Politics & Stuff

[Sir Mikel OBE 4,920]

2 hours ago, cosmicway said:

About Biden.
If the dems ditch him now it's kind of an admission of guilt.
He may be unfit, it's true.
In Greece Karamanlis and Papandreou who were both legends were visibly unfit in their old age in the nineties. Looks like a similar situation.
But if this is true about Biden it did n't happen the day of the debate. It's from the beginning, or let's say from 2021.
So it's a Scylla and Charybde situation.
The likely replacement seems to be Californian Gavin Newsom and also Michelle is very popular.
Michelle is not a housewife. She has postgrad degrees like Barack and at one time she was his company supervisor (it's where they met). But unlike Hillary she has never been involved with politics seriously.
It's perplexing and it gives Trump points he does not deserve.
Trump is twice the idiot but he is a fast talker (in pidgin English).

Michelle and Barack met when she was his mentor when he interned at Sidley & Austin which is a big Law firm. She is very popular and one of the most impressive people in modern history IMO, but she's no politician. Shes the ultimate king maker though because without her Barack doesnt get anywhere near where he got.

 

Gavin, barring him murdering a prostitute in a Los Angeles ghetto, is the nominee in 2028. He'd be a fool to throw away a sure thing for a rushed campaign now. Also Biden is adamant about not stepping down this cycle. 

[cosmicway 1,333]

56 minutes ago, Sir Mikel OBE said:

Michelle and Barack met when she was his mentor when he interned at Sidley & Austin which is a big Law firm. She is very popular and one of the most impressive people in modern history IMO, but she's no politician. Shes the ultimate king maker though because without her Barack doesnt get anywhere near where he got.

 

Gavin, barring him murdering a prostitute in a Los Angeles ghetto, is the nominee in 2028. He'd be a fool to throw away a sure thing for a rushed campaign now. Also Biden is adamant about not stepping down this cycle. 

Not a politician ?
What does it take to be a politician ?

[YorkshireBlue 3,279]

15 minutes ago, cosmicway said:

Not a politician ?
What does it take to be a politician ?

You need to be a lying bullshitting snakey horrible cunt, but you have to excel at all not just one.

[Fulham Broadway 17,333]

1 hour ago, YorkshireBlue said:

You need to be a lying bullshitting snakey horrible cunt, but you have to excel at all not just one.

Tony Benn nailed it

''All politicians need to be-asked five questions: "What power have you got? Where did you get it from? In whose interests do you exercise it? To whom are you accountable? And how can we get rid of you?''

Tony Benn

[Sir Mikel OBE 4,920]

1 hour ago, cosmicway said:

Not a politician ?
What does it take to be a politician ?

Someone who seeks public office, which she hasnt. She also hated when Barack was doing it so much that if he didnt get that last senate bid they probably would have divorced.

[Vesper 30,229]

9 hours ago, cosmicway said:

Today you should ideally vote Lib Dem.
The Tories are an abomination from the Hammer film studios and I speak as one who is more conservative than liberal.
Labour are a spent force, with marxist daydreamers and the red wall pulling the strings.
Vote Lib Dem, Plaid Cymru if you are in Wales, SNP if you are in Scotland.

Fuck the Lib Dems

they were the ones who first kicked off Brexit talk in the 2000s

 

and the fuckers propped up Cameron and his austerity regime for years

 

from 2019:

 

The Lib Dems are deeply stained by austerity. Don’t trust them

With a new leader the party is enjoying a resurgence, but its support for the Tories in coalition can’t be forgotten so easily

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jul/23/lib-dems-stained-austerity-trust-tories

The Liberal Democrats are back, or so we’re told, with Jo Swinson’s leadership victory being pitched as the rebirth of the party. The unique conditions of Brexit have given the Lib Dems not only a reason to exist but the opportunity to detoxify their brand after their fatal coalition with the Conservatives, and to cast themselves as a reforming, progressive party in troubled times.

And yet remarkably little has changed since the days when Nick Clegg stood laughing in the Downing Street rose garden next to David Cameron as he signed Britain up to years of sweeping public spending cuts. When asked throughout this summer’s leadership campaign, Swinson (and her opponent, Ed Davey) consistently defended her party’s role in austerity measures. In an interview with Channel 4 News, Swinson said she had no regrets about the coalition, stating it was the right move “to get our country back on track”. This is despite the fact it has been shown that austerity shrunk the British economy by £100bn, and has even been linked to 130,000 preventable deaths. Swinson acknowledged “there were policies we let through [in coalition] that we shouldn’t have done”, naming the bedroom tax, but remained unrepentant on a whole host of others.

Instead, Swinson repeatedly claims credit for the Lib Dems being a moderating influence on the Tories. They may well have helped to rein in the Conservatives on some things (the party is said to have forced George Osborne to temporarily shelve child tax credit cuts) but this fundamentally misses the point: the Lib Dems weren’t coerced into the partnership, they voluntarily chose it, and as such were a reason every Tory cut that was passed was possible.

This isn’t about holding grudges or some sort of ideological purity. Political parties naturally evolve depending on the political times, and progress in policy positions should be credited. It was four years ago this week that the Labour party adopted its abysmal abstention strategy for key “welfare reform”, but the party has since wrestled internally to have the strong anti-austerity message it holds today, winning back support in the process.

The same cannot be said for the Lib Dems. This is a party that as recently as last year spoke of sacrificing some of the poorest people in society to benefit sanctions in exchange for a 5p tax on plastic bags while in coalition. Nor are their MPs against forming a pact with the Tories again, with Swinson simply ruling out joining forces with Boris Johnson or any Brexiteer.

Swinson, for her part, could hardly be called a fully progressive figure. As employment minister, she reversed workers’ rights by introducing charges of up to £1,200 for the privilege of attending an employment tribunal (a move later ruled unlawful by the supreme court) and even considered cutting the minimum wage, all at a time when workers faced an unprecedented squeeze.

There is a sense in some circles that disabled people and working-class families should “get over it”; that those who can’t summon optimism for the revived Lib Dems are too tribal, irrational, or stuck in the past. But this insultingly dismisses the scale of suffering austerity has caused – typically by commentators who have never experienced the pain themselves – and recasts it as a historical slight. Go to your closed local Sure Start centre or try to get your elderly mother a social care package and this all seems ever-present news.

Similarly, it’s often inferred that compared with Brexit, cuts to services are insignificant. The danger of no-deal Brexit is real and this will hit the poorest hardest. But the idea that this is enough to revive the Lib Dems – and that all else should somehow be forgotten – is a symptom of a political discourse that too often suggests nothing but Brexit matters. Some voters may find it easier to switch back to the Lib Dems, but large numbers of disabled and low-income families will find it considerably harder to trust them ever again. If you’re queueing in your wheelchair at a food bank because the coalition took your disability benefits, it’s unlikely you’ll be tempted to the yellow fold, even by the promise of a second EU referendum.

Besides, the two issues are linked. While credit should be given to the party leading the charge against Brexit, there is irony in the Lib Dem position. After all, savage cuts to services and living standards helped create the conditions for the leave vote in the first place. Indeed, it feels a bit rich to see a party that helped heap austerity on to struggling families now leading concern for the country over Brexit. For many disabled and poor people, years of Lib Dem-enabled cuts mean hardship is already here. Austerity has harmed millions of people in Britain, and continues to wreck lives. It is not too much to ask that the politicians who administered it learn lessons before their rehabilitation begins. As it stands, the rebirthed Lib Dems are still deeply stained.

 

 

[Vesper 30,229]

[Vesper 30,229]

 

based off of exit polls

Edited July 4, 2024 by Vesper

[YorkshireBlue 3,279]

14 minutes ago, Vesper said:

 

based off of exit polls

If labour get in I might have to go abroad, imagine living in a country ran by the guy who defended Jimmy savile.

Edited July 4, 2024 by YorkshireBlue

[Fulham Broadway 17,333]

14 minutes ago, YorkshireBlue said:

If labour get in I might have to go abroad, imagine living in a country ran by the guy who defended Jimmy savile.

That was said by the Bullingdon boy, Alexander de Pfeffel Boris Johnson - it was fact checked by various organisations and proved Johnson was lying. He must have been, his lips were moving.

[YorkshireBlue 3,279]

11 minutes ago, Fulham Broadway said:

That was said by the Bullingdon boy, Alexander de Pfeffel Boris Johnson - it was fact checked by various organisations and proved Johnson was lying. He must have been, his lips were moving.

He was head of the CPS when they decided not to prosecute Jimmy, that's enough for me.

[Fulham Broadway 17,333]

2 minutes ago, YorkshireBlue said:

He was head of the CPS when they decided not to prosecute Jimmy, that's enough for me.

BBC Reality Check has examined Boris Johnson's claim that Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer failed to prosecute Jimmy Savile when he was director of public prosecutions (DPP) and has found no evidence that Sir Keir was never involved at any point in the decision not to charge Savile.

-One politician close to Savile, spending every New Years eve with him was Thatcher - old FA Cup head Charles was very matey with him as well

[Vesper 30,229]

10 minutes ago, YorkshireBlue said:

He was head of the CPS when they decided not to prosecute Jimmy, that's enough for me.

you are pushing BoJo bollocks

Keir Starmer was not told about dropping of Jimmy Savile case, say sources

Labour leader was unaware a prosecutor had closed case in 2009 despite being head of CPS, it has emerged

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/dec/21/keir-starmer-not-told-about-dropping-of-jimmy-savile-case-say-sources-dpp-labour

 

Keir Starmer was not informed when an investigator at the Crown Prosecution Service decided to drop a case against Jimmy Savile, sources have told the Guardian, despite the fact he led the institution at the time.

The Labour leader was unaware that a prosecutor had closed the case into the notorious child sexual abuser in 2009, nearly a year after he took over as director of public prosecutions (DPP).

He later reviewed the case in 2012 and came very close to rubber-stamping the original decision not to prosecute, before deciding at the last minute to commission his chief legal adviser, Alison Levitt, to conduct a formal inquiry.

The controversy continues to dog Starmer more than a decade later, with the former prime minister Boris Johnson having accused him of “failing to prosecute” Savile and victims criticising the Labour leader’s lack of action in the case.

Conservative officials are poring over Starmer’s record as a human rights lawyer and DPP for material to use against Labour in a general election campaign. This week the Daily Mail and the Daily Telegraph have reported on cases fought by Starmer as a lawyer, one involving trying to stop a pet alsatian being put down and another in which he argued successfully for the early release of an arsonist.

However, it is arguably the Savile case that is most likely to capture the public attention, and about which the Guardian can now reveal the full details.

Nazir Afzal, a former prosecutor at the CPS, told the Guardian: “Pretty much the first time I’ve seen him angry was when he commissioned the Levitt report. He was angry because he did not know. He wondered why the escalation process did not permit the case to be referred up to his office.”

Another person who worked closely with Starmer at the CPS at the time said: “Keir knew nothing about it. We had a lawyer with a file with Jimmy Savile written on it … The reviewing lawyer was told there were several victims but that none of them were willing to attend court, so he closed the case. The reviewing lawyer should have asked for advice.”

A spokesperson for Starmer declined to comment on individual cases. However, they said: “Keir Starmer made it his mission as director of public prosecutions to ensure that victims of crime received justice and that criminals were brought to book for their crimes. He is rightly proud of his record.”

The Guardian has been through Starmer’s record as DPP, reviewing individual cases, reading official reports and speaking to about a dozen current and former colleagues. The findings shed light both on the attacks he might face in the heat of an election campaign and on how he might approach being prime minister should Labour win next year’s election.

The investigation uncovered details of how Starmer also admitted the CPS had made mistakes over the Rochdale grooming case; how he rubber-stamped a report into undercover policing that was later shown to have significant gaps; and how he was so successful at pushing through rapid budget cuts that some believed he damaged the institution in the longer term. Some critics say he was cautious in challenging police decisions and overly concerned with avoiding controversy, with some even speculating he had half an eye on his future political career.

Several others praised Starmer’s management of the CPS and his decision-making skills, saying he went to great lengths to support colleagues who were under pressure and was willing to overhaul the organisation’s decision-making processes when they were found to be lacking.

The most telling episode, both in terms of Starmer’s approach to leading large institutions and the political attacks that were to follow, was the controversy over the decision to close the Savile case in 2009.

It first came into the public spotlight when Boris Johnson, the then prime minister, accused the Labour leader of “failing to prosecute Jimmy Savile”. Johnson’s comments provoked anger on the Labour benches and were cited by his policy chief, Munira Mirza, as the reason for her subsequent resignation.

The Guardian’s investigation has uncovered the most detailed explanation yet for how Starmer’s CPS came to drop its case into Savile in 2009. Sources who spoke to the Guardian said Starmer inherited a sprawling network of prosecutors and lawyers who operated largely independently from the DPP’s office. Cases were often not referred up to senior leaders, even if decisions could have been politically sensitive.

Starmer had recognised the problems this could cause him as DPP and appointed Levitt as his principal legal adviser in 2009. He gave her a remit to monitor and advise on any case which could prove contentious, including anything which involved the reckless transmission of HIV and anything that involved granting immunity from prosecution.

Neither Starmer nor Levitt were aware of the decision taken by the prosecutor to close the Savile file in 2009, after which the CPS records were destroyed.

One person involved at the time said the prosecutor should have asked more questions about why the victims were not willing to testify and whether anything could have been done to persuade them to. However, the person added that it was unsurprising that given the evidence in front of them they decided not to take further action.

Starmer reviewed the case again in late 2012 after allegations about Savile became public. One person who worked with him at the time said he was about to close the file again when he decided instead to ask Levitt to look into it one more time.

The colleague said Starmer told them: “This case is nagging at me. I’m going to go public tomorrow and say we’ve reviewed this and I believe the decision is fine, but I want Alison to take one last look at it.”

Levitt then conducted a full inquiry into the case in which she found that not only had the CPS made mistakes in the Savile case but that is was likely to have mistakenly dropped many similar sexual assault complaints. In response the CPS changed its guidance on how prosecutors should deal with accusations of sexual abuse – changes that were to have a lasting effect on how serious cases were dealt with.

The controversy also had a lasting effect on Starmer. Those close to him say it helped formulate his views on how closely he needed to monitor such a large and decentralised organisation – a style of leadership that allies and critics say he has brought with him to the Labour party.

One person who has worked with him said: “If you think Keir is a control freak now, that has its roots in the Savile case and his early days in the CPS. That’s when he realised how hard he needed to work to ensure consistency across a large organisation.”

[Vesper 30,229]

41 minutes ago, YorkshireBlue said:

If labour get in I might have to go abroad, imagine living in a country ran by the guy who defended Jimmy savile.

bye bye then

leaving based on a falsehood, there is winning life strategy

🤪

[Vesper 30,229]

Kylian Mbappé laments ‘catastrophic’ French election vote for National Rally

• French striker says runoff vote is ‘urgent situation’
• ‘We can’t let France fall into the hands of these people’

https://www.theguardian.com/football/article/2024/jul/04/kylian-mbappe-laments-catastrophic-french-election-first-round-vote-national-rally

 

Kylian Mbappé has branded the first-round results of France’s snap parliamentary election “catastrophic”, urging voters to turn out in force and fend off the threat of a National Rally-controlled government when polls open for the runoff vote on Sunday.

In the latest of several interventions by members of the France national football team, the influential captain Mbappé warned that the country must take its chance to ensure the far right, anti-immigration party is unable to seize power in what has become a tumultuous political battle.

“It’s an urgent situation,” he said when asked for his thoughts on a parlous state of affairs that saw National Rally win 33% of the popular vote in last weekend’s first round. “We cannot let our country fall into the hands of these people. It is pressing. We saw the results, it’s catastrophic. We really hope it’s going to change: that everyone is going to rally together, go and vote, and vote for the correct party.”

Mbappé emphasised the importance of voting “now, more than ever”. France’s players are currently in Germany for the European Championship but they have maintained close attention on events back home and, unlike their English counterparts, a number of them have felt comfortable commenting on political matters.

Speaking on Monday after their victory over Belgium, the defender Jules Koundé said he was “disappointed” with the level of support for a party that “seek to take away our freedom and take away the fact that we live together”. He stated that previous non-voters must be persuaded to the ballot box in order to ensure the extreme right do not gain an absolute majority.

Before the tournament began, the forwards Marcus Thuram and Ousmane Dembélé both made similar exhortations to those eligible to vote. Mbappé joined them, saying at the time that he is “against extreme views and against ideas that divide people”.

Those comments were criticised by, among others, the National Rally leader Jordan Bardella. Mbappé, who recently signed for the Champions League winners Real Madrid, is France’s star player and a figure whose voice holds considerable weight among the country’s youth.

France face Portugal in a quarter-final on Friday and it means Mbappé, who will again play in a mask after breaking his nose in the group stage, will face a former Real Madrid forward in Cristiano Ronaldo. It is widely held that this could be the moment Mbappé, who is 25, takes the baton of greatness from the 39-year-old Portugal legend. “He is one of a kind,” Mbappé said. “He has shaped football, inspired generations, scored goals. I can only sing his praises.”

[cosmicway 1,333]

Will Starmer return the Elginians at least ?

[Sir Mikel OBE 4,920]

2 hours ago, Vesper said:

 

based off of exit polls

UK has too many damn parties.

 

We have 2 shit choices in America, but I cant imagine breaking down everyone these many ways.

[Vesper 30,229]

22 minutes ago, Sir Mikel OBE said:

UK has too many damn parties.

 

We have 2 shit choices in America, but I cant imagine breaking down everyone these many ways.

the UK has fewer parties actually in Parliament than most other European nations have, as we have 'first-past-the-post' single member district voting, not PR (proportional representation)

[Vesper 30,229]

Farage wins (on his 8th try) Braverman holds on, Corbyn wins as an independent

 

 

[Vesper 30,229]

shock Labour loss, an independent defeats Jonathan Ashworth, this was due to Muslims turning on Labour over Gaza

the higher the percentage of Muslims so far, the bigger the Labour drop off