Search results

Neither you nor I know what his lawyers would argue if it comes to an employment court. But, if he is dismissed it must be done according to the procedures. Maybe he will be allowed to reapply for his own job. Who knows?

He was appointed to run the civil service. What you say about handing each other jobs is correct and is why they have pulled them up on the Selmayr appointment. The complaint is that they didn’t follow procedure to appoint him, so they can hardly sack him without following procedure. You are...

Wrong again

FFS. You got the last bit wrong. He is an employee not a politician, which means he has rights. IMO he won’t be going anywhere before the EU elections, because the new EC President will have to nominate a successor if he goes. Nowhere have I said that makes it all ok. More lies. MEPs are not...

1. the second report went mich further than the first one. As you admit in point 2. 2. the EU has to accept the report. He has probably got employment rights and probably will appeal. The EU elections are coming up, so I presume noowill happen until Juncker‘s successot takes over. But, you can...

I‘m working. Everything is getting screwed up because someone is intent on smearing me on the internet. A ridiculous discussion about the bloody obvious. I am going to stop now because it’s screwing my business up.

May‘s deal would be the easy bit.

No I don’t. I still say you were wrong to say the law was broken according to the ombudswoman‘s first report. Those running the EU have to accept the final report. Twisting again.

Trying to. Every time I think it is over, comes the next smear.

He‘ll deny that he loves Pete and say he hates liars.

You’ve had evidence that the Nazis thought that Churchill was a war criminal. That he was to be arrested. The leaders in France were put on trial by Vichy France. Others in other defeated countries were executed. Yet that is not enough to convince you that the Nazis classed Churchill as a war...

If my post disappeared, check with Nick, but don’t call me a liar. Yes deliberate smears and lies. That is what you constantly do. You are being constantly called out on here by others for twisting.

Another fxxking lie. I have said all along that it was a sham. The only point of contention was whether the law was broken or not. The first report said it was stretched and possibly even broken. That means not actually broken, as honest Astute was claiming. Öttinger had a right to reply. He...

I don’t know where the post is. I explained several times that the second report came whilst I was working. I corrected myself as soon as I got the verdict. You still haven’t apologized for your deliberate smears and lies.

No might about it. Nazis said what a said they said. There are quotes on here. You have no case.

I never said the first report was still current after seeing the second report. I posted something after the second report before I got the second report. Which I first got a couple of days after it’s release as I was working. Then corrected it to agree with the new report. I have no motive to...

Another lie. I did quote the the original EC argumentation as balance against your rabid accusations, something you didn’t do Mr Neutral, but the main quote saying „possibly even“ that I quoted came from the initial ombudsman’s report. It was the law quote not the regulations that was quoted by...

You are not neutral and not honest. You are a liar and a twister, twisting which you use to claim you are always right, which is another lie in itself.

I have never deleted a post. Liar. I have never lied about Selmayr. Liar. I haven’t come out with misinformation. Liar. You are a complete liar.

You are asking me to prove that Churchill would have been tried if the war had been won by Germany. Then you moan that you have to prove something that didn’t happen. Germany didn’t win the war, but the Nazis classed Churchill as a a war criminal. Then you say, but Hitler was in charge and try...