The Starmer Years - Can The New Broom Sweep Clean?

[CB Fry]

Every single day the WASPI women get fuck all is a brilliant day.

[whelk]

2 minutes ago, CB Fry said:

Every single day the WASPI women get fuck all is a brilliant day.

I actually thought of you when I saw the story today. Robbed they was! 
 

[Farmer Saint]

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DUBf56JCf5j/?igsh=MTUyZHl2enFoOGY5aA==

[iansums]

17 hours ago, Farmer Saint said:

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DUBf56JCf5j/?igsh=MTUyZHl2enFoOGY5aA==

Interesting, what’s it got to do with this thread?

[egg]

Sadly accurate. 

[AlexLaw76]

Not been a good day for the Labour Party

 

[Holmes_and_Watson]

34 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

Not been a good day for the Labour Party

 

Nope. And certainly not for Starmer and his inner circle.

Intelligence raised concerns, as part of vetting. No idea what the foreign office found.

Passed along to cabinet office, who did sod all in any depth, before passing it along.

Meanwhile, you've got Morgan McSweeney pushing whole heartedly to give his pal the job.

Starmer, perhaps trying for some reflected Blairism, or just a puppet for others goes along with it.

Mandelson's dealings were known, to enough of an extent to establish risk.

They ask him a sum total of 3 questions. And let him take the job.

Even Trump didn't want him to have the job, knowing about the depth of the Epstein links.

Both Starmer and McSweeney were reluctant to punt Mandelson out of his ambassador's role, despite them claiming to have taken "decisive action."

I remember one labour MP being truly disgusted about Starmer and his decisions. She pointed out that MP's had lost the whip for standing against policies enforced from above (probably u-turned on by now), while they allowed Mandelson to get in and wanted him to stay. Right up until, like so many politicians, they were dragged into it being untenable.

We'll see if Starmer holds himself to the same standards, as he did Johnson, who promoted someone against reason.

The allegations of what Mandelson was doing while in office are damning, and are going to run and run.

Even the SNP, who try and block any police enquiry going, have asked for a police investigation.

[AlexLaw76]

10 hours ago, Holmes_and_Watson said:

Nope. And certainly not for Starmer and his inner circle.

Intelligence raised concerns, as part of vetting. No idea what the foreign office found.

Passed along to cabinet office, who did sod all in any depth, before passing it along.

Meanwhile, you've got Morgan McSweeney pushing whole heartedly to give his pal the job.

Starmer, perhaps trying for some reflected Blairism, or just a puppet for others goes along with it.

Mandelson's dealings were known, to enough of an extent to establish risk.

They ask him a sum total of 3 questions. And let him take the job.

Even Trump didn't want him to have the job, knowing about the depth of the Epstein links.

Both Starmer and McSweeney were reluctant to punt Mandelson out of his ambassador's role, despite them claiming to have taken "decisive action."

I remember one labour MP being truly disgusted about Starmer and his decisions. She pointed out that MP's had lost the whip for standing against policies enforced from above (probably u-turned on by now), while they allowed Mandelson to get in and wanted him to stay. Right up until, like so many politicians, they were dragged into it being untenable.

We'll see if Starmer holds himself to the same standards, as he did Johnson, who promoted someone against reason.

The allegations of what Mandelson was doing while in office are damning, and are going to run and run.

Even the SNP, who try and block any police enquiry going, have asked for a police investigation.

Throw in that odious little woman sent to prison, and that bloke Caught out for being a nonce.

Thankfully this new broom is sweeping clean. Oh, more doctors strikes incoming.

Edited yesterday at 08:26 by AlexLaw76

[sadoldgit]

54 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

Throw in that odious little woman sent to prison, and that bloke Caught out for being a nonce.

Thankfully this new broom is sweeping clean

If only you had been so critical of the last lot, perhaps you could be taken seriously. As for nonces, have you said anything about Trump so far?

[Farmer Saint]

Mandelson has always been a dodgy cunt, not sure why he was let near this iteration of the party.

 

[east-stand-nic]

1 hour ago, sadoldgit said:

If only you had been so critical of the last lot, perhaps you could be taken seriously. As for nonces, have you said anything about Trump so far?

OMG, the amazing level of Irony. 

[sadoldgit]

2 hours ago, Farmer Saint said:

Mandelson has always been a dodgy cunt, not sure why he was let near this iteration of the party.

 

Wasn’t he called “The Prince of Darkness” when he was Blair’s spin doctor? If the emails are kosher he needs the book thrown at him (as does Trump for kiddy fiddling). It seems that we have taken more action over the Epstein files so far than the US has. Andrew Mountbatten needs further investigation too. The Epstein files could probably do with its own thread.

I wonder how many of those who will kick off about Mandelson said a word against Dominic Cummings?

Edited yesterday at 11:29 by sadoldgit

[hypochondriac]

The adults are back in the room, the calm and silence is wonderful, no scandals emanating from the Labour Party.

[hypochondriac]

5 hours ago, Farmer Saint said:

Mandelson has always been a dodgy cunt, not sure why he was let near this iteration of the party.

 

Because those making the decisions have shown time and again now to be utterly incompetent and liable to make precisely the wrong decisions at the worst time. Watch for the inevitable u turn on scrapping jury trials and potentially Chagos next to join the long list. Fingers crossed assisted suicide joins it soon after.

[Farmer Saint]

35 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Because those making the decisions have shown time and again now to be utterly incompetent and liable to make precisely the wrong decisions at the worst time. Watch for the inevitable u turn on scrapping jury trials and potentially Chagos next to join the long list. Fingers crossed assisted suicide joins it soon after.

Considering we have now had this for the last 4 or 5 governments, it really does show the need for political reform.

[hypochondriac]

1 minute ago, Farmer Saint said:

Considering we have now had this for the last 4 or 5 governments, it really does show the need for political reform.

Agreed. It started primarily with Blair and has continued pretty much ever since.

Edited 22 hours ago by hypochondriac

[sadoldgit]

2 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

Considering we have now had this for the last 4 or 5 governments, it really does show the need for political reform.

It makes you wonder about the vetting processes of all of the parties. I can see why Starmer wanted Mandelson in Washington. He is a smarmy character who would be happy to suck up to Trump. A rudimentary check on his personal email account would have flushed out his activities during the Blair/Brown governments. We have a functioning spy network yet don’t seem to use it to monitor the activities of our own. It isn’t as if we don’t have a previous history of turncoats and currently Farage is far too cozy with the likes of Steve Bannon and Putin.

[badgerx16]

35 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

It makes you wonder about the vetting processes of all of the parties. I can see why Starmer wanted Mandelson in Washington. He is a smarmy character who would be happy to suck up to Trump. A rudimentary check on his personal email account would have flushed out his activities during the Blair/Brown governments. We have a functioning spy network yet don’t seem to use it to monitor the activities of our own. It isn’t as if we don’t have a previous history of turncoats and currently Farage is far too cozy with the likes of Steve Bannon and Putin.

Which failed to detect a Russian agent working as Keeper of the Queen's pictures.

[hypochondriac]

36 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

It makes you wonder about the vetting processes of all of the parties. I can see why Starmer wanted Mandelson in Washington. He is a smarmy character who would be happy to suck up to Trump. A rudimentary check on his personal email account would have flushed out his activities during the Blair/Brown governments. We have a functioning spy network yet don’t seem to use it to monitor the activities of our own. It isn’t as if we don’t have a previous history of turncoats and currently Farage is far too cozy with the likes of Steve Bannon and Putin.

Yes we do. Mandy was labelled a security risk but Starmer ignored it. Not sure why you're banging on about Farage again but there's a Reform thread if you want to discuss someone who isn't currently in power.

[AlexLaw76]

1 hour ago, hypochondriac said:

Yes we do. Mandy was labelled a security risk but Starmer ignored it. Not sure why you're banging on about Farage again but there's a Reform thread if you want to discuss someone who isn't currently in power.

Security threat, yet the forensic Starmer loved it

 

[Sheaf Saint]

2 hours ago, hypochondriac said:

Agreed. It started primarily with Blair and has continued pretty much ever since.

It goes back longer than that. There was plenty of incompetence and corruption in John Major's government. It's one of the main reasons they lost the 1997 election so heavily.

[iansums]

7 hours ago, sadoldgit said:

Wasn’t he called “The Prince of Darkness” when he was Blair’s spin doctor? If the emails are kosher he needs the book thrown at him (as does Trump for kiddy fiddling). It seems that we have taken more action over the Epstein files so far than the US has. Andrew Mountbatten needs further investigation too. The Epstein files could probably do with its own thread.

I wonder how many of those who will kick off about Mandelson said a word against Dominic Cummings?

To be fair this thread is about the ‘Starmer years’, you should know as you started it. Maybe resurrect that other thread you started ‘Tory scum years’.

[Lord Duckhunter]

3 hours ago, hypochondriac said:

Not sure why you're banging on about Farage again but there's a Reform thread if you want to discuss someone who isn't currently in power.

He can’t help himself.

Petie is the story, together with Starmers complete and utter  lack of judgement

“New broom” 😂😂😂

[hypochondriac]

2 hours ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

He can’t help himself.

Petie is the story, together with Starmers complete and utter  lack of judgement

“New broom” 😂😂😂

I don't know about you but for the first time in most of our lives Britain is looking like a little haven of peace and stability.

 

[hypochondriac]

Still at least it's not the evil tories eh? 

"And so my government will fight, every day…

Until you believe again.

From now on…

You have a government unburdened by doctrine…

Guided only by a determination to serve your interests…

To defy, quietly…

Those who have written our country off.

You have given us a clear mandate…

And we will use it to deliver change…

To restore service and respect to politics…

End the era of noisy performance…

Tread more lightly on your lives…"

 

[whelk]

9 hours ago, hypochondriac said:

Still at least it's not the evil tories eh? 

"And so my government will fight, every day…

Until you believe again.

From now on…

You have a government unburdened by doctrine…

Guided only by a determination to serve your interests…

To defy, quietly…

Those who have written our country off.

You have given us a clear mandate…

And we will use it to deliver change…

To restore service and respect to politics…

End the era of noisy performance…

Tread more lightly on your lives…"

 

Although there is going to be free transport for families who have children with cancer. McSweeney above himself it would seem. Mandelson was always dodgy - like Savile you just look at them and know they are a wrong ‘un. Starmer’s judgement clearly off. To the average voter it is still about making their own life better off so don’t think Mandelson impacts but all more ammo against them wanting moral high ground. 

[hypochondriac]

8 minutes ago, whelk said:

Although there is going to be free transport for families who have children with cancer. McSweeney above himself it would seem. Mandelson was always dodgy - like Savile you just look at them and know they are a wrong ‘un. Starmer’s judgement clearly off. To the average voter it is still about making their own life better off so don’t think Mandelson impacts but all more ammo against them wanting moral high ground. 

Whilst I agree it won't matter so much come the election if they sort cost of living, you have to admit the amount of scandal and crises has been ridiculous. Anyone can love Starmer but it's undeniable he has terrible judgement and no political instincts.

Edited 5 hours ago by hypochondriac

[The Kraken]

15 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Whilst I agree it won't matter so much come the election if they sort cost of living, you have to admit the amount of scandal and crises has been ridiculous. Anyone can love Starmer but it's undeniable he has terrible judgement and no political instincts.

I don’t think anybody does, do they? I certainly voted for Labour on the basis that Starmer was bland and a bit boring but might steady the ship, cut out the weekly crises, and bring some normality to politics.

Oh sweet summer child….

[hypochondriac]

1 minute ago, The Kraken said:

I don’t think anybody does, do they? I certainly voted for Labour on the basis that Starmer was bland and a bit boring but might steady the ship, cut out the weekly crises, and bring some normality to politics.

Oh sweet summer child….

I just saying it's theoretically possible! Fair to say those who voted Labour have been rather burnt including my father.

[tdmickey3]

19 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

I just saying it's theoretically possible! Fair to say those who voted Labour have been rather burnt including my father.

This is true but you can understand why they didn't vote for the Tories again after the 14 year mess.

God forbid we get Reform next

The political landscape is an utter mess.

What is the answer?

[egg]

17 minutes ago, tdmickey3 said:

This is true but you can understand why they didn't vote for the Tories again after the 14 year mess.

God forbid we get Reform next

The political landscape is an utter mess.

What is the answer?

This. I voted Lib Dem, but labour were considered as the Tories simply had to go after their destruction. 

Labour had very little to work with, but the dithering is not the sign of a decent government, and putting faith in Mandelson knowing the Epstein link was naive at the very best. 

But yep, Tories still ain't the answer,  Reform would be an epic disaster, Labour are failing, the Libs aren't making many credible noises, and the Greens are madder than a box of frogs. 

[trousers]

[hypochondriac]

1 hour ago, trousers said:

Indeed. He's now admitted in parliament that he knew that Mandelson continued to have a relationship with Epstein after he'd gone to prison for being a paedophile and he still considered it appropriate to hire him. Not sure how he survives this one.

[hypochondriac]

No idea if this is true or not but if it is then undoubtedly more to come

[tdmickey3]

27 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Indeed. He's now admitted in parliament that he knew that Mandelson continued to have a relationship with Epstein after he'd gone to prison for being a paedophile and he still considered it appropriate to hire him. Not sure how he survives this one.

I expect serious moves in the party will be being made to remove him from the PM role

[trousers]

30 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Indeed. He's now admitted in parliament that he knew that Mandelson continued to have a relationship with Epstein after he'd gone to prison for being a paedophile and he still considered it appropriate to hire him. Not sure how he survives this one.

Starmer's argument seems to be: "I knew Mandleson was still involved with a convicted peadophile but I didn't know by how much"

Surely the depth of his relationship is immaterial? Surely any level of relationship is enough to rule him out? 

Starmer doesn't have a leg to stand on. It's almost as bad a judgement as eating a piece of birthday cake during a Covid lockdown...

Edited 9 minutes ago by trousers