This entry was posted on
Monday, October 11th, 2010 at
8:17 am and is filed
under Tories! Tories! Tories!.
Yesterday, Nadine Dorries published a further attack on a constituent in an effort to justify her earlier attacks on that same constituent (more). A lot of what she publishes in response to this article in her local paper (while claiming her target is conning people) is wildly exaggerated or entirely false. The Credo covers two key claims here, and I’d like to cover a few myself, starting with this passage:
“Ms Cullen attended my local hustings. She stormed around the hall after me, shouted a great deal and even followed me outside, pacing up and down whilst I chatted to constituents. Odd that she has never mentioned once on twitter that she was the Labour party organiser. And believe me, she can walk pretty fast and shout very loud.” (Nadine Dorries)
As Nadine Dorries is aware, I recorded that hustings event on two cameras. Though I have only published ‘highlights’ from the main camera, one of those cameras caught her arrival, the other caught her departure, and the footage overlaps, so I have captured video and audio of every moment from her arrival to her departure.
I have now reviewed the footage, and it supports my recollection of the event:
Ms Cullen did not ‘storm’ after Dorries before or after the event, though I think what Dorries is referring to in this particular gross distortion is Ms Cullen following her outside (which I will get to in a moment). Nor did Ms Cullen ‘strut’ as Dorries claimed in an earlier post. These are exaggerations by Ms Dorries that prove nothing but her mind-boggling determination to portray Ms Cullen as a benefits cheat.
(Yes, Ms Cullen dared to walk, but this could best be described as an ‘amble’, and her ability to walk does nothing to disprove the condition of arthritis. All Dorries does here is stumble witlessly once again in the area that got her into so much trouble last week; not every disabled person is in a wheelchair.)
The only person at that meeting who could be described as a ‘shouter’ spoke in Dorries’ defence (it’s pronounced ‘Flit-ick’, children). Dorries cannot classify Ms Cushion as a shouter without calling herself one too… not that anyone’s capacity to shout is relevant beyond Ms Dorries’ attempts to portray Ms Cullen as aggressive.
Dorries claimed during that meeting (after she realised I was filming, of course) that she had to leave early at a certain time because of an unspecified event that took precedent over the final hustings before polling day. She ended up leaving some 10-15 minutes before even this predicted time, and yes, Ms Cullen followed Ms Dorries outside. Certainly not to berate her as she implies, but merely to observe. And what Ms Cullen (and others) observed was Nadine Dorries standing around and smoking when she had just moments earlier claimed that she had to leave because she was in a hurry to be somewhere else.
“An Open Letter to Nadine Dorries
However, what I want to know as one of your constituents is why you advised everyone that you had to leave at 8.45 for an important meeting, actually left at 8.30. stood outside smoking for 15 minutes and then started tweeting within half an hour.
Perhaps the people Dorries was talking to while taking her dose of nicotine would care to step forward and support her claim that Ms Cullen was a restless, pacing beast at this time. (Not that this would prove anything of relevance; see above.)
“Labour party organiser” stretches the truth to breaking point and the truth of this matter is covered by The Credo.
I did not witness Ms Cullen walking “pretty fast” and footage of her walking shows a slow amble at best. The claim that she “stormed around the hall” after Dorries is pure invention.
There is far more about Dorries’ latest outburst that I know to be false if not misleading, but for now I leave you with the arrogance of this assertion:
“This is my last comment on this as I am sure the voters will have their say at the ballot box.” -(Nadine Dorries)
If you’re feeling lost for words at that, you’re not alone, but it’s worse than you think; Dorries has opted out of the WriteToThem service and will now only respond to “constituents requesting advice or representation” by snail mail.
UPDATE (13 Oct) – A dignified response from the victim of Dorries’ mudslinging.
By andyholland07 October 11, 2010 - 11:51 am
Does Dorries have absolutely no shame? An awful woman who should be sacked asap.
By @JimmyHSands October 11, 2010 - 1:37 pm
I must admit I'd never really understood why you seemed to have it in for this woman until now. I don't care how drunk she was when she posted that, the evil witch has to go. I don't think there's the slightest point in attempting to engage her, rather her party has to decide if this is the image they wish to project.
By mshumphreycushion October 11, 2010 - 3:13 pm
Thank you Tim. I have been advised to not comment publically yet on the details of Ms Dorrie's accusations, knowing you are putting the truth out there is incredibly reassuring to me. Once I get the go-ahead, I shall be making a statement.
(Thanks to everyone who is supporting me, you have no idea how much I appreciate it) xx
By Pete Connolly October 11, 2010 - 6:23 pm
The part that troubled me is that she had a “local voluntary student researcher who just happens to live in Harlington” help her with this. That’s the kind of crap that the Stasi used to encourage – spy on your neighbours, ‘research’ through twitter and web sites and report back. Very stalkerish behaviour on her part.
By David Boothroyd October 20, 2010 - 8:24 am
The Standards and Privileges Committee agreed a report on Nadine Dorries yesterday (19 October); likely to be published in the next few days. See minute 40: http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011…
By Tim_Ireland October 20, 2010 - 9:58 am
By David Boothroyd October 21, 2010 - 8:18 am
At 11 AM today it will appear on this link: http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011…