Daily Mail

The Covid Inquiry finds Boris guilty… of BREXIT!

- Littlejohn richard.littlejohn@dailymail.co.uk

THE official Covid Inquiry has rapidly descended into yet another Whitehall farce. We already know the ending. Like Brian Rix before him, Boris will be left standing on stage with his trousers round his ankles, his modesty covered by a pair of comedy Brexit boxer shorts.

Yet despite the fact that the judge and leading counsel appear already to have decided on a verdict, this one will run and run.

Its main line of investigat­ion seems to be designed to discredit the former Prime Minister still further and reinforce the widely-held Establishm­ent view that Britain should have locked down faster and for longer.

Most of the so-called evidence to date has amounted to little more than scoresettl­ing, name- calling and trawling through social media in search of swear words. Lockdown sceptics such as the eminent scientist Professor Carl Heneghan have been given short shrift by the judge, Lady Hallett.

There may well be a long way to go, but my impression is that the final report will turn out to be as one-sided as the judge’s instructio­ns to the jury which found former Liberal leader Jeremy Thorpe not guilty of murder in 1979, despite an avalanche of damning evidence against him.

That case was brought back to life recently by John Preston’s brilliant book on the subject and subsequent TV drama, A Very English Scandal, starring Hugh Grant as Thorpe.

The summing- up was superbly parodied by the late, great Peter Cook in an hilarious satirical sketch co-written with the late, and equally great, Christophe­r Booker, occasional­ly of this parish. It was performed at The Secret Policeman’s Ball, a charity concert in aid of Amnesty Internatio­nal, and concluded with the line:

LADIES and gentlemen of the jury, you will now retire carefully to consider your verdict of . . . Not Guilty.’ (Check it out online. It’s still doing the rounds on YouTube.) The Thorpe trial was widely considered a cynical Establishm­ent stitch-up. The Covid Inquiry looks to be heading the same way. only this time there would seem to be little chance of an acquittal when it comes to apportioni­ng blame.

This got me wondering how the final Covid report would turn out had Mr Justice Peter Cook been presiding over the Covid show trial. His summing up may have gone something like this:

OVER the past few months and years, we have all heard some pretty extraordin­ary allegation­s about one of the most unsuitable politician­s ever to rise to high office in this country. We have heard, for example, from the ex-Downing Street adviser Mr Lee Cain, a man who by his own admission is a self-confessed chicken-strangler.

You may choose to believe the evidence of Mr Cain, that the former Prime Minister is a liar, a humbug, a hypocrite, a vagabond, a loathsome spotted reptile, responsibl­e for the deaths of tens of thousands of old people. That is entirely a matter for you. Mr Cain has further maintained that after contractin­g Covid, Mr Johnson was effectivel­y away with the fairies.

We have heard, too, from a Mr Dominic Cummings, who worked alongside Johnson during the height of the pandemic and has described his former boss as an out-of-control shopping trolley.

You may wish to balance his evidence alongside the fact that Mr Cummings broke lockdown regulation­s to drive first to the North East of England and thence to Barnard Castle, in order to test his eyesight prior to embarking on a return journey to London, so he could resume his duties as our de facto Prime Minister saving the world from coronaviru­s.

Mr Cummings may have used intemperat­e language at times, describing colleagues and subordinat­es in the most disparagin­g terms. But he was under enormous pressure trying to prevent Mr Johnson recklessly ordering the certain deaths of millions of vulnerable citizens.

We fully accept that at all times, Mr Cummings acted in the public interest.

It has been said that Professor Neil Ferguson, the so- called architect of lockdown, is an unreliable witness, based upon the fact that he had previously over- estimated the numbers of deaths from swine flu and other animal-related diseases by a factor of several million — causing the unnecessar­y slaughter of every sheep in the country. But, surely, it is better to be safe than sorry.

Prof Ferguson — who also answers to Professor Legover — has been criticised for breaking lockdown by indulging in some extra- curricular rumpy-pumpy with his mistress, but we find his explanatio­n — that it was a necessary experiment to test the efficacy of social distancing regulation­s — entirely credible, indeed commendabl­y selfless in the circumstan­ces.

We have also been forced to listen to the pitiful whining testimony of Mr Matthew Hancock, the former Health Secretary, who was caught on camera snogging his aide, gorgeous, pouting Miss Gina Lollobrigi­da, and who has since been reduced to chewing a kangaroo’s anus on primetime television.

It would be hard to imagine, ladies and gentlemen, a more discredite­d man, a more unreliable witness, now a national laughing stock. You may choose to believe the transparen­t tissue of odious lies that streamed on and on from his disgusting, greedy, slavering lips. That is entirely a matter for you.

Mr Hancock has still not provided a satisfacto­ry explanatio­n as to how contracts for hundreds of millions of pounds of PPE equipment were awarded to Tory donors with no previous medical supplies experience.

I speak specifical­ly of a Mr Arthur Daley, managing director of Daley Into Europe Inc, which operates out of a lock-up in Acton; and Mr Derek Trotter, proprietor of Trotter’s Independen­t Traders, which has branches in New York, Paris and Peckham.

Mr Daley and Mr Trotter are, as far as I can make out, complete and utter crooks.

BILLIONS of pounds were wasted on PPE which never arrived or was unfit for purpose. But we have been unable to verify wilder allegation­s that public money intended for the NHS was diverted to more nefarious items of expenditur­e, including the purchase of several rolls of expensive gold wallpaper and the provision of prosecco and birthday cake for illicit gatherings in No 10 Downing Street.

Which brings me to the evidence of the defendant, Boris Johnson. You may choose to believe the testimony of this philanderi­ng fantasist and his arrogant dismissal of all the charges against him as merely an inverted pyramid of piffle.

You may think him the most discredite­d, most embittered, most unreliable, most dishonest, most economical-with-the - actualité witness ever to have sullied a witness box in any court of law in this country, let alone to have become Prime Minister and to aspire to be World King.

You may, on the other hand, care to regard him as a true, selfless Churchilli­an patriot, a man who saved Britain from Covid and Got Brexit Done. That, ladies and gentlemen, is entirely a matter for you. You poor, deluded fools.

Boris Johnson taking Britain out of the EU did more damage than coronaviru­s and it is for that, rather than any mistakes he may or may not have made during the pandemic, that he must be severely punished.

And on that sole count, ladies of gentlemen of the jury, you must now retire to consider your verdict of . . . GUILTY!

 ?? ??
 ?? ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United Kingdom