the local district attorney hung up the phone on me, telling me she wouldn t be commenting on the case. last week when dps stopped answering media questions, they referred all inquiries to busby but she s not answering either. i m nadia romero in new lisbon, wisconsin. 56-year-old douglas uda, the suspect in this case has a criminal history dating back to at least 2002 in the state of wisconsin for convictions of armed burglary and firearm charges. we know he would have crossed paths in the courtroom with judge john romer in 2005. the community is rattled because nothing like this ever happens in this small town. there is no threat to the public but that doesn t mean people are not impacted we his death. the city of chattanooga has experienced two mass shootings in the last week. this is what the mayor had to say. i m tired of standing in front of you talking about guns and bodies. chattanooga will put a stop to this. with us now, the mayor of chattanooga, tim kelly.
apologising for the fact that as a minister, isaid it. and that s fair enough, a minister needs to toe the line. and, to be clear, for those listening and watching, what you did when a parliamentary committee, a bipartisan so called privileges committee, had looked at borisjohnson s words and behaviours around this partygate scandal that we all remember, the privileges committee ultimately found that borisjohnson had deliberately misled the house of commons. he had committed a contempt of parliament. you then came out and dismissed the findings of that bipartisan committee as, an appalling witch hunt, an anti democratic kangaroo court. how could you do that? so, i m going to try and be brief on this, because it s so unimportant compared to the issues. i would like that. but the reality is that if this committee had been a court of law, it would have been struck out on day one for the simple reason that
so, this was the narrative that was put out by number 10 after i resigned, and it s just not true. i was asked very politely by a colleague, a friend in number 10, to issue a soft apology, not apologising for what i said, but apologising for the fact that as a minister, isaid it. and that s fair enough, a minister needs to toe the line. and, to be clear, for those listening and watching, what you did when a parliamentary committee, a bipartisan so called privileges committee, had looked at borisjohnson s words and behaviours around this partygate scandal that we all remember, the privileges committee ultimately found that borisjohnson had deliberately misled the house of commons. he had committed a contempt of parliament. you then came out and dismissed the findings of that bipartisan committee as, an appalling witch hunt, an anti democratic kangaroo court. how could you do that? so, i m going to try and be brief on this, because it s so unimportant compared to the issues. i would l
and to be clear, for those listening and watching, what you did when a parliamentary committee, a bipartisan so called privileges committee, had looked at borisjohnson s words and behaviours around this partygate scandal that we all remember, the privileges committee ultimately found that borisjohnson had deliberately misled the house of commons. he had committed a contempt of parliament. you then came out and dismissed the findings of that bipartisan committee as, an appalling witch hunt, an anti democratic kangaroo court. how could you do that? so, i m going to try and be brief on this, because it s so unimportant compared to the issues. i would like that. but the reality is that if this committee had been a court of law, it would have been struck out on day one for the simple reason that almost all of the mps on that committee had expressed their verdict long before they saw any of the evidence almost all of them. i m sorry, but you re an experienced parliamentarian,