I like to think you are deep cover at the Mail, slowly plotting to bring the whole rotten edifice down.
Westminster Politics
- Thread starter altodevil
- Start date
Any normal journalist working for the Mail should be embarrassed.
Has the Daily Mail always been like this?
Here's the owner of the Daily Mail in the 1930s (he's the one on the left)
Also:
Price, G. Ward. “The Fruits of Fascism.” Daily Mail, 16 July 1926
R. Moore, T. C., C. B. E., M. P. “The Blackshirts Have What The Conservatives Need.” Daily Mail, 25 Apr. 1934
Viscount Rothermere. “Hurrah for the Blackshirts!” Daily Mail, 15 Jan. 1934
Viscount Rothermere. “Give the Blackshirts a Helping Hand.” Daily Mail, 22 Jan. 1934
I actually know one personally. Shes a rather cold lady but the pieces that she does for the mail are probably the only things worth reading.
Don't remember it being this bad as a kid
Thanks for the disclaimer!Here's the owner of the Daily Mail in the 1930s (he's the one on the left)
Also:
Price, G. Ward. “The Fruits of Fascism.” Daily Mail, 16 July 1926
R. Moore, T. C., C. B. E., M. P. “The Blackshirts Have What The Conservatives Need.” Daily Mail, 25 Apr. 1934
Viscount Rothermere. “Hurrah for the Blackshirts!” Daily Mail, 15 Jan. 1934
Viscount Rothermere. “Give the Blackshirts a Helping Hand.” Daily Mail, 22 Jan. 1934
I know five to varying degrees
Two in particular very good journos - they don't work on politics.
Of course he isn't an honourable politician, he's in his position off the back of ten false promises and he'd rather bash the left and wank over flags than oppose the Tories.
I hope he does have to resign; we'd be rid of a loser and a liar from the top of the party and Johnson would look even more of a cnut for not resigning himself.
The Mail and GB News though, they would be funny if they weren't so evil and destructive.
So what about that council seat result huh?
Did the count here last Thursday. Took great pleasure in watching them get battered. Funnily enough, prospective councillors from Labour, Lib Dems and the Greens all came over to say thankyou (for doing the job). Not one single Tory did the same.
We actually had our own national newspaper (Aftenposten) that were also fairly positive about Hitler in the 30s, in the name of anti-communism, and also furthered anti-Semitic stereotypes. Today they're probably the most professional, serious newspaper in Norway, and have apologized for their past. In 2019 they published an in-depth editorial about this. In it they also point out how they were too easily controlled by the Nazis during the occupation. It's weird how the two newspapers can be so utterly different.Here's the owner of the Daily Mail in the 1930s (he's the one on the left)
Also:
Price, G. Ward. “The Fruits of Fascism.” Daily Mail, 16 July 1926
R. Moore, T. C., C. B. E., M. P. “The Blackshirts Have What The Conservatives Need.” Daily Mail, 25 Apr. 1934
Viscount Rothermere. “Hurrah for the Blackshirts!” Daily Mail, 15 Jan. 1934
Viscount Rothermere. “Give the Blackshirts a Helping Hand.” Daily Mail, 22 Jan. 1934
Better hope the Police think the same ...otherwise this turns out to be a real humdinger/og for Starmer and its a Tory serenade of "cheerio cheerio cheerio" as he leaves the field. It would go down in Tory annals as the easiest bring down of a Labour leader in history.... big, big. gamble for Sir Keir!
Has Starmer never heard of... 'don't give hostages to fortune'
He’s a former prosecutor. He’s not going to have gone down this route unless he is absolutely certain of the rules and the police aren’t going to try to fine him unless they are absolutely certain the rules were broken.
If you look at what actually happened, they stopped to eat and then continued working until 1.30am. During that lockdown there is absolutely nothing illegal about that. People were allowed to eat.
I agree, but could it be the case of 'a little knowledge is a dangerous thing'. Its a hell of a gamble!
I think it ridiculous that a man who wants the trust of the nation is prepared to give 'hostage to fortune' a run out... that's Boris's game for goodness sake.
Starmer shouldn't be getting into a pi**ing/'holier than thou' contest with him, the whole point of Starmer is that he is different than Boris, this risk-taking shows he's a 'chancer' just like Boris, will say anything at the time, but hope to make good later... only in this case if it goes 'tits up' for him, Sir Keir will be gone!
By all accounts he’s been praised for it as a political move and lots of Tories have briefed that it puts them in a lose lose situation.
I’m interested to know what you would have done in his position.
Or maybe because in a 2020 Durham police statement read: "In line with [our] approach throughout the pandemic, there is no intention to take retrospective action... since this would amount to treating [x] differently... Durham Constabulary has not taken retrospective action against any other person". X being Mr Cummings. As a prosecutor, KS will know all about legal precedent.
I think with hindsight (ironically) he probably wishes he had not tweeted that boris should resign before the police investigation was concluded
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
But given that was on public record he has probably made the right strategy call (particularly if they have a very high confidence in the outcome)
Ultimately if Starmer is investigated and gets no fine (after having offered to resign) and the PM gets several fines (and does not resign) I can only see that playing well for Starmer
Arguably standing down temporarily whilst the investigation is concluded could have been an option if the deputy wasn't eating a curry with him but given the circumstances I think he's made decent calls and it could end up working out pretty well for him
Can't we just put a few quid on the table, like £35.40 and buy the Daily Mail and then burn it to the ground?
The only Tories this applies to are those trying to oust Boris anyway, his own 'awkward squad'. I wouldn't get too comfortable around what they have to say!
What I think he should have done was demonstrate his difference to Boris, e.g.
Apologise first, (if deemed necessary) e.g. he doesn't think he needs to do, but "recognises the hurt this sort of thing could cause other people" , then just stand back, keep mouth shut and wait 'for the truth to set him free'... then go for Boris's throat.
Giving a hostage to fortune even if it turns out OK for him will make people wonder, is he just a 'chancer' like Boris, a variation maybe, but still a 'chancer'.
I think the greater risk is if they don't give a FPN but criticise his actions. He might not have to resign but you can imagine the spin from all sides.
As always "they're all the same" is an easy tactic to deploy to excuse Tory behaviour.
As always "they're all the same" is an easy tactic to deploy to excuse Tory behaviour.
He’s a former public prosecutor that knows all the facts about this situation and knows the law at the time. There’s no hostage to fortune, it’s not even a calculated risk. He’s just absolutely certain he will be cleared.
What is he meant to have done wrong? Is it the beer bit? Because people only drink beer at social events or something?
He had better hope so (and so will the party), imagine the chaos if he has to make good on his pledge to resign!!
If he is so sure then for goodness sake keep your mouth shut and then bask in the glory you know is coming your way when the truth comes out and then go hunting for Boris in a pure white suite!
Trying to be 'too clever' just puts him into the Boris 'play pen', even if he gets the result!
Would the right wing press have allowed him to keep his mouth shout? The longer he kept his mouth shout the more pressure builds, and the longer it allows the daily mail to dictate the narrative surely? I'm not sure what the best approach would be, but it is clear that the goal is to show that not all politicians and political parties are the same. A goal that would not have been achieved by just keeping quiet and hoping it all blows over - the Johnson playbook.
What narrative?
If Starmer is innocent as he seems to think he is, then why respond to and get pushed around by the Daily Mail... he is better than that, and that is the whole point for goodness sake!
Nothing comes across more strongly than an innocent man, pillared in the right wing press' who doesn't have to get down in the mud (something he accuses others of doing) to defend himself, he just lets others prove him innocent.
I honestly believe in situations like this, over the years, that the right wing press only win when Labour politicians set them selves up to be hit, again and again. Starmer doesn't have to dodge any bullets, so why put himself in the firing line; is he being a 'strong leader' by such actions, or a dangerous fool who is showing the preponderance at some point, to lead his troops into the enemy cross-fire on a futile mission?
Make no mistake if this goes badly for him, Jeremy should try for a comeback, even he would not have gone down this crazy route!
Starmer took the job of leader of the opposition. I think that is enough to convict him of some sort of wrong doing.
Johnson did something wrong so now the press have to discredit Starmer so that the shit bag isn't held accountable for being a disgraceful shit bag.
If he won't say that he will resign he is a hypocrite because he called for Johnson to resign when he lied to parliament and got caught doing so. Now that he has said he will resign the Johnson apologists are going to make it about something else because they can't have the public see just how big a shit bag Johnson is. It is their job to make the loss of 500 seats in the council elections go away and just like Trump they go on the attack and lie about what the other guy did, while getting caught doing it themselves.
It is quite amusing and sad and terrible all at the same time. So just the new normal.
Just a thought, but why do your political talking points often read like they are lifted directly out of the Daily Mail or Guido?
calm down lad dont strain yourself trying something new
and are guido and the DM saying hes played it well and probably has high confidence he's done nothing wrong?
I know the canary seemed to be implying he should be sacked though
https://www.thecanary.co/uk/news/20...drinking-at-work-doesnt-show-breach-of-rules/
Well this is it with Starmer, his whole leadership has been based on fear of the right wing media going after him. This episode has shown how foolish this is.
On the narrative though, it is clear what narrative is trying to be pushed. They want people to be thinking, "all these politicians are the same, not an ounce of integrity between them". Which of course is exactly what Johnson wants people to think, as he actually has no integrity whatsoever.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
A reminder that policy only gets derailed by lawyers if what you are doing is illegal in the first place.
“He’s the one on the left”Here's the owner of the Daily Mail in the 1930s (he's the one on the left)
Also:
Price, G. Ward. “The Fruits of Fascism.” Daily Mail, 16 July 1926
R. Moore, T. C., C. B. E., M. P. “The Blackshirts Have What The Conservatives Need.” Daily Mail, 25 Apr. 1934
Viscount Rothermere. “Hurrah for the Blackshirts!” Daily Mail, 15 Jan. 1934
Viscount Rothermere. “Give the Blackshirts a Helping Hand.” Daily Mail, 22 Jan. 1934
I think it probably is...if Starmer and his legal buddies are all rock solidly certain he has no case to answer, why make the stepping down, promise statement... to gain political advantage perhaps?
Would the use of this legal 'insider knowledge' be seen as the equivalent of profiting from 'insider trading' on the stock market, i.e. gambling on something you already know the outcome??
The right wing press will have a field day with that outcome!
Christ, that is quite the conflation you are making there.
Important to remember that it was only a few days ago that Durham Police had said that they were not investigating the incident.
But now they are, he has done the right thing.
And I completely agree with your last point.
Starmer natural cautious style needs to be counterbalanced by a bad cop type.
Im sorry, what?
No.
Spot on.
All that has happened is that a number of people stopped working for something to eat.
But as we all know, if you throw enough mud, which the Tories have understandably done, some of it will stick.