The problem with Patel is that she's got beliefs that a lot of the Twitterati mob disagree with plus she's an ethnic minority so a lot of them think they own her.
It's the same with someone like Corbyn. He rubs a lot of people up the wrong way so people naturally question whether the process is politicised and whether he is actually x, y, z although a lot of what Corbyn did is public record whereas bullying occurs behind doors although you'd argue Patel doesn't have a great track record for integrity either.
Either way, this will blow over in a few days outside of the Guardian.
The problem is, these were contraventions of the ministerial code.
And it demonstrates that once again, there is one rule for friends of Boris, another for everyone else.
It's Trumpism, UK style. Or should I say, Bannonism, where constant, flagrant bending and breaking of the rules, and leaning on the arbiters reinforces that the leader has enough power to flout all conventions, and will use it.
It's also thought that more contraventions of law and process are better than a few, each story becomes less outrageous, the psychology is well understood, well if he did that then this can't be any worse.
Strongman politics. Signs are, it's not actually working that well for him. The Telegraph and Mail are now more critical of him than the BBC! The Spectator has been kicked back to the right, but until recently, they were gunning for him. See how long it all lasts. The right wing MPs keen on a no-deal will leave Boris needing Labour support in ginourmously significant votes next month. And the moderates are already far from happy. There are some really principled people amongst them, who could walk into any number of high paying prestigious jobs. It's a tug of war. They'll do well to not implode frequently. It's easy street for Starmer, it'll be empty net after empty net, all tiny, temporary victories, but once Brexit is out of the way (assuming we don't get a delay), that's Boris' mandate delivered and spent.
