Jacob Rees-Mogg – A Catholic Hero?

Jacob Rees-Mogg – A Catholic Hero?


Apart from making it crystal clear that it is not possible for a fully believing Catholic to play a leading role in UK politics, let alone achieve Leader of a Party and become Prime Minister – even one as “liberal” (“who am I to judge”) as Jacob Rees-Mogg – what else do we learn from this interview?  Any chance that it stiffened a few backbones, and makes us more determined than ever to act as true Confirmed  Soldiers of Jesus Christ when we are presented with opportunities to defend the moral law?

Is Jacob Rees-Mogg a “Catholic hero” as a result of his responses in the above TV interview, aired on ITV this morning?   Was he demonstrating Christian prudence with one eye on possibly entering a future leadership contest – or was this a golden opportunity missed?

Comments (107)

  • Alice Montgomery

    Hi editor,
    thanks, I take a lot of your points – I think the responses to this interview from many quarters show how rarely Catholic voices are heard – to the point that they are called ‘extreme’, when someone has the courage to do what they can to express them. What I take from all this, is that we must all be encouraged as Catholics to speak out and voice our beliefs far more, and far more often in the public sphere! In this way, they will not sound so unusual or extreme. And Jacob Rees Mogg’s comments are a cracking start – sure they aren’t perfect – but a cracking start!
    God bless!

    September 9, 2017 at 12:33 pm
  • Andrew Paterson

    JRM perhaps made the best comments he could. That he responded to a typical ambush is something. However, it has become a common trick for people to be brought onto talk shows in order to be asked a question that they are not expecting. The purpose is to embarass and entertain not to elicit enlightenment. JRM is well aware of this and appears on shows, I think, as much for his own amusement as anyone else’s.
    This is not the beginning of a more vocal Catholic presence in the media, promoting the moral law, decency and orthodox Christianity. It is a sign of the end. That it has been greeted with such a degree of attention is a clue. Fifty, even forty years ago it would have passed unnoticed, as the country was still broadly and unopposedly Christian and it was not necessary to rein back on orthodox opinions in order not to cause “offence” to a multitude of multicultural atheists who loathed everything our civilisation stands for, as is the case now.
    Our Bishops have seen the light and wisely stay in their boxes, as quiet as the church mice they so closely resemble.
    Our notion of Armaggedon is one of soldiers contesting the ground in a field, perhaps wearing armour and flying colourful banners. It is not one of the enemy slipping onto our shores at night, armed with mobile phones, taking over our cities by stealth and striking out at our children by raping and bombing.

    September 9, 2017 at 1:48 pm
    • Petrus

      Get me on Piers Morgan’s show and I would make mince meat of him. HE would be the one feeling overwhelmed and ambushed! In fact, I’ve tweeted him and volunteered to go on his show to defend the moral law.

      Jacob Rees-Mogg is a politician, for goodness sake! He should be used to being put on the spot and being blind sided. Let’s not make too many excuses for him!

      September 9, 2017 at 4:44 pm
      • editor


        Good for you! Tweet him again and say you would be representing an organisation accused of being “homophobic” – even in line for the Stonewall Bigot of the Year award in recent years. Assure him that you will not disappoint his audience – if it’s ratings they’re after, they’ll sure get them after your appearance! I hope he takes the bait!

        September 9, 2017 at 4:49 pm
  • Alice Montgomery

    As far as I’m personally concerned, this is very much the beginning of a more vocal Catholic presence in the media! Come on, let’s rise up, rise up! If God is for us, who can be against us?
    Christ is our strong deliverer, mighty warrior, our strength and our song. What a privelege to live in the ‘end times’ – hard, but exciting – we’re called to be signs of contradiction – let’s go for it!

    September 9, 2017 at 3:35 pm
    • editor


      We’ve been trying to get Catholics to “rise up” for what seems like centuries, and all we get is accused of being extremists. We “rose up” a long time ago. Your turn!

      You can begin by contacting the TV show directly to object to the way Piers Morgan accuses everyone of bigotry just because they oppose his PC views:

      Contact details to help you “rise up”!

      Email: gmb@itv.com

      Telephone: 034488 14150, option 1 (lines open from 6.00am-10.00pm)

      Don’t forget to come back here and let us know what sort of response you get…

      When I emailed ITV using the viewer’s email address given online, they wrote back with thanks blah blah but included the above information. I have since sent an email to the gmb@itv.com address, marked For the Attention of Piers Morgan. Text below, in case it helps kick start your own message, as you “rise up” in defence of God’s moral law…


      Dear Mr Morgan,

      We’ve been blogging at Catholic Truth about your interview with Jacob Rees-Mogg MP, who, disappointingly, gave the impression that abortion and homosexual activity are wrong because the Catholic Church teaches that they are wrong. WRONG! The Catholic Church teaches that these (and other moral evils) are wrong, BECAUSE they are wrong. They go against the natural moral law. It is the Church’s duty to uphold, defend and proclaim that moral law, designed by God for our health and well-being. Tell me, when was the last time you met a person diagnosed with a sexually transmitted disease who lives a fully Catholic life, adhering to the natural moral law. That’s right – never.

      However, the real reason I am emailing you right now is to ask you to stop barracking people on your show. Bullying is never attractive. Of course, you don’t barrack or bully those who adhere to the NEW order of things, the licentious, the permissive, the sexually aberrant. They’re fine and allowed to spread their evil propaganda, with your benign help. Your mild interviews with “transgenders” stands as clear testimony to your unfailing political correctness. But anyone remotely espousing the moral law, especially by adhering to Catholicism, are given short shrift by you.

      I notice, though, that you never miss an opportunity to claim to be a Catholic yourself. You are not: by definition, you are not a Catholic. Deny a single dogma of the Faith or moral precept, and we automatically place ourselves outside the Church. So the “I’m a Catholic but I don’t agree with this or that teaching” brigade, are Catholics in name only – and it will mean nothing at your judgment – except, be warned, a huge pile of coals upon your head.

      Please, therefore, do not add chaos to the confusion already prevalent in the Church due to the current diabolical crisis of Faith and morality; instead, educate yourself about the Fatima apparitions and prophecies, unfolding before our very eyes, and then – with respect – either return to the proper practise of the Faith or stop claiming Catholic credentials. And do, please stop bullying folk.

      Kind regards

      Catholic Truth

      September 9, 2017 at 4:50 pm
      • Athanasius

        Great letter, Editor!

        September 9, 2017 at 11:53 pm
  • Alex F

    We live today in a kind of soft totalitarianism. Catholics, or anyone who believes in the natural law, are effectively excluded from public office. It’s not like the old USSR, with state censors and labour camps in Siberia, but it’s no less effective in ensuring adherence to the prevailing articles of faith of the modern world.
    What Mr Rees-Mogg said on GMB was not even especially hard-hitting, but it was enough to unleash the predictable hysteria among the chattering classes. So now, if Mr Rees-Mogg still harbours any ambitions to be prime minister, he is going to have to make a display of giving assent to the doctrines of “equal marriage” and “fertility rights.” I have no doubt that he is a good man and does believe in what the Church teaches on these grave evils; however, if Mr Rees-Mogg wishes to continue in his political career, he is going to have to be seen at the first “gay wedding” he is invited to (and he will get invitations now) and he will have to post selfies with the happy couple and buy a beautiful present, even if he doesn’t know or like the couple in question. The media and Twitterati will go wild if he is elected leader of the Conservative Party, and the party itself will not accept him. Remember it was a Conservative MP who asked Tim Farron in the Commons if he thought gay sex was a sin, thereby kick-starting the backlash against him leading to his resignation. So some public display of assent to the modern philosophy is the necessary grain of incense and a sad consequence of trying to serve two masters.

    September 10, 2017 at 4:30 pm
    • Athanasius

      Alex F

      I agree with you 100%. I woiuld add, however, that the Conservative Party is not the Tory Party of old. It has long sold out to the same sinister hidden forces that control Labour, the Lib Dems and the fake news. The obvious giveaway is that they are all united in their godlessness, the primary agenda being to eradicate Christian morality forever from the public domain. The old Conservative Party was a Party that would never have gone along with such a heinous agenda, but now it’s just another atheistic Socialist Party operating under a very misleading name. There’s nothing morally Conservative about today’s Tories.

      September 10, 2017 at 5:13 pm
      • Alex F

        My thanks to Athanasius for his response to my post.
        I agree. There is nothing “conservative” about the modern Conservative Party. They have become thoroughly atheistic, just like all the other main parties and their agenda is the same godless agenda.
        It is always going to be unlikely that the modern Tories would elect a real Tory as their leader at this point in history. However, Trump’s election and Brexit have shown that sometimes unlikely things can happen. After all, the Labour Party currently has a real Socialist as leader, and he has shown to be very popular with the actual party members, even though the majority of Labour MPs have tried their best to get rid of him. So it does not seem so incredible that the Conservative Party would elect someone who appears to be a real Tory as leader. The difference is, of course, that the Conservatives do not allow normal members to vote in leadership elections. They understand that the election of party leader is too important to let the plebs get wrong. The majority of Conservative MPs are just as plugged in to the modern world as any other party so someone like Mr Rees-Mogg is unlikely to be elected as leader.
        However, unlikely events have been known to happen before, and if Mr Rees-Mogg plays the game he may be in with a shot. The problem is, as posters have said above, there are things that a Catholic cannot compromise on. It’s not enough to practice as a Catholic and leave our beliefs on moral issues at home. Our Faith has to inform everything we say or do in both public and private. For instance, it is not enough to say “I am personally opposed to abortion, but I respect your opinion.” That’s the same as saying, “I oppose murder but respect your right to murder.” Similarly, it would be a grave occasion of sin for a Catholic to knowingly witness an invalid wedding, so we cannot even attend a wedding we know is obviously invalid, such as when two men pretend to get married. That’s what will be necessary to obtain public office, and that might not even be enough for the world. So a Catholic would have to ask if it is worth the price.

        September 10, 2017 at 6:55 pm
      • Athanasius

        Alex F

        I agree that things can sometimes take a strange twist, but when the people of the nation are kept out of the vote it usually goes the establishment way, and it’s very obvious that Britain remains extremely hostile to the Catholic religion. I do not believe a practicing Catholic will ever be allowed to be leader of the Party. Corbyn, on the othe hand, only got a surge of support because of Theresa May’s incredible suicide election policy aimed at the nations pensioners. Had she not made that fatal error Corbyn would have been away.

        It’s interesting that all the silly young people, the kids with no experience of life, are voting that Communist into popularity. I mean to say, he was laughed at when he turned up in the Commons one day and started quoting from Mao Tse Tung’s little red book. It was pretty embarrassing for the nation and now their touting this old commie as a possible future Prime Minister. Crazy Britain right enough.

        Anyway, JRM is not the only “Traditional-leaning” Catholic in the Tory Party. Claire Coffey is also a Catholic who used to be Traditional (SSPX). I stayed overnight at her house back in 1989 when Archbishop Lefebvre came to Liverpool to bless the new chapel there. Her parents were lovely people, as was Claire and her sister who were teenagers at the time. As far as I understand it, though, Claire stopped going to the Traditional Mass many years ago. I could be wrong but that was the information that came to me. If so, then it’s a great pity.

        September 10, 2017 at 7:27 pm
      • Athanasius

        Alex F

        Plenty of typos in that response, sorry about that. I will definitely have to slow down with the typing and/or spell check before posting.

        September 10, 2017 at 7:29 pm
      • Alex F

        Thank you for your response, Athanasius.
        It’s always hopeful to learn of traditional-leaning Catholics in Parliament. I had never heard of Claire Coffey until now. Even if they do go to the new Mass, there is still hope that they might not be so infected with Modernism that they might still have held onto a bit of Catholic sense. We can but hope!

        September 10, 2017 at 7:58 pm
      • Athanasius

        Alex F,

        I’m now scratching my head wondering if it’s Claire or Therese Coffey who is the Tory MP. It could be Therese, the sister.

        September 10, 2017 at 9:09 pm
      • Alex F

        I wondered. I’ve found a Therese Coffey who is a Tory MP. Perhaps it’s herself.

        September 10, 2017 at 9:15 pm
      • Athanasius

        Alex F

        Yes, that’s the one. I obviously mixed the two sisters up.

        September 10, 2017 at 9:52 pm
      • Vianney

        Athanasius, the Coffeys stopped attending the SSPX Masses around the time that the then Prior, Fr. King, started putting up his “modesty notices.” You will probably remember them with their long list of women’s clothing that he deemed unacceptable. There was a lot of hostility towards them at all the chapels but it was particularly strong in Liverpool because it was posted on the outside door and people felt it would put newcomers off. Added to this, there was an elderly lady who used to stand in the porch selling literature, and because there was no heating she would wear trousers to keep warm. apparently Fr King kept telling her off for wearing them and no amount of explaining would satisfy him. There was another lady who wore trousers because she had badly scarred legs and he reduced her to tears with his reprimands. Eventually the Coffeys had enough and left but continued to attend an “approved” Traditional Latin Mass. There was an article about Therese in one of the “Catholic” papers last year and it did say that she was a supporter of the Tridentine Mass so I assume she still attends, but not at a SSPX chapel.

        September 11, 2017 at 3:38 pm
      • Athanasius


        Yes, I knew the Coffey’s had left the SSPX but I didn’t know why. Now I know it was down to Fr. King, who, thankfully, has now taken himself off to the “Resistance” along with all the other bitter zeal brigade.

        I remember the horrible atmosphere created by a handful of priests like Fr. King with his Wee Free spirit. Everything was a sin; watching TV, smoking cigarettes, women dressed in trousers, etc. And the worst thing was that they were making it up to suit their own miserable personalities. The SSPX never had official rules about these things. The damage this handful of fanatics caused during that period is incalculable, both to the reputation of the SSPX and to consciences.

        It all started with Bishop Williamson, he was the one who turned them into Wee Free’s with all his writings about “pants” and modern technology. Well, they’re all together now in their own wee sect and the SSPX is much healthier without them. Pity it didn’t happen while Sally and Tom were alive.

        September 11, 2017 at 4:50 pm
      • Petrus

        Well said, Athanasius!

        September 11, 2017 at 11:44 pm
      • Vianney


        Fr. King certainly done a lot of damage when he was in charge. I remember him saying that people shouldn’t attend Mass in working clothes and should go home first and change. This, to people trying to get to Mass in their lunch hour on Holy Days of Obligation. Despite his opposition to women in trousers his own mother used to wear them. I remember Sally Coffey showing me a leaflet that was doing the rounds of the SSPX chapels in the north of England. It had a photo of a woman in a burka and the caption “available soon at an SSPX chapel repository near you.” Apparently he is claiming that he is not in the resistance but is independent, yet both resistance groups (the original resistance, and the resistance to the resistance) claim him as their own and advertise his Masses.
        You mention Sally and Tom, I hadn’t heard that Sally had died, was this recently? She was still alive when Therese was elected an MP as I saw a photo of the two of them taken at Westminster.

        September 13, 2017 at 12:21 am
      • Athanasius


        Maybe I’ve jumped the gun on Sally. I just assumed she had passed away by now, she was a good age back in ’89. Oops! Sorry Sally.

        Regarding Fr. King, I know he claims to be independent but the truth as we all understand it is that he is an independent priest of the resistance, without which he would have nothing to do.

        I don’t think he left the SSPX because he particularly supported the resistance, I think it was more personal than that. He probably guessed he was about to be transferred abroad and didn’t want to leave Britain. If that was the case then he should not have joined the missionary SSPX to begin with.

        We can only hope and pray in charity that all these rebellious people, especially priests, will regain some sense of humilty and return to sanity. It’s a big ask when up against their kind of belligerence, but not impossible from at least some. Crazy people!

        September 13, 2017 at 12:39 am
      • gabriel syme

        Athanasius and Vianney,

        Further to your discussion about Fr King leaving the SSPX and his relationship (if any) with the “resistance”:

        Yesterday I happened to google our former district superior, Fr Paul Morgan, to see where he was based now (I am terribly nosy you see).

        The results threw up several of those wacky resistance blogs, claiming Fr Morgan has recently left the SSPX to “join the resistance”.

        However, further reading seemed to indicate that Fr Morgan has in fact decided to become a Capuchin (in France). I also discovered information that a French SSPX priest, Fr David Aldalur is making the same move. A few years go, our district newsletter featured news of some British laymen joining these orders, as well as the then superior of the SSPX French district.

        Am I right to think the traditional Capuchin orders in France are not formally part of the SSPX structure, but are closely aligned with the Society?

        Some of the resistance blogs claim these Capuchins orders are part of the resistance, seemingly based on a claim they reject the recent arrangements put forward by Rome regarding SSPX marriages. But surely that in itself does not mean they have made any drastic move?

        These blogs claim all of Fr Morgan, Fr Aldalur and all other former Society priests who have moved to the Capuchins are all now “resistance priests”. They claim 100 priests have left the SSPX to be “resistance” priests.

        Personally I think these claims are erroneous and this “resistance” is just a small deluded outfit, who would claim allegiance from anyone and anything if they thought they could get away with it.

        I would appreciate any information / thoughts on this, especially with regard to Fr Morgan.

        September 13, 2017 at 1:25 pm
      • Athanasius

        Gabriel Syme

        I also heard that Fr. Morgan had joined the Capuchins in France but was then told by a priest in the U.S. that he was living with his brother, so I don’t really know what’s going on with him.

        I think the Capuchins in question have in fact cut ties with the SSPX but are not active resistance people. It seems they just disagree with the SSPX in its negotiations with Rome but prefer not to be vocal about it. That’s what I was told but again I don’t know for sure.

        Some of the resistance people were tipping Fr. Morgan as Bishop Williamson’s fourth bishop. It seems Bishop Williamson is trying to create a parallel structure to the SSPX, including four bishops consecrated by him. Maybe he thinks the SSPX robbed him of the superior General role and has therefore decided to create a new SSPX with him at the top.

        Speaking on the phone recently with a friend in South America, he said the resistance has already split into numerous opposing groups, some with their own pope. It’s hard to believe that educated Catholics could be led into such blindness. That’s what anger does to those with bitter zeal, it leads them into total darkness.

        September 13, 2017 at 5:40 pm
      • Vianney

        Regarding Fr Morgan, I too heard that he was going to join the Capuchins in Morgon but also heard that his brother stays near to the monastery and he was going to live with him.

        While the community at Morgon have criticised the talks with Rome they don’t seem to have cut ties with the SSPX as they still appear on the SSPX French District web site on the religious orders page, and in fact, James Murphy, the late Sacristan in Edinburgh, was attached to the Third Order at Morgon.

        It’s not a surprise that the resistance has split into different factions. They have a Protestant mentality and like the Protestant Churches if they don’t agree with something they just go off and stat an new Church.

        September 13, 2017 at 11:32 pm
      • Athanasius


        Absolutely right in your assessment of the resistance, it’s just like Protestantism. I hope they open their eyes to the fact and get their souls back on the Catholic track, so to speak.

        You mention the late James Murphy, God rest him. I liked James, he was a fixture in Edinburgh for as long as I can remember. Sadly missed.

        September 14, 2017 at 12:48 am
      • Vianney


        I think you are correct about Fr King. He was going to leave the SSPX a few years ago and set up an independent Mass centre on the Isle of Lewis. Not a catholic island like Barra, South Uist or Eriskay, no, he was going to one of the most Protestant Islands in the country. It was all because friends of his had a holiday home on the island and were going to retire there. they asked him to go to be their chaplain but it never materialised. He spent all his priestly life within the SSPX in the north of England and apparently any attempts to move him were met with resistance. I heard that he was told he was going to be moved and that this time he would have to go and that, like you say, is probably the real reason he left.

        September 13, 2017 at 11:17 pm
      • Helen

        We have a traddie MP! Wow! Who is this Therese lady?

        September 13, 2017 at 10:15 am
      • Athanasius

        Hi Helen

        We’re talking about Therese Coffey, the Conservative MP. She was a Traditional Catholic when I knew her many years ago but not sure if she is now. Vianney thinks she is, so we’ll assume that’s the case.

        September 13, 2017 at 1:14 pm
  • Paisley Parishoner

    Piers morgan has a history of trying to push his own version of Catholic belief and doctrine.

    In an embarrasing moment for him a renowned atheist puts him in his place and sounds more Catholic than Morgan

    September 10, 2017 at 6:53 pm
    • editor

      Paisley Parishioner,

      Superb! Thank you a million times over for posting this. Fantastic!

      September 10, 2017 at 6:59 pm
  • Athanasius

    Paisley Parishioner

    Fantastic video, thank you for posting it. Great to see Mr. Morgan get shown for what he has become – a Protestant. The guy who is a supposed atheist, however, is closer to God than he knows, I suspect. I have a feeling that man will eventually come into the Catholic Church. I hope so, he’d make a good Catholic apologist!

    September 10, 2017 at 7:14 pm
    • Petrus


      Yes, Penn was brilliant! He spoke with real passion and understanding. I know he is a magician – if only he could make Piers Morgan disappear, or even better, but him in a box and saw him in half!

      September 11, 2017 at 4:31 pm
  • gildaswiseman

    “But gay weddings are legal.” Oh are they? So when St Thomas Aquinas states that a bad law is no law what does he mean? To be a politician in this day and age is a risk to one’s soul, yet we are desperately in need of strong, truthful and holy Catholic leaders. The problem is, history demonstrates, that they usually lose their heads.

    September 17, 2017 at 8:26 am
    • Athanasius


      Absolutely correct. Spot on!

      September 17, 2017 at 10:06 pm
  • John Kearney

    There is a tendency in our human nature to put ourselves in the place of others when they are answering a question and sometimes we are disappointed when they do not reply in the way we would. But all of us are different. We should therefore after any such happenings ask the question did he say anything wrong. I do not see that an interview on TV is a place for an explanation of doctrine. In the statement that he did not judge gays was the implicit message that what they were doing was wrong. In our teaching there is the distinction made between formal sin and actual sin. Yes an act is always sinful in itself but there is the question of culpability which depe4nds on so many things including the formation of conscience. I think I would probably answer exactly how Rees-Mogg did- but that may not be your opinion.

    September 17, 2017 at 6:35 pm
    • editor


      You don’t see anything wrong in what Jacob Rees-Mogg said in his interview on TV (and subsequent interviews on radio and in newspapers when he said he would have no problem attending a “gay” wedding?

      If, as you say, a TV interview in not the place for an explanation of doctrine (God may beg to differ, given His instruction to us to “go out into the whole world [to spread the Fatih] “) but, if that is your view, all I can say is, in that case, JRM should not have answered the questions asked. He should have said what the cops say on camera when asked for details of a crime: that he was not at liberty to discuss the issues in question, since a TV interview is not the appropriate time or place. But he didn’t.

      “Yes an act is always sinful in itself …”

      Well Mr Rees-Mogg refused to say that. THAT is the problem.

      It’s not about “judging” – that is a typical modernist red herring. He must have made judgements during his life: which political party to join, which girl to marry, blah blah, so it’s baloney to say we cannot judge. We make judgements all the time.

      The only thing we may NOT judge is the soul of another. I can say that, yes, sodomy – commonly called “gay sex” these days – is ALWAYS a sin, but I am not free to speculate on the condition of the soul of the sodomite. I can certainly say that an unrepentant sodomite is in spiritual danger, may lose his soul, but I can’t say he HAS lost his soul or is going to Hell. I can only say that – like any other person committing a mortal sin and refusing to repent of it before death – he is at risk of ending up in Hell.

      There’s really nothing controversial in any of that. It’s ancient moral teaching, which the Church upholds because it reflects the correct natural order. Those who do not engage in such unnatural homosexual activity are healthy in body and soul. Those who do engage in it, risk both physical and spiritual well-being and the latter for all eternity. Common sense.

      Where’s the controversy? Why couldn’t JRM just say that, and be done with it?

      It is quite shocking to me to read that you would have answered in the same impoverished way that JRM answered. At your age, John, you should be hanging your head in shame. You should know better.

      September 17, 2017 at 9:31 pm
  • crofterlady

    I haven’t time to take on board all that this thread examines. It is a very good thread. Although I agree with those who said that Jacob Rees Mogg has not been thoroughly catechised as a traditional Catholic, I still think he is a shining example, especially to our mute hierarchy. He defended his beliefs and Church teaching in a very brave manner and in the face of severe hostilities. I think we should be proud of such a Catholic man post the ravages of Vatican 2.

    The bishops should not be letting the laity take the flack whilst they cosy up to the world!!

    September 19, 2017 at 4:45 pm
    • Lily


      “a shining example”?

      He’s hardly a shining example! He’s no different from the hierarchy – they’re all politically correct. He only spoke out on abortion, but I didn’t see any severe hostilities on anything, He was only asked if he thought homosexuality was a sin, and he refused to answer. I’ve been asked the same question and just answered “yes, it is a sin”. I didn’t see the question as hostile. He was pushed a little to check that he meant abortion was wrong even in cases of incest or rape but there was no hostility that I could see.

      September 19, 2017 at 5:17 pm
      • editor


        Just checked, and you said above somewhere that Piers Morgan “barracked” Jacob Rees Mogg ! Be consistent wummin!

        Still, I think you’re basically right – it wasn’t much of a barracking – I’ve had worse over a cup of tea with my family and alleged friends 😀

        September 19, 2017 at 6:35 pm
    • Petrus


      A shining example? He said he would attend a same sex “wedding”!!!!!!

      September 19, 2017 at 5:40 pm
  • Lily

    I am very disappointed to read this, that Jacob Rees Mogg makes money out of abortion pills – he says “in a roundabout way” and one of the bloggers below said “roundabout a few million”. How disappointing.

    It seems he is very far from being a Catholic hero.

    October 2, 2017 at 1:57 pm
    • gabriel syme


      Jacob Rees Mogg makes money out of abortion pills

      I havent read in great detail, but I think that link is a hatchet job on Mogg. It says:

      Invitec is made to treat stomach ulcers but is widely used to trigger terminations in Indonesia, where abortions are illegal.

      So it isn’t fair of the evening standard to say his investment company “profits from abortion pills”.

      The drugs are actually made as medicine for stomach ulcers, but are used in Indonesia to harm unborn children. It seems that the production of the drugs is legitimate with healthcare in mind, but a secondary function of them is being abused.

      George Osbourne, former Tory MP and Chancellor, is now Editor of the Evening Standard – I wonder if these kind of articles are being used to attack his rivals in the party?

      October 2, 2017 at 3:01 pm
  • editor

    Well, sitting on the fence, refusing to speak the WHOLE truth, hasn’t help JRM one bit. Check out this report and watch the video clip

    October 15, 2017 at 3:20 pm

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: