Forum menu
Not really though because his campaign evening meal broke no rules
That's exactly what Johnson is saying too about his impromptu birthday party. He can't have it both ways. Also don't forget that he made a massive thing of Johnson simply being investigated, so how is he any better? To the casual observer it looks like hypocrisy and political opportunism. You know when people say 'politicians are all the same'? This is exactly what they're talking about.
Starmer to be investigated by cops for eating that curry. Game over. If found guilty he’ll have to resign.
If he's found guilty I'm sure BJ will be leading the they must resign calls, without any sense of irony.
That’s exactly what Johnson is saying too about his impromptu birthday party.
No it isn't, Johnson said first there wasn't one, then he said he wasn't there, then he said he didn't know what the rules were, and then he said he was furious that he hadn't been told that it might've broken the rules, then he said he'd pay the fine as it was obvious he'd broken the rules.
In Starmer's case the cops have said "They did't break the rules"
Did you not read the post above yours?
In Starmer’s case the cops have said “They did’t break the rules”
Although they have now said there is more information and so they are investigating again.
Whether that is anything other than political pressure we will have to see. Whats been provided by the mail doesnt seem to add anything so unless they kept something back cant see it going far.
Did you not read the post above yours?
I think he's going for Starmers throat more than the tories or the daily mail!
As for the police investigation, new evidence points at either more allegations or pap photos, i doubt either will do more than end with a no further action response, as SKS's response was pretty solid, he was campaigning, doing news slots and online stuff, all of which can be verified if true.
In Starmer’s case the cops have said “They did’t break the rules”
As have been said on the BBC and Sky - new significant info for what it's worth.
Like DazH says the damage is now done and "all politicians are the same" will be the new line.
I mean we all knew Starmer wanted to ape the Toriee in lots of ways but I didn't expect he wanted a police investigation too.
I bet Dunt and co are having kittens.
https://twitter.com/IanDunt/status/1522569015415164928?t=dzjkvIQMmemXjxDL6Sh9aA&s=19
Thought so.
kimbers
Full MemberCorbyn was monstered for his associations with Hamas, IRA etc
Starmer is attacked for having dinner
Corbyn was monstered for wearing a hat. Or a coat. And one time, for walking perfectly normally. Your choice of examples is ridiculous.
I bet Dunt and co are having kittens.
urgh, creepy weird man...
Corbyn was monstered for wanting to help the friggin' disadvantaged and put the brakes on 40 years of regressive market forces - let's be clear.
urgh, creepy weird man…
You not heard that expression?
Is the new significant info that they had poppadoms?
Corbyn was monstered for his associations with Hamas, IRA etc
Starmer is attacked for having dinner
Fun fact. I've always thought the IRA association was ridiculous with Corbyn when there was an actual former member of the IRA also a member of the Tory Party and Tory councillor.
(Maria Gatland)
Bet most Tories don't know that.
he was campaigning, doing news slots and online stuff, all of which can be verified if true.
I have to admit that I haven't been following partygate and beergate very closely, like most people it's not very high on my priority lists of things to worry about, but didn't beergate involve drinking beer?
Is Starmer claiming that he needs to drink alcoholic beverages whilst he is working? It might seem like a perfectly acceptable explanation to some but for many voters it will be seen as hypocritical.
And in particular as Starmer has focused more on Johnson's workplace social interactions than he has on pressingly important issues such as the cost of living crises.
The prime minister needs to have followed the lockdown rules of no social interactions to the letter seems to have been Starmer's obsession of the last few weeks, how awkward if he didn't.
there was an actual former member of the IRA also a member of the Tory Party and Tory councillor.
There still is, she lives two roads from me and she is my local councillor, based on the fact that there is zero chance that she wasn't reelected yesterday.
Her name is Maria Gatland.
And she intensely dislikes mtbers btw. She has successfully managed to ban off road cycling in my local woods on some spurious claim that it causes soil erosion.
And she intensely dislikes mtbers btw. She has successfully managed to ban off road cycling in my local woods on some spurious claim that it causes soil erosion.
She's a bad package then.
Bet most Tories don’t know that.
They are flexible about that sort of thing. Hence why nowt was said about Claire Fox who was close enough to Johnson for him to put her into the Lords.
Or indeed the pages dedicated to Corbyn allegedly not bowing low enough at remembrance day vs the lack of pages when Johnson turned up looking like a sack of shit and couldnt follow basic protocol.
And in particular as Starmer has focused more on Johnson’s workplace social interactions than he has on pressingly important issues such as the cost of living crises.
No he hasn't. The number of fronts that opposition parties are fighting the government on is many. Labour (and the SNP, and others) have been bashing away at the man for whom no rules apply on everything, especially fuel prices and cuts to benefits. Both Starmer and Blackford (and others) have been raising and pushing all these cost of living crises issues again, and again, and again. The Prime Minister's "I set the rules, but don't follow them" approach to government can be attacked without ignoring all the other stuff going on. And the opposition parties have done so very well, and got the balance right without making it all about law breaking in government. They've gone in hard on the cost of living crises again, and again, and again. For months and months and months.
Or indeed the pages dedicated to Corbyn allegedly not bowing low enough at remembrance day vs the lack of pages when Johnson turned up looking like a sack of shit and couldnt follow basic protocol.
That one really grates me considering how bad Johnson is mostly turned out.
It's an asset for Johnson you see, that he gets away with it as part of his "rules don't apply to me" approach... he choses to be untidy. Corbyn just wears normal clothes that don't cost a fortune and can be reused for many events. And wears them in a perfectly respectable normal way. He's not a carefully self curated clown basking in the ridiculous of what he can get away with. Good old Boris.
As for the police investigation, new evidence points at either more allegations or pap photos, i doubt either will do more than end with a no further action response
I think the new evidence might have come from interviewing Starmer's personal police bodyguards. The Tory Durham MP apparently urged Durham Constabulary to interview them.
I guess that if their evidence contradicts what Starmer has claimed it will be hard for them to ignore it.
IMO it's ridiculous that Durham police should investigate a fairly minor alleged incident which occurred a year ago simply to satisfy political pressure. But then if the Met were forced to do the same then I guess that they feel the need, quite rightly, to be evenhanded and nonpartisan.
Is Starmer claiming that he needs to drink alcoholic beverages whilst he is working?
I don't think he said that did he? I think he said that he needed to have a meal. I'm not sure that the components of that meal are relevant.
I see Diane Abbott has weighed in with some helpful comments just in case anyone thought voting labour would get them a unified party fit for government.
ffs
I see Diane Abbott has weighed in with some helpful comments just in case anyone thought voting labour would get them a unified party fit for government.
I've defended Diane Abbott on here before, but this is just stupidity.
It’s not “stupid”, it’s factional, and deliberately destructive. Not sure how it helps the case for the next leader, whenever that happens, to be more clearly left wing (something I’d like). The obvious infighting isn’t going to result in that, quite the opposite.
What is this ridiculous thing she said?
Because she's just repeating what Starmer said about Johnson.
Starmer should absolutely resign if he's issued with a fix penalty.
So do you agree with Starmer or not?
I don't see the issue at all.
D.A now responsible for Starmer's actions?
I see Diane Abbott has weighed in with some helpful comments just in case anyone thought voting labour would get them a unified party fit for government.
ffs
You reap what you sow.
I see Diane Abbott has weighed in with some helpful comments
Shocking. Did she call him a ‘f***** racist anti-semite’?
Diane Abbott is not the full ticket nowadays.
That's not meant in a light-hearted way, either, she is actually showing some signs of genuine illness. It is her time to bow out gracefully.
she is actually showing some signs of genuine illness.
Jesus. She stated the obvious fact that he should resign if found to be guilty and your conclusion is that she’s ‘ill’? As well as being patronising that offensive comment has just a hint of mysogyny in it too. Go have a think.
It’s not “stupid”, it’s factional, and deliberately destructive
What utter rubbish.
Have you bothered to read what she said before going waaaahhhh corbynist must attack?
I know you are a factional extremist but seriously how can you get upset about someone saying.
"“I don’t think he will – I think this is a lot of hype built up by the Tory press. But if he were to get a fixed penalty notice, he would have to consider his position."
Or do you think it is sensible for the labour leader to say Johnson should resign it fined but then say nahhh dont apply to me?
Not sure how my post could be construed as misogynistic, I would say exactly the same of any male politician who has so obviously lost their sharpness and edge with time.
Mind you, when I say "I'm not sure how my post could be construed as misogynistic"...
dazh
Now it becomes clearer. For 'construed' read 'deliberately misconstrued to deflect'. Yawn.
Not sure how my post could be construed as misogynistic,
So did you bother to read what she wrote before going off on your rant?
If yes then its problematic if not then why didnt you?
<disengages from the thread before the North Korean style clique assemble for death by reductio ad absurdum>
You could just admit that you spewed out your comment without bothering to check anything beyond the headlines.
It is okay to do so. All it shows is that you havent learnt the basics of print journalism.
Probably best though to go waahhhhhh everyone is picking on me and they are all NK types.
That’s not meant in a light-hearted way, either, she is actually showing some signs of genuine illness. It is her time to bow out gracefully.
Your diagnosis is based on your extensive medical training? Or is it a personal attack because you don't like her stating the obvious?
Meh, as Dissonance says, she hasn't said anything out of turn, it's just the same press that's 'reopened' this investigation going around looking for comments to then use to stoke the flames.
Dianne Abbot has her faults, and i do agree that she is starting to get a little prone to issues, but she is nearing 70 and should be handing over the reins to someone else, it's never a good thing to stay in politics as the world passes you by, we have way too many politicians like that unfortunately, then again we also have a load of young career politicians at the other end of the spectrum, it's a bit of a crap time for politics!
it’s never a good thing to stay in politics as the world passes you by
John Enoch covered that "All political lives, unless they are cut off in midstream at a happy juncture, end in failure,"
I know you are a factional extremist
This thread is so much fun. Corbyn got me voting Labour. I think he made a mistake staying leader when he should have paved the way for a (left wing) successor after losing an election. I also don’t think he has played his part in helping Labour sort out its problems since he stepped down. Not sure why those views makes me a factional extremist, they’re fairly mainstream with a lot of Labour voters, but hey. And I think like many Labour voters, and voters who might consider Labour next time, hearing less about Corbyn would be very welcome at this point.
Abbot has been a great MP. Maybe not as sharp as she was, but deserves respect for her work in parliament over the decades. She still has the nouse to be able to create trouble with plausible deniability. But she is deliberately causing trouble. No point pretending otherwise.
Not sure why those views makes me a factional extremist
Simple really. Did you bother to read what she actually said before declaring it "factional" and "deliberately destructive"?
Yes clearly shows you are a factional extremist.
No shows some severe bias which points towards being a factional extremist.
The right answer would have been to read what she said and go yeah thats reasonable since it defends him but upholds the idea that our leaders should actually lead.
Admittedly it would be a travesty if Starmer resigned for a fixed penalty whilst Johnson didnt but do we really want everyone to lower themselves to Johnsons level or instead demonstrate some honour still exists?
I heard what she said. I didn’t need to read it. Abbot has done this before, some nice little reasonable comment quietly mumbled, followed by a nice clear “he’ll have to resign” in a tone that suggests she’s hopeful that day comes soon. “He’ll have to resign if Labour lose the by-election”. I think Labour should replace him. But I’m not a Labour MP, and ex shadow cabinet minister, what I say does no damage to the party in the view of voters. She’s listened to (rightly so) and should use her media access and political history to better effect.
So which part exactly did you feel was wrong?
Do you feel if he is found guilty he should ignore it and lower himself to Johnsons level?
Given she said she didnt think that was the case.
For Starmer to be so vocal that Johnson should resign if fined he would have to be very clear in his head that he would never get fined for the same. If not then he is even more useless than most people on this thread think he is as that would have been the biggest own goal ever.