Christopher Hope📝 @christopherhope · 1h The film maker [of the Starmer video] added: “It was pretty outrageous because at the time we were not allowed to have our friends over and everything was shut down, feeling very isolated.
"It was a kick in the teeth that they were having a bit of a jolly inside. So I thought I would film it."
The @Telegraph has established that the person who made the video recording of Sir Keir has not been questioned by detectives or asked to hand over the original recording.
The individual who made the film said: "I have not had any contact [from the police] yet.”
Its been "investigated" claims Rochdale who spent months banging on about Boris being photographed with beer in hand.
The *stills* from the video have been in the media since the event itself. I'm not a copper, but if someone says "I wish to complain about the party that Starmer had" and image of said party are in the newspapers, and the images don't show an offence being committed, then what do you want them to do?
We're going to keep going round the same loop forever. Another day, another AMAZING REVELATION of some non-detail we supposedly didn't know about which makes sod all difference to the legal case.
Come on Tories. Demand to know if the £200 for the curry was properly declared on the election return. You can still prove Boris innocent if you try hard enough.
In what way was fifteen to thirty (accounts vary) people being in the same office at all necessary for a by-election campaign in a different constituency?
I really do not want to labour this but the police are accused of not viewing the available video, Starmer admits 30 were in attendance, the £200 is about the cost of curries for 30, and it appears an on line quiz was involved
I have received a lot of criticism for posting about this story from those wanting it to be not so, but it appears this is story that has a momentum of its own across the media involving journalists sensing a story, including journalists (Kay Burley and others) who are not HMG friendly
Sir Peter Fahy, former chief constable of Greater Manchester has said today that Durham Police should reconsider a probe into the allegations
It is a shame there is no lotoqs in the house of commons, would be wonderful to see someone doing an inverse sks on sks (what does the loto have to say to my constituent who could not be with her husband of 87 years etc)
Christopher Hope📝 @christopherhope · 1h The film maker [of the Starmer video] added: “It was pretty outrageous because at the time we were not allowed to have our friends over and everything was shut down, feeling very isolated.
"It was a kick in the teeth that they were having a bit of a jolly inside. So I thought I would film it."
The @Telegraph has established that the person who made the video recording of Sir Keir has not been questioned by detectives or asked to hand over the original recording.
The individual who made the film said: "I have not had any contact [from the police] yet.”
Its been "investigated" claims Rochdale who spent months banging on about Boris being photographed with beer in hand.
The *stills* from the video have been in the media since the event itself. I'm not a copper, but if someone says "I wish to complain about the party that Starmer had" and image of said party are in the newspapers, and the images don't show an offence being committed, then what do you want them to do?
We're going to keep going round the same loop forever. Another day, another AMAZING REVELATION of some non-detail we supposedly didn't know about which makes sod all difference to the legal case.
Come on Tories. Demand to know if the £200 for the curry was properly declared on the election return. You can still prove Boris innocent if you try hard enough.
In what way was fifteen to thirty (accounts vary) people being in the same office at all necessary for a by-election campaign in a different constituency?
I really do not want to labour this but the police are accused of not viewing the available video, Starmer admits 30 were in attendance, the £200 is about the cost of curries for 30, and it appears an on line quiz was involved
I have received a lot of criticism for posting about this story from those wanting it to be not so, but it appears this is story that has a momentum of its own across the media involving journalists sensing a story, including journalists (Kay Burley and others) who are not HMG friendly
Sir Peter Fahy, former chief constable of Greater Manchester has said today that Durham Police should reconsider a probe into the allegations
When you say the police are accused of not viewing the available video, do you mean they are accused of not viewing the last 10 seconds of the video that were not posted to social media?
This is the quote from the student present who filmed his video
It is unclear which version the police have viewed. The version published on social media lasts for 34 seconds, while the original version is 10 seconds longer at 44 seconds.
The individual who made the film in Durham at 10.04pm on April 30 last year told The Telegraph that they had not been asked to provide a copy to police, nor been interviewed by officers. The film-maker said: "I have not had any contact [from the police] yet."
Asked why they had made the film, they said: "I thought it was pretty outrageous, because at the time we were not allowed to have our friends over and everything was shut down, feeling very isolated.
"It was a kick in the teeth that they were having a bit of a jolly inside. So I thought I would film it."
Christopher Hope📝 @christopherhope · 1h The film maker [of the Starmer video] added: “It was pretty outrageous because at the time we were not allowed to have our friends over and everything was shut down, feeling very isolated.
"It was a kick in the teeth that they were having a bit of a jolly inside. So I thought I would film it."
The @Telegraph has established that the person who made the video recording of Sir Keir has not been questioned by detectives or asked to hand over the original recording.
The individual who made the film said: "I have not had any contact [from the police] yet.”
Its been "investigated" claims Rochdale who spent months banging on about Boris being photographed with beer in hand.
The *stills* from the video have been in the media since the event itself. I'm not a copper, but if someone says "I wish to complain about the party that Starmer had" and image of said party are in the newspapers, and the images don't show an offence being committed, then what do you want them to do?
We're going to keep going round the same loop forever. Another day, another AMAZING REVELATION of some non-detail we supposedly didn't know about which makes sod all difference to the legal case.
Come on Tories. Demand to know if the £200 for the curry was properly declared on the election return. You can still prove Boris innocent if you try hard enough.
In what way was fifteen to thirty (accounts vary) people being in the same office at all necessary for a by-election campaign in a different constituency?
Really? You've never done campaigning then. The Tories were bussing people up to Teesside from Guildford a few years ago.
“Meetings to organise and plan campaigns should be held online or over the phone. They should not take place in person. Where campaigners must attend in person, for example to collect printed materials, this should be organised on a one by one basis.”
Thanks for confirming the legality of doing it in person. Had the Tories gone after Starmer for ignoring the *advise* they would have had an argument. The *advise* was that you shouldn't do face to face. But the law said different. The same law that allowed Boris to share a pint with Jill Mortimer in her one and only appearance in her constituency.
As the polls have shown, nobody has been remotely convinced of the Tory claims, and the longer they have gone on and the more hysterical in tone the funnier it has got.
Do your SNP comrades know you spend all your time on here defending SKS?
If you can't tell the difference between Slab, the SNP, and the LDs, that might explain why you're always on here slagging off your party leader?
Not my party. Not RP party. He is defending SKS for 6 days running whilst being a Candidate for a competing party
Christopher Hope📝 @christopherhope · 1h The film maker [of the Starmer video] added: “It was pretty outrageous because at the time we were not allowed to have our friends over and everything was shut down, feeling very isolated.
"It was a kick in the teeth that they were having a bit of a jolly inside. So I thought I would film it."
The @Telegraph has established that the person who made the video recording of Sir Keir has not been questioned by detectives or asked to hand over the original recording.
The individual who made the film said: "I have not had any contact [from the police] yet.”
Its been "investigated" claims Rochdale who spent months banging on about Boris being photographed with beer in hand.
The *stills* from the video have been in the media since the event itself. I'm not a copper, but if someone says "I wish to complain about the party that Starmer had" and image of said party are in the newspapers, and the images don't show an offence being committed, then what do you want them to do?
We're going to keep going round the same loop forever. Another day, another AMAZING REVELATION of some non-detail we supposedly didn't know about which makes sod all difference to the legal case.
Come on Tories. Demand to know if the £200 for the curry was properly declared on the election return. You can still prove Boris innocent if you try hard enough.
In what way was fifteen to thirty (accounts vary) people being in the same office at all necessary for a by-election campaign in a different constituency?
Really? You've never done campaigning then. The Tories were bussing people up to Teesside from Guildford a few years ago.
“Meetings to organise and plan campaigns should be held online or over the phone. They should not take place in person. Where campaigners must attend in person, for example to collect printed materials, this should be organised on a one by one basis.”
Thanks for confirming the legality of doing it in person. Had the Tories gone after Starmer for ignoring the *advise* they would have had an argument. The *advise* was that you shouldn't do face to face. But the law said different. The same law that allowed Boris to share a pint with Jill Mortimer in her one and only appearance in her constituency.
As the polls have shown, nobody has been remotely convinced of the Tory claims, and the longer they have gone on and the more hysterical in tone the funnier it has got.
This is I think your sixth straight day of obsessing about it?
Here is your daily reminder that the weakness of the case against starmer is exactly the point. This was the issue on which he was meant to wring Boris's neck like a chicken's.
Erm I didn't start the conversation, Blanche did.
Eh? I replied to you.
Apologies, too many nested replies. BR started the conversation.
Christopher Hope📝 @christopherhope · 1h The film maker [of the Starmer video] added: “It was pretty outrageous because at the time we were not allowed to have our friends over and everything was shut down, feeling very isolated.
"It was a kick in the teeth that they were having a bit of a jolly inside. So I thought I would film it."
The @Telegraph has established that the person who made the video recording of Sir Keir has not been questioned by detectives or asked to hand over the original recording.
The individual who made the film said: "I have not had any contact [from the police] yet.”
Its been "investigated" claims Rochdale who spent months banging on about Boris being photographed with beer in hand.
The *stills* from the video have been in the media since the event itself. I'm not a copper, but if someone says "I wish to complain about the party that Starmer had" and image of said party are in the newspapers, and the images don't show an offence being committed, then what do you want them to do?
We're going to keep going round the same loop forever. Another day, another AMAZING REVELATION of some non-detail we supposedly didn't know about which makes sod all difference to the legal case.
Come on Tories. Demand to know if the £200 for the curry was properly declared on the election return. You can still prove Boris innocent if you try hard enough.
In what way was fifteen to thirty (accounts vary) people being in the same office at all necessary for a by-election campaign in a different constituency?
Really? You've never done campaigning then. The Tories were bussing people up to Teesside from Guildford a few years ago.
“Meetings to organise and plan campaigns should be held online or over the phone. They should not take place in person. Where campaigners must attend in person, for example to collect printed materials, this should be organised on a one by one basis.”
Thanks for confirming the legality of doing it in person. Had the Tories gone after Starmer for ignoring the *advise* they would have had an argument. The *advise* was that you shouldn't do face to face. But the law said different. The same law that allowed Boris to share a pint with Jill Mortimer in her one and only appearance in her constituency.
As the polls have shown, nobody has been remotely convinced of the Tory claims, and the longer they have gone on and the more hysterical in tone the funnier it has got.
Do your SNP comrades know you spend all your time on here defending SKS?
If you can't tell the difference between Slab, the SNP, and the LDs, that might explain why you're always on here slagging off your party leader?
Not my party. Not RP party. He is defending SKS for 6 days running whilst being a Candidate for a competing party
If you've read my contributions you will see I am defending the rule of law. Plenty of LD MPs saying the same on Twitter btw including Tim Farron. We're not hyper-partisan hacks.
Christopher Hope📝 @christopherhope · 1h The film maker [of the Starmer video] added: “It was pretty outrageous because at the time we were not allowed to have our friends over and everything was shut down, feeling very isolated.
"It was a kick in the teeth that they were having a bit of a jolly inside. So I thought I would film it."
The @Telegraph has established that the person who made the video recording of Sir Keir has not been questioned by detectives or asked to hand over the original recording.
The individual who made the film said: "I have not had any contact [from the police] yet.”
Its been "investigated" claims Rochdale who spent months banging on about Boris being photographed with beer in hand.
The *stills* from the video have been in the media since the event itself. I'm not a copper, but if someone says "I wish to complain about the party that Starmer had" and image of said party are in the newspapers, and the images don't show an offence being committed, then what do you want them to do?
We're going to keep going round the same loop forever. Another day, another AMAZING REVELATION of some non-detail we supposedly didn't know about which makes sod all difference to the legal case.
Come on Tories. Demand to know if the £200 for the curry was properly declared on the election return. You can still prove Boris innocent if you try hard enough.
In what way was fifteen to thirty (accounts vary) people being in the same office at all necessary for a by-election campaign in a different constituency?
Really? You've never done campaigning then. The Tories were bussing people up to Teesside from Guildford a few years ago.
“Meetings to organise and plan campaigns should be held online or over the phone. They should not take place in person. Where campaigners must attend in person, for example to collect printed materials, this should be organised on a one by one basis.”
Thanks for confirming the legality of doing it in person. Had the Tories gone after Starmer for ignoring the *advise* they would have had an argument. The *advise* was that you shouldn't do face to face. But the law said different. The same law that allowed Boris to share a pint with Jill Mortimer in her one and only appearance in her constituency.
As the polls have shown, nobody has been remotely convinced of the Tory claims, and the longer they have gone on and the more hysterical in tone the funnier it has got.
Do your SNP comrades know you spend all your time on here defending SKS?
If you can't tell the difference between Slab, the SNP, and the LDs, that might explain why you're always on here slagging off your party leader?
Not my party. Not RP party. He is defending SKS for 6 days running whilst being a Candidate for a competing party
I’d hate to live in a world so partisan that we are not allowed to speak well of someone in another party.
For 6 days non stop.
Is there absolutely nothing positive to say about his own Party?
Ohio 2022 Primary Results NOT previously reported on PB
MEIGS COUNTY - Unincorp. Salisbury Twp Additional Cemeteries Levy – .5 mills/5 years — For the tax levy: 118; Against the tax levy: 141
Is it like the times claim, the Ohio candidate only surged to victory with Trumps endorsement?
True.
Vance was back of the pack before the endoresment; likely that Mandel, who got support from many 45 fans, would have gotten even more, had the Sage of Mar-a-Lardo not anointed the V-man.
Hope Tim Ryan tears him a new one.
Thanks for the answer.
Is hope all you got left. It’s just a economic downturn away from all the Trump loonies winning?
Moon, you may have noticed that something even bigger than the Ohio Primary happened in America this week?
News of impending overturning of Roe v Wade by US Supreme Court has tossed a MAJOR wild card into the deck for the 2022 midterms. May help Democrats to redress the enthusiasm gap, is certainly galvanizing plenty right now.
When abortion is broadly legal, you don't have harrowing stories about rape victims committing suicide rather than carry their baby to term. You don't have scandals about people prevented from crossing state lines by restrictive laws. You don't have stories about the deaths of people carrying out home abortions based on YouTube videos.
Legal abortion - at least up until about 18 weeks or so - is supported by the vast majority of Americans.
Now, do anti-abortionists (by and large) care about it more?
Probably.
But that's because most Americans haven't had to deal with abortion being illegal. Like with Brexit, it is those who wish to change the status quo who are the most motivated.
I think this is a Pyrrhic victory for the anti-abortion lobby, that will end in abortion being legally endorsed at the ballot box in more than 40 states in the next decade.
One issue may be this: there are some references or suggestions in the Alito judgment to the foetus having legal personality. Depending on how these are put and interpreted, it is possible that any state pro-abortion law might be struck down as unconstitutional on the basis that the foetus - as a person - has a right to life.
I am no US lawyer and we don't have the final judgment but that might well be a risk.
In the ordinary world of ordinary words and actions we regard the unborn as obviously having rights and humanity as a whole as having duties towards them. To kick a woman in the stomach is abhorrent. To do so when they are pregnant we regard as even worse. We ordinarily think of that element of being 'even worse' as related to how we should treat the unborn as well as the woman.
To my mind it is inevitable that there will be abortions. But the issue has to balance competing rights. Neither extreme seems very good at this.
Christopher Hope📝 @christopherhope · 1h The film maker [of the Starmer video] added: “It was pretty outrageous because at the time we were not allowed to have our friends over and everything was shut down, feeling very isolated.
"It was a kick in the teeth that they were having a bit of a jolly inside. So I thought I would film it."
The @Telegraph has established that the person who made the video recording of Sir Keir has not been questioned by detectives or asked to hand over the original recording.
The individual who made the film said: "I have not had any contact [from the police] yet.”
Its been "investigated" claims Rochdale who spent months banging on about Boris being photographed with beer in hand.
The *stills* from the video have been in the media since the event itself. I'm not a copper, but if someone says "I wish to complain about the party that Starmer had" and image of said party are in the newspapers, and the images don't show an offence being committed, then what do you want them to do?
We're going to keep going round the same loop forever. Another day, another AMAZING REVELATION of some non-detail we supposedly didn't know about which makes sod all difference to the legal case.
Come on Tories. Demand to know if the £200 for the curry was properly declared on the election return. You can still prove Boris innocent if you try hard enough.
In what way was fifteen to thirty (accounts vary) people being in the same office at all necessary for a by-election campaign in a different constituency?
Really? You've never done campaigning then. The Tories were bussing people up to Teesside from Guildford a few years ago.
“Meetings to organise and plan campaigns should be held online or over the phone. They should not take place in person. Where campaigners must attend in person, for example to collect printed materials, this should be organised on a one by one basis.”
Thanks for confirming the legality of doing it in person. Had the Tories gone after Starmer for ignoring the *advise* they would have had an argument. The *advise* was that you shouldn't do face to face. But the law said different. The same law that allowed Boris to share a pint with Jill Mortimer in her one and only appearance in her constituency.
As the polls have shown, nobody has been remotely convinced of the Tory claims, and the longer they have gone on and the more hysterical in tone the funnier it has got.
Do your SNP comrades know you spend all your time on here defending SKS?
If you can't tell the difference between Slab, the SNP, and the LDs, that might explain why you're always on here slagging off your party leader?
Not my party. Not RP party. He is defending SKS for 6 days running whilst being a Candidate for a competing party
If you've read my contributions you will see I am defending the rule of law. Plenty of LD MPs saying the same on Twitter btw including Tim Farron. We're not hyper-partisan hacks.
Should your priority not be helping your colleagues win Elections?
Christopher Hope📝 @christopherhope · 1h The film maker [of the Starmer video] added: “It was pretty outrageous because at the time we were not allowed to have our friends over and everything was shut down, feeling very isolated.
"It was a kick in the teeth that they were having a bit of a jolly inside. So I thought I would film it."
The @Telegraph has established that the person who made the video recording of Sir Keir has not been questioned by detectives or asked to hand over the original recording.
The individual who made the film said: "I have not had any contact [from the police] yet.”
Its been "investigated" claims Rochdale who spent months banging on about Boris being photographed with beer in hand.
The *stills* from the video have been in the media since the event itself. I'm not a copper, but if someone says "I wish to complain about the party that Starmer had" and image of said party are in the newspapers, and the images don't show an offence being committed, then what do you want them to do?
We're going to keep going round the same loop forever. Another day, another AMAZING REVELATION of some non-detail we supposedly didn't know about which makes sod all difference to the legal case.
Come on Tories. Demand to know if the £200 for the curry was properly declared on the election return. You can still prove Boris innocent if you try hard enough.
In what way was fifteen to thirty (accounts vary) people being in the same office at all necessary for a by-election campaign in a different constituency?
I really do not want to labour this but the police are accused of not viewing the available video, Starmer admits 30 were in attendance, the £200 is about the cost of curries for 30, and it appears an on line quiz was involved
I have received a lot of criticism for posting about this story from those wanting it to be not so, but it appears this is story that has a momentum of its own across the media involving journalists sensing a story, including journalists (Kay Burley and others) who are not HMG friendly
Sir Peter Fahy, former chief constable of Greater Manchester has said today that Durham Police should reconsider a probe into the allegations
It is a shame there is no lotoqs in the house of commons, would be wonderful to see someone doing an inverse sks on sks (what does the loto have to say to my constituent who could not be with her husband of 87 years etc)
So BigG. has won you over. Hats off to BigG.
The beauty of BigG. confirming Starmer's guilt makes Johnson de facto innocent.
People distrust politicians, and if they have policies they don't like, they distrust them more. But hyocrisy is routine for the political class too. I snatch a break from a packed schedule, you take the piss, and he killed my parents and danced on their grave by celebrating their lock-down.
The press love it. All that emoting available to them.
Boris should resign because he's lazy. He should resign because he's incompetent in allowing that lax behaviour in Downing Street while demanding others stick strictly to the advice/law.
Starmer is waffling, a Boris trait, but there's always a risk of hypocrisy when you go full bore without being Caesar's wife yourself.
Wouldn't regard it as a legitimate word if it had been me setting it
Feckin dangers of getting 3 letters early. Saw something on twitter half way through saying it was US slang so plumped for specific US slang on last try. IT’S UK SLANG YOU MUPPET.
Wordle 320 X/6
⬛⬛🟨🟩⬛ ⬛🟩⬛🟩🟩 ⬛🟩⬛🟩🟩 ⬛🟩⬛🟩🟩 🟨🟩⬛🟩🟩 ⬛🟩🟩🟩🟩
3 quite different meanings in Scots English English English and US English it seems. There's whole newspaper articles about it (and they look like daily features, even more worryingly)
Christopher Hope📝 @christopherhope · 1h The film maker [of the Starmer video] added: “It was pretty outrageous because at the time we were not allowed to have our friends over and everything was shut down, feeling very isolated.
"It was a kick in the teeth that they were having a bit of a jolly inside. So I thought I would film it."
The @Telegraph has established that the person who made the video recording of Sir Keir has not been questioned by detectives or asked to hand over the original recording.
The individual who made the film said: "I have not had any contact [from the police] yet.”
Its been "investigated" claims Rochdale who spent months banging on about Boris being photographed with beer in hand.
The *stills* from the video have been in the media since the event itself. I'm not a copper, but if someone says "I wish to complain about the party that Starmer had" and image of said party are in the newspapers, and the images don't show an offence being committed, then what do you want them to do?
We're going to keep going round the same loop forever. Another day, another AMAZING REVELATION of some non-detail we supposedly didn't know about which makes sod all difference to the legal case.
Come on Tories. Demand to know if the £200 for the curry was properly declared on the election return. You can still prove Boris innocent if you try hard enough.
In what way was fifteen to thirty (accounts vary) people being in the same office at all necessary for a by-election campaign in a different constituency?
Really? You've never done campaigning then. The Tories were bussing people up to Teesside from Guildford a few years ago.
“Meetings to organise and plan campaigns should be held online or over the phone. They should not take place in person. Where campaigners must attend in person, for example to collect printed materials, this should be organised on a one by one basis.”
Thanks for confirming the legality of doing it in person. Had the Tories gone after Starmer for ignoring the *advise* they would have had an argument. The *advise* was that you shouldn't do face to face. But the law said different. The same law that allowed Boris to share a pint with Jill Mortimer in her one and only appearance in her constituency.
As the polls have shown, nobody has been remotely convinced of the Tory claims, and the longer they have gone on and the more hysterical in tone the funnier it has got.
Do your SNP comrades know you spend all your time on here defending SKS?
If you can't tell the difference between Slab, the SNP, and the LDs, that might explain why you're always on here slagging off your party leader?
Not my party. Not RP party. He is defending SKS for 6 days running whilst being a Candidate for a competing party
If you've read my contributions you will see I am defending the rule of law. Plenty of LD MPs saying the same on Twitter btw including Tim Farron. We're not hyper-partisan hacks.
Should your priority not be helping your colleagues win Elections?
Ooh, are we doing priorities for other people? Wait til you hear what I think you should do.
Christopher Hope📝 @christopherhope · 1h The film maker [of the Starmer video] added: “It was pretty outrageous because at the time we were not allowed to have our friends over and everything was shut down, feeling very isolated.
"It was a kick in the teeth that they were having a bit of a jolly inside. So I thought I would film it."
The @Telegraph has established that the person who made the video recording of Sir Keir has not been questioned by detectives or asked to hand over the original recording.
The individual who made the film said: "I have not had any contact [from the police] yet.”
Its been "investigated" claims Rochdale who spent months banging on about Boris being photographed with beer in hand.
The *stills* from the video have been in the media since the event itself. I'm not a copper, but if someone says "I wish to complain about the party that Starmer had" and image of said party are in the newspapers, and the images don't show an offence being committed, then what do you want them to do?
We're going to keep going round the same loop forever. Another day, another AMAZING REVELATION of some non-detail we supposedly didn't know about which makes sod all difference to the legal case.
Come on Tories. Demand to know if the £200 for the curry was properly declared on the election return. You can still prove Boris innocent if you try hard enough.
In what way was fifteen to thirty (accounts vary) people being in the same office at all necessary for a by-election campaign in a different constituency?
Really? You've never done campaigning then. The Tories were bussing people up to Teesside from Guildford a few years ago.
“Meetings to organise and plan campaigns should be held online or over the phone. They should not take place in person. Where campaigners must attend in person, for example to collect printed materials, this should be organised on a one by one basis.”
Thanks for confirming the legality of doing it in person. Had the Tories gone after Starmer for ignoring the *advise* they would have had an argument. The *advise* was that you shouldn't do face to face. But the law said different. The same law that allowed Boris to share a pint with Jill Mortimer in her one and only appearance in her constituency.
As the polls have shown, nobody has been remotely convinced of the Tory claims, and the longer they have gone on and the more hysterical in tone the funnier it has got.
Do your SNP comrades know you spend all your time on here defending SKS?
If you can't tell the difference between Slab, the SNP, and the LDs, that might explain why you're always on here slagging off your party leader?
Not my party. Not RP party. He is defending SKS for 6 days running whilst being a Candidate for a competing party
If you've read my contributions you will see I am defending the rule of law. Plenty of LD MPs saying the same on Twitter btw including Tim Farron. We're not hyper-partisan hacks.
Should your priority not be helping your colleagues win Elections?
Ooh, are we doing priorities for other people? Wait til you hear what I think you should do.
Christopher Hope📝 @christopherhope · 1h The film maker [of the Starmer video] added: “It was pretty outrageous because at the time we were not allowed to have our friends over and everything was shut down, feeling very isolated.
"It was a kick in the teeth that they were having a bit of a jolly inside. So I thought I would film it."
The @Telegraph has established that the person who made the video recording of Sir Keir has not been questioned by detectives or asked to hand over the original recording.
The individual who made the film said: "I have not had any contact [from the police] yet.”
Its been "investigated" claims Rochdale who spent months banging on about Boris being photographed with beer in hand.
The *stills* from the video have been in the media since the event itself. I'm not a copper, but if someone says "I wish to complain about the party that Starmer had" and image of said party are in the newspapers, and the images don't show an offence being committed, then what do you want them to do?
We're going to keep going round the same loop forever. Another day, another AMAZING REVELATION of some non-detail we supposedly didn't know about which makes sod all difference to the legal case.
Come on Tories. Demand to know if the £200 for the curry was properly declared on the election return. You can still prove Boris innocent if you try hard enough.
In what way was fifteen to thirty (accounts vary) people being in the same office at all necessary for a by-election campaign in a different constituency?
Really? You've never done campaigning then. The Tories were bussing people up to Teesside from Guildford a few years ago.
“Meetings to organise and plan campaigns should be held online or over the phone. They should not take place in person. Where campaigners must attend in person, for example to collect printed materials, this should be organised on a one by one basis.”
Thanks for confirming the legality of doing it in person. Had the Tories gone after Starmer for ignoring the *advise* they would have had an argument. The *advise* was that you shouldn't do face to face. But the law said different. The same law that allowed Boris to share a pint with Jill Mortimer in her one and only appearance in her constituency.
As the polls have shown, nobody has been remotely convinced of the Tory claims, and the longer they have gone on and the more hysterical in tone the funnier it has got.
Do your SNP comrades know you spend all your time on here defending SKS?
If you can't tell the difference between Slab, the SNP, and the LDs, that might explain why you're always on here slagging off your party leader?
Not my party. Not RP party. He is defending SKS for 6 days running whilst being a Candidate for a competing party
If you've read my contributions you will see I am defending the rule of law. Plenty of LD MPs saying the same on Twitter btw including Tim Farron. We're not hyper-partisan hacks.
Should your priority not be helping your colleagues win Elections?
Ooh, are we doing priorities for other people? Wait til you hear what I think you should do.
He'll be telling us to get off PB next.
Might be needed, tbh. I should probably get out of bed and head to work.
Christopher Hope📝 @christopherhope · 1h The film maker [of the Starmer video] added: “It was pretty outrageous because at the time we were not allowed to have our friends over and everything was shut down, feeling very isolated.
"It was a kick in the teeth that they were having a bit of a jolly inside. So I thought I would film it."
The @Telegraph has established that the person who made the video recording of Sir Keir has not been questioned by detectives or asked to hand over the original recording.
The individual who made the film said: "I have not had any contact [from the police] yet.”
Its been "investigated" claims Rochdale who spent months banging on about Boris being photographed with beer in hand.
The *stills* from the video have been in the media since the event itself. I'm not a copper, but if someone says "I wish to complain about the party that Starmer had" and image of said party are in the newspapers, and the images don't show an offence being committed, then what do you want them to do?
We're going to keep going round the same loop forever. Another day, another AMAZING REVELATION of some non-detail we supposedly didn't know about which makes sod all difference to the legal case.
Come on Tories. Demand to know if the £200 for the curry was properly declared on the election return. You can still prove Boris innocent if you try hard enough.
In what way was fifteen to thirty (accounts vary) people being in the same office at all necessary for a by-election campaign in a different constituency?
Really? You've never done campaigning then. The Tories were bussing people up to Teesside from Guildford a few years ago.
“Meetings to organise and plan campaigns should be held online or over the phone. They should not take place in person. Where campaigners must attend in person, for example to collect printed materials, this should be organised on a one by one basis.”
Thanks for confirming the legality of doing it in person. Had the Tories gone after Starmer for ignoring the *advise* they would have had an argument. The *advise* was that you shouldn't do face to face. But the law said different. The same law that allowed Boris to share a pint with Jill Mortimer in her one and only appearance in her constituency.
As the polls have shown, nobody has been remotely convinced of the Tory claims, and the longer they have gone on and the more hysterical in tone the funnier it has got.
Do your SNP comrades know you spend all your time on here defending SKS?
If you can't tell the difference between Slab, the SNP, and the LDs, that might explain why you're always on here slagging off your party leader?
Not my party. Not RP party. He is defending SKS for 6 days running whilst being a Candidate for a competing party
If you've read my contributions you will see I am defending the rule of law. Plenty of LD MPs saying the same on Twitter btw including Tim Farron. We're not hyper-partisan hacks.
Should your priority not be helping your colleagues win Elections?
Have posted on here as a stress relief valve during what has been a brutally intense period of work. Would be happy not to post about the #currygate story every again but it keeps rolling on and its designed to effect elections and we're a political betting forum and elections are kind of what we do.
As for winning elections vs standing up for clearly held principles I choose the latter. Surprised with your own political views that you imply that winning elections is more important than principles...
Christopher Hope📝 @christopherhope · 1h The film maker [of the Starmer video] added: “It was pretty outrageous because at the time we were not allowed to have our friends over and everything was shut down, feeling very isolated.
"It was a kick in the teeth that they were having a bit of a jolly inside. So I thought I would film it."
The @Telegraph has established that the person who made the video recording of Sir Keir has not been questioned by detectives or asked to hand over the original recording.
The individual who made the film said: "I have not had any contact [from the police] yet.”
Its been "investigated" claims Rochdale who spent months banging on about Boris being photographed with beer in hand.
The *stills* from the video have been in the media since the event itself. I'm not a copper, but if someone says "I wish to complain about the party that Starmer had" and image of said party are in the newspapers, and the images don't show an offence being committed, then what do you want them to do?
We're going to keep going round the same loop forever. Another day, another AMAZING REVELATION of some non-detail we supposedly didn't know about which makes sod all difference to the legal case.
Come on Tories. Demand to know if the £200 for the curry was properly declared on the election return. You can still prove Boris innocent if you try hard enough.
In what way was fifteen to thirty (accounts vary) people being in the same office at all necessary for a by-election campaign in a different constituency?
I really do not want to labour this but the police are accused of not viewing the available video, Starmer admits 30 were in attendance, the £200 is about the cost of curries for 30, and it appears an on line quiz was involved
I have received a lot of criticism for posting about this story from those wanting it to be not so, but it appears this is story that has a momentum of its own across the media involving journalists sensing a story, including journalists (Kay Burley and others) who are not HMG friendly
Sir Peter Fahy, former chief constable of Greater Manchester has said today that Durham Police should reconsider a probe into the allegations
It is a shame there is no lotoqs in the house of commons, would be wonderful to see someone doing an inverse sks on sks (what does the loto have to say to my constituent who could not be with her husband of 87 years etc)
So BigG. has won you over. Hats off to BigG.
The beauty of BigG. confirming Starmer's guilt makes Johnson de facto innocent.
No he has not. The fact of Starmer's almost certain innocence is what would make it so funny
Christopher Hope📝 @christopherhope · 1h The film maker [of the Starmer video] added: “It was pretty outrageous because at the time we were not allowed to have our friends over and everything was shut down, feeling very isolated.
"It was a kick in the teeth that they were having a bit of a jolly inside. So I thought I would film it."
The @Telegraph has established that the person who made the video recording of Sir Keir has not been questioned by detectives or asked to hand over the original recording.
The individual who made the film said: "I have not had any contact [from the police] yet.”
Its been "investigated" claims Rochdale who spent months banging on about Boris being photographed with beer in hand.
The *stills* from the video have been in the media since the event itself. I'm not a copper, but if someone says "I wish to complain about the party that Starmer had" and image of said party are in the newspapers, and the images don't show an offence being committed, then what do you want them to do?
We're going to keep going round the same loop forever. Another day, another AMAZING REVELATION of some non-detail we supposedly didn't know about which makes sod all difference to the legal case.
Come on Tories. Demand to know if the £200 for the curry was properly declared on the election return. You can still prove Boris innocent if you try hard enough.
In what way was fifteen to thirty (accounts vary) people being in the same office at all necessary for a by-election campaign in a different constituency?
I really do not want to labour this but the police are accused of not viewing the available video, Starmer admits 30 were in attendance, the £200 is about the cost of curries for 30, and it appears an on line quiz was involved
I have received a lot of criticism for posting about this story from those wanting it to be not so, but it appears this is story that has a momentum of its own across the media involving journalists sensing a story, including journalists (Kay Burley and others) who are not HMG friendly
Sir Peter Fahy, former chief constable of Greater Manchester has said today that Durham Police should reconsider a probe into the allegations
When you say the police are accused of not viewing the available video, do you mean they are accused of not viewing the last 10 seconds of the video that were not posted to social media?
This is the quote from the student present who filmed his video
It is unclear which version the police have viewed. The version published on social media lasts for 34 seconds, while the original version is 10 seconds longer at 44 seconds.
The individual who made the film in Durham at 10.04pm on April 30 last year told The Telegraph that they had not been asked to provide a copy to police, nor been interviewed by officers. The film-maker said: "I have not had any contact [from the police] yet."
Asked why they had made the film, they said: "I thought it was pretty outrageous, because at the time we were not allowed to have our friends over and everything was shut down, feeling very isolated.
"It was a kick in the teeth that they were having a bit of a jolly inside. So I thought I would film it."
So, what should the police have done?
Student takes a video, posts it on social media. Doesn't seem to show anything illegal.
If the student really thought this was serious, shouldn't they have sent the whole 44 seconds to the police?
What did the student want? A "I helped the police today" sticker?
Besides, as The Sun have helpfully pointed out, pubs were open by that point.
Starmer told GMB that pubs and restaurants were not open during #Beergate on 30 April 2021 so he had to dine inside with 30 comrades… but that’s not quite true:
Christopher Hope📝 @christopherhope · 1h The film maker [of the Starmer video] added: “It was pretty outrageous because at the time we were not allowed to have our friends over and everything was shut down, feeling very isolated.
"It was a kick in the teeth that they were having a bit of a jolly inside. So I thought I would film it."
The @Telegraph has established that the person who made the video recording of Sir Keir has not been questioned by detectives or asked to hand over the original recording.
The individual who made the film said: "I have not had any contact [from the police] yet.”
Its been "investigated" claims Rochdale who spent months banging on about Boris being photographed with beer in hand.
The *stills* from the video have been in the media since the event itself. I'm not a copper, but if someone says "I wish to complain about the party that Starmer had" and image of said party are in the newspapers, and the images don't show an offence being committed, then what do you want them to do?
We're going to keep going round the same loop forever. Another day, another AMAZING REVELATION of some non-detail we supposedly didn't know about which makes sod all difference to the legal case.
Come on Tories. Demand to know if the £200 for the curry was properly declared on the election return. You can still prove Boris innocent if you try hard enough.
In what way was fifteen to thirty (accounts vary) people being in the same office at all necessary for a by-election campaign in a different constituency?
Really? You've never done campaigning then. The Tories were bussing people up to Teesside from Guildford a few years ago.
“Meetings to organise and plan campaigns should be held online or over the phone. They should not take place in person. Where campaigners must attend in person, for example to collect printed materials, this should be organised on a one by one basis.”
Thanks for confirming the legality of doing it in person. Had the Tories gone after Starmer for ignoring the *advise* they would have had an argument. The *advise* was that you shouldn't do face to face. But the law said different. The same law that allowed Boris to share a pint with Jill Mortimer in her one and only appearance in her constituency.
As the polls have shown, nobody has been remotely convinced of the Tory claims, and the longer they have gone on and the more hysterical in tone the funnier it has got.
Do your SNP comrades know you spend all your time on here defending SKS?
They're sat next to me and Lord Mandelson in the same room. Mandy says "hi" btw
Christopher Hope📝 @christopherhope · 1h The film maker [of the Starmer video] added: “It was pretty outrageous because at the time we were not allowed to have our friends over and everything was shut down, feeling very isolated.
"It was a kick in the teeth that they were having a bit of a jolly inside. So I thought I would film it."
The @Telegraph has established that the person who made the video recording of Sir Keir has not been questioned by detectives or asked to hand over the original recording.
The individual who made the film said: "I have not had any contact [from the police] yet.”
Its been "investigated" claims Rochdale who spent months banging on about Boris being photographed with beer in hand.
The *stills* from the video have been in the media since the event itself. I'm not a copper, but if someone says "I wish to complain about the party that Starmer had" and image of said party are in the newspapers, and the images don't show an offence being committed, then what do you want them to do?
We're going to keep going round the same loop forever. Another day, another AMAZING REVELATION of some non-detail we supposedly didn't know about which makes sod all difference to the legal case.
Come on Tories. Demand to know if the £200 for the curry was properly declared on the election return. You can still prove Boris innocent if you try hard enough.
In what way was fifteen to thirty (accounts vary) people being in the same office at all necessary for a by-election campaign in a different constituency?
I really do not want to labour this but the police are accused of not viewing the available video, Starmer admits 30 were in attendance, the £200 is about the cost of curries for 30, and it appears an on line quiz was involved
I have received a lot of criticism for posting about this story from those wanting it to be not so, but it appears this is story that has a momentum of its own across the media involving journalists sensing a story, including journalists (Kay Burley and others) who are not HMG friendly
Sir Peter Fahy, former chief constable of Greater Manchester has said today that Durham Police should reconsider a probe into the allegations
When you say the police are accused of not viewing the available video, do you mean they are accused of not viewing the last 10 seconds of the video that were not posted to social media?
This is the quote from the student present who filmed his video
It is unclear which version the police have viewed. The version published on social media lasts for 34 seconds, while the original version is 10 seconds longer at 44 seconds.
The individual who made the film in Durham at 10.04pm on April 30 last year told The Telegraph that they had not been asked to provide a copy to police, nor been interviewed by officers. The film-maker said: "I have not had any contact [from the police] yet."
Asked why they had made the film, they said: "I thought it was pretty outrageous, because at the time we were not allowed to have our friends over and everything was shut down, feeling very isolated.
"It was a kick in the teeth that they were having a bit of a jolly inside. So I thought I would film it."
Are you outraged that Johnson has not received a questionnaire for the Lee Cain "work event" that he attended whilst others attending have? No, I thought not.
Ohio 2022 Primary Results NOT previously reported on PB
MEIGS COUNTY - Unincorp. Salisbury Twp Additional Cemeteries Levy – .5 mills/5 years — For the tax levy: 118; Against the tax levy: 141
Is it like the times claim, the Ohio candidate only surged to victory with Trumps endorsement?
True.
Vance was back of the pack before the endoresment; likely that Mandel, who got support from many 45 fans, would have gotten even more, had the Sage of Mar-a-Lardo not anointed the V-man.
Hope Tim Ryan tears him a new one.
Thanks for the answer.
Is hope all you got left. It’s just a economic downturn away from all the Trump loonies winning?
Moon, you may have noticed that something even bigger than the Ohio Primary happened in America this week?
News of impending overturning of Roe v Wade by US Supreme Court has tossed a MAJOR wild card into the deck for the 2022 midterms. May help Democrats to redress the enthusiasm gap, is certainly galvanizing plenty right now.
When abortion is broadly legal, you don't have harrowing stories about rape victims committing suicide rather than carry their baby to term. You don't have scandals about people prevented from crossing state lines by restrictive laws. You don't have stories about the deaths of people carrying out home abortions based on YouTube videos.
Legal abortion - at least up until about 18 weeks or so - is supported by the vast majority of Americans.
Now, do anti-abortionists (by and large) care about it more?
Probably.
But that's because most Americans haven't had to deal with abortion being illegal. Like with Brexit, it is those who wish to change the status quo who are the most motivated.
I think this is a Pyrrhic victory for the anti-abortion lobby, that will end in abortion being legally endorsed at the ballot box in more than 40 states in the next decade.
One issue may be this: there are some references or suggestions in the Alito judgment to the foetus having legal personality. Depending on how these are put and interpreted, it is possible that any state pro-abortion law might be struck down as unconstitutional on the basis that the foetus - as a person - has a right to life.
I am no US lawyer and we don't have the final judgment but that might well be a risk.
In the ordinary world of ordinary words and actions we regard the unborn as obviously having rights and humanity as a whole as having duties towards them. To kick a woman in the stomach is abhorrent. To do so when they are pregnant we regard as even worse. We ordinarily think of that element of being 'even worse' as related to how we should treat the unborn as well as the woman.
To my mind it is inevitable that there will be abortions. But the issue has to balance competing rights. Neither extreme seems very good at this.
The unborn child has legal personality, and that should not be contentious.
What I expect that Alito wants to do is to give it equivalent legal personality to the mother, so that in almost every circumstance, abortion is treated as being the equivalent of murder. My understanding is that in Mississippi, Republicans are drafting a bill that would potentially render women who have abortions liable to the death penalty.
Christopher Hope📝 @christopherhope · 1h The film maker [of the Starmer video] added: “It was pretty outrageous because at the time we were not allowed to have our friends over and everything was shut down, feeling very isolated.
"It was a kick in the teeth that they were having a bit of a jolly inside. So I thought I would film it."
The @Telegraph has established that the person who made the video recording of Sir Keir has not been questioned by detectives or asked to hand over the original recording.
The individual who made the film said: "I have not had any contact [from the police] yet.”
Its been "investigated" claims Rochdale who spent months banging on about Boris being photographed with beer in hand.
The *stills* from the video have been in the media since the event itself. I'm not a copper, but if someone says "I wish to complain about the party that Starmer had" and image of said party are in the newspapers, and the images don't show an offence being committed, then what do you want them to do?
We're going to keep going round the same loop forever. Another day, another AMAZING REVELATION of some non-detail we supposedly didn't know about which makes sod all difference to the legal case.
Come on Tories. Demand to know if the £200 for the curry was properly declared on the election return. You can still prove Boris innocent if you try hard enough.
In what way was fifteen to thirty (accounts vary) people being in the same office at all necessary for a by-election campaign in a different constituency?
Really? You've never done campaigning then. The Tories were bussing people up to Teesside from Guildford a few years ago.
“Meetings to organise and plan campaigns should be held online or over the phone. They should not take place in person. Where campaigners must attend in person, for example to collect printed materials, this should be organised on a one by one basis.”
Thanks for confirming the legality of doing it in person. Had the Tories gone after Starmer for ignoring the *advise* they would have had an argument. The *advise* was that you shouldn't do face to face. But the law said different. The same law that allowed Boris to share a pint with Jill Mortimer in her one and only appearance in her constituency.
As the polls have shown, nobody has been remotely convinced of the Tory claims, and the longer they have gone on and the more hysterical in tone the funnier it has got.
Do your SNP comrades know you spend all your time on here defending SKS?
If you can't tell the difference between Slab, the SNP, and the LDs, that might explain why you're always on here slagging off your party leader?
Not my party. Not RP party. He is defending SKS for 6 days running whilst being a Candidate for a competing party
I’d hate to live in a world so partisan that we are not allowed to speak well of someone in another party.
Agree. I am finding these arguments very sad. Even if you think your opponent has done nothing wrong you should slag him off for it anyway, just because he is your opponent. A very sad day indeed.
Wouldn't regard it as a legitimate word if it had been me setting it
Feckin dangers of getting 3 letters early. Saw something on twitter half way through saying it was US slang so plumped for specific US slang on last try. IT’S UK SLANG YOU MUPPET.
Wordle 320 X/6
⬛⬛🟨🟩⬛ ⬛🟩⬛🟩🟩 ⬛🟩⬛🟩🟩 ⬛🟩⬛🟩🟩 🟨🟩⬛🟩🟩 ⬛🟩🟩🟩🟩
3 quite different meanings in Scots English English English and US English it seems. There's whole newspaper articles about it (and they look like daily features, even more worryingly)
I got it in 5 but I do think of it as US usage - never heard of the UK interpretations!
Christopher Hope📝 @christopherhope · 1h The film maker [of the Starmer video] added: “It was pretty outrageous because at the time we were not allowed to have our friends over and everything was shut down, feeling very isolated.
"It was a kick in the teeth that they were having a bit of a jolly inside. So I thought I would film it."
The @Telegraph has established that the person who made the video recording of Sir Keir has not been questioned by detectives or asked to hand over the original recording.
The individual who made the film said: "I have not had any contact [from the police] yet.”
Its been "investigated" claims Rochdale who spent months banging on about Boris being photographed with beer in hand.
The *stills* from the video have been in the media since the event itself. I'm not a copper, but if someone says "I wish to complain about the party that Starmer had" and image of said party are in the newspapers, and the images don't show an offence being committed, then what do you want them to do?
We're going to keep going round the same loop forever. Another day, another AMAZING REVELATION of some non-detail we supposedly didn't know about which makes sod all difference to the legal case.
Come on Tories. Demand to know if the £200 for the curry was properly declared on the election return. You can still prove Boris innocent if you try hard enough.
In what way was fifteen to thirty (accounts vary) people being in the same office at all necessary for a by-election campaign in a different constituency?
I really do not want to labour this but the police are accused of not viewing the available video, Starmer admits 30 were in attendance, the £200 is about the cost of curries for 30, and it appears an on line quiz was involved
I have received a lot of criticism for posting about this story from those wanting it to be not so, but it appears this is story that has a momentum of its own across the media involving journalists sensing a story, including journalists (Kay Burley and others) who are not HMG friendly
Sir Peter Fahy, former chief constable of Greater Manchester has said today that Durham Police should reconsider a probe into the allegations
It is a shame there is no lotoqs in the house of commons, would be wonderful to see someone doing an inverse sks on sks (what does the loto have to say to my constituent who could not be with her husband of 87 years etc)
So BigG. has won you over. Hats off to BigG.
The beauty of BigG. confirming Starmer's guilt makes Johnson de facto innocent.
You are really rather amusing suggesting that allegations that Starmer may have broken covid regulations somehow excuses Boris who cannot be excused and should resign
However, what this has done is compromise Starmer on a subject he has been obsessing about in the HOC demanding resignations daily
Christopher Hope📝 @christopherhope · 1h The film maker [of the Starmer video] added: “It was pretty outrageous because at the time we were not allowed to have our friends over and everything was shut down, feeling very isolated.
"It was a kick in the teeth that they were having a bit of a jolly inside. So I thought I would film it."
The @Telegraph has established that the person who made the video recording of Sir Keir has not been questioned by detectives or asked to hand over the original recording.
The individual who made the film said: "I have not had any contact [from the police] yet.”
Its been "investigated" claims Rochdale who spent months banging on about Boris being photographed with beer in hand.
The *stills* from the video have been in the media since the event itself. I'm not a copper, but if someone says "I wish to complain about the party that Starmer had" and image of said party are in the newspapers, and the images don't show an offence being committed, then what do you want them to do?
We're going to keep going round the same loop forever. Another day, another AMAZING REVELATION of some non-detail we supposedly didn't know about which makes sod all difference to the legal case.
Come on Tories. Demand to know if the £200 for the curry was properly declared on the election return. You can still prove Boris innocent if you try hard enough.
In what way was fifteen to thirty (accounts vary) people being in the same office at all necessary for a by-election campaign in a different constituency?
I really do not want to labour this but the police are accused of not viewing the available video, Starmer admits 30 were in attendance, the £200 is about the cost of curries for 30, and it appears an on line quiz was involved
I have received a lot of criticism for posting about this story from those wanting it to be not so, but it appears this is story that has a momentum of its own across the media involving journalists sensing a story, including journalists (Kay Burley and others) who are not HMG friendly
Sir Peter Fahy, former chief constable of Greater Manchester has said today that Durham Police should reconsider a probe into the allegations
When you say the police are accused of not viewing the available video, do you mean they are accused of not viewing the last 10 seconds of the video that were not posted to social media?
This is the quote from the student present who filmed his video
It is unclear which version the police have viewed. The version published on social media lasts for 34 seconds, while the original version is 10 seconds longer at 44 seconds.
The individual who made the film in Durham at 10.04pm on April 30 last year told The Telegraph that they had not been asked to provide a copy to police, nor been interviewed by officers. The film-maker said: "I have not had any contact [from the police] yet."
Asked why they had made the film, they said: "I thought it was pretty outrageous, because at the time we were not allowed to have our friends over and everything was shut down, feeling very isolated.
"It was a kick in the teeth that they were having a bit of a jolly inside. So I thought I would film it."
So, what should the police have done?
Student takes a video, posts it on social media. Doesn't seem to show anything illegal.
If the student really thought this was serious, shouldn't they have sent the whole 44 seconds to the police?
What did the student want? A "I helped the police today" sticker?
Besides, as The Sun have helpfully pointed out, pubs were open by that point.
Starmer told GMB that pubs and restaurants were not open during #Beergate on 30 April 2021 so he had to dine inside with 30 comrades… but that’s not quite true:
“Hospitality venues will be allowed to serve people outdoors at Step 2 and there will be no need for customers to order a substantial meal with alcoholic drinks and no curfew, although customers must order, eat and drink while seated (‘table service’). Wider social contact rules will apply in all these settings to prevent indoor mixing between different households.”
Absolutely. It made me feel better about American democracy and politics generally. A political world led by LBJ's dictum ("I know he's not guilty but I want to see him struggling to disprove it") is deeply cynical and brings out the worst in all of us.
We had an Xmas content on PB a few years ago where we all had to say something genuinely positive about an opponent. I think we all thought it refreshing, and in some cases quite a difficult challenge to get over themselves - but we all got there in the end.
Christopher Hope📝 @christopherhope · 1h The film maker [of the Starmer video] added: “It was pretty outrageous because at the time we were not allowed to have our friends over and everything was shut down, feeling very isolated.
"It was a kick in the teeth that they were having a bit of a jolly inside. So I thought I would film it."
The @Telegraph has established that the person who made the video recording of Sir Keir has not been questioned by detectives or asked to hand over the original recording.
The individual who made the film said: "I have not had any contact [from the police] yet.”
Its been "investigated" claims Rochdale who spent months banging on about Boris being photographed with beer in hand.
The *stills* from the video have been in the media since the event itself. I'm not a copper, but if someone says "I wish to complain about the party that Starmer had" and image of said party are in the newspapers, and the images don't show an offence being committed, then what do you want them to do?
We're going to keep going round the same loop forever. Another day, another AMAZING REVELATION of some non-detail we supposedly didn't know about which makes sod all difference to the legal case.
Come on Tories. Demand to know if the £200 for the curry was properly declared on the election return. You can still prove Boris innocent if you try hard enough.
In what way was fifteen to thirty (accounts vary) people being in the same office at all necessary for a by-election campaign in a different constituency?
I really do not want to labour this but the police are accused of not viewing the available video, Starmer admits 30 were in attendance, the £200 is about the cost of curries for 30, and it appears an on line quiz was involved
I have received a lot of criticism for posting about this story from those wanting it to be not so, but it appears this is story that has a momentum of its own across the media involving journalists sensing a story, including journalists (Kay Burley and others) who are not HMG friendly
Sir Peter Fahy, former chief constable of Greater Manchester has said today that Durham Police should reconsider a probe into the allegations
When you say the police are accused of not viewing the available video, do you mean they are accused of not viewing the last 10 seconds of the video that were not posted to social media?
This is the quote from the student present who filmed his video
It is unclear which version the police have viewed. The version published on social media lasts for 34 seconds, while the original version is 10 seconds longer at 44 seconds.
The individual who made the film in Durham at 10.04pm on April 30 last year told The Telegraph that they had not been asked to provide a copy to police, nor been interviewed by officers. The film-maker said: "I have not had any contact [from the police] yet."
Asked why they had made the film, they said: "I thought it was pretty outrageous, because at the time we were not allowed to have our friends over and everything was shut down, feeling very isolated.
"It was a kick in the teeth that they were having a bit of a jolly inside. So I thought I would film it."
Are you outraged that Johnson has not received a questionnaire for the Lee Cain "work event" that he attended whilst others attending have? No, I thought not.
Boris has received a FPN and I have repeatedly called for him to go
Starmer has questions to answer and to be honest has only himself to blame by not closing the story down long ago whereas now he looks evasive
Ohio 2022 Primary Results NOT previously reported on PB
MEIGS COUNTY - Unincorp. Salisbury Twp Additional Cemeteries Levy – .5 mills/5 years — For the tax levy: 118; Against the tax levy: 141
Is it like the times claim, the Ohio candidate only surged to victory with Trumps endorsement?
True.
Vance was back of the pack before the endoresment; likely that Mandel, who got support from many 45 fans, would have gotten even more, had the Sage of Mar-a-Lardo not anointed the V-man.
Hope Tim Ryan tears him a new one.
Thanks for the answer.
Is hope all you got left. It’s just a economic downturn away from all the Trump loonies winning?
Moon, you may have noticed that something even bigger than the Ohio Primary happened in America this week?
News of impending overturning of Roe v Wade by US Supreme Court has tossed a MAJOR wild card into the deck for the 2022 midterms. May help Democrats to redress the enthusiasm gap, is certainly galvanizing plenty right now.
When abortion is broadly legal, you don't have harrowing stories about rape victims committing suicide rather than carry their baby to term. You don't have scandals about people prevented from crossing state lines by restrictive laws. You don't have stories about the deaths of people carrying out home abortions based on YouTube videos.
Legal abortion - at least up until about 18 weeks or so - is supported by the vast majority of Americans.
Now, do anti-abortionists (by and large) care about it more?
Probably.
But that's because most Americans haven't had to deal with abortion being illegal. Like with Brexit, it is those who wish to change the status quo who are the most motivated.
I think this is a Pyrrhic victory for the anti-abortion lobby, that will end in abortion being legally endorsed at the ballot box in more than 40 states in the next decade.
One issue may be this: there are some references or suggestions in the Alito judgment to the foetus having legal personality. Depending on how these are put and interpreted, it is possible that any state pro-abortion law might be struck down as unconstitutional on the basis that the foetus - as a person - has a right to life.
I am no US lawyer and we don't have the final judgment but that might well be a risk.
In the ordinary world of ordinary words and actions we regard the unborn as obviously having rights and humanity as a whole as having duties towards them. To kick a woman in the stomach is abhorrent. To do so when they are pregnant we regard as even worse. We ordinarily think of that element of being 'even worse' as related to how we should treat the unborn as well as the woman.
To my mind it is inevitable that there will be abortions. But the issue has to balance competing rights. Neither extreme seems very good at this.
The unborn child has legal personality, and that should not be contentious.
What I expect that Alito wants to do is to give it equivalent legal personality to the mother, so that in almost every circumstance, abortion is treated as being the equivalent of murder. My understanding is that in Mississippi, Republicans are drafting a bill that would potentially render women who have abortions liable to the death penalty.
I think a certain amount of 'wait and see' might be helpful here.
The other, and more robust issue is this: In the USA the democratic process has become corrupted by simplifications, extremes, populism and tribalism. One of the major factors in this is the failure of millions of people to participate in the process.
If abortion law (or any other) is a matter for legislators then it is impossible ultimately for the voting public as a whole to fail to have their way, whether in Mississippi or California.
There is no self evidently correct balance to be struck between the competing and legitimate claims about rights and duties towards the unborn. Let the voters set the strategy and legislators decide the law. (And let those of Mississippi be voted out).
Christopher Hope📝 @christopherhope · 1h The film maker [of the Starmer video] added: “It was pretty outrageous because at the time we were not allowed to have our friends over and everything was shut down, feeling very isolated.
"It was a kick in the teeth that they were having a bit of a jolly inside. So I thought I would film it."
The @Telegraph has established that the person who made the video recording of Sir Keir has not been questioned by detectives or asked to hand over the original recording.
The individual who made the film said: "I have not had any contact [from the police] yet.”
Its been "investigated" claims Rochdale who spent months banging on about Boris being photographed with beer in hand.
The *stills* from the video have been in the media since the event itself. I'm not a copper, but if someone says "I wish to complain about the party that Starmer had" and image of said party are in the newspapers, and the images don't show an offence being committed, then what do you want them to do?
We're going to keep going round the same loop forever. Another day, another AMAZING REVELATION of some non-detail we supposedly didn't know about which makes sod all difference to the legal case.
Come on Tories. Demand to know if the £200 for the curry was properly declared on the election return. You can still prove Boris innocent if you try hard enough.
In what way was fifteen to thirty (accounts vary) people being in the same office at all necessary for a by-election campaign in a different constituency?
I really do not want to labour this but the police are accused of not viewing the available video, Starmer admits 30 were in attendance, the £200 is about the cost of curries for 30, and it appears an on line quiz was involved
I have received a lot of criticism for posting about this story from those wanting it to be not so, but it appears this is story that has a momentum of its own across the media involving journalists sensing a story, including journalists (Kay Burley and others) who are not HMG friendly
Sir Peter Fahy, former chief constable of Greater Manchester has said today that Durham Police should reconsider a probe into the allegations
When you say the police are accused of not viewing the available video, do you mean they are accused of not viewing the last 10 seconds of the video that were not posted to social media?
This is the quote from the student present who filmed his video
It is unclear which version the police have viewed. The version published on social media lasts for 34 seconds, while the original version is 10 seconds longer at 44 seconds.
The individual who made the film in Durham at 10.04pm on April 30 last year told The Telegraph that they had not been asked to provide a copy to police, nor been interviewed by officers. The film-maker said: "I have not had any contact [from the police] yet."
Asked why they had made the film, they said: "I thought it was pretty outrageous, because at the time we were not allowed to have our friends over and everything was shut down, feeling very isolated.
"It was a kick in the teeth that they were having a bit of a jolly inside. So I thought I would film it."
Indeed. So, this 10 seconds the police haven't seen, we are to believe it has compelling evidence that is not apparent in the prior 34 seconds? And it's so juicy, the student deliberately cut it out of what he uploaded to social media because...? LOL.
(Also, if said student is so outraged, he can walk into any police station in the country and say, "I have some evidence of a crime. Let me give it to you." A police officer will then talk to him. If I had video evidence of a crime, that's what I'd do.)
This is plain weird, even for Aberdeen. PBers who used to hang out on UKpolling Report will remember Barney Crockett as a partisan and irascible SLab supporter on that site.
Christopher Hope📝 @christopherhope · 1h The film maker [of the Starmer video] added: “It was pretty outrageous because at the time we were not allowed to have our friends over and everything was shut down, feeling very isolated.
"It was a kick in the teeth that they were having a bit of a jolly inside. So I thought I would film it."
The @Telegraph has established that the person who made the video recording of Sir Keir has not been questioned by detectives or asked to hand over the original recording.
The individual who made the film said: "I have not had any contact [from the police] yet.”
Its been "investigated" claims Rochdale who spent months banging on about Boris being photographed with beer in hand.
The *stills* from the video have been in the media since the event itself. I'm not a copper, but if someone says "I wish to complain about the party that Starmer had" and image of said party are in the newspapers, and the images don't show an offence being committed, then what do you want them to do?
We're going to keep going round the same loop forever. Another day, another AMAZING REVELATION of some non-detail we supposedly didn't know about which makes sod all difference to the legal case.
Come on Tories. Demand to know if the £200 for the curry was properly declared on the election return. You can still prove Boris innocent if you try hard enough.
In what way was fifteen to thirty (accounts vary) people being in the same office at all necessary for a by-election campaign in a different constituency?
Really? You've never done campaigning then. The Tories were bussing people up to Teesside from Guildford a few years ago.
“Meetings to organise and plan campaigns should be held online or over the phone. They should not take place in person. Where campaigners must attend in person, for example to collect printed materials, this should be organised on a one by one basis.”
Thanks for confirming the legality of doing it in person. Had the Tories gone after Starmer for ignoring the *advise* they would have had an argument. The *advise* was that you shouldn't do face to face. But the law said different. The same law that allowed Boris to share a pint with Jill Mortimer in her one and only appearance in her constituency.
As the polls have shown, nobody has been remotely convinced of the Tory claims, and the longer they have gone on and the more hysterical in tone the funnier it has got.
Do your SNP comrades know you spend all your time on here defending SKS?
If you can't tell the difference between Slab, the SNP, and the LDs, that might explain why you're always on here slagging off your party leader?
Not my party. Not RP party. He is defending SKS for 6 days running whilst being a Candidate for a competing party
If you've read my contributions you will see I am defending the rule of law. Plenty of LD MPs saying the same on Twitter btw including Tim Farron. We're not hyper-partisan hacks.
Should your priority not be helping your colleagues win Elections?
This a fun site to discuss politics and political betting. Are people not allowed to have fun, engage in a conversation? Must we all be out campaigning 24/7?
Interesting dose of realism from Kieran Pedley, Ben Walker and Co. over at Britain Elects / New Statesman. Basically suggesting 100-200 council seats changing hands. Which would be very very 'meh' and definitely not worth staying up for in my opinion.
Now that the tories lanced the boil by a) exaggerated expectation management '800' loss nonsense and b) nonsense about Keir Starmer Boris Johnson will be safe and he will go on to fight the 2024 General Election, which he will lose.
Even Major's Tories only lost 516 seats in the equivalent local elections in 1994, despite being over 20% behind in the polls.
So over 800 losses is certainly expectations management from CCHQ
I've said it before, but I do find HYUFD's candour about hard electoral facts refreshing.
I think that the "story" for the mainstream Westminster press is going to come down to Wandsworth, Barnet and Westminster. If Labour takes all three it will be seen as amazing. Taking two will be "moderate progress". Only one? Meh. None? "Starmer leadership crisis". Worthing? Glasgow? Sunderland? Burneley? "Where are these places?" says the London editor.
Christopher Hope📝 @christopherhope · 1h The film maker [of the Starmer video] added: “It was pretty outrageous because at the time we were not allowed to have our friends over and everything was shut down, feeling very isolated.
"It was a kick in the teeth that they were having a bit of a jolly inside. So I thought I would film it."
The @Telegraph has established that the person who made the video recording of Sir Keir has not been questioned by detectives or asked to hand over the original recording.
The individual who made the film said: "I have not had any contact [from the police] yet.”
Its been "investigated" claims Rochdale who spent months banging on about Boris being photographed with beer in hand.
The *stills* from the video have been in the media since the event itself. I'm not a copper, but if someone says "I wish to complain about the party that Starmer had" and image of said party are in the newspapers, and the images don't show an offence being committed, then what do you want them to do?
We're going to keep going round the same loop forever. Another day, another AMAZING REVELATION of some non-detail we supposedly didn't know about which makes sod all difference to the legal case.
Come on Tories. Demand to know if the £200 for the curry was properly declared on the election return. You can still prove Boris innocent if you try hard enough.
In what way was fifteen to thirty (accounts vary) people being in the same office at all necessary for a by-election campaign in a different constituency?
I really do not want to labour this but the police are accused of not viewing the available video, Starmer admits 30 were in attendance, the £200 is about the cost of curries for 30, and it appears an on line quiz was involved
I have received a lot of criticism for posting about this story from those wanting it to be not so, but it appears this is story that has a momentum of its own across the media involving journalists sensing a story, including journalists (Kay Burley and others) who are not HMG friendly
Sir Peter Fahy, former chief constable of Greater Manchester has said today that Durham Police should reconsider a probe into the allegations
When you say the police are accused of not viewing the available video, do you mean they are accused of not viewing the last 10 seconds of the video that were not posted to social media?
This is the quote from the student present who filmed his video
It is unclear which version the police have viewed. The version published on social media lasts for 34 seconds, while the original version is 10 seconds longer at 44 seconds.
The individual who made the film in Durham at 10.04pm on April 30 last year told The Telegraph that they had not been asked to provide a copy to police, nor been interviewed by officers. The film-maker said: "I have not had any contact [from the police] yet."
Asked why they had made the film, they said: "I thought it was pretty outrageous, because at the time we were not allowed to have our friends over and everything was shut down, feeling very isolated.
"It was a kick in the teeth that they were having a bit of a jolly inside. So I thought I would film it."
Are you outraged that Johnson has not received a questionnaire for the Lee Cain "work event" that he attended whilst others attending have? No, I thought not.
Boris has received a FPN and I have repeatedly called for him to go
Starmer has questions to answer and to be honest has only himself to blame by not closing the story down long ago whereas now he looks evasive
And he lied about Angela Rayner being there which made it worse
Interesting dose of realism from Kieran Pedley, Ben Walker and Co. over at Britain Elects / New Statesman. Basically suggesting 100-200 council seats changing hands. Which would be very very 'meh' and definitely not worth staying up for in my opinion.
Now that the tories lanced the boil by a) exaggerated expectation management '800' loss nonsense and b) nonsense about Keir Starmer Boris Johnson will be safe and he will go on to fight the 2024 General Election, which he will lose.
Even Major's Tories only lost 516 seats in the equivalent local elections in 1994, despite being over 20% behind in the polls.
So over 800 losses is certainly expectations management from CCHQ
I've said it before, but I do find HYUFD's candour about hard electoral facts refreshing.
I think that the "story" for the mainstream Westminster press is going to come down to Wandsworth, Barnet and Westminster. If Labour takes all three it will be seen as amazing. Taking two will be "moderate progress". Only one? Meh. None? "Starmer leadership crisis". Worthing? Glasgow? Sunderland? Burneley? "Where are these places?" says the London editor.
It seems to be shaping up to be a fairly boring set of English local results, given all the expectations management. More interesting in NI of course, and possibly Scotland. It would have been much more fun if these seats were last contested at a high point in Tory fortunes rather than at their 2019 nadir.
Christopher Hope📝 @christopherhope · 1h The film maker [of the Starmer video] added: “It was pretty outrageous because at the time we were not allowed to have our friends over and everything was shut down, feeling very isolated.
"It was a kick in the teeth that they were having a bit of a jolly inside. So I thought I would film it."
The @Telegraph has established that the person who made the video recording of Sir Keir has not been questioned by detectives or asked to hand over the original recording.
The individual who made the film said: "I have not had any contact [from the police] yet.”
Its been "investigated" claims Rochdale who spent months banging on about Boris being photographed with beer in hand.
The *stills* from the video have been in the media since the event itself. I'm not a copper, but if someone says "I wish to complain about the party that Starmer had" and image of said party are in the newspapers, and the images don't show an offence being committed, then what do you want them to do?
We're going to keep going round the same loop forever. Another day, another AMAZING REVELATION of some non-detail we supposedly didn't know about which makes sod all difference to the legal case.
Come on Tories. Demand to know if the £200 for the curry was properly declared on the election return. You can still prove Boris innocent if you try hard enough.
In what way was fifteen to thirty (accounts vary) people being in the same office at all necessary for a by-election campaign in a different constituency?
I really do not want to labour this but the police are accused of not viewing the available video, Starmer admits 30 were in attendance, the £200 is about the cost of curries for 30, and it appears an on line quiz was involved
I have received a lot of criticism for posting about this story from those wanting it to be not so, but it appears this is story that has a momentum of its own across the media involving journalists sensing a story, including journalists (Kay Burley and others) who are not HMG friendly
Sir Peter Fahy, former chief constable of Greater Manchester has said today that Durham Police should reconsider a probe into the allegations
When you say the police are accused of not viewing the available video, do you mean they are accused of not viewing the last 10 seconds of the video that were not posted to social media?
This is the quote from the student present who filmed his video
It is unclear which version the police have viewed. The version published on social media lasts for 34 seconds, while the original version is 10 seconds longer at 44 seconds.
The individual who made the film in Durham at 10.04pm on April 30 last year told The Telegraph that they had not been asked to provide a copy to police, nor been interviewed by officers. The film-maker said: "I have not had any contact [from the police] yet."
Asked why they had made the film, they said: "I thought it was pretty outrageous, because at the time we were not allowed to have our friends over and everything was shut down, feeling very isolated.
"It was a kick in the teeth that they were having a bit of a jolly inside. So I thought I would film it."
Are you outraged that Johnson has not received a questionnaire for the Lee Cain "work event" that he attended whilst others attending have? No, I thought not.
Boris has received a FPN and I have repeatedly called for him to go
Starmer has questions to answer and to be honest has only himself to blame by not closing the story down long ago whereas now he looks evasive
To take a very wise question that a very wise boss liked to ask-
"What do you want to happen?"
For some, that's depressingly obvious. Create enough of a sense that everyone was at it that BoJo can survive his FPNs and the Gray Report.
For others, it's a chance to bring boring old goody two shoes down a peg or two.
For others, it's that the police have another look, even if it ends up concluding that everything was fine. Justice being seen to be done.
The evil genius of those pushing the story is to never make it clear what an appropriate response would be. By never saying what should happen, or what questions actually heed to be answered, any response can be deemed unsatisfactory.
Christopher Hope📝 @christopherhope · 1h The film maker [of the Starmer video] added: “It was pretty outrageous because at the time we were not allowed to have our friends over and everything was shut down, feeling very isolated.
"It was a kick in the teeth that they were having a bit of a jolly inside. So I thought I would film it."
The @Telegraph has established that the person who made the video recording of Sir Keir has not been questioned by detectives or asked to hand over the original recording.
The individual who made the film said: "I have not had any contact [from the police] yet.”
Its been "investigated" claims Rochdale who spent months banging on about Boris being photographed with beer in hand.
The *stills* from the video have been in the media since the event itself. I'm not a copper, but if someone says "I wish to complain about the party that Starmer had" and image of said party are in the newspapers, and the images don't show an offence being committed, then what do you want them to do?
We're going to keep going round the same loop forever. Another day, another AMAZING REVELATION of some non-detail we supposedly didn't know about which makes sod all difference to the legal case.
Come on Tories. Demand to know if the £200 for the curry was properly declared on the election return. You can still prove Boris innocent if you try hard enough.
In what way was fifteen to thirty (accounts vary) people being in the same office at all necessary for a by-election campaign in a different constituency?
Really? You've never done campaigning then. The Tories were bussing people up to Teesside from Guildford a few years ago.
“Meetings to organise and plan campaigns should be held online or over the phone. They should not take place in person. Where campaigners must attend in person, for example to collect printed materials, this should be organised on a one by one basis.”
Thanks for confirming the legality of doing it in person. Had the Tories gone after Starmer for ignoring the *advise* they would have had an argument. The *advise* was that you shouldn't do face to face. But the law said different. The same law that allowed Boris to share a pint with Jill Mortimer in her one and only appearance in her constituency.
As the polls have shown, nobody has been remotely convinced of the Tory claims, and the longer they have gone on and the more hysterical in tone the funnier it has got.
Do your SNP comrades know you spend all your time on here defending SKS?
If you can't tell the difference between Slab, the SNP, and the LDs, that might explain why you're always on here slagging off your party leader?
Not my party. Not RP party. He is defending SKS for 6 days running whilst being a Candidate for a competing party
I’d hate to live in a world so partisan that we are not allowed to speak well of someone in another party.
Agree. I am finding these arguments very sad. Even if you think your opponent has done nothing wrong you should slag him off for it anyway, just because he is your opponent. A very sad day indeed.
Indeed so. Something needs to be done, but it’s not really clear what exactly, to move political discourse back to be more moderate in language.
Perhaps a starting point might be Elon Musk limiting everyone to three Tweets a day?
Christopher Hope📝 @christopherhope · 1h The film maker [of the Starmer video] added: “It was pretty outrageous because at the time we were not allowed to have our friends over and everything was shut down, feeling very isolated.
"It was a kick in the teeth that they were having a bit of a jolly inside. So I thought I would film it."
The @Telegraph has established that the person who made the video recording of Sir Keir has not been questioned by detectives or asked to hand over the original recording.
The individual who made the film said: "I have not had any contact [from the police] yet.”
Its been "investigated" claims Rochdale who spent months banging on about Boris being photographed with beer in hand.
The *stills* from the video have been in the media since the event itself. I'm not a copper, but if someone says "I wish to complain about the party that Starmer had" and image of said party are in the newspapers, and the images don't show an offence being committed, then what do you want them to do?
We're going to keep going round the same loop forever. Another day, another AMAZING REVELATION of some non-detail we supposedly didn't know about which makes sod all difference to the legal case.
Come on Tories. Demand to know if the £200 for the curry was properly declared on the election return. You can still prove Boris innocent if you try hard enough.
In what way was fifteen to thirty (accounts vary) people being in the same office at all necessary for a by-election campaign in a different constituency?
I really do not want to labour this but the police are accused of not viewing the available video, Starmer admits 30 were in attendance, the £200 is about the cost of curries for 30, and it appears an on line quiz was involved
I have received a lot of criticism for posting about this story from those wanting it to be not so, but it appears this is story that has a momentum of its own across the media involving journalists sensing a story, including journalists (Kay Burley and others) who are not HMG friendly
Sir Peter Fahy, former chief constable of Greater Manchester has said today that Durham Police should reconsider a probe into the allegations
When you say the police are accused of not viewing the available video, do you mean they are accused of not viewing the last 10 seconds of the video that were not posted to social media?
This is the quote from the student present who filmed his video
It is unclear which version the police have viewed. The version published on social media lasts for 34 seconds, while the original version is 10 seconds longer at 44 seconds.
The individual who made the film in Durham at 10.04pm on April 30 last year told The Telegraph that they had not been asked to provide a copy to police, nor been interviewed by officers. The film-maker said: "I have not had any contact [from the police] yet."
Asked why they had made the film, they said: "I thought it was pretty outrageous, because at the time we were not allowed to have our friends over and everything was shut down, feeling very isolated.
"It was a kick in the teeth that they were having a bit of a jolly inside. So I thought I would film it."
Are you outraged that Johnson has not received a questionnaire for the Lee Cain "work event" that he attended whilst others attending have? No, I thought not.
Boris has received a FPN and I have repeatedly called for him to go
Starmer has questions to answer and to be honest has only himself to blame by not closing the story down long ago whereas now he looks evasive
To take a very wise question that a very wise boss liked to ask-
"What do you want to happen?"
For some, that's depressingly obvious. Create enough of a sense that everyone was at it that BoJo can survive his FPNs and the Gray Report.
For others, it's a chance to bring boring old goody two shoes down a peg or two.
For others, it's that the police have another look, even if it ends up concluding that everything was fine. Justice being seen to be done.
The evil genius of those pushing the story is to never make it clear what an appropriate response would be. By never saying what should happen, or what questions actually heed to be answered, any response can be deemed unsatisfactory.
For me this is the fairest response:
For others, it's that the police have another look, even if it ends up concluding that everything was fine. Justice being seen to be done.
Christopher Hope📝 @christopherhope · 1h The film maker [of the Starmer video] added: “It was pretty outrageous because at the time we were not allowed to have our friends over and everything was shut down, feeling very isolated.
"It was a kick in the teeth that they were having a bit of a jolly inside. So I thought I would film it."
The @Telegraph has established that the person who made the video recording of Sir Keir has not been questioned by detectives or asked to hand over the original recording.
The individual who made the film said: "I have not had any contact [from the police] yet.”
Its been "investigated" claims Rochdale who spent months banging on about Boris being photographed with beer in hand.
The *stills* from the video have been in the media since the event itself. I'm not a copper, but if someone says "I wish to complain about the party that Starmer had" and image of said party are in the newspapers, and the images don't show an offence being committed, then what do you want them to do?
We're going to keep going round the same loop forever. Another day, another AMAZING REVELATION of some non-detail we supposedly didn't know about which makes sod all difference to the legal case.
Come on Tories. Demand to know if the £200 for the curry was properly declared on the election return. You can still prove Boris innocent if you try hard enough.
In what way was fifteen to thirty (accounts vary) people being in the same office at all necessary for a by-election campaign in a different constituency?
Really? You've never done campaigning then. The Tories were bussing people up to Teesside from Guildford a few years ago.
“Meetings to organise and plan campaigns should be held online or over the phone. They should not take place in person. Where campaigners must attend in person, for example to collect printed materials, this should be organised on a one by one basis.”
Thanks for confirming the legality of doing it in person. Had the Tories gone after Starmer for ignoring the *advise* they would have had an argument. The *advise* was that you shouldn't do face to face. But the law said different. The same law that allowed Boris to share a pint with Jill Mortimer in her one and only appearance in her constituency.
As the polls have shown, nobody has been remotely convinced of the Tory claims, and the longer they have gone on and the more hysterical in tone the funnier it has got.
Do your SNP comrades know you spend all your time on here defending SKS?
If you can't tell the difference between Slab, the SNP, and the LDs, that might explain why you're always on here slagging off your party leader?
Not my party. Not RP party. He is defending SKS for 6 days running whilst being a Candidate for a competing party
I’d hate to live in a world so partisan that we are not allowed to speak well of someone in another party.
Agree. I am finding these arguments very sad. Even if you think your opponent has done nothing wrong you should slag him off for it anyway, just because he is your opponent. A very sad day indeed.
Indeed so. Something needs to be done, but it’s not really clear what exactly, to move political discourse back to be more moderate in language.
Perhaps a starting point might be Elon Musk limiting everyone to three Tweets a day?
Christopher Hope📝 @christopherhope · 1h The film maker [of the Starmer video] added: “It was pretty outrageous because at the time we were not allowed to have our friends over and everything was shut down, feeling very isolated.
"It was a kick in the teeth that they were having a bit of a jolly inside. So I thought I would film it."
The @Telegraph has established that the person who made the video recording of Sir Keir has not been questioned by detectives or asked to hand over the original recording.
The individual who made the film said: "I have not had any contact [from the police] yet.”
Its been "investigated" claims Rochdale who spent months banging on about Boris being photographed with beer in hand.
The *stills* from the video have been in the media since the event itself. I'm not a copper, but if someone says "I wish to complain about the party that Starmer had" and image of said party are in the newspapers, and the images don't show an offence being committed, then what do you want them to do?
We're going to keep going round the same loop forever. Another day, another AMAZING REVELATION of some non-detail we supposedly didn't know about which makes sod all difference to the legal case.
Come on Tories. Demand to know if the £200 for the curry was properly declared on the election return. You can still prove Boris innocent if you try hard enough.
In what way was fifteen to thirty (accounts vary) people being in the same office at all necessary for a by-election campaign in a different constituency?
I really do not want to labour this but the police are accused of not viewing the available video, Starmer admits 30 were in attendance, the £200 is about the cost of curries for 30, and it appears an on line quiz was involved
I have received a lot of criticism for posting about this story from those wanting it to be not so, but it appears this is story that has a momentum of its own across the media involving journalists sensing a story, including journalists (Kay Burley and others) who are not HMG friendly
Sir Peter Fahy, former chief constable of Greater Manchester has said today that Durham Police should reconsider a probe into the allegations
When you say the police are accused of not viewing the available video, do you mean they are accused of not viewing the last 10 seconds of the video that were not posted to social media?
This is the quote from the student present who filmed his video
It is unclear which version the police have viewed. The version published on social media lasts for 34 seconds, while the original version is 10 seconds longer at 44 seconds.
The individual who made the film in Durham at 10.04pm on April 30 last year told The Telegraph that they had not been asked to provide a copy to police, nor been interviewed by officers. The film-maker said: "I have not had any contact [from the police] yet."
Asked why they had made the film, they said: "I thought it was pretty outrageous, because at the time we were not allowed to have our friends over and everything was shut down, feeling very isolated.
"It was a kick in the teeth that they were having a bit of a jolly inside. So I thought I would film it."
Are you outraged that Johnson has not received a questionnaire for the Lee Cain "work event" that he attended whilst others attending have? No, I thought not.
Boris has received a FPN and I have repeatedly called for him to go
Starmer has questions to answer and to be honest has only himself to blame by not closing the story down long ago whereas now he looks evasive
To an extent I don't disagree with your last statement, but he did belatedly close it down yesterday and still Team Australia are chasing him with no new evidence. Beergate has been a masterclass of political subterfuge by Lynton Crosby.
Wouldn't regard it as a legitimate word if it had been me setting it
Feckin dangers of getting 3 letters early. Saw something on twitter half way through saying it was US slang so plumped for specific US slang on last try. IT’S UK SLANG YOU MUPPET.
Wordle 320 X/6
⬛⬛🟨🟩⬛ ⬛🟩⬛🟩🟩 ⬛🟩⬛🟩🟩 ⬛🟩⬛🟩🟩 🟨🟩⬛🟩🟩 ⬛🟩🟩🟩🟩
3 quite different meanings in Scots English English English and US English it seems. There's whole newspaper articles about it (and they look like daily features, even more worryingly)
I got it in 5 but I do think of it as US usage - never heard of the UK interpretations!
Five for me, too. I knew the last four letters by row three - lucky choice of third guess. But I couldn't think of any of the remaining letters to start it so just went through them (most not words, so I got to eliminate without counting as a go). There was another word before the correct one (starting with a different letter) that I also did not know was a word - starting with letter before the correct letter on the wordle keyboard - but which I shall use from now on.
Interesting dose of realism from Kieran Pedley, Ben Walker and Co. over at Britain Elects / New Statesman. Basically suggesting 100-200 council seats changing hands. Which would be very very 'meh' and definitely not worth staying up for in my opinion.
Now that the tories lanced the boil by a) exaggerated expectation management '800' loss nonsense and b) nonsense about Keir Starmer Boris Johnson will be safe and he will go on to fight the 2024 General Election, which he will lose.
Even Major's Tories only lost 516 seats in the equivalent local elections in 1994, despite being over 20% behind in the polls.
So over 800 losses is certainly expectations management from CCHQ
I've said it before, but I do find HYUFD's candour about hard electoral facts refreshing.
I think that the "story" for the mainstream Westminster press is going to come down to Wandsworth, Barnet and Westminster. If Labour takes all three it will be seen as amazing. Taking two will be "moderate progress". Only one? Meh. None? "Starmer leadership crisis". Worthing? Glasgow? Sunderland? Burneley? "Where are these places?" says the London editor.
I'll be gutted if Wandsworth doesn't happen. That would make me reassess my view that SKS is a shrewdie and looking good for PM after the GE.
Christopher Hope📝 @christopherhope · 1h The film maker [of the Starmer video] added: “It was pretty outrageous because at the time we were not allowed to have our friends over and everything was shut down, feeling very isolated.
"It was a kick in the teeth that they were having a bit of a jolly inside. So I thought I would film it."
The @Telegraph has established that the person who made the video recording of Sir Keir has not been questioned by detectives or asked to hand over the original recording.
The individual who made the film said: "I have not had any contact [from the police] yet.”
Its been "investigated" claims Rochdale who spent months banging on about Boris being photographed with beer in hand.
The *stills* from the video have been in the media since the event itself. I'm not a copper, but if someone says "I wish to complain about the party that Starmer had" and image of said party are in the newspapers, and the images don't show an offence being committed, then what do you want them to do?
We're going to keep going round the same loop forever. Another day, another AMAZING REVELATION of some non-detail we supposedly didn't know about which makes sod all difference to the legal case.
Come on Tories. Demand to know if the £200 for the curry was properly declared on the election return. You can still prove Boris innocent if you try hard enough.
In what way was fifteen to thirty (accounts vary) people being in the same office at all necessary for a by-election campaign in a different constituency?
I really do not want to labour this but the police are accused of not viewing the available video, Starmer admits 30 were in attendance, the £200 is about the cost of curries for 30, and it appears an on line quiz was involved
I have received a lot of criticism for posting about this story from those wanting it to be not so, but it appears this is story that has a momentum of its own across the media involving journalists sensing a story, including journalists (Kay Burley and others) who are not HMG friendly
Sir Peter Fahy, former chief constable of Greater Manchester has said today that Durham Police should reconsider a probe into the allegations
When you say the police are accused of not viewing the available video, do you mean they are accused of not viewing the last 10 seconds of the video that were not posted to social media?
This is the quote from the student present who filmed his video
It is unclear which version the police have viewed. The version published on social media lasts for 34 seconds, while the original version is 10 seconds longer at 44 seconds.
The individual who made the film in Durham at 10.04pm on April 30 last year told The Telegraph that they had not been asked to provide a copy to police, nor been interviewed by officers. The film-maker said: "I have not had any contact [from the police] yet."
Asked why they had made the film, they said: "I thought it was pretty outrageous, because at the time we were not allowed to have our friends over and everything was shut down, feeling very isolated.
"It was a kick in the teeth that they were having a bit of a jolly inside. So I thought I would film it."
Are you outraged that Johnson has not received a questionnaire for the Lee Cain "work event" that he attended whilst others attending have? No, I thought not.
Boris has received a FPN and I have repeatedly called for him to go
Starmer has questions to answer and to be honest has only himself to blame by not closing the story down long ago whereas now he looks evasive
What on earth do you expect Starmer to do? How do you close down such a story? There is no evidence of wrong doing. If someone comes up with something, fine. I mean when you come up with crap like a £200 curry bill which is completely reasonable for the number of people involved and was legal what are you supposed to do. This is just smears to make Starmer look as bad as Boris and is disgraceful.
And I say that as someone who has never voted Labour because being ethical is more important than winning. Something the Daily Mail has no concept of.
- Judge Alito has invaded Ukraine. - Putin has avoided an FPN for partying, due to using a really long table. - Boris Johnson is still stuck in the toaster.
Christopher Hope📝 @christopherhope · 1h The film maker [of the Starmer video] added: “It was pretty outrageous because at the time we were not allowed to have our friends over and everything was shut down, feeling very isolated.
"It was a kick in the teeth that they were having a bit of a jolly inside. So I thought I would film it."
The @Telegraph has established that the person who made the video recording of Sir Keir has not been questioned by detectives or asked to hand over the original recording.
The individual who made the film said: "I have not had any contact [from the police] yet.”
Its been "investigated" claims Rochdale who spent months banging on about Boris being photographed with beer in hand.
The *stills* from the video have been in the media since the event itself. I'm not a copper, but if someone says "I wish to complain about the party that Starmer had" and image of said party are in the newspapers, and the images don't show an offence being committed, then what do you want them to do?
We're going to keep going round the same loop forever. Another day, another AMAZING REVELATION of some non-detail we supposedly didn't know about which makes sod all difference to the legal case.
Come on Tories. Demand to know if the £200 for the curry was properly declared on the election return. You can still prove Boris innocent if you try hard enough.
In what way was fifteen to thirty (accounts vary) people being in the same office at all necessary for a by-election campaign in a different constituency?
I really do not want to labour this but the police are accused of not viewing the available video, Starmer admits 30 were in attendance, the £200 is about the cost of curries for 30, and it appears an on line quiz was involved
I have received a lot of criticism for posting about this story from those wanting it to be not so, but it appears this is story that has a momentum of its own across the media involving journalists sensing a story, including journalists (Kay Burley and others) who are not HMG friendly
Sir Peter Fahy, former chief constable of Greater Manchester has said today that Durham Police should reconsider a probe into the allegations
When you say the police are accused of not viewing the available video, do you mean they are accused of not viewing the last 10 seconds of the video that were not posted to social media?
This is the quote from the student present who filmed his video
It is unclear which version the police have viewed. The version published on social media lasts for 34 seconds, while the original version is 10 seconds longer at 44 seconds.
The individual who made the film in Durham at 10.04pm on April 30 last year told The Telegraph that they had not been asked to provide a copy to police, nor been interviewed by officers. The film-maker said: "I have not had any contact [from the police] yet."
Asked why they had made the film, they said: "I thought it was pretty outrageous, because at the time we were not allowed to have our friends over and everything was shut down, feeling very isolated.
"It was a kick in the teeth that they were having a bit of a jolly inside. So I thought I would film it."
Indeed. So, this 10 seconds the police haven't seen, we are to believe it has compelling evidence that is not apparent in the prior 34 seconds? And it's so juicy, the student deliberately cut it out of what he uploaded to social media because...? LOL.
(Also, if said student is so outraged, he can walk into any police station in the country and say, "I have some evidence of a crime. Let me give it to you." A police officer will then talk to him. If I had video evidence of a crime, that's what I'd do.)
Is the student a thick posho who couldn't get into Oxford?
Genuine question. I haven't drilled into the story.
Interesting dose of realism from Kieran Pedley, Ben Walker and Co. over at Britain Elects / New Statesman. Basically suggesting 100-200 council seats changing hands. Which would be very very 'meh' and definitely not worth staying up for in my opinion.
Now that the tories lanced the boil by a) exaggerated expectation management '800' loss nonsense and b) nonsense about Keir Starmer Boris Johnson will be safe and he will go on to fight the 2024 General Election, which he will lose.
“ Boris Johnson will be safe and he will go on to fight the 2024 General Election, which he will lose. “
We may be able to call out people like you pushing that line by analysing these results carefully.
How bad can a mid term be, but have those who gave Boris a 80 seat majority actually given up on him yet? A mountain of actual votes today may actually answer that question as yes or no.
At this moment you have little evidence that 1992 isn’t going to happen all over again.
Interesting dose of realism from Kieran Pedley, Ben Walker and Co. over at Britain Elects / New Statesman. Basically suggesting 100-200 council seats changing hands. Which would be very very 'meh' and definitely not worth staying up for in my opinion.
Now that the tories lanced the boil by a) exaggerated expectation management '800' loss nonsense and b) nonsense about Keir Starmer Boris Johnson will be safe and he will go on to fight the 2024 General Election, which he will lose.
Even Major's Tories only lost 516 seats in the equivalent local elections in 1994, despite being over 20% behind in the polls.
So over 800 losses is certainly expectations management from CCHQ
I've said it before, but I do find HYUFD's candour about hard electoral facts refreshing.
I think that the "story" for the mainstream Westminster press is going to come down to Wandsworth, Barnet and Westminster. If Labour takes all three it will be seen as amazing. Taking two will be "moderate progress". Only one? Meh. None? "Starmer leadership crisis". Worthing? Glasgow? Sunderland? Burneley? "Where are these places?" says the London editor.
I'll be gutted if Wandsworth doesn't happen. That would make me reassess my view that SKS is a shrewdie and looking good for PM after the GE.
I'd place the likelihood of Labour winning Wandsworth at 99%.
Ukraine. This seems to be a very plausible forecast of Putin's next moves from someone who predicted the invasion back in December (and gave the reasons). Worth a few minutes of your time.
"I am going to go out on a limb here and make a prediction that Putin will not do a full mobilization call on May 9th or anytime in the near future"
Gosh are we still doing currygate? It's like reading the Daily Mail! (I'm guessing)
It’s a great example of the “Westminster Bubble” of politicians and journalists, utterly obsessed by the trivialities of what’s going on in their own little world.
Unfortunately for Mr Starmer, he made a massive story of such trivialities when it suited him politically, without ensuring that he was whiter than white himself.
Meanwhile, there’s still a war in Ukraine, inflation is at 8%, and the US Fed has just doubled interest rates.
On topic. Dunno. Will they do Johnson in? I suspect it will never be the right time. There are a few months before he has to be kicked out in time for the next election and I suspect the dithering will continue. Quite possibly until the next GE.
I'm all green, initially I bet against an early exit at the start of the year and also on surviving the year, but I plugged my vulnerability to an April-June exit when the odds shifted. I get my best result if he's still PM on 1 January 2023. Another one of those situations where what's best for my book is probably worst for the country
If Starmer ends up with a FPN then surely we are looking at resignation and a leadership election?
He said Sunak must resign even though as Chris Smyth writes in the Times, the chancellor only ended up briefly and accidentally at a presentation of birthday cake.
Which could well be seen as the same level as accidentally breaking rules by ordering a curry late in the evening after working.
Who takes over if Starmer has to fall on his sword?
If Starmer ends up with a FPN then surely we are looking at resignation and a leadership election?
He said Sunak must resign even though as Chris Smyth writes in the Times, the chancellor only ended up briefly and accidentally at a presentation of birthday cake.
Which could well be seen as the same level as accidentally breaking rules by ordering a curry late in the evening after working.
Who takes over if Starmer has to fall on his sword?
Reeves? Cooper? Or will Balls be in by then?
If Starmer does get a FPN so will Rayner as she was also present
If Starmer ends up with a FPN then surely we are looking at resignation and a leadership election?
He said Sunak must resign even though as Chris Smyth writes in the Times, the chancellor only ended up briefly and accidentally at a presentation of birthday cake.
Which could well be seen as the same level as accidentally breaking rules by ordering a curry late in the evening after working.
Who takes over if Starmer has to fall on his sword?
Christopher Hope📝 @christopherhope · 1h The film maker [of the Starmer video] added: “It was pretty outrageous because at the time we were not allowed to have our friends over and everything was shut down, feeling very isolated.
"It was a kick in the teeth that they were having a bit of a jolly inside. So I thought I would film it."
The @Telegraph has established that the person who made the video recording of Sir Keir has not been questioned by detectives or asked to hand over the original recording.
The individual who made the film said: "I have not had any contact [from the police] yet.”
Its been "investigated" claims Rochdale who spent months banging on about Boris being photographed with beer in hand.
The *stills* from the video have been in the media since the event itself. I'm not a copper, but if someone says "I wish to complain about the party that Starmer had" and image of said party are in the newspapers, and the images don't show an offence being committed, then what do you want them to do?
We're going to keep going round the same loop forever. Another day, another AMAZING REVELATION of some non-detail we supposedly didn't know about which makes sod all difference to the legal case.
Come on Tories. Demand to know if the £200 for the curry was properly declared on the election return. You can still prove Boris innocent if you try hard enough.
In what way was fifteen to thirty (accounts vary) people being in the same office at all necessary for a by-election campaign in a different constituency?
I really do not want to labour this but the police are accused of not viewing the available video, Starmer admits 30 were in attendance, the £200 is about the cost of curries for 30, and it appears an on line quiz was involved
I have received a lot of criticism for posting about this story from those wanting it to be not so, but it appears this is story that has a momentum of its own across the media involving journalists sensing a story, including journalists (Kay Burley and others) who are not HMG friendly
Sir Peter Fahy, former chief constable of Greater Manchester has said today that Durham Police should reconsider a probe into the allegations
It is a shame there is no lotoqs in the house of commons, would be wonderful to see someone doing an inverse sks on sks (what does the loto have to say to my constituent who could not be with her husband of 87 years etc)
So BigG. has won you over. Hats off to BigG.
The beauty of BigG. confirming Starmer's guilt makes Johnson de facto innocent.
You are really rather amusing suggesting that allegations that Starmer may have broken covid regulations somehow excuses Boris who cannot be excused and should resign
However, what this has done is compromise Starmer on a subject he has been obsessing about in the HOC demanding resignations daily
Starmer's incident which looks to be at worst on the cusp of not strictly following guidance has been cleverly contorted to undermine him to the point that Johnson's wilful flouting of laws he created for a series of wine, cheese and karaoke parties. I use the term "parties" advisedly, but now they can be downgraded to being no worse than Beergate, and anyway Boris is not really guilty because they were all at it, hammer and tongs.
It is a very clever use of the friendly media, but disconcerting nonetheless. Big Dog is saved!
Ohio 2022 Primary Results NOT previously reported on PB
MEIGS COUNTY - Unincorp. Salisbury Twp Additional Cemeteries Levy – .5 mills/5 years — For the tax levy: 118; Against the tax levy: 141
Is it like the times claim, the Ohio candidate only surged to victory with Trumps endorsement?
True.
Vance was back of the pack before the endoresment; likely that Mandel, who got support from many 45 fans, would have gotten even more, had the Sage of Mar-a-Lardo not anointed the V-man.
Hope Tim Ryan tears him a new one.
Thanks for the answer.
Is hope all you got left. It’s just a economic downturn away from all the Trump loonies winning?
Moon, you may have noticed that something even bigger than the Ohio Primary happened in America this week?
News of impending overturning of Roe v Wade by US Supreme Court has tossed a MAJOR wild card into the deck for the 2022 midterms. May help Democrats to redress the enthusiasm gap, is certainly galvanizing plenty right now.
When abortion is broadly legal, you don't have harrowing stories about rape victims committing suicide rather than carry their baby to term. You don't have scandals about people prevented from crossing state lines by restrictive laws. You don't have stories about the deaths of people carrying out home abortions based on YouTube videos.
Legal abortion - at least up until about 18 weeks or so - is supported by the vast majority of Americans.
Now, do anti-abortionists (by and large) care about it more?
Probably.
But that's because most Americans haven't had to deal with abortion being illegal. Like with Brexit, it is those who wish to change the status quo who are the most motivated.
I think this is a Pyrrhic victory for the anti-abortion lobby, that will end in abortion being legally endorsed at the ballot box in more than 40 states in the next decade.
One issue may be this: there are some references or suggestions in the Alito judgment to the foetus having legal personality. Depending on how these are put and interpreted, it is possible that any state pro-abortion law might be struck down as unconstitutional on the basis that the foetus - as a person - has a right to life.
I am no US lawyer and we don't have the final judgment but that might well be a risk.
In the ordinary world of ordinary words and actions we regard the unborn as obviously having rights and humanity as a whole as having duties towards them. To kick a woman in the stomach is abhorrent. To do so when they are pregnant we regard as even worse. We ordinarily think of that element of being 'even worse' as related to how we should treat the unborn as well as the woman.
To my mind it is inevitable that there will be abortions. But the issue has to balance competing rights. Neither extreme seems very good at this.
One side seeks to balance the rights. The right to abortion but with controls. The other side seeks to obliterate the rights of the woman. To ban abortion completely. The equivalence you see is imaginary. There's none.
My dad has just voted Tory. I can’t remember the last time he did in a council election. I asked him why and he said it was because “there was a horrible Lib Dem bloke outside the polling station.”
Ukraine. This seems to be a very plausible forecast of Putin's next moves from someone who predicted the invasion back in December (and gave the reasons). Worth a few minutes of your time.
"I am going to go out on a limb here and make a prediction that Putin will not do a full mobilization call on May 9th or anytime in the near future"
That’s a good thread. There’s a huge risk for Putin domestically, in declaring a full war. Remember that most Russians have little understanding of what’s actually going on in Ukraine at the moment. A declaration of war in the current circumstances, means going again for Kiev, something that would sink Putin if it fails.
Ukraine. This seems to be a very plausible forecast of Putin's next moves from someone who predicted the invasion back in December (and gave the reasons). Worth a few minutes of your time.
"I am going to go out on a limb here and make a prediction that Putin will not do a full mobilization call on May 9th or anytime in the near future"
That’s a good thread. There’s a huge risk for Putin domestically, in declaring a full war. Remember that most Russians have little understanding of what’s actually going on in Ukraine at the moment. A declaration of war in the current circumstances, means going again for Kiev, something that would sink Putin if it fails.
The problem is the last Tweet in the thread - how divorced from reality is Putin now?
Why are the FA worrying about football’s coming home? We’re not bidding for the World Cup and the Euros are in the bag, so who cares what anyone else thinks of the song?
Christopher Hope📝 @christopherhope · 1h The film maker [of the Starmer video] added: “It was pretty outrageous because at the time we were not allowed to have our friends over and everything was shut down, feeling very isolated.
"It was a kick in the teeth that they were having a bit of a jolly inside. So I thought I would film it."
The @Telegraph has established that the person who made the video recording of Sir Keir has not been questioned by detectives or asked to hand over the original recording.
The individual who made the film said: "I have not had any contact [from the police] yet.”
Its been "investigated" claims Rochdale who spent months banging on about Boris being photographed with beer in hand.
The *stills* from the video have been in the media since the event itself. I'm not a copper, but if someone says "I wish to complain about the party that Starmer had" and image of said party are in the newspapers, and the images don't show an offence being committed, then what do you want them to do?
We're going to keep going round the same loop forever. Another day, another AMAZING REVELATION of some non-detail we supposedly didn't know about which makes sod all difference to the legal case.
Come on Tories. Demand to know if the £200 for the curry was properly declared on the election return. You can still prove Boris innocent if you try hard enough.
In what way was fifteen to thirty (accounts vary) people being in the same office at all necessary for a by-election campaign in a different constituency?
I really do not want to labour this but the police are accused of not viewing the available video, Starmer admits 30 were in attendance, the £200 is about the cost of curries for 30, and it appears an on line quiz was involved
I have received a lot of criticism for posting about this story from those wanting it to be not so, but it appears this is story that has a momentum of its own across the media involving journalists sensing a story, including journalists (Kay Burley and others) who are not HMG friendly
Sir Peter Fahy, former chief constable of Greater Manchester has said today that Durham Police should reconsider a probe into the allegations
It is a shame there is no lotoqs in the house of commons, would be wonderful to see someone doing an inverse sks on sks (what does the loto have to say to my constituent who could not be with her husband of 87 years etc)
So BigG. has won you over. Hats off to BigG.
The beauty of BigG. confirming Starmer's guilt makes Johnson de facto innocent.
You are really rather amusing suggesting that allegations that Starmer may have broken covid regulations somehow excuses Boris who cannot be excused and should resign
However, what this has done is compromise Starmer on a subject he has been obsessing about in the HOC demanding resignations daily
Starmer's incident which looks to be at worst on the cusp of not strictly following guidance has been cleverly contorted to undermine him to the point that Johnson's wilful flouting of laws he created for a series of wine, cheese and karaoke parties. I use the term "parties" advisedly, but now they can be downgraded to being no worse than Beergate, and anyway Boris is not really guilty because they were all at it, hammer and tongs.
It is a very clever use of the friendly media, but disconcerting nonetheless. Big Dog is saved!
A more serious point is the laws were ill conceived and unworkable as many found out
If we ever have to lockdown again then far more thought is needed when restricting peoples freedoms
Christopher Hope📝 @christopherhope · 1h The film maker [of the Starmer video] added: “It was pretty outrageous because at the time we were not allowed to have our friends over and everything was shut down, feeling very isolated.
"It was a kick in the teeth that they were having a bit of a jolly inside. So I thought I would film it."
The @Telegraph has established that the person who made the video recording of Sir Keir has not been questioned by detectives or asked to hand over the original recording.
The individual who made the film said: "I have not had any contact [from the police] yet.”
Its been "investigated" claims Rochdale who spent months banging on about Boris being photographed with beer in hand.
The *stills* from the video have been in the media since the event itself. I'm not a copper, but if someone says "I wish to complain about the party that Starmer had" and image of said party are in the newspapers, and the images don't show an offence being committed, then what do you want them to do?
We're going to keep going round the same loop forever. Another day, another AMAZING REVELATION of some non-detail we supposedly didn't know about which makes sod all difference to the legal case.
Come on Tories. Demand to know if the £200 for the curry was properly declared on the election return. You can still prove Boris innocent if you try hard enough.
In what way was fifteen to thirty (accounts vary) people being in the same office at all necessary for a by-election campaign in a different constituency?
I really do not want to labour this but the police are accused of not viewing the available video, Starmer admits 30 were in attendance, the £200 is about the cost of curries for 30, and it appears an on line quiz was involved
I have received a lot of criticism for posting about this story from those wanting it to be not so, but it appears this is story that has a momentum of its own across the media involving journalists sensing a story, including journalists (Kay Burley and others) who are not HMG friendly
Sir Peter Fahy, former chief constable of Greater Manchester has said today that Durham Police should reconsider a probe into the allegations
When you say the police are accused of not viewing the available video, do you mean they are accused of not viewing the last 10 seconds of the video that were not posted to social media?
This is the quote from the student present who filmed his video
It is unclear which version the police have viewed. The version published on social media lasts for 34 seconds, while the original version is 10 seconds longer at 44 seconds.
The individual who made the film in Durham at 10.04pm on April 30 last year told The Telegraph that they had not been asked to provide a copy to police, nor been interviewed by officers. The film-maker said: "I have not had any contact [from the police] yet."
Asked why they had made the film, they said: "I thought it was pretty outrageous, because at the time we were not allowed to have our friends over and everything was shut down, feeling very isolated.
"It was a kick in the teeth that they were having a bit of a jolly inside. So I thought I would film it."
Indeed. So, this 10 seconds the police haven't seen, we are to believe it has compelling evidence that is not apparent in the prior 34 seconds? And it's so juicy, the student deliberately cut it out of what he uploaded to social media because...? LOL.
(Also, if said student is so outraged, he can walk into any police station in the country and say, "I have some evidence of a crime. Let me give it to you." A police officer will then talk to him. If I had video evidence of a crime, that's what I'd do.)
Is the student a thick posho who couldn't get into Oxford?
Genuine question. I haven't drilled into the story.
It's an interesting question... Is the 'student' a. an opportunistic Tory? (the Tory student, that rarest of beasts) b. an unreformed Corbynite out to get Starmer? (perhaps more likely, given student demographics) c. Laura Pidcock, in disguise? (kind of overlap with c. there...) d. our very own BJO, in disguise? (also possible overlap with c.)
Ohio 2022 Primary Results NOT previously reported on PB
MEIGS COUNTY - Unincorp. Salisbury Twp Additional Cemeteries Levy – .5 mills/5 years — For the tax levy: 118; Against the tax levy: 141
Is it like the times claim, the Ohio candidate only surged to victory with Trumps endorsement?
True.
Vance was back of the pack before the endoresment; likely that Mandel, who got support from many 45 fans, would have gotten even more, had the Sage of Mar-a-Lardo not anointed the V-man.
Hope Tim Ryan tears him a new one.
Thanks for the answer.
Is hope all you got left. It’s just a economic downturn away from all the Trump loonies winning?
Moon, you may have noticed that something even bigger than the Ohio Primary happened in America this week?
News of impending overturning of Roe v Wade by US Supreme Court has tossed a MAJOR wild card into the deck for the 2022 midterms. May help Democrats to redress the enthusiasm gap, is certainly galvanizing plenty right now.
When abortion is broadly legal, you don't have harrowing stories about rape victims committing suicide rather than carry their baby to term. You don't have scandals about people prevented from crossing state lines by restrictive laws. You don't have stories about the deaths of people carrying out home abortions based on YouTube videos.
Legal abortion - at least up until about 18 weeks or so - is supported by the vast majority of Americans.
Now, do anti-abortionists (by and large) care about it more?
Probably.
But that's because most Americans haven't had to deal with abortion being illegal. Like with Brexit, it is those who wish to change the status quo who are the most motivated.
I think this is a Pyrrhic victory for the anti-abortion lobby, that will end in abortion being legally endorsed at the ballot box in more than 40 states in the next decade.
One issue may be this: there are some references or suggestions in the Alito judgment to the foetus having legal personality. Depending on how these are put and interpreted, it is possible that any state pro-abortion law might be struck down as unconstitutional on the basis that the foetus - as a person - has a right to life.
I am no US lawyer and we don't have the final judgment but that might well be a risk.
In the ordinary world of ordinary words and actions we regard the unborn as obviously having rights and humanity as a whole as having duties towards them. To kick a woman in the stomach is abhorrent. To do so when they are pregnant we regard as even worse. We ordinarily think of that element of being 'even worse' as related to how we should treat the unborn as well as the woman.
To my mind it is inevitable that there will be abortions. But the issue has to balance competing rights. Neither extreme seems very good at this.
One side seeks to balance the rights. The right to abortion but with controls. The other side seeks to obliterate the rights of the woman. To ban abortion completely. The equivalence you see is imaginary. There's none.
Unfortunately, there are many on the far left in the US arguing for what amounts to infanticide.
Let’s hope a sensible middle way is the result of this argument. The actual case before the Supremes, is regarding a state law that sets a 15-week limit which is in the same ballpark as abortion laws in much of Europe.
If Starmer ends up with a FPN then surely we are looking at resignation and a leadership election?
He said Sunak must resign even though as Chris Smyth writes in the Times, the chancellor only ended up briefly and accidentally at a presentation of birthday cake.
Which could well be seen as the same level as accidentally breaking rules by ordering a curry late in the evening after working.
Who takes over if Starmer has to fall on his sword?
Reeves? Cooper? Or will Balls be in by then?
Yes, Sir Keir will have to go if PC Plod comes knocking. (Might there also be a case for him to be stripped of his knighthood?) But what a mess for the opposition to have gotten itself into should it transpire. Reminds me of all the trouble Michael Howard got into over the invasion of Iraq.
Ukraine. This seems to be a very plausible forecast of Putin's next moves from someone who predicted the invasion back in December (and gave the reasons). Worth a few minutes of your time.
"I am going to go out on a limb here and make a prediction that Putin will not do a full mobilization call on May 9th or anytime in the near future"
Ohio 2022 Primary Results NOT previously reported on PB
MEIGS COUNTY - Unincorp. Salisbury Twp Additional Cemeteries Levy – .5 mills/5 years — For the tax levy: 118; Against the tax levy: 141
Is it like the times claim, the Ohio candidate only surged to victory with Trumps endorsement?
True.
Vance was back of the pack before the endoresment; likely that Mandel, who got support from many 45 fans, would have gotten even more, had the Sage of Mar-a-Lardo not anointed the V-man.
Hope Tim Ryan tears him a new one.
Thanks for the answer.
Is hope all you got left. It’s just a economic downturn away from all the Trump loonies winning?
Moon, you may have noticed that something even bigger than the Ohio Primary happened in America this week?
News of impending overturning of Roe v Wade by US Supreme Court has tossed a MAJOR wild card into the deck for the 2022 midterms. May help Democrats to redress the enthusiasm gap, is certainly galvanizing plenty right now.
When abortion is broadly legal, you don't have harrowing stories about rape victims committing suicide rather than carry their baby to term. You don't have scandals about people prevented from crossing state lines by restrictive laws. You don't have stories about the deaths of people carrying out home abortions based on YouTube videos.
Legal abortion - at least up until about 18 weeks or so - is supported by the vast majority of Americans.
Now, do anti-abortionists (by and large) care about it more?
Probably.
But that's because most Americans haven't had to deal with abortion being illegal. Like with Brexit, it is those who wish to change the status quo who are the most motivated.
I think this is a Pyrrhic victory for the anti-abortion lobby, that will end in abortion being legally endorsed at the ballot box in more than 40 states in the next decade.
One issue may be this: there are some references or suggestions in the Alito judgment to the foetus having legal personality. Depending on how these are put and interpreted, it is possible that any state pro-abortion law might be struck down as unconstitutional on the basis that the foetus - as a person - has a right to life.
I am no US lawyer and we don't have the final judgment but that might well be a risk.
In the ordinary world of ordinary words and actions we regard the unborn as obviously having rights and humanity as a whole as having duties towards them. To kick a woman in the stomach is abhorrent. To do so when they are pregnant we regard as even worse. We ordinarily think of that element of being 'even worse' as related to how we should treat the unborn as well as the woman.
To my mind it is inevitable that there will be abortions. But the issue has to balance competing rights. Neither extreme seems very good at this.
One side seeks to balance the rights. The right to abortion but with controls. The other side seeks to obliterate the rights of the woman. To ban abortion completely. The equivalence you see is imaginary. There's none.
Unfortunately, there are many on the far left in the US arguing for what amounts to infanticide.
Let’s hope a sensible middle way is the result of this argument. The actual case before the Supremes, is regarding a state law that sets a 15-week limit which is in the same ballpark as abortion laws in much of Europe.
Shell profits triple to over 9 billion dollars . Not going to help the governments no windfall tax message and will certainly help the opposition parties get out a few extra voters .
Christopher Hope📝 @christopherhope · 1h The film maker [of the Starmer video] added: “It was pretty outrageous because at the time we were not allowed to have our friends over and everything was shut down, feeling very isolated.
"It was a kick in the teeth that they were having a bit of a jolly inside. So I thought I would film it."
The @Telegraph has established that the person who made the video recording of Sir Keir has not been questioned by detectives or asked to hand over the original recording.
The individual who made the film said: "I have not had any contact [from the police] yet.”
Its been "investigated" claims Rochdale who spent months banging on about Boris being photographed with beer in hand.
The *stills* from the video have been in the media since the event itself. I'm not a copper, but if someone says "I wish to complain about the party that Starmer had" and image of said party are in the newspapers, and the images don't show an offence being committed, then what do you want them to do?
We're going to keep going round the same loop forever. Another day, another AMAZING REVELATION of some non-detail we supposedly didn't know about which makes sod all difference to the legal case.
Come on Tories. Demand to know if the £200 for the curry was properly declared on the election return. You can still prove Boris innocent if you try hard enough.
In what way was fifteen to thirty (accounts vary) people being in the same office at all necessary for a by-election campaign in a different constituency?
I really do not want to labour this but the police are accused of not viewing the available video, Starmer admits 30 were in attendance, the £200 is about the cost of curries for 30, and it appears an on line quiz was involved
I have received a lot of criticism for posting about this story from those wanting it to be not so, but it appears this is story that has a momentum of its own across the media involving journalists sensing a story, including journalists (Kay Burley and others) who are not HMG friendly
Sir Peter Fahy, former chief constable of Greater Manchester has said today that Durham Police should reconsider a probe into the allegations
It is a shame there is no lotoqs in the house of commons, would be wonderful to see someone doing an inverse sks on sks (what does the loto have to say to my constituent who could not be with her husband of 87 years etc)
So BigG. has won you over. Hats off to BigG.
The beauty of BigG. confirming Starmer's guilt makes Johnson de facto innocent.
You are really rather amusing suggesting that allegations that Starmer may have broken covid regulations somehow excuses Boris who cannot be excused and should resign
However, what this has done is compromise Starmer on a subject he has been obsessing about in the HOC demanding resignations daily
Starmer's incident which looks to be at worst on the cusp of not strictly following guidance has been cleverly contorted to undermine him to the point that Johnson's wilful flouting of laws he created for a series of wine, cheese and karaoke parties. I use the term "parties" advisedly, but now they can be downgraded to being no worse than Beergate, and anyway Boris is not really guilty because they were all at it, hammer and tongs.
It is a very clever use of the friendly media, but disconcerting nonetheless. Big Dog is saved!
A more serious point is the laws were ill conceived and unworkable as many found out
If we ever have to lockdown again then far more thought is needed when restricting peoples freedoms
Yes, what annoys me is Labour signalling their virtue by wearing masks in the Commons, but when they didn’t think anyone was watching, they weren’t all that fussed about trying to stop the spread of COVID.
Wouldn't regard it as a legitimate word if it had been me setting it
Feckin dangers of getting 3 letters early. Saw something on twitter half way through saying it was US slang so plumped for specific US slang on last try. IT’S UK SLANG YOU MUPPET.
Wordle 320 X/6
⬛⬛🟨🟩⬛ ⬛🟩⬛🟩🟩 ⬛🟩⬛🟩🟩 ⬛🟩⬛🟩🟩 🟨🟩⬛🟩🟩 ⬛🟩🟩🟩🟩
3 quite different meanings in Scots English English English and US English it seems. There's whole newspaper articles about it (and they look like daily features, even more worryingly)
Tricky.
3 cycles of words made from a range of possible letters fishing for possibles. Not a word I knew, except for the 3 obvious applications.
Christopher Hope📝 @christopherhope · 1h The film maker [of the Starmer video] added: “It was pretty outrageous because at the time we were not allowed to have our friends over and everything was shut down, feeling very isolated.
"It was a kick in the teeth that they were having a bit of a jolly inside. So I thought I would film it."
The @Telegraph has established that the person who made the video recording of Sir Keir has not been questioned by detectives or asked to hand over the original recording.
The individual who made the film said: "I have not had any contact [from the police] yet.”
Its been "investigated" claims Rochdale who spent months banging on about Boris being photographed with beer in hand.
The *stills* from the video have been in the media since the event itself. I'm not a copper, but if someone says "I wish to complain about the party that Starmer had" and image of said party are in the newspapers, and the images don't show an offence being committed, then what do you want them to do?
We're going to keep going round the same loop forever. Another day, another AMAZING REVELATION of some non-detail we supposedly didn't know about which makes sod all difference to the legal case.
Come on Tories. Demand to know if the £200 for the curry was properly declared on the election return. You can still prove Boris innocent if you try hard enough.
In what way was fifteen to thirty (accounts vary) people being in the same office at all necessary for a by-election campaign in a different constituency?
I really do not want to labour this but the police are accused of not viewing the available video, Starmer admits 30 were in attendance, the £200 is about the cost of curries for 30, and it appears an on line quiz was involved
I have received a lot of criticism for posting about this story from those wanting it to be not so, but it appears this is story that has a momentum of its own across the media involving journalists sensing a story, including journalists (Kay Burley and others) who are not HMG friendly
Sir Peter Fahy, former chief constable of Greater Manchester has said today that Durham Police should reconsider a probe into the allegations
When you say the police are accused of not viewing the available video, do you mean they are accused of not viewing the last 10 seconds of the video that were not posted to social media?
This is the quote from the student present who filmed his video
It is unclear which version the police have viewed. The version published on social media lasts for 34 seconds, while the original version is 10 seconds longer at 44 seconds.
The individual who made the film in Durham at 10.04pm on April 30 last year told The Telegraph that they had not been asked to provide a copy to police, nor been interviewed by officers. The film-maker said: "I have not had any contact [from the police] yet."
Asked why they had made the film, they said: "I thought it was pretty outrageous, because at the time we were not allowed to have our friends over and everything was shut down, feeling very isolated.
"It was a kick in the teeth that they were having a bit of a jolly inside. So I thought I would film it."
Are you outraged that Johnson has not received a questionnaire for the Lee Cain "work event" that he attended whilst others attending have? No, I thought not.
Boris has received a FPN and I have repeatedly called for him to go
Starmer has questions to answer and to be honest has only himself to blame by not closing the story down long ago whereas now he looks evasive
What on earth do you expect Starmer to do? How do you close down such a story? There is no evidence of wrong doing. If someone comes up with something, fine. I mean when you come up with crap like a £200 curry bill which is completely reasonable for the number of people involved and was legal what are you supposed to do. This is just smears to make Starmer look as bad as Boris and is disgraceful.
And I say that as someone who has never voted Labour because being ethical is more important than winning. Something the Daily Mail has no concept of.
@Big_G_NorthWales just in case it is misinterpreted when I said 'you' above I wasn't referring to you but the the world in general. My usual inability to express myself correctly coming out as an unintended insult.
Why are the FA worrying about football’s coming home? We’re not bidding for the World Cup and the Euros are in the bag, so who cares what anyone else thinks of the song?
I guess they're taking the Italians' nonsense of "we used it for motivation" rather more seriously than it deserves,
Ukraine. This seems to be a very plausible forecast of Putin's next moves from someone who predicted the invasion back in December (and gave the reasons). Worth a few minutes of your time.
"I am going to go out on a limb here and make a prediction that Putin will not do a full mobilization call on May 9th or anytime in the near future"
That’s a good thread. There’s a huge risk for Putin domestically, in declaring a full war. Remember that most Russians have little understanding of what’s actually going on in Ukraine at the moment. A declaration of war in the current circumstances, means going again for Kiev, something that would sink Putin if it fails.
The problem is the last Tweet in the thread - how divorced from reality is Putin now?
Indeed. At some point, someone has to be the guy who gives him the bad news. He will know that the first attempt to take Kiev was a massive failure, but exactly what was he told about the losses, and how accurate is his picture of the equipment available to him?
There’s a huge difference between having 3,000 tanks and 12,000 tanks in your army, especially when you’ve lost maybe a thousand already and have limited production capability. Oh, and the enemy has a pretty much unlimited supply of the world’s best military equipment coming in.
In my mind, the biggest unknown is China. At some point, Putin is going to pick up the phone to Xi, and ask for supplies. Xi will be the man who decides if we end up with WWIII.
Wouldn't regard it as a legitimate word if it had been me setting it
Feckin dangers of getting 3 letters early. Saw something on twitter half way through saying it was US slang so plumped for specific US slang on last try. IT’S UK SLANG YOU MUPPET.
Wordle 320 X/6
⬛⬛🟨🟩⬛ ⬛🟩⬛🟩🟩 ⬛🟩⬛🟩🟩 ⬛🟩⬛🟩🟩 🟨🟩⬛🟩🟩 ⬛🟩🟩🟩🟩
3 quite different meanings in Scots English English English and US English it seems. There's whole newspaper articles about it (and they look like daily features, even more worryingly)
Tricky.
2 cycles of words made from a range of possible letters fishing for possibles. Not a word I knew.
Wordle 320 5/6
🟩🟩⬜⬜🟨 🟨⬜⬜⬜⬜ 🟩🟩🟨⬜🟨 🟨⬜⬜🟩🟩 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
I only know it from American sports, where it has two different meanings.
It is well known to advertisers that Publicity disproportionately affects the market leader both positively and negatively. In this instance the market leader would seem to be 'Partygate'. If 'Beergate' reminds the public of the iconic images of 'Partygate' then it will prove to be ill advised
Another fact well known to advertisers is that opinions are formed over time and persuading people to change their opinions is very difficult indeed.
Do people think Starmer is a liar and a good time Charlie?
Ohio 2022 Primary Results NOT previously reported on PB
MEIGS COUNTY - Unincorp. Salisbury Twp Additional Cemeteries Levy – .5 mills/5 years — For the tax levy: 118; Against the tax levy: 141
Is it like the times claim, the Ohio candidate only surged to victory with Trumps endorsement?
True.
Vance was back of the pack before the endoresment; likely that Mandel, who got support from many 45 fans, would have gotten even more, had the Sage of Mar-a-Lardo not anointed the V-man.
Hope Tim Ryan tears him a new one.
Thanks for the answer.
Is hope all you got left. It’s just a economic downturn away from all the Trump loonies winning?
Moon, you may have noticed that something even bigger than the Ohio Primary happened in America this week?
News of impending overturning of Roe v Wade by US Supreme Court has tossed a MAJOR wild card into the deck for the 2022 midterms. May help Democrats to redress the enthusiasm gap, is certainly galvanizing plenty right now.
When abortion is broadly legal, you don't have harrowing stories about rape victims committing suicide rather than carry their baby to term. You don't have scandals about people prevented from crossing state lines by restrictive laws. You don't have stories about the deaths of people carrying out home abortions based on YouTube videos.
Legal abortion - at least up until about 18 weeks or so - is supported by the vast majority of Americans.
Now, do anti-abortionists (by and large) care about it more?
Probably.
But that's because most Americans haven't had to deal with abortion being illegal. Like with Brexit, it is those who wish to change the status quo who are the most motivated.
I think this is a Pyrrhic victory for the anti-abortion lobby, that will end in abortion being legally endorsed at the ballot box in more than 40 states in the next decade.
One issue may be this: there are some references or suggestions in the Alito judgment to the foetus having legal personality. Depending on how these are put and interpreted, it is possible that any state pro-abortion law might be struck down as unconstitutional on the basis that the foetus - as a person - has a right to life.
I am no US lawyer and we don't have the final judgment but that might well be a risk.
In the ordinary world of ordinary words and actions we regard the unborn as obviously having rights and humanity as a whole as having duties towards them. To kick a woman in the stomach is abhorrent. To do so when they are pregnant we regard as even worse. We ordinarily think of that element of being 'even worse' as related to how we should treat the unborn as well as the woman.
To my mind it is inevitable that there will be abortions. But the issue has to balance competing rights. Neither extreme seems very good at this.
One side seeks to balance the rights. The right to abortion but with controls. The other side seeks to obliterate the rights of the woman. To ban abortion completely. The equivalence you see is imaginary. There's none.
Thanks. It isn't a binary issue except for the extremes. We are agreed. There is a spectrum of beliefs and opinions about where exactly the balance of rights should lie. The debate between the extremes is mostly uninteresting. As a result it should be a matter for voters and legislators.
Why are the FA worrying about football’s coming home? We’re not bidding for the World Cup and the Euros are in the bag, so who cares what anyone else thinks of the song?
I think the song needs to be retired, great tune but it just builds up expectations and pressure on the team every tournament. This England team have got the best chance of winning a major trophy than any in decades this winter, we just need to leave them to it.
Christopher Hope📝 @christopherhope · 1h The film maker [of the Starmer video] added: “It was pretty outrageous because at the time we were not allowed to have our friends over and everything was shut down, feeling very isolated.
"It was a kick in the teeth that they were having a bit of a jolly inside. So I thought I would film it."
The @Telegraph has established that the person who made the video recording of Sir Keir has not been questioned by detectives or asked to hand over the original recording.
The individual who made the film said: "I have not had any contact [from the police] yet.”
Its been "investigated" claims Rochdale who spent months banging on about Boris being photographed with beer in hand.
The *stills* from the video have been in the media since the event itself. I'm not a copper, but if someone says "I wish to complain about the party that Starmer had" and image of said party are in the newspapers, and the images don't show an offence being committed, then what do you want them to do?
We're going to keep going round the same loop forever. Another day, another AMAZING REVELATION of some non-detail we supposedly didn't know about which makes sod all difference to the legal case.
Come on Tories. Demand to know if the £200 for the curry was properly declared on the election return. You can still prove Boris innocent if you try hard enough.
In what way was fifteen to thirty (accounts vary) people being in the same office at all necessary for a by-election campaign in a different constituency?
I really do not want to labour this but the police are accused of not viewing the available video, Starmer admits 30 were in attendance, the £200 is about the cost of curries for 30, and it appears an on line quiz was involved
I have received a lot of criticism for posting about this story from those wanting it to be not so, but it appears this is story that has a momentum of its own across the media involving journalists sensing a story, including journalists (Kay Burley and others) who are not HMG friendly
Sir Peter Fahy, former chief constable of Greater Manchester has said today that Durham Police should reconsider a probe into the allegations
When you say the police are accused of not viewing the available video, do you mean they are accused of not viewing the last 10 seconds of the video that were not posted to social media?
This is the quote from the student present who filmed his video
It is unclear which version the police have viewed. The version published on social media lasts for 34 seconds, while the original version is 10 seconds longer at 44 seconds.
The individual who made the film in Durham at 10.04pm on April 30 last year told The Telegraph that they had not been asked to provide a copy to police, nor been interviewed by officers. The film-maker said: "I have not had any contact [from the police] yet."
Asked why they had made the film, they said: "I thought it was pretty outrageous, because at the time we were not allowed to have our friends over and everything was shut down, feeling very isolated.
"It was a kick in the teeth that they were having a bit of a jolly inside. So I thought I would film it."
Are you outraged that Johnson has not received a questionnaire for the Lee Cain "work event" that he attended whilst others attending have? No, I thought not.
Boris has received a FPN and I have repeatedly called for him to go
Starmer has questions to answer and to be honest has only himself to blame by not closing the story down long ago whereas now he looks evasive
Simple question for you to answer Big G - do you think they worked through the meeting and continued to work afterwards? If they did, they are completely in the clear on the law at the time.
Wether they did or didn’t work afterwards is completely unprovable is why police won’t touch it.
That’s the key difference between restrictions at time different compared to the Partying on the Downing Street estate.
You said “ Starmer has questions to answer”. Well he doesn’t, he never had in any of this campaign mud slinging. That’s why people are laughing at you when you say he has.
Gosh are we still doing currygate? It's like reading the Daily Mail! (I'm guessing)
I thought the Daily Hate had moved on to 'Lefty Lawyers Sabotage Rwanda'.
Yeah, currygate, beergate, whatever you want to call it will largely disappear for a bit, I reckon. It's job has been done. Maybe it's been successful in muddying the waters, maybe not.
It might be resurrected if Johnson gets more FPNs. It'll probably be resurrected before the next GE. But for now, the client media has done its work.
It is well known to advertisers that Publicity disproportionately affects the market leader both positively and negatively. In this instance the market leader would seem to be 'Partygate'. If 'Beergate' reminds the public of the iconic images of 'Partygate' then it will prove to be ill advised
Another fact well known to advertisers is that opinions are formed over time and persuading people to change their opinions is very difficult indeed.
Do people think Starmer is a liar and a good time Charlie?
Morning again. It's now a year, well 375 days to be exact, since I started using Gener8 browser + VPN's to block trackers which are euphemistically called 'cookies' as if to make them sound nice. They're not nice. They're bits of code designed to spy on your every move online and then use YOUR data.
I use Gener8 in private mode and in that time Gener8 has blocked 800.46k of cookies.
It is well known to advertisers that Publicity disproportionately affects the market leader both positively and negatively. In this instance the market leader would seem to be 'Partygate'. If 'Beergate' reminds the public of the iconic images of 'Partygate' then it will prove to be ill advised
Another fact well known to advertisers is that opinions are formed over time and persuading people to change their opinions is very difficult indeed.
Do people think Starmer is a liar and a good time Charlie?
Do They think Johnson is?
Good point , I thought most thought Starmer was dull and not really a party man !
Ukraine. This seems to be a very plausible forecast of Putin's next moves from someone who predicted the invasion back in December (and gave the reasons). Worth a few minutes of your time.
"I am going to go out on a limb here and make a prediction that Putin will not do a full mobilization call on May 9th or anytime in the near future"
VVP has obviously lowered his sights a little since the Gostomel "An Airport Too Far" fiasco and will settle for territorial gains that connects Transnistria to Novorossiya and denies whatever's left of Ukraine access to the Black Sea.
Ohio 2022 Primary Results NOT previously reported on PB
MEIGS COUNTY - Unincorp. Salisbury Twp Additional Cemeteries Levy – .5 mills/5 years — For the tax levy: 118; Against the tax levy: 141
Is it like the times claim, the Ohio candidate only surged to victory with Trumps endorsement?
True.
Vance was back of the pack before the endoresment; likely that Mandel, who got support from many 45 fans, would have gotten even more, had the Sage of Mar-a-Lardo not anointed the V-man.
Hope Tim Ryan tears him a new one.
Thanks for the answer.
Is hope all you got left. It’s just a economic downturn away from all the Trump loonies winning?
Moon, you may have noticed that something even bigger than the Ohio Primary happened in America this week?
News of impending overturning of Roe v Wade by US Supreme Court has tossed a MAJOR wild card into the deck for the 2022 midterms. May help Democrats to redress the enthusiasm gap, is certainly galvanizing plenty right now.
When abortion is broadly legal, you don't have harrowing stories about rape victims committing suicide rather than carry their baby to term. You don't have scandals about people prevented from crossing state lines by restrictive laws. You don't have stories about the deaths of people carrying out home abortions based on YouTube videos.
Legal abortion - at least up until about 18 weeks or so - is supported by the vast majority of Americans.
Now, do anti-abortionists (by and large) care about it more?
Probably.
But that's because most Americans haven't had to deal with abortion being illegal. Like with Brexit, it is those who wish to change the status quo who are the most motivated.
I think this is a Pyrrhic victory for the anti-abortion lobby, that will end in abortion being legally endorsed at the ballot box in more than 40 states in the next decade.
One issue may be this: there are some references or suggestions in the Alito judgment to the foetus having legal personality. Depending on how these are put and interpreted, it is possible that any state pro-abortion law might be struck down as unconstitutional on the basis that the foetus - as a person - has a right to life.
I am no US lawyer and we don't have the final judgment but that might well be a risk.
In the ordinary world of ordinary words and actions we regard the unborn as obviously having rights and humanity as a whole as having duties towards them. To kick a woman in the stomach is abhorrent. To do so when they are pregnant we regard as even worse. We ordinarily think of that element of being 'even worse' as related to how we should treat the unborn as well as the woman.
To my mind it is inevitable that there will be abortions. But the issue has to balance competing rights. Neither extreme seems very good at this.
One side seeks to balance the rights. The right to abortion but with controls. The other side seeks to obliterate the rights of the woman. To ban abortion completely. The equivalence you see is imaginary. There's none.
Unfortunately, there are many on the far left in the US arguing for what amounts to infanticide.
Let’s hope a sensible middle way is the result of this argument. The actual case before the Supremes, is regarding a state law that sets a 15-week limit which is in the same ballpark as abortion laws in much of Europe.
Is your first sentence true or is it a few nutters whose views get exploited by the anti abortionists. I saw the video that @leon posted last night and I was shocked, but equally the person trying to defend the situation was reduced to a gibbering idiot. It is difficult to imagine any sane person has these views in reality.
Morning all! Nice sunny day here in Cambridge, and the first time I've been outside since getting Covid 10 days ago.
Walked my daughter to school and saw a grand total of 3 party boards - 2 Labour, and 1 LD. Gone are the days of a sea of Orange Diamonds on the south side of Cambridge City.
I also discovered a Labour party leaflet in my mailbox. The first of the campaign.
It is well known to advertisers that Publicity disproportionately affects the market leader both positively and negatively. In this instance the market leader would seem to be 'Partygate'. If 'Beergate' reminds the public of the iconic images of 'Partygate' then it will prove to be ill advised
Another fact well known to advertisers is that opinions are formed over time and persuading people to change their opinions is very difficult indeed.
Do people think Starmer is a liar and a good time Charlie?
Do They think Johnson is?
Do they think Starmer has ever had sex with a light on?
Do they think he could ever run in his boxers through a field of wheat 😆
Ohio 2022 Primary Results NOT previously reported on PB
MEIGS COUNTY - Unincorp. Salisbury Twp Additional Cemeteries Levy – .5 mills/5 years — For the tax levy: 118; Against the tax levy: 141
Is it like the times claim, the Ohio candidate only surged to victory with Trumps endorsement?
True.
Vance was back of the pack before the endoresment; likely that Mandel, who got support from many 45 fans, would have gotten even more, had the Sage of Mar-a-Lardo not anointed the V-man.
Hope Tim Ryan tears him a new one.
Thanks for the answer.
Is hope all you got left. It’s just a economic downturn away from all the Trump loonies winning?
Moon, you may have noticed that something even bigger than the Ohio Primary happened in America this week?
News of impending overturning of Roe v Wade by US Supreme Court has tossed a MAJOR wild card into the deck for the 2022 midterms. May help Democrats to redress the enthusiasm gap, is certainly galvanizing plenty right now.
When abortion is broadly legal, you don't have harrowing stories about rape victims committing suicide rather than carry their baby to term. You don't have scandals about people prevented from crossing state lines by restrictive laws. You don't have stories about the deaths of people carrying out home abortions based on YouTube videos.
Legal abortion - at least up until about 18 weeks or so - is supported by the vast majority of Americans.
Now, do anti-abortionists (by and large) care about it more?
Probably.
But that's because most Americans haven't had to deal with abortion being illegal. Like with Brexit, it is those who wish to change the status quo who are the most motivated.
I think this is a Pyrrhic victory for the anti-abortion lobby, that will end in abortion being legally endorsed at the ballot box in more than 40 states in the next decade.
One issue may be this: there are some references or suggestions in the Alito judgment to the foetus having legal personality. Depending on how these are put and interpreted, it is possible that any state pro-abortion law might be struck down as unconstitutional on the basis that the foetus - as a person - has a right to life.
I am no US lawyer and we don't have the final judgment but that might well be a risk.
In the ordinary world of ordinary words and actions we regard the unborn as obviously having rights and humanity as a whole as having duties towards them. To kick a woman in the stomach is abhorrent. To do so when they are pregnant we regard as even worse. We ordinarily think of that element of being 'even worse' as related to how we should treat the unborn as well as the woman.
To my mind it is inevitable that there will be abortions. But the issue has to balance competing rights. Neither extreme seems very good at this.
One side seeks to balance the rights. The right to abortion but with controls. The other side seeks to obliterate the rights of the woman. To ban abortion completely. The equivalence you see is imaginary. There's none.
Unfortunately, there are many on the far left in the US arguing for what amounts to infanticide.
Let’s hope a sensible middle way is the result of this argument. The actual case before the Supremes, is regarding a state law that sets a 15-week limit which is in the same ballpark as abortion laws in much of Europe.
The Supremes will do baby love 💕
That I would love to see. The Supreme Court Judges I mean.
Comments
It is unclear which version the police have viewed. The version published on social media lasts for 34 seconds, while the original version is 10 seconds longer at 44 seconds.
The individual who made the film in Durham at 10.04pm on April 30 last year told The Telegraph that they had not been asked to provide a copy to police, nor been interviewed by officers. The film-maker said: "I have not had any contact [from the police] yet."
Asked why they had made the film, they said: "I thought it was pretty outrageous, because at the time we were not allowed to have our friends over and everything was shut down, feeling very isolated.
"It was a kick in the teeth that they were having a bit of a jolly inside. So I thought I would film it."
King Cole, my sympathies, hope the hand situation isn't too bad.
Is there absolutely nothing positive to say about his own Party?
Maybe a bit of canvassing wouldn't go amiss
To my mind it is inevitable that there will be abortions. But the issue has to balance competing rights. Neither extreme seems very good at this.
The beauty of BigG. confirming Starmer's guilt makes Johnson de facto innocent.
But for the town council, I had to choose 19 out of 21. I think it was the longest ballot paper I've ever had?
I didn't think I could count that high.
The press love it. All that emoting available to them.
Boris should resign because he's lazy. He should resign because he's incompetent in allowing that lax behaviour in Downing Street while demanding others stick strictly to the advice/law.
Starmer is waffling, a Boris trait, but there's always a risk of hypocrisy when you go full bore without being Caesar's wife yourself.
Might be needed, tbh. I should probably get out of bed and head to work.
As for winning elections vs standing up for clearly held principles I choose the latter. Surprised with your own political views that you imply that winning elections is more important than principles...
Student takes a video, posts it on social media. Doesn't seem to show anything illegal.
If the student really thought this was serious, shouldn't they have sent the whole 44 seconds to the police?
What did the student want? A "I helped the police today" sticker?
Besides, as The Sun have helpfully pointed out, pubs were open by that point.
Starmer told GMB that pubs and restaurants were not open during #Beergate on 30 April 2021 so he had to dine inside with 30 comrades… but that’s not quite true:
https://t.co/2PYsjVSZMJ
Best wishes to those PBers standing, of any and all political persuasion.
What I expect that Alito wants to do is to give it equivalent legal personality to the mother, so that in almost every circumstance, abortion is treated as being the equivalent of murder. My understanding is that in Mississippi, Republicans are drafting a bill that would potentially render women who have abortions liable to the death penalty.
However, what this has done is compromise Starmer on a subject he has been obsessing about in the HOC demanding resignations daily
We had an Xmas content on PB a few years ago where we all had to say something genuinely positive about an opponent. I think we all thought it refreshing, and in some cases quite a difficult challenge to get over themselves - but we all got there in the end.
Starmer has questions to answer and to be honest has only himself to blame by not closing the story down long ago whereas now he looks evasive
The other, and more robust issue is this: In the USA the democratic process has become corrupted by simplifications, extremes, populism and tribalism. One of the major factors in this is the failure of millions of people to participate in the process.
If abortion law (or any other) is a matter for legislators then it is impossible ultimately for the voting public as a whole to fail to have their way, whether in Mississippi or California.
There is no self evidently correct balance to be struck between the competing and legitimate claims about rights and duties towards the unborn. Let the voters set the strategy and legislators decide the law. (And let those of Mississippi be voted out).
(Also, if said student is so outraged, he can walk into any police station in the country and say, "I have some evidence of a crime. Let me give it to you." A police officer will then talk to him. If I had video evidence of a crime, that's what I'd do.)
Absolutely gash portrait btw.
https://twitter.com/eveningexpress/status/1521736385820037123?s=21&t=tLV1jqyfll2ksva_zP8dzQ
I think that the "story" for the mainstream Westminster press is going to come down to Wandsworth, Barnet and Westminster. If Labour takes all three it will be seen as amazing. Taking two will be "moderate progress". Only one? Meh. None? "Starmer leadership crisis". Worthing? Glasgow? Sunderland? Burneley? "Where are these places?" says the London editor.
"What do you want to happen?"
For some, that's depressingly obvious. Create enough of a sense that everyone was at it that BoJo can survive his FPNs and the Gray Report.
For others, it's a chance to bring boring old goody two shoes down a peg or two.
For others, it's that the police have another look, even if it ends up concluding that everything was fine. Justice being seen to be done.
The evil genius of those pushing the story is to never make it clear what an appropriate response would be. By never saying what should happen, or what questions actually heed to be answered, any response can be deemed unsatisfactory.
Perhaps a starting point might be Elon Musk limiting everyone to three Tweets a day?
For others, it's that the police have another look, even if it ends up concluding that everything was fine. Justice being seen to be done.
(I'm guessing)
And I say that as someone who has never voted Labour because being ethical is more important than winning. Something the Daily Mail has no concept of.
- Judge Alito has invaded Ukraine.
- Putin has avoided an FPN for partying, due to using a really long table.
- Boris Johnson is still stuck in the toaster.
Genuine question. I haven't drilled into the story.
We may be able to call out people like you pushing that line by analysing these results carefully.
How bad can a mid term be, but have those who gave Boris a 80 seat majority actually given up on him yet? A mountain of actual votes today may actually answer that question as yes or no.
At this moment you have little evidence that 1992 isn’t going to happen all over again.
Barnet, 55%, Westminster 30%.
"I am going to go out on a limb here and make a prediction that Putin will not do a full mobilization call on May 9th or anytime in the near future"
https://twitter.com/DAlperovitch/status/1521803362152374274
Unfortunately for Mr Starmer, he made a massive story of such trivialities when it suited him politically, without ensuring that he was whiter than white himself.
Meanwhile, there’s still a war in Ukraine, inflation is at 8%, and the US Fed has just doubled interest rates.
I'm all green, initially I bet against an early exit at the start of the year and also on surviving the year, but I plugged my vulnerability to an April-June exit when the odds shifted. I get my best result if he's still PM on 1 January 2023. Another one of those situations where what's best for my book is probably worst for the country
He said Sunak must resign even though as Chris Smyth writes in the Times, the chancellor only ended up briefly and accidentally at a presentation of birthday cake.
Which could well be seen as the same level as accidentally breaking rules by ordering a curry late in the evening after working.
Who takes over if Starmer has to fall on his sword?
Reeves? Cooper? Or will Balls be in by then?
It is a very clever use of the friendly media, but disconcerting nonetheless. Big Dog is saved!
If we ever have to lockdown again then far more thought is needed when restricting peoples freedoms
a. an opportunistic Tory? (the Tory student, that rarest of beasts)
b. an unreformed Corbynite out to get Starmer? (perhaps more likely, given student demographics)
c. Laura Pidcock, in disguise? (kind of overlap with c. there...)
d. our very own BJO, in disguise? (also possible overlap with c.)
Eating my breakfast was brisk
Drinking my coffee is steady
Happy voting, everyone.
Let’s hope a sensible middle way is the result of this argument. The actual case before the Supremes, is regarding a state law that sets a 15-week limit which is in the same ballpark as abortion laws in much of Europe.
That is at least prima facie evidence that they will.
Struggled to get to sleep - lots of car horns. Was anything going on?
Mainly because there are no Elections.
3 cycles of words made from a range of possible letters fishing for possibles. Not a word I knew, except for the 3 obvious applications.
Wordle 320 5/6
🟩🟩⬜⬜🟨
🟨⬜⬜⬜⬜
🟩🟩🟨⬜🟨
🟨⬜⬜🟩🟩
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
There’s a huge difference between having 3,000 tanks and 12,000 tanks in your army, especially when you’ve lost maybe a thousand already and have limited production capability. Oh, and the enemy has a pretty much unlimited supply of the world’s best military equipment coming in.
In my mind, the biggest unknown is China. At some point, Putin is going to pick up the phone to Xi, and ask for supplies. Xi will be the man who decides if we end up with WWIII.
Another fact well known to advertisers is that opinions are formed over time and persuading people to change their opinions is very difficult indeed.
Do people think Starmer is a liar and a good time Charlie?
Do They think Johnson is?
Wether they did or didn’t work afterwards is completely unprovable is why police won’t touch it.
That’s the key difference between restrictions at time different compared to the Partying on the Downing Street estate.
You said “ Starmer has questions to answer”. Well he doesn’t, he never had in any of this campaign mud slinging. That’s why people are laughing at you when you say he has.
It might be resurrected if Johnson gets more FPNs. It'll probably be resurrected before the next GE. But for now, the client media has done its work.
I use Gener8 in private mode and in that time Gener8 has blocked 800.46k of cookies.
https://www.globalthoughtleaders.org/articles/gener8-seizing-control-over-your-data-amidst-its-commoditisation
https://www.facebook.com/Gener8Ads/posts/cookies-a-cute-word-for-tracker-cookies-are-little-bits-of-data-that-allow-a-web/695828827633606/
----------------------
I use a VPN. So should you.
----------------------
Do we have a reference with the current total qty of seats held by party in the selection up for election?
Walked my daughter to school and saw a grand total of 3 party boards - 2 Labour, and 1 LD. Gone are the days of a sea of Orange Diamonds on the south side of Cambridge City.
I also discovered a Labour party leaflet in my mailbox. The first of the campaign.
Do they think he could ever run in his boxers through a field of wheat 😆