Election 2024
- Thread starter brb
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
I don't want the leader changed, but IF it was then as long as it is not Cooper then anyone else I can just about tolerate, Cooper is just a ****ing tortoise that's escaped its confine.
Streeting would probably do my head in.
Mahmood would be ok for me, she seems to have her head screwed on and comes across more professional than most the others, not forgetting it would also make for excellent bantz with @Sucky
Trouble is with Streeting for me he is just a mouth piece, has lots to say for himself, but when push comes to shove he gets all arsey and any diplomacy is completely different public facing than what he preaches.
Whether he's better behind closed doors can only be measured by that he does seem to calm things temporarily - until the next round.
I'm not sure I'd call him sleazy more a fat ponce, whose jaws don't stop chattering. I'd rather him than Cooper, but that's as far as my generosity stretches.
I don't know much about Lucy Powell, so my first choice would probably be Mahmood, I like her professionalism, I feel it would work well on the world stage.
Miliband can **** off, he's just a smarmy creep.
Miliband can **** off, he's just a smarmy creep.
I think it's ridiculous that Starmer's job is on the line because of the actions of a ****ing sleaze ball and all of those like him, who for years hid their disgusting behaviour and protected each other.
I know he's not the most dynamic PM, but I actually think Starmer is a decent bloke who does a good job given the circumstances in the UK and on the world stage. And when you look at the ****e this country had before him, we've actually got a good statesman representing our country at the moment.
He might end up having to fall on his sword over all of this, but the people who were involved with Epstein and raped and abused children should be ****ing burnt alive.
I know he's not the most dynamic PM, but I actually think Starmer is a decent bloke who does a good job given the circumstances in the UK and on the world stage. And when you look at the ****e this country had before him, we've actually got a good statesman representing our country at the moment.
He might end up having to fall on his sword over all of this, but the people who were involved with Epstein and raped and abused children should be ****ing burnt alive.
I wouldn't get rid of Starmer, I never believed in getting rid of Boris, the one elected should stay the whole term except for exceptional circumstances, and that shouldn't be because you've upset the back benches.
Keir's problem appears to be in being very naive, which is absolutely gobsmacking for someone who was DPP. I was listening to the newspaper reviews on tv last night, and even they were saying, the one person who should be able to spot a liar, falls for Mandelson's lies!
I think this is where the problem lies, people think KS is lieing and that he must have known, hand on heart I'd probably say he did, but maybe he's just a bit naive like me and didn't accept to what extreme.
Thing is Keir Starmer is known throughout Europe now, just let him finish what he started and stop the dog whistle politics. I'm more concerned with Tony Blair being on that peace panel, that really gets my goat.
That's a perfect description of him.
I agree he's not PM material. More like a jumped up Butlins red coat.
I tend to agree with you - I think he was naive - it seems unlikely to me that a man of his intelligence would have appointed Mandelson with prior knowledge of the true depth of his association (and machinations) with Epstein - far more likely that he asked a civil servant to delve into 'clearance' and report back - as it transpires, with a deeply flawed report.
Full disclosure of the due diligence undertaken, and any recommendations given to Starmer as a result, may, ironically, help the PM here...
Starmer is woefully lacking in charisma... but I don't feel he lacks integrity ...
he lacks common sense as anyone with a brain wouldn't take Mandelsons word at face value .
mind you i actually think that he knew that but went ahead as he knows the septics like him so imo he lacks integrity as well
I'm a bit confused with the stage we are at now and what Keir and the security services should of known, but known what?
Mandelson as far as I'm aware has never admitted anything, aside from stating he wished he had never known (or met) Epstein.
I thought the documents regarding his financial leak only came out recently from the US government, so the UK government would not have known about them on Mandelsons appointment, unless the security services had already been tipped off, prior to the documents being released on the QT.
As much as Epstein's and Trumps crimes are dreadful, Mandelsons guilt towards that at this stage only appears to be due to association.
Yes he stayed at Epstein Island and there is a picture of him in a nightrobe, I'm not sure when that picture was taken, but other than that all other pictures were released recently (locations identified via media examination but no authentication on the photos).
So from Keir Starmers perspective he would have only have known what our security services had told him, and that's only if the Americans had tipped them off. Even if you are doing new checks on Mandelson, what are you checking for, I'm not aware of him having a criminal record, so it all comes down to the intelligence services.
IF our security services did know about the financial tipping off, surely criminal charges should have been brought long before now and long before Keir ever had to consider Mandelson for appointment.
The police haven't even charged Mandelson for anything yet nor brought him in for questioning to my knowledge, yes they are raiding a couple of homes today, but not sure what the lead is with that.
Don't get me wrong I'm not defending Mandelson, but everything at the moment appears to be based on assumption and suggestions of emails and photos that have not yet even been tested by the judicial system. And Mandelson is keeping completely stum.
Oh and photo's for all we know that could have been photoshopped, until they come under closer forensic examination.
Other than that lynch the fooker.
Put another way, Tony Blair met Epstein at Number 10, so should we arrest him as well and say he can't be part of the peace process due to his past association with meeting Epstein.
Mandelson as far as I'm aware has never admitted anything, aside from stating he wished he had never known (or met) Epstein.
I thought the documents regarding his financial leak only came out recently from the US government, so the UK government would not have known about them on Mandelsons appointment, unless the security services had already been tipped off, prior to the documents being released on the QT.
As much as Epstein's and Trumps crimes are dreadful, Mandelsons guilt towards that at this stage only appears to be due to association.
Yes he stayed at Epstein Island and there is a picture of him in a nightrobe, I'm not sure when that picture was taken, but other than that all other pictures were released recently (locations identified via media examination but no authentication on the photos).
So from Keir Starmers perspective he would have only have known what our security services had told him, and that's only if the Americans had tipped them off. Even if you are doing new checks on Mandelson, what are you checking for, I'm not aware of him having a criminal record, so it all comes down to the intelligence services.
IF our security services did know about the financial tipping off, surely criminal charges should have been brought long before now and long before Keir ever had to consider Mandelson for appointment.
The police haven't even charged Mandelson for anything yet nor brought him in for questioning to my knowledge, yes they are raiding a couple of homes today, but not sure what the lead is with that.
Don't get me wrong I'm not defending Mandelson, but everything at the moment appears to be based on assumption and suggestions of emails and photos that have not yet even been tested by the judicial system. And Mandelson is keeping completely stum.
Oh and photo's for all we know that could have been photoshopped, until they come under closer forensic examination.
Other than that lynch the fooker.
Put another way, Tony Blair met Epstein at Number 10, so should we arrest him as well and say he can't be part of the peace process due to his past association with meeting Epstein.
Last edited:
Mandelson is like Andrew Mountbatten always looking for someone / anyone with a big wedge to subsidise his lifestyle which automatically makes him "vulnerable" in security terms .
and thats my nice version
and thats my nice version
Don't disagree with you mate but lots of politicians fall into that category, probably most the Tories, so if we are basing his appointment on that, Keir's not got a bat in hells chance of appointing the right person, because they are all at it... see Angela Rayner for more details.
not seen anything about Rayner sucking up to Multi millionaires / oligarchs just being a bit "careless" in official paperworkDon't disagree with you mate but lots of politicians fall into that category, probably most the Tories, so if we are basing his appointment on that, Keir's not got a bat in hells chance of appointing the right person, because they are all at it... see Angela Rayner for more details.
Truenot seen anything about Rayner sucking up to Multi millionaires / oligarchs just being a bit "careless" in official paperwork