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,

Oh, don't come on here spouting facts! Rumour and sleazy innuendo only please.

Exactly he declared it while boris fucking hid a lot. As for the comment made originally that starmer is dark for locking up those that write different words etc you do realise that’s not what happened. How thick are reform voters on a scale of one to ten

Don’t insult them, it reinforces their belief that they’re superior paragons of virtue.

Starmer fan club is right. Sometimes mumsnet is so out of step with public opinion it's shocking, although it's not surprising because political parties monitor threads on here and it's not all Tory HQ, a little too much protest about that sometimes.

I don't think there is a superinjunction but that's just my opinion so I could obviously be very wrong and I don't really care about politician's private lives. But Starmer ran on a holier-than-thou platform promising to clean up the sleaze but the dodgy so-and-so was deepest in the trough, the donations he's taken are weird and he has been exceptionally greedy.

(just as an aside about the Charlotte Owen derail, she's apparently got a great voting record, regularly attends and speaks in HoL debates and is introducing legislation on deepfake porn. So an odd choice on paper as I believe she was nominated because she walked past Johnson's office door when he was trying to think of names for his resignation list (although there have been much odder) but turning out to be a dedicated and hardworking member)

“But Starmer ran on a holier-than-thou platform promising to clean up the sleaze”

Did he? I truly do not remember this. What was the slogan/key interview/main bullet points?

It really worries me that there’s now enough people who might fall for the press and their headlines.

Of course Owen regularly attends the Lords - she collects £361 every time she goes. She’s got a meal ticket for life which she could be using for 60 years at taxpayers’ expense.

Comments like this make me sick tbh. Far! Right!!! accusations are thrown around far too easily. I say that as someone who was accused by posters actually on this thread of being at the Southport riot when I posted about being at the official vigil being held for the victims of the stabbings so I have personally experience of how disgusting, ignorant and insulting they are.

I believe they get a clothing allowance that enables them to buy appropriate work clothes.

bbc weather came under fire a few years ago as the womens was less than mens. Whilst, arguably, the womens is more expensive

He’d be an absolute fucking fool to have run whilst having a super injunction. Hes not that stupid and more so when your career has been law.

Who gets a clothing allowance? MPs absolutely don’t.

It's very odd on here sometimes. Posters simultaneously so knowledgeable about politics they can list every wrong one party has ever done no matter how obscure while being totally ignorant of a flagship policy platform of the party they proclaim to support. I won't spam loads of links, this will do https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/politics/2024/jan/02/labour-crackdown-on-cronyism-could-send-public-fraudsters-to-jail-for-a-decade

More intelligentsia. Point out where I mentioned the far right.

I remember you. MNHQ deleted posts from you about that vigil.

Eh? You get that there is no such thing as homogenous “mumsnet posters” right? Tens of thousands of individual women (and a few hundred men) post here. Personally, I rarely go on the politics topic and hopped on this thread because the title was funny and I wondered what it was about.

Thanks for the link, but “not thanks” for the unfounded implication of hypocrisy.

to @Alltheprettyseahorses

She would just need to sign in for that. She's actually speaking, voting, introducing legislation and impressing other members across the HoL. Not that it matters what good she does as far as some are concerned, she's not on their team so is forever a bastard.

You seem very angry.

She would just need to sign in for that.

Precisely.

In fact two out of the last five Tory PMs have cheated on their spouses.

Or even three out of the last six Tory PMs.

Can anyone link to what Guido Fawkes has actually published?

I’m not sure whether anything has popped up on Order-Order, but Dan Wootton has pinned a clip of him talking to Paul Staines (Guido Fawkes) on X.

Yes they did delate my posts. They were reinstated and I got an email apology. I was accused of being at a riot and of lying about someone arrested by us despite it being in the papers. Do you have any idea of how vile and nauseating that was? I actually think there was an agenda behind the deranged false accusations.

I didn't know they were reinstated. I don't remember you being accused of being a rioter, though.

The content of that article has nothing to do with donations, it’s about fraud and contracts for mates.

I am not a shill. If you think I am, report me to MNHQ.

it's an interesting re-telling and not what i recall either - but can't imagine anyone's going to take the time to check it out