I am opening the kitchen drawer. . .

. . . and I'm removing my tin foil hat.

Why?

Well, isn't funny how two days after this:

Christine Lagarde has become the head of the International Monetary Fund, its board confirmed following a meeting in Washington.

The French finance minister is the first woman to hold the post. She takes over from Dominique Strauss-Kahn, beginning her five-year term on 5 July.

We get this?

The sex assault case against former IMF head Dominique Strauss-Kahn appears to be in trouble amid reported concerns over the alleged victim's credibility.

Law enforcement officials have told US media the accuser has repeatedly lied since the alleged attack on 14 May.

Could it have been that DS-K saw that the writing on the wall for the Euro and was foolish enough to communicate this?

Surely, someone wouldn't get a hard-up Francophone immigrant to the US, bung them a couple of €, (although if she had any sense, she'd have held out for US$), and get them set about a campaign to discredit the head of the IMF who could see the plug pulled on Euro?

No, no. That's far too paranoid.

Isn't it?

This isn't a bloodless assasination, is it?

It's a complete coincedence that two days after the empty chair is filled, the case starts to unravel. Isn't it?

If, heaven forfend, it all turns out to be put-up job, I wonder how miffed the New York DA is going to be, and how many resources they'd dedicate to getting to the bottom of the issue? Could we be looking at conspiracy to pervert the course of justice here?

Enjoy your new job, Christine, well, until you've served your purpose. A rape charge ain't going to stick against you. Have you got kids or grandkids, or nieces and nephews? An abuse charge will fit nicely, or perhaps you should take your first pay-cheque and use it as a down payment on a Popemobile.

I will now return the tin foil hat to the drawer.

Perhaps we can concentrate on him now.

So one of the great conspiracy theories of recent years has been laid to rest with the release of Obama's full 'long form' birth certificate.

It was always a very lazy attack on a president which (at the risk of sounding like a Grauniadista) smacked a little of racism. There's plenty of things to take Obama to task about, but this was never one of them. Perhaps the public can now turn their attentions to the man's policies rather than his place of birth.

No doubt it will be decried as a forgery, counterfeit or some other sort of fraud now.

Meanwhile, what the hell is all this guff about Labour demanding an apology from Cameron over his 'calm down, dear' line to Angela Eagle?

Really? Really? Is that the biggest thing you have to worry about?

Stop being so bloody precious.

Or I'll start demanding she apologise for this comment, when the House was warned about the financial bubble in 2008:

"Fortunately for all of us...that colourful and lurid fiction has no real bearing on the macro-economic reality."

Policitians and conspiracy-theorists, I'm not sure which I have less time for, to be honest.

The One That Wonders What Else They've Got. . .

I like a good conspiracy, and this one is quite entertaining.

The events of the last couple of days about David Laws has left me wondering what else the Torygraph have hidden away. Why Laws and more importantly, why now?

The Telegraph must have realised how damaging this could be to a coalition, especially in these early days. Whilst I have no doubt that the Telegraph and their core readership would much rather have a Tory majority government, surely the ConDem coalition is infinitely preferable to a LibLab coalition or one of them governing in their own right.

To risk bringing down a coalition so soon just doesn't make sense.

So it makes we wonder, what do the Telegraph have on Cameron and Osborne? They could have run this Laws story at any time over the last year. For what it's worth, I have little sympathy for Laws. If his personal life was so important to him, he could have just not claimed the £40k. I mean, if he's living with this bloke, how much is it costing him? How much is it costing his partner to have him there? Is this beyond the normal cost of living borne by millions of others of same and different sex partnerships? This sexuality thing is a smoke screen and I don't buy it. Looks like troughing to me, whether within the rules or not.

God, are we still going on about the rules? I'm not bored of it yet. I get the impression that the politicians were hoping we would be. But this story is here to stay.

I digress.

Cameron has already put noses out of joint with his attempt to immasculate the 1922 Committee and I can see a huge row brewing over the re-ratification of Lisbon. There's a real hunger amongst the membership to give the EU a bloody nose, and Lisbon/EUro Constitution 1.3 is the perfect opportunity.

The Telegraph, who in the main represent the more right wing, Euro-sceptic faction of Conservatism are probably a decent representation of the Tory majority view. So I can't help wondering if the destruction of Laws isn't a warning shot across the bows of Cameron. If he knows they've something on him and/or Osborne then this is a very neat, surgical way of letting him know that if they feel the need, they'll do the same to him. At least with Laws it gives Cameron a bit of a headache, but leaves the Tories unharmed.

Next time the target may be a bit closer to home.

I shall return my tin-foil hat to the kitchen drawer for when I need it next.

The One That Is Passing It On. . .

I don't use Twitter, I tried to, but couldn't get on with it.

From Obo comes this selection of documents leaked from the IPCC, which could be HUGE, if they are what they appear to be. I know Obnoxio has asked for it to be 're-tweeted'.

Could it be we're being lied to? Surely not. . .