Giving Cameron the benefit of the doubt

I'm actually giving Cameron the benefit of the doubt.

It seems to me that he asked Coulson if there were any general issues he should be aware of, Coulson said no. I'd imagine Cameron asked specifically if there were any issues relating to phone hacking etc. I imagine Coulson said no.

Cameron saw a man who probably swore on his word that he had not been involved in wrong-doing but who had done the decent thing and resigned.

Cameron's background checks probably found no other faults, and so he was employed.

If the above scenario is anywhere near correct then I find no fault on Cameron's part, other than being trusting, which is no great fault.
In that case, Coulson comes off very badly.

If this was not the scenario then I think Cameron may have questions to answer





Tweet

David Cameron: Andy Coulson deserves to be given a second chance

It sounds as if Cameron knows that Coulson was in the wrong and has accepted that privately without wanting to admit publicly. Sounds dodgy to me.

Andy Coulson comes under fresh scrutiny over News of the World activities | Media | guardian.co.uk‏

The whole thing stinks, and not just coz he's a Tory. I don't like Labour people involved in this, and I don't think anyone, much less those with significant links to top party people and positions should be involved in this.
It's all allegations and all that, but tabloids are a dirty lot.
I don't want to get all party political (Labour = good, Tory = bad), but this does no one any favours. Except maybe the lawyers

Andy Coulson: 'I do not know. I do not recall' | Media | guardian.co.uk‏

Interesting. Selective memory? Lying bastard?