The second round of public hearings examining the UK's handling of the COVID pandemic - Penny Mordaunt says her WhatsApp messages went missing

Health & Diet Health & Diet: In The News
, , , , ,
141

Summary

10:13

Hugo Keith KC, lawyer for the inquiry, is referencing Hancock’s “lengthy statement” for the inquiry. He also says they have read Hancock’s book Pandemic Diaries.

Keith adds this book is a “significant contribution” to the debate about the pandemic response, and that in Hancock’s own words this book is “pieced together” from memos, interviews and papers.

Hancock says this is right: “It was written after the pandemic using contemporaneous materials.”

Will Hancock be hoist by his own petard?

Let’s have a quick recap of the key moments from this morning:

  • The former health secretary used his appearance at the inquiry to insist the Department of Health and Social Care “rose to the challenge” of responding to the pandemic
  • Previous evidence sessions had heard accusations there was a “clear lack of grip” within the department
  • Hancock branded Dominic Cummings’s evidence to the UK Covid-19 inquiry “not accurate” adding from his point of view Cummings “got in the way” of the response to the pandemic by trying to stage “a power-grab”
  • Hancock insisted he had to “wake up Whitehall” to the emerging threat from Covid-19
  • He also said the working relationship within Downing Street was not good, describing a “toxic” culture
  • The former Tory MP told the inquiry in the early stages of the coronavirus outbreak there was a “fog of uncertainty” about asymptomatic transmission of Covid-19 which he found “deeply frustrating”
  • He said even by the end of January his staff were still being “dragged into meetings” with Number 10 about meeting manifesto commitments when they should have been focusing on the pandemic

Hancock, as usual, does not evade questions - but he does put his own spin (self-justification) on the answers, in effect, lying to save his own skin.

142

Comment:

Hancock is trying to save his public reputation

Henry Zeffman

Chief political correspondent

The question of Matt Hancock’s honesty has been a pivotal part of so many previous witnesses’ evidence.

Hugo Keith KC put the question fairly starkly to the former health secretary: how could so many people “have concluded that the secretary of state for health in the maw of this public health crisis was a liar?”

Hancock’s response was straightforward: “I was not”. (1)

He said that there is “no evidence” from those who worked with him in the health department that he lied and again blamed the allegations against him on the “toxic culture” in Number 10.

This exchange shows how high the stakes are for Hancock here. There is the central matter of what the inquiry concludes about his actions, and how they helped or hindered the government’s handling of the pandemic.

But zoom out briefly. Hancock is only 45. He is standing down from the Commons at the next election but clearly wants to continue in public life in some form.

So another crucial personal task he faces today is to try to save his public reputation after the brutal assault on his character from so many former colleagues.

(1) He’s lying … again … :roll_eyes:

143

Hancock seems to have decided that his defense is to blame someone he thinks might be even less popular than himself. In normal circumstances finding such a soul would be difficult. But Hancock has the luck of the liar with him and destiny provided one Dominic to be Hancock’s go to fall guy.

1 Like
144

Hancock is, of course, spinning a yarn in his own favour but, unlikely as it may seem, Cummings is the one to believed because he’s got nothing to lose while Hancock (thinks he) has everything to gain.

He has, however, been hoist:

In other evidence to the inquiry, Hancock pushed back against criticisms that the health department he led in 2020 was chaotic and apt to overpromise.

However, under questioning from Hugo Keith KC, the inquiry counsel, Hancock struggled to justify documents and messages from early 2020 in which he repeatedly told colleagues a cohesive plan was in place for Covid, or to provide evidence for a claim he urged Johnson to call an early lockdown.

Hancock was shown extracts from the diary of Patrick Vallance, the government’s then chief scientific adviser, which cited Vallance and various other senior figures discussing the “operational mess” in the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC), saying it had “no grip” and was “ungovernable”.

Hancock said that while it was clear the DHSC made mistakes, and that it was the role of the Cabinet Office and Downing Street to be “sceptical” of departments, Johnson’s No 10 had an “unhealthy toxic culture”. "We rubbed up against this deep unpleasantness at the centre. Some of these exhibits [from Vallance’s diary] demonstrate a lack of generosity or empathy in understanding the difficulty of rising to such a challenge.”

Under subsequent questioning, Keith repeatedly pushed Hancock about whether he had incorrectly assured colleagues that his department had a plan in place for the pandemic, citing examples such as a WhatsApp message to Cummings in January 2020 in which Hancock said “full plans” existed.

The inquiry also saw minutes from a cabinet meeting on 6 February 2020 when Hancock was quoted as saying: “The central point to make was that the government had a plan to deal with this issue.”

Keith quizzed Hancock about this, saying that a Covid-specific plan was not even commissioned until four days later. Hancock replied that he was referring to “a whole series of different plans”, (1) including a 2011 plan for pandemic flu.

Hancock’s a lying toe-rag … :man_shrugging:

145

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/health-67572394

Matt Hancock has been sat in the inquiry giving evidence for the last few hours. He is due back tomorrow, but for now let’s have a look back at some key moments from today.

  • The former health secretary used his appearance at the inquiry to accuse Boris Johnson’s former aide, Dominic Cummings, of a “power grab” during the pandemic
  • Hancock claimed Cummings actively circumvented the government’s emergency response system and wanted decision-making to be under the control of his office
  • The former Tory MP said back in 2020 the UK should have locked down three weeks earlier than it actually did - he added that a decision could have saved thousands of lives
  • He also told the inquiry he had to “wake up Whitehall” to the threat of Covid in the early months of 2020
  • In his view, the UK still needs a better testing system for future pandemics
  • Hancock said he had not been given any advance notice of the Eat Out to Help Out scheme which was launched by the then-Chancellor Rishi Sunak during the summer of 2020
  • He was against a so-called “circuit breaker” as Covid cases rose in the autumn of 2020

Additionally:

Hancock asked about plans to stop Covid spread

Hugo Keith KC looks at the witness statement provided by Hancock.

On 13 February, the statement shows that Sage (Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies) came to the view that China had "failed to contain coronavirus". Keith asks if Hancock can recall his reaction to this. Hancock says “no”, he doesn’t recall being told that “as early as that”.

Hugo Keith KC moves to press Matt Hancock on what plans there were for infection control by the middle of February. What in hard copy, emails, or other written formats, were the plans for infection control, he asks the former health secretary. “Was enough going on?” Keith asks to which Hancock answers: “Absolutely not.”

More now on the government meeting on 14 February.

The lawyer for the inquiry says it appears Hancock did not say to the prime minister and colleagues that "containment has been lost, China has given up… we have no practical measures for infection control, there is no test and trace system… and there are still no plans in existence".

Why did he not say these things, Hugo Keith KC asks.

Hancock says that is not how he’d “characterise the situation”, adding he was not confident that by this meeting that Sage had concluded that China’s containment of coronavirus was lost. “At this point in the department… we were working extremely hard to prepare for the pandemic,” he adds. Again he mentions he was pushing for a testing system and had commissioned an action plan.

It seems that Hancock was doing nothing but he claims he was initiating a response.

Care homes.

Keith reminds the inquiry that on 19 March, the government issued the hospital discharge requirements which meant patients began to be moved to care homes when it was “medically okay” to do so. He asks whether those discharges were in any way contingent upon a negative test being applied to the patient. Hancock replies that in March that wasn’t the case. Hancock says, simply: “We didn’t have enough tests”.

Keith quotes Hancock from a press conference in May 2020. “Right from the start we’ve tried to throw a protective ring around care homes,” Hancock had said at the time. Keith suggests that it gave the impression there was a barrier, whether in terms of finance, testing or discharge within the care sector.

Hancock tells the inquiry that they wanted to make it clear that they were trying to protect care homes. He explains that’s why he had said in the press conference that they had put £3 billion into the care sector in March and April 2020, and had given free PPE to care homes and put in place controls. (1)

However, Keith quotes Professor Van Tam, the former deputy medical officer for England: “My view is a ring is a circle without a break in it.” Hancock concedes to Keith, and admits that their protections did not form an unbroken circle around the care home sector.

(1) Was this true or just another of Hancock’s lies?

The inquiry was just shown another diary entry from the government’s chief scientific adviser, Sir Patrick Vallance, regarding agency care staff often rotating between a number of different residential homes

“Chris Whitty now says people (staff) moving between care homes important,” he wrote on 15 May 2020. “I raised that and got told off by Matt Hancock a couple of weeks ago - again!”

Hancock says it was not a “fair reflection” of his position and he would never “tell off” Vallance in that way.

As we all guessed, Hancock’s under-informed or ill-informed “judgement” precipitated most of the early deaths and disasters of the early stages of the pandemic. Now, he’s claiming he was thinking about the situation but the evidence implies that, at the time, he was “shooting from the hip.”

146

(1) Matt Hancock’s cringe COVID inquiry grilling – POLITICO

All of the “diary entries” were written by Hancock and journalist Isabel Oakeshott after the fact — but as if they were written at the time. He argued they were written with the help of contemporaneous documents and WhatsApp messages.

With more than a hint of snark, top inquiry lawyer Hugo Keith — who’d presumably been forced to read the whole thing — got Hancock to admit that the “so-called diaries” as he described them were in fact… not stylistically a diary at all. And Keith gave Hancock short shrift when he tried to argue that diary notes given to the inquiry by former government science adviser Patrick Vallance might not have been made at the time either.

“These were evening notes made certainly more contemporaneously than your Pandemic Diaries book,” Keith snapped back at the seemingly unembarrassed Hancock.

147

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/health-67572394

10:03

Matt Hancock starts second day of evidence

Matt Hancock has taken his seat inside the Covid inquiry in central London ahead of his second day of evidence.

He will start by continuing to face questions from the inquiry’s lead counsel Hugo Keith KC.

10:39

Hugo Keith KC asks about Hancock’s “transgression” - when he was discovered to be having an affair with his aide Gina Coladangelo in June 2021.

At the time, Hancock admitted breaking social distancing guidance after pictures of him kissing Coladangelo were published in a newspaper.

Keith puts to Hancock that, overall, rule-breaking breaches were damaging to the public.

“The lesson for the future is very clear,” Hancock replies. “It is important that those who make the rules abide by them and I resigned in order to take accountability.” (1)

(1) So, he broke the rules but only resigned because he got found out … :roll_eyes:

10:49

Hancock pressed on discharging patients to care homes

Hancock’s asked about the decision on 19 March 2020 to discharge untested patients into care homes, and what was done to minimise risk of infection.

Hancock says this was “early on”, at a time with few cases, but it was clear the virus was impacting older people more than others, and care homes were a particular risk.

The inquiry is shown a comment from Public Health England on 24 February 2020, which advises that no discharges made from hospitals to care homes.

Hancock says he didn’t see the document at the time.

Was he too busy with Gina … :question:

10:58

Did care homes fail to get PPE due to NHS need?

Turning to issues around personal protective equipment (PPE) in care homes, Hancock says he is not aware of PPE stock being requisitioned for NHS staff use.

Anna Morris KC highlights a departmental note which says PPE ordered by the care sector was being requisitioned for the NHS.

Obviously he was tied up elsewhere … :roll_eyes:

11:24

Hancock says it was “rational” and “reasonable” to discharge people from hospital to care homes.

The former health secretary says his fear was if patients had been left in hospital more would have caught Covid.

“No-one … brought to me a better decision,” Hancock tells the inquiry, insisting if there was one he would want to know about it.

… but if Hancock wasn’t aware or wasn’t seeing then presumably he DIDN’T want to know about it … :roll_eyes:

12:20

Sticking with questions on disability, Danny Friedman KC now brings up a message to Hancock from a media adviser on 4 April 2020, about testing for Covid in care homes.

The adviser suggests that questions may be asked about why there is not more testing for the virus in care homes given the discharge policy, even though he adds many care home residents are near the end of their lives.

Friedman asks why Hancock didn’t point out, in reply, that many residents were disabled people not near the end of their lives.

Hancock says he “absolutely” had that fact at the forefront of his mind and cared deeply about it, but he was “exceptionally busy” at the time (2) and was aware that the adviser was coming at this “from a comms point of view”.

(2) Of course he was … :roll_eyes:

13:07

Inquiry finishes for the day

The inquiry has finished questioning former Health Secretary Matt Hancock, and has come to a close for the day.

Next week we’ll hear from the man at the very centre of government during the pandemic - former PM Boris Johnson (3).

(3) That’ll be the BJ that’s Master of BS … : :face_with_raised_eyebrow:

Hopefully, a summary for today will follow soon.

148

Summary of today’s evidence from Matt Hancock:

  • Matt Hancock says school closures could have been avoided in January 2021 if the government had acted more swiftly on spiralling Covid cases
  • He tells the Covid inquiry that he argued introducing restrictions later would mean “a tougher lockdown with more economic damage”
  • Hancock also accepts “transgressions” in his personal life may have impacted the public’s confidence in Covid rules
  • Elsewhere, Hancock says he was “in despair” when the government announced a tier system in England, which it “knew would not work”
  • He says this was because local politicians were “under significant pressure” not to accept the measures

Of course, as we know ‘recollections may vary’ … Hancock has a predilection for putting himself in the best possible light … BJ’s recollections will be similarly inclined but not necessarily in the same direction … :lying_face:

149

Boris Johnson is expected to apologise to the Covid Inquiry next week and acknowledge the government did not get everything right during the pandemic. But the former PM will argue robustly that his government got many of the big calls right. He will talk with pride about the vaccines programme and argue the UK emerged the final lockdown earlier than other comparable economies.

His evidence will follow weeks of heavy criticism of him at the inquiry. Boris Johnson’s capabilities as a prime minister in a pandemic have been criticised by some of those who worked most closely with him when Covid struck.

I would expect no less from Blustering BJ, Master of BS … :neutral_face:

1 Like
150

Since Mr Hancock left the inquiry on Friday lunchtime, his 173-page written statement has been published.

SECOND WITNESS STATEMENT OF MATT HANCOCK

Extracts from the Introduction:

  1. As the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care (“the Health Secretary” or “Secretary
    of State”) my motivation was to improve the health services in this country and to save
    lives. In the early days of the pandemic, huge decisions had to be made very quickly on
    the basis of very limited information. A vast amount of work by a very large number of
    people was done with diligence, due care and huge effort against the background that
    any pandemic involves enormous uncertainty; it is a response to a novel disease. My
    Civil Service and clinical advisers were exemplary.

  2. In a crisis of the scale of the pandemic, there are inevitably a vast number of decisions
    taken at all levels. The approach I took in leading the Department was to set the direction
    in which we needed to go, based on the best available advice, and encourage and
    empower all involved to take decisions to the best of their ability. There were thousands
    of decisions to be taken every day. One of the central tasks of the Department and wider
    Government was to make decisions at the right level.

At this point the conceit and pomposity proved too much for me … :078:

2 Likes
151

  1. Did he take Covid seriously enough early on?

  2. Could a full lockdown have been avoided?

  3. Did dysfunction in government cost lives?

  4. Did he undermine the scientists?

  5. Why was there no ‘circuit breaker’ lockdown?

  6. Was it a mistake to try to save Christmas?

  7. Was decision-making ‘colour blind’?

  8. Did you forget about children?

I’m sure there are many more that others can think of … :face_with_raised_eyebrow:

152

Ahead of the former prime minister taking the stand on Wednesday and Thursday, Rachel Johnson has said the multi-year inquiry is a “show trial” just like the Parliamentary Privileges inquiry into partygate.

She told the podcast by Sky News and Politico that “100% it’s about scapegoating because, as I said, it’s already been agreed that lockdown was the right thing to do. Therefore, the only questions they can really ask is, was it done properly? And if not, who do we blame? So this is going to follow the model of all public inquiries in recent years. Rather than learn lessons for the future, for the next pandemic, which is going to come down the pike. They are spending £100m of taxpayers’ money working out who to blame most for the past rather than using that money to get our pandemic plan or our pandemic response geared up and match fit for the next pandemic. It is driving me mad.”

Rachel Johnson says that while of course the government led by her brother made mistakes, it also did things well and “they should be applauded”. (*)

Mr Johnson is expected to issue an apology on behalf of the government about the early handling of the pandemic, but defend his personal behaviour. He will point to shifting advice and the nature of the pandemic, as well as a desire to pit advisers against one another to get the best out of them.

(*) Well, she would say that, wouldn’t she … if the losses incurred by BJ’s profligacy with the public purse could be recovered then they would pay for several inquiries several times over, so the taxpayer needs to know why so much was was wasted and so many deaths incurred. If it wasn’t lack of money then why was the response of BJ’s cabinet to the pandemic so poorly planned and poorly executed?

153

Funny, I’d always thought that scapegoating was done by people in power to deflect blame away from themselves. Like the government does over so many things (immigrants, strikers, judges, etc.). Scapegoating is not pointing the finger at those who were in charge and making the decisions. That’s called determining fault & failings.

1 Like
154

couldn’t handle a pork pie!!!

155

They all badly let Britian down . I remember seeing the chinese building those huge extra hospital wards in days , ready to accommodate covid people. The panic was evident, yet it was ignored by parliament . I remember the young chinese doctor scientist pleading with the world to prepare . ( he died 3 months later, - apparently from covid :unamused:) odd, that he worked in the Wuhan lab . Poor man . The country left open for aircraft from all over the world , thousands coming into Britain yet our airplanes grounded ! Why ?

They are all a disgrace

1 Like
156

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-67634545

Former Prime Minister Boris Johnson has arrived for two days of questioning at the UK Covid-19 Inquiry at around 07:00.

In an interview with Sky News, Policing Minister Chris Philp joked: “It’s the first time Boris has ever been early for anything.”

The inquiry has already heard that much of the decision-making in the pandemic didn’t take place in cabinet, or in the Cobra emergency committee, but in Downing Street itself.

The prime minister, his advisers and a small number of key ministers tended to be involved. That often included the Chancellor Rishi Sunak but also cabinet office minister Michael Gove and the health secretary Matt Hancock.

The final call, though, would have to be made by the prime minister. And his decision-making has come under intense scrutiny in this inquiry.

BJ is, of course, expected to lie, or at least obfuscate, throughout his appearance at the inquiry - it’s habitual for him … :man_shrugging:

Boris Johnson has been unable to supply the Covid-19 inquiry with any of his WhatsApp messages for almost the entirety of the first lockdown.

He was initially unable to hand over WhatsApp messages to the inquiry because he could not remember the passcode. Earlier this year he was able to access the device with the support of experts and it had been assumed the messages were passed on.

However, Johnson has told the inquiry that even with access to the device, experts were unable to retrieve any of his messages from January 31 to June 7, which covers a critical period from the run-up to the first Covid lockdown to the easing of restrictions. “The technical team has been unable to determine the cause of this,” he has told the inquiry.

A source close to Johnson denied that he had deleted the messages. Rishi Sunak has separately told the inquiry that he no longer has access to WhatsApp messages from his time as chancellor.

Well, that’s convenient … and reeks of conspiracy … :poop:

Inside the inquiry, Johnson is asked by lawyer Hugo Keith what the main mistakes of the government’s response to the pandemic were.

Johnson says he would struggle to list them in a hierarchy, but insists he and his government did their “level best”. He admits mistakes were made, saying “there were unquestionably things we should have done differently”.

He says he takes “personal responsibility for all decisions made”.

That means that he will have plenty of reasons to blame other people/factors … :roll_eyes:

Here we go … obfuscation:

Did government actions lead to excess deaths?

Keith next asks Johnson about whether he believes government decision-making led “materially” to excess deaths in the UK.

The pair go back and forth on whether the UK was the second-worst country for excess deaths in Western Europe (1).

“I think the UK from the evidence I’ve seen was well down the European table and even further down the world table,” Johnson says, adding that an “extremely elderly population”, a high rate of “Covid-related morbidities” and high population density also influenced the death rate (2).

Keith asks again whether government actions materially affected the outcome.

“The answer is I don’t know,” Johnson replies.

(1) That’s the appalling status that I recall … :scream:

(2) BJ’s recollections vary … :roll_eyes:

As I read elsewhere:

Having been prime minister for three years with all the House of Commons debating that entails, Johnson is used to being scrutinised at despatch box exchanges where the prime minister has raucous supporters sitting behind them and usually gets the last word.

But the format and power dynamics of the inquiry are very different. Hugo Keith KC has visibly lost patience with some of the politicians he has interrogated so far, demanding more concise answers and interjecting when he feels they are wandering away from the topic.

Hopefully, there will be summaries of BJ’s “evidence” later.

157

Hi

I will not be watching it, I have had enough of him.

158

13:04
The inquiry is now breaking for lunch – so it’s time for us to catch our breath and look back over what we heard:

An apology: Boris Johnson said sorry for the “pain and the loss and the suffering” in the UK during the Covid-19 pandemic, acknowledging that mistakes were made - for which he took personal responsibility

Too many men: The ex-PM also admitted he should have had a better gender balance in his team, explaining: “Too many meetings were male dominated”

A defence: But he also insisted “we did our level best” to manage the pandemic, using the information available at the time - and defended lockdowns as being “very important”

A (back-handed) endorsement: Johnson said former health secretary Matt Hancock “may have had defects, but I thought he was doing his best in challenging circumstances”

Early recollections: He defended not chairing five Cobra meetings on Covid in early 2020 - saying between January and February Covid was a "cloud on the horizon no bigger than a man’s hand”

Failing to twig: The ex-PM then said he was “really rattled” by the outbreaks in Italy in February 2020 – admitting he should have “twigged much sooner” how serious the virus was (1)

Close to tears: Johnson fought back tears while speaking about the March 2020 lockdown, and the “tragic, tragic year”

Interruptions: The session was interrupted more than once - with inquiry chair Baroness Heather Hallett ordering the removal of four people from the room

The hearing is due to resume just before 14:00

(1) Why the government and scientists were not paying more attention to the emerging evidence from the rest of the world – the high death rate and speed of spread – remains one of the big unanswered questions in the inquiry so far

159

16:56

Today’s session of the Covid inquiry has now ended and Boris Johnson is expected to exit Dorland House in London shortly.

While we wait for a summary, evidence typical of BJ’s responses at the time:

The inquiry was also shown a document on long Covid, on which in October 2020 Johnson had scrawled “bollocks” in the margin and “this is Gulf War syndrome stuff”.

image

Johnson tells the inquiry he is sure his assertions have “caused hurt and offence to huge numbers of people who have that syndrome”.

He said he regretted “very, very much” his use of language.

BJ can apologise all he likes but, during much of the COVID pandemic, his attitude to the threats was careless and cavalier while his “unofficial” responses are seemingly, ill-informed and crude. Small wonder that his WhatsApp messages “disappeared” … :roll_eyes:

Summary

  • Boris Johnson has told the UK Covid inquiry he had “no other tool” than lockdown to control the virus in March 2020
  • The former PM was answering a rare question from the inquiry chair - on whether he’d considered anti-lockdown arguments
  • Johnson also said he shouldn’t have shaken the hands of Covid patients in March 2020, and should have cancelled mass gatherings like the Cheltenham Festival

Hopefully, there’s more to come.

Comment

Iain Watson - Political correspondent

The inquiry has already heard from former aides Dominic Cummings - who described Johnson as the “trolley” due to the way he would change direction on things - and Lee Cain, who suggested he didn’t have the “skill set” to deal with the pandemic. This afternoon, we’re hearing the ex-PM’s defence.

So far we have seen very little of the Boris bombast - but he was visibly agitated with what he saw as the suggestion that he should have agreed a course of action before talking to Rishi Sunak, the then-chancellor, about the risks to the bond markets and the government’s ability to raise cash.

“I had to go through the arguments,” was Johnson’s view. But to his detractors, that will seem a very positive spin being put on indecisiveness and a lack of leadership

Exactly … :neutral_face:

Boris Johnson has given almost five hours of evidence to the inquiry today, which has now moved on to discussing the culture at No 10.

Johnson says it was “argumentative” but stresses that it needed an atmosphere where people could “say things that were going to be controversial”.

Inquiry lawyer Hugo Keith KC highlights a long list of evidence that has been heard so far, pointing to the fact that there were systemic problems in No 10 and the Cabinet Office - including “God complexes”, “misogyny” and “leadership issues”.

Johnson says that because the country “needed continuous urgent action” he wanted people to “speak their minds without fear of being embarrassed” in meetings.

A pathetically weak excuse for his lack of leadership … :roll_eyes:

Hugo Keith brings up former Health Secretary Matt Hancock again.

Keith asks whether Johnson was aware that some people perceived the Department of Health as “overwhelmed” and “inefficient” - and if he was, why he did not address them by replacing Hancock?

After a lot of back and forth, Johnson finally says that, under the circumstances, he thought Hancock was doing “a good job” and was “on top of the subject”.

As well as a bad leader, BJ is patently a poor judge of character … :man_shrugging:

160

I dislike them ALL intensly . The group of women ousted from the hearing all lost a close family member to covid .

They are all responsible for the thousands of deaths .