[Arrowhead]

I’m not convinced but do it anyway and we’ll find out. I’m finding it difficult to find a downside to this move. Starmer’s latest approval rating with Labour voters is 77 percent.

My 73yo Mum - a Leave-voting lifelong Tory who regularly reads the Mail and habitually refers to Johnson as 'Boris' - was recently singing the praises of Starmer once again, this time citing the sharp contrast with Corbyn at the despatch box. "They don't dish out knighthoods to anyone, do they?", apparently.

She will almost certainly remain loyal to the Tories, but come 2024 there will be plenty of others glad to finally have another adult in the room whose name isn't Sturgeon.

[youngian]

"They don't dish out knighthoods to anyone, do they?", apparently.

If she's thinking of voting for Keir I'd let that one slide.

Rarely is giving in to blackmail a no-brainer

Expelling Jeremy Corbyn from Labour could spare the party legal action over a leaked anti-Semitism report that would bankrupt it.

Some ex-party staff now poised to take part in multi-million pound lawsuits against Labour say they will drop their claims if the former leader is thrown out of the party.

But the extraordinary ultimatum will enrage backers of Mr Corbyn already furious that Labour under new leader Sir Keir Starmer last week apologised to anti-Semitism whistleblowers and agreed to pay them damages in a separate case. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... mTFRMCcvts

[Tubby Isaacs]

I could see quite a few councilors and MPs walking out if that happened. I think that's likely bollocks.

[Tubby Isaacs]

[Malcolm Armsteen]

I could see quite a few councilors and MPs walking out if that happened. I think that's likely bollocks.

And I know many in the party who would consider their departure a small loss - especially as we have locl elections next May. I can't see many MPs nailing their pants to the Momentum mast.

[Abernathy]

Of course it was leaked by someone within the party. Who the fuck else could have leaked it?

I'd lay odds on it being leaked on Formby's instructions, but the other unanswered question is who the fuck authored it?

[Malcolm Armsteen]

Same answer. Didn't she admit it?

[Abernathy]

Same answer. Didn't she admit it?

Can't recall her ever doing so. There is no author identified on the document (like you, I imagine, I have my own copy), though it does carry Labour branding. I found that rather odd.

[Malcolm Armsteen]

I thought she admitted it in an interview.

Where did you get your copy?

[Abernathy]

Picked it up somewhere on the web when it was first leaked.

I could send you it, but that might land me in trouble (DM).

It's about 850 fucking pages long, mind.

[Malcolm Armsteen]

I'll stick to the summary, then! Cheers.

[Malcolm Armsteen]

I've managed to gethold of a copy, via the Interwebs.

Fack me. I've not read much (it's over 850 pages of deathless turgidity) but I can see why the lawyers were spitting kittens. It's pretty typical 6th form resentment stuff.

It has LIBEL written right across it.

[Cyclist]

Have the Momentalists seen this?

If they really want a Labour government, young voters need to move on from Jeremy Corbyn
As a 16-year-old party member, I voted for Keir Starmer to be leader because he will make a real difference to young people's lives


https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/la ... 6.html?amp

That's one brave 16 year-old, exposing themself to the kinder, gentler politics of the Corbynites.

[Malcolm Armsteen]

With reference to Len McClunky threatening to stop paying into the Labour Party because they have settled with the whistleblowers - he wants to fight the case. Reckons Starmer's not much good at the legal stuff.

Nicked this from Facebook - is it 100% true?

Len seems to believe he understands libel cases better than the senior lawyer Keir Starmer.
In 2017 Len provided personal information about the Labour MP Anna Turley to Skwawkbox which they then published.
Anna Turley MP threatened to sue for libel and breach of data protection.
She offered to settle out of court.
But no, Len decided to fight the case.
After a year or so it got to court.
Len battled it out over six days in court.
He lost and was ordered to pay her £75,000 in damages.
He was also ordered to pay an extra £7,500 for rejecting an earlier out of court offer to settle the case.
And he was ordered to pay Anna Turley's legal costs, reported to be around £1 million.
Len had also incurred legal and barrister costs for his side.
On top of that Len also took responsibility for the legal costs of Skwawkbox (he's throwing around Unite member's money here).
That's a hefty bill so far for just one person. Much more than Labour's recent settlement for eight people in July.
But did it end there for Len?
No, he didn’t pay what the court ordered.
So Anna Turley applied for enforcement (when bailiffs can go in).
Len lost again and was forced to pay up a fortnight later.
But surely it must’ve have ended at that point?
No, Len decided he’d appeal.
And guess what?
He lost again!
Be smart.
Don’t be like Len.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Unite definitely underwrote Sqwawkbox and then didn't pay Turley before her solicitor said they'd agreed to. They tried to appeal but were refused leave to.

I don't know about them having turned down out of court settlements though.

I think we can ignore Len's opinion on who would have won the whistleblower case. And of course it could still have been won but yielded very bad publicity for Labour.