Steamers and the superinjunction

[hamstersarse]

Starmer surely can’t survive this one?

Guido Fox guy says it’s about the ‘shape of his family’ and reveals: “We have a name. As do the Mail and the Telegraph. We have a birth certificate."

Seems the allegations are something to do with an extra marital lady plus baby.

My opinion on this is that anyone who is such a control freak as to jail people for what they say is clearly a very dark person. And the hypocrisy he’s shown about almost everything he’s ever said, also shows a very dark underbelly,

I can’t think of a single person who could replace Starmer that they wouldn’t hate more than Starmer.

The hoped-for outcome is continuous shit-stirring and chaos to distract the government, put them on the back-foot, and prevent them settling down to achieve anything.

The right-wing press see themselves as the political opposition. Probably because that position is currently vacant. The Conservatives are in a state of leaderless chaos, and looking at the four choices they've narrowed it down to don't appear to have any reasonable chance of sorting themselves out for a couple more years yet.

Seconded.

I have to not think about it or I get all conspiracy theorist about who is behind this and what their motivations are.

Operation Save Big Dog 3.0 maybe?

Kuenssberg messed up a bit there

Cameron and the pigs head, no. Ballerina, probable - Johnson was and is such a womaniser. Charlotte Owen - either his daughter or knows where a particularly horrible body is buried, there was just no sensible reason for giving her that sort of honour.

Tom Bradby’s doing it for ITV instead.

Plus leadership contests are often back-stabbing bitchfests.

This Tory leadership contest is hovering on the edge of that (despite the candidates having been told to leave it out). Well, that and Badenoch digging herself deeper and deeper into her hole about maternity pay.

So distraction's where it's at for the Tories' media friends.

Unfortunately for the Tories, one of the four remaining candidates is Robert Jenrick.

The Robert Jenrick who unlawfully approved a building development on the Isle of Dogs the day before new rules came into force, saving Tory donor and newspaper magnate Richard Desmond £40 million pounds. Two weeks later Desmond donated a further £12,000 to the Tories.

Desmond had been lobbying Jenrick, who didn't declare the conflict of interest until he got caught.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-53011728
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-52826751
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-53158002
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Jenrick

Someone asked what above what the interests register is for. This. This is what it's for.

It's not to stop MPs having dinner with people, or staying with friends, or accepting donations. It's so that when the people MPs have dinner with ask them to use their office for political favours, we can see it.

And here the Tory party is, contemplating making Jenrick their leader.

The hypocrisy is off the scale.

I must have missed the Boris and the Ballerina story.

There was also the Boris and the Violinist story?

That's the one I remember too - wasn't she a Russian violinist as well? Pics of a very pretty brunette with her instrument online

And also wasn't there a tennis coach too - ?during covid

I absolutely love these threads. As someone who's never had any loyalty to any political party I find it fascinating how angry people get when 'their' party gets slated.

So much 'what about xxx?' because they can't bring themselves to admit that every party is the same no matter what colour rosette they wear.

Disappointed in the lack of Tory bot/HQ comments that always come with criticising the Labour Party though.

They really aren’t all the same @spuddy4
Anyway - do you believe the rumour that is the subject of this thread? Because that more than just ‘slating’ the party, isn’t it? It’s nasty and personal - and almost certainly a lie, as explained by posters early on.

It's not that difficult to understand that people can disapprove of the gifts whilst understanding that is within the rules.

The media outrage is frankly bizarre

It makes more sense if you think the media outrage is probably coming from people who have kids at private school.

Perfect example of which is one of the PP on this thread.

Unfortunately for the Tories, one of the four remaining candidates is Robert Jenrick.

@PerkingFaintly I think that "unfortunately" could be applied to all four candidates to varying degrees. They're all a bit grim in their own way. Hopefully the MPs will reject Kemi as one of the two to go in the next round as there's a real risk the membership might vote for her. I'm surprised that Jenrick made it this far.

Cleverly seemed the more sensible one during the conference but he might have blown it with his reaction to the Chagos Treaty

Back to the topic of this thread

https://x.com/AdamBienkov/status/1842201651832095186

Dan Wootton has now deleted his video claiming there was a conspiracy between The Sun and Keir Starmer to cover up stories about him

News UK source says claims were a failed revenge attempt by someone accused of bullying and catfishing former colleagues

James Cleverly …

… proof that nominative determinism isn’t a thing.

Is Wootton still in the UK. He's the human equivalent of a crusty sock found down the back of a radiator after the students moved out.🤢🤢🤮

Wonder whether he got a legal letter.

Idiot man.

@hamstersarse will hopefully now come back to her thread and apologise for spreading vile lies.

Perfect description of Wootton and his ilk @TooBigForMyBoots

I wouldn’t hold your breath.

Well, here is the link from Guido and whence the story came (because someone has to sully themselves to find it for you! Guess that'll be me then washes grubby hands) So yes, a story certainly does exist and has been doing the rounds. This appears to be it. It's based on something in a book about Angela Rayner (and no the woman in question doesn't appear to be her).

https://order-order.com/2024/06/05/unreported-affair-hacks-are-gossiping-about-privately/

Do I think it's a desperate attempt to whip up something out of nothing to avenge Boris? Almost certainly, yes. Even if it were true, is Boris worse? Yes. There's no evidence beyond this, as far as I can see, and since the person is not named, there are a lot of assumptions there. But this is what Wooton et al are referring to.

However. Starmer DID run on a "we're different from the sleazy Tories" which is why people, including Labour voters, are pissed off about the gifts even if they are much less than Boris's many misdemeanours. This is supposed to be a party with completely different values to their predecessors and who are better than that, not just "we do similar only slightly less." It is disappointing, to say the least. And terrible optics.

And the issue about donations/gifts/bribes/lobbyists and murky influence behind the scenes is a much bigger concern than any one party, or tribe, that should be the point, not "oh, it's my side so that's okay but the other side are obviously bad". UK Politics needs cleaning up fullstop, has done for a few years now. We have weak, inexperienced politicians across the board. So yes, I would be concerned about the influence of Alli, just as I was concerned about the Tory sleaze and backhanders.

So the passage in question from the Rayner book reads:

“What is perhaps more intriguing is that, throughout this time, there was alarm bordering on paranoia in select Labour circles that the extramarital affair of a senior party figure other than Rayner was in danger of being exposed. Most damagingly, the male politician at the centre of the claims is said to have enjoyed a long-standing relationship with a woman that had lasted until after his own wife was pregnant with their first child. The politician’s lover, who is herself a public figure, then went on to have a child of her own. She left the name of her child’s father off her child’s birth certificate. This led to concerns that the Labour politician was in fact the child’s father, but there was no evidence to support that.”

So even if the politician in question is who @hamstersarse has suggested, he wasn't even a politician at the time. It won't be the end of him, even if true.