’m sure we all understand that you want to help us protect ourselves. If for one am grateful for that. Stay safe, Kanga!

      Liked by 2 people

      1. Martin put out a Tweet advising the hearing started Tuesday 9:30am with a phone number to listen in, however there were technical issues, surprise surprise. I believe the hearing was scheduled for two days.

        Ed thanks for your comment. I am indeed trying to alert you all, let me tell you it is an uphill task like climbing the North Face. Sadly it is now too late, a lot has been uncovered for all to see in the last week. Everything looks like there will be another ANTIFA BLM false flag attack in DC on Saturday as they are flyers saying to come along armed. They appear to be trying to do this in multiple cities, I hope my intel is wrong on this and everyone is safe.

        So what is going to happen ?
        Biden is not going to be President, that is a guarantee. I suspect his public crime will be as a stooge for China. That is not the worst of it, impaling would be too good for him and the rest of these(…) I can’t even come up with a word to describe them, its so evil.
        Pied Piper…red shoes clue. If you need more ask Tris as I gave him directions to a file, though I have much worse evidence which is so bad I am not willing to share. If you go back and look I have shared some fairly terrible stuff, but this is on an entirely different level. Brace yourself as I suspect that Trump has no other option but to release the details. You will need multiple boke pokes.

        On the plus side once we get through this they will disclose a ton of new technology which has been supressed. This will blow your mind, in a good way, as it contains medical breakthroughs, free energy and other stuff that seems impossible. If China gets stroppy then the US has the ‘Rod of God’, this is an EMF weapon. Unlike the usual ‘waves’ which are transverse like a wave in a pond, these are longitudinal like a slinky. The energy is therefore contained until it hits the target, there is NO defence. The 3 Gorges Dam would be a target – Game Over. Nicola Tesla wanted to provide this to every nation as he anticipated that it would prevent war, unfortunately others had different ideas.

        I am very positive ūüėÄ just sad that I cannot seem to break through the MSM propaganda. Alex Salmond was correct, it is correctly called the British Brainwashing Corporation.

        Liked by 1 person

      2. I wish someone would tell him that Westminster can simply and quickly limit the competence on referendums to devolved topics. “That was never our intention”, they’ll say, as they add the words, “limited to devolved competences” and vote for the amendment without pause for thought. He’s raised an awful lot of money and it could all be for nothing.


        1. That is, in effect, how Westminster looks at the situation already, Terry: otherwise, They would not talk about “allowing” us to have an independence referendum.

          One of the reasons why I think the Keating case is a strategic error – which would go some way to explaining the Scottish Government’s attitude toward it – is that it would have been better to leave the ball in Westminster’s court, and also, not signal one’s moves to one’s opponent in advance. Not knowing in advance whether the referendum-without-an-¬ß30 route would be lawful would leave the Scottish Government able to legislate and organize an advisory referendum and see whether Westminster had the guts and gall to try to deny us.

          The amendment you mention could be challenged in court, I believe, Terry; it would signify in clear that, like a legal action by Westminster to ban an advisory referendum after the passage of Scotland’s own legislation for it rather than banning the passage of such legislation, the Westminster regime was prepared to trash, inter alia, not just the Claim of Right but also the Edinburgh Agreement. It would finally demolish too the Unionist fiction that Scotland is in a voluntary Union with the rUK, and reveal the true, colonial nature of Westminster rule in Scotland. That Scotland has elected a majority of SNP / pro-independence MPs is another chiel that winna ding – even Margaret Thatcher agreed that for Scotland to return a majority of pro-independence MPs would be sufficient to end the Union.

          Such a high-handed and heavy-handed action to deny Scotland the right to national self determination au pr√©alable would also have the effect of galvanizing Scottish public opinion against the Westminster regime. “Further galvanizing” might be a better way of putting it, in fact – and I’m sure it is a fact now.

          It’s possible that, in response to the pressure from its electorate, the Scottish Parliament and Government would legislate for an advisory referendum anyway, and Westminster be damned: I do not believe that we Scots, or the Government we elect, would simply roll over and beg Westminster to tickle our tummies if Westminster says No. As David Cameron realized in 2014, the consequences of not agreeing to a referendum and granting a ¬ß30 order are worse than agreeing to so graciously grant one, and Cameron was not faced with an existing majority in favour of independence. Oh, the panic and the lies of those last days before the referendum, in which Better Together, Gordon Brown, Cameron et al. breached the terms of the agreement and came out with the infamous Vow, over and above the usual pack of lies! Reason enough to re-run the referendum anyway, in my opinion – but when has Westminster ever had an attack of conscience over its own bad faith…

          There’s enough anger in this country with Westminster in general, and with the current Westminster regime in particular, and resentment against its ignorant, arrogant, overweening intransigence and high-handed, democratically illegitimate treatment of us, that it would provoke – let’s say serious pushback of one kind or another – to the point of rioting in the streets. And Niko, before you start, that is a warning, not a threat. No one sane in Scotland wants violence, though the case of Northern Ireland would suggest that the only way to get the UK Government to pay attention to your demands is to pose a risk of people starting to blow things up again.

          It’s not actually possible for any government, even dictatorial ones, to withstand in perpetuity the kind of public pressure we’ve got here for at least the right to decide our own fate as a nation; I’d posit that not only do we have a majority in favour of independence now, despite the constant propaganda barrage and firehose of misinformation in the mainstream media, a majority of our people have withdrawn their consent to be governed by Westminster, at least insofar as it interferes in areas which our own Government should decide: any Scot who is not aware that we were promised that the status of the Scottish Parliament would be made permanent in law, and that the Sewel Convention was actually a thing, must be one of the ones who lives under a rock.

          For Westminster to attempt to deny us the right to choose the system of government that best suits us would be a naked abuse of power and, I believe, itself open to legal challenge (note to self: ask Joanna Cherry QC or one of our other legal big guns). With Westminster out of the EU, we have a much better chance at raising an international ruckus when it further oppresses us. We’ve tried to do it by the book; to deny us our right, as one of the original parties to the treaties creating the Union, to choose whether to continue it, is in itself not a trivial matter in international law either.

          It is rare for nations to become independent States without breaking the laws of the other State which prevent them doing so. Would Westminster get away with treating Scotland as it did Ireland in the years after WWI? Would They risk it, even given that They appear to be wilfully pig-ignorant about the history of the non-English parts of these islands, and so very evidently hew to the doctrine that might makes right? They’d be ill-advised to try, but doing really stupid, short-sighted, counterproductive, self-harmful things is the current regime’s forte – as we all know to our cost.

          P.S. I note that part of “Taking Back Control”is that Gibraltar is not part of Schengen. How unusual of the regime to actually bow to public pressure and accept reality! I suppose that means that Gibraltarians must still have Freedom of Movement at least – perhaps one of the many well-informed Munguinites out there can tell us.

          P.P.S. I’d ask Cassandra what Westminster may get up to between now and Scotland’s eventual and ineluctable independence, but she’s got her “The Prophetess is Out” sign up at the moment. Anyway, she always says that while human foolishness and folly are predictable, sheer idiocy is inherently chaotic. A bit of a bummer when dealing with the Westminster regime we have now, really; and Dross, and what’s-his-face the Pinky-Blue Tory, and Mr. Alkaseltzer.

          Liked by 1 person

  4. I see the U.S Congress is going ahead with their effort to impeach Trump. I don’t know enough to about the procedure to know if it stands any chance of success. Maybe some of our American friends could enlighten me?

    Liked by 1 person

      1. I’ve heard various analyses of what may pan out in the Senate, especially since Mitch McConnell has come out in favour of impeachment. If McConnell wants to purge the Republican party of Trumpism, the first step must be getting rid of Trump – and as a subsidiary part of a successful impeachment, Trump would never be allowed to hold office again.

        It would be good if the leading Republicans would go over to the White House and tell Trump it’s over and he has to resign, like they did to Nixon back in the day. But with Pence refusing to consider invoking article 25, despite his beloved President egging on a mob which changed “Hang Mike Pence!” and even brought a gallows with them to do so, I can’t see them doing that. Though it would show willing, it would be a fruitless endeavour in that Trump would undoubtedly not listen to them.

        Republican senators are truly afraid of what will happen if they cast a vote to impeach – not of being tweeted at by the orange ar*sehole in the White House any more, because he’s had his Twitter privileges revoked, but by people like the mob who invaded the Capitol. They’re afraid for their families as well. It’s a real fear, not least because even before the attempted coup the governor of Michigan, a particular target of Trump’s so very vocal anger and animus, was the subject of a conspiracy to kidnap and kill her. Not to mention the fact that there is a serious risk of armed conflict at all 50 state capitols from this coming weekend and into the week up to Biden’s inauguration, so it’s not just the Democrats and Republicans in the House and Senate who are not deemed sufficiently Trumpian that will be in real, physical danger.

        If enough Republicans simply do not turn up to vote in the impeachment trial, then the necessary supermajority in the Senate may well be achieved, with impeachment leading to Trump’s immediate removal from office and Mike Pence assuming the presidency.

        If Pence then pardons Trump, as Gerald Ford did Nixon, he will be making a historic mistake by implying that encouraging armed insurrection against the democratically elected government (no matter how imperfect that democracy is) is a pardonable offence, despite a guilty verdict in an impeachment trial. It would also violate the principle of equal treatment under law, as lesser fish doing Trump’s bidding have already gone to jail for it, and more of them undoubtedly will in the future.

        Still, never fear, Trump is going to go down for state crimes even if he’s pardoned for the federal ones: fraud, corruption, tax evasion, racketeering (including money laundering), election fraud, witness intimidation, and more. Your typical boss of a crime family, basically, with added politics.

        Liked by 1 person

      2. You’re probably up to date with this already, but just in case…

        As you say,Tris, a two-thirds Senate majority would be needed to convict Trump = 67 votes. That means at least 17 Republicans voting for conviction. The New York Times now reports that as many as 20 (!) Senate Republicans are open to convicting the president.

        And they’re not just obscure place-holders we’ve never heard of. Leading them is Liz Cheney, the third-ranking Republican in the House. The FT reports that she sent shock waves through Washington when she said she would vote to impeach Trump.

        Ms Cheney, who represents Wyoming, is seen as a future Republican presidential contender and said she would vote to impeach because: “The president‚ÄČ.‚ÄČ.‚ÄČ.‚ÄČsummoned this mob, assembled the mob, and lit the flame of this attack.‚ÄĚ

        The daughter of former Republican vice-president Dick Cheney went on: ‚ÄúThere has never been a greater betrayal by a president of the US of his office and his oath to the constitution.‚ÄĚ

        That’s the kind of quote we’d expect from a Biden representative, not a top Republican. Orange you surprised? Bet he is!

        Liked by 3 people

        1. But from what Ed was saying it is a 2/3 vote of those who turn up to vote.

          So it some Republicans, fearing for their lives, and the lives of their families, refuse to vote for impeachment, but take the day off, he could still go down.

          I can’t believe we’re talking about Senators in America fearing for their lives.

          Liz Cheney, an old fashioned Republican.

          Liked by 2 people

          1. Yes, I’d like confirmation or otherwise of that – 2/3 of the total senate or 2/3 of those present?

            I think I’m right for the same reason counting non-voters as automatically No or Yes on any particular question is a democratic abomination; the old “giving dead people the vote”, and so on.

            Danny, Jon in Chicago, anyone in the US Chapter of Munguinworld, please confirm or deny!

            Liked by 1 person

  5. https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/news/politics/uk-politics/2810566/fisheries-minister/

    No answers from Johnson for the fishermen he promised the earth to who are losing vast amounts of money.

    Johnson uses the SNP question on support for fishermen to have a dig at Scotland and how we vote.

    And to add insult to injury, the Fisheries Minister for England didn’t bother reading the fishing agreement because she was busy organising something to do with Christmas. (Fishery ministers from the other countries not being given a voice in Brexit, it was all down to her… but hey, Christmas and that.)

    Oh well, that’s Ok then. Who cares if fishermen go broke as long as some Tory MP had a nice Christmas.

    Question. What’s the point of asking Johnson questions at PMQs. He simply uses them to pour bitterness, spite and English, Eton Boy superiority all over us.

    Our MPs might as well stay at home.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. Motion seconded, Tris. They should just choose the right time to leave to gain most political benefit – the monstrous de Piffle regime will give them a juicy opportunity sooner or later, and probably sooner, as sure as eggs is eggs.

      Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.