Keeleklogger
Because he's rich and the BBC won't sack him. The fact this made the BBC news is basically them laughing in the governments face just like they've flaunted rules in the past and using the story to further push their left wing politics.
A shame really because no matter what you think about Lineker's opinions he is a sports presenter, if he wants to get political he needs to cut ties with the BBC and use his own platform. But both he and the BBC won't do that, their political opinions is the same as Lineker and they'll use each other to push their politics when the rules state they have to be impartial.
Will Westminster and the govt stop the BBC using loop holes to break the rules? Nope, so they deserve all the shit the BBC gives them
The BBC is in no position to "sack" Lineker; he is not employed by them. They could refuse to renew his contract as he is a freelancer. However, if I were them, I would be very careful about doing that. We have freedom of speech in this country. He was speaking for himself. Speaking on a platform that has nothing to do with the BBC.
"Impartial" would mean that both sides are heard not just the perverted view of the world from the far right. Just think of all those who were persuaded to think of "others" as vermin, etc. There is no difference between how the "enemy" was defined in the 1930s and how the unwise words of people such as Braverman define the "enemy" for all who think they need someone to blame.
In both cases, these people had done nothing to be castigated in this way. It was/is simply political expediency for those who wanted/want power.