He just takes pics and pretends like the biggest cuntfluencer in the world
Sir Keir Starmer #3
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Keir Starmer Threads
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
For anyone who’s seen ted lasso and loves Roy Kent (I apologise because he’s a legend and I love him).
He’s here, he’s there, he’s every bleeping where, Keir Starmer, Keir Starmer!
He’s here, he’s there, he’s every bleeping where, Keir Starmer, Keir Starmer!
Are we really supposed to believe that Starmer and McSweeney had no idea that Mandelson failed his vetting until this week? I note that the official govt position tonight is that no 'government ministers' were aware of the failure to pass the vetting. McSweeney, of course, was not a government minister.
And this adds to the extraordinary coincidence of McSweeney's unbacked up 'stolen' phone which disappeared soon after the government were aware that it was likely that the opposition would push for a disclosure of what was known about Mandelson, who knew what and when.
For someone with the reputation of being a forensic lawyer bound by legal and due process, Starmer seems extraordinarily incurious about many important issues that should have passed over his desk.
I find it completely implausible that Robbins, s career civil servant, would take such s decision off his own bat. Mandelson was a political appointee - not a civil service one - Robbins would have no skin in the game that would make him inclined to hide the truth with zero reference to anyone in number 10. What motive would he have to do thar?
And how does Starmer only find this out this week when he has made numerous statements about 'due process having been followed'? When his career was perilously on the line in February, are we to believe that he still didn't analyse every step of the process snd discover this immense vetting secret earlier? He has already misled parliament by saying that Mandelson lied to him when he actually delegsted the further questions to McSweeney and the also discredited Doyle. And Mandelson was apparently announced as ambassador before this enhanced vetting was concluded - so in fact due process was most definitely not followed despite what Starmer has claimed previously. Jonathan Powell is already on record commentating on the 'weirdly rushed vetting process', so he knew that something wasn't right.
Either Starmer is sleepwalking as nominal PM who knows nothing about what is going on in his government and allows his underlings to make important decisions without any reference to him, or he and McSweeney are barefaced liars. I'm not sure which is worse.
They are taking us for fools but they're not even very good at their incompetence and cover-ups.
And this adds to the extraordinary coincidence of McSweeney's unbacked up 'stolen' phone which disappeared soon after the government were aware that it was likely that the opposition would push for a disclosure of what was known about Mandelson, who knew what and when.
For someone with the reputation of being a forensic lawyer bound by legal and due process, Starmer seems extraordinarily incurious about many important issues that should have passed over his desk.
I find it completely implausible that Robbins, s career civil servant, would take such s decision off his own bat. Mandelson was a political appointee - not a civil service one - Robbins would have no skin in the game that would make him inclined to hide the truth with zero reference to anyone in number 10. What motive would he have to do thar?
And how does Starmer only find this out this week when he has made numerous statements about 'due process having been followed'? When his career was perilously on the line in February, are we to believe that he still didn't analyse every step of the process snd discover this immense vetting secret earlier? He has already misled parliament by saying that Mandelson lied to him when he actually delegsted the further questions to McSweeney and the also discredited Doyle. And Mandelson was apparently announced as ambassador before this enhanced vetting was concluded - so in fact due process was most definitely not followed despite what Starmer has claimed previously. Jonathan Powell is already on record commentating on the 'weirdly rushed vetting process', so he knew that something wasn't right.
Either Starmer is sleepwalking as nominal PM who knows nothing about what is going on in his government and allows his underlings to make important decisions without any reference to him, or he and McSweeney are barefaced liars. I'm not sure which is worse.
They are taking us for fools but they're not even very good at their incompetence and cover-ups.
Starmer sacked Oliver Robbins who wasn‘t even in post when he appointed mandelson.
The lies are just embarrassing now
The lies are just embarrassing now
Hes either lying through his teeth or, as you say, incurious. Which makes him totally incompetent. He has misled parliament and if the same is done to him as was done to Johnson over the Downing Street parties, then even if it were true he had zero knowledge of the vetting, he has still misled parliament and must go.
It's a sad indictment of just how poor everyone else is as there's no one capable to take over being the MP.
Keir would have gone months ago if there was anyone suitable.
Keir would have gone months ago if there was anyone suitable.
Far too many people have got ALL the receipts on this, I don't see how he can survive ?
Attachments
So the Independent had a story in Sept last year saying that they had been informed that Mandelson had failed his vetting. They checked this with No 10. Yet today Starmer is insisting that he was unaware that Mandelson had failed his vetting until this week. He claims thar no-one in No 10 knew this.
It's always the cover-up that does for them in the end. Lies, lies and more lies. Darren Jones was a mess doing the media today. His eyes told a very different story to the words coming out of his mouth.
Let’s not forget bozza was ousted for a “surprise” cake. Starmer kept this guy knowing full well he didn’t pass the vetting process
Would love to know who the sources were.
also MI5 and FCDO don't do vetting I think? its done by UK security and vetting.
The original independent article say 'concerns he hasn't passed vetting' but doesn't say they knew outright?
Concerns Mandelson did not pass MI6 vetting for US ambassador role – but Starmer appointed him anyway | The Independent
The article quotes a spokesperson as saying;
so we are to assume that text chain is between Tim Tim Allan - Wikipedia who resigned in Feb over the Mandy scandal.
So could it be that Tim Allen and Morgan McSweeney (who I think was close to Mandelson) have obfuscated the fact that Mandy failed his vetting by using non-committal language like 'vetting done by FCDO in normal way' which says neither that he passed or failed? scandalous! And they've both scurried off before the real truth has come out.
I bet that's why Starmer is fuming.
What a shame that Maddox didn't then pursue it further and simply accepted what "Tim" told him.
All very well for him to be shouting now but fair play to the Guardian for digging deeper than Maddox ever bothered to do.
Why's the knobend flown to Paris if it's a *virtual* meeting? (of a made-up committee no less!)
Starmer leaves the country to come up with a plan where he doesn’t look like a big liar.
The issue is that IF Starmer truly didn't know, surely these questions by the Independent would make him ask? Unless he's said to someone at some point "don't tell me as I don't want to know" which is as bad
If he was that convinced he wasnt told then we need an inquiry into why he wasnt told. The truth will come out then for sure. As in Boris's case, not knowing cant be held as an excuse for misleading parliament
Well you’ve clearly forgotten because that’s not why he was ousted.
He finally had to resign as PM for backing Chris Pincher ( claiming to be unaware of the numerous allegations against him ), after a number of other offences.
And he resigned as an MP after the Privilege’s Committee ruled that he had repeatedly lied to the Commons ( although why they needed a committee for that is anyone’s guess ).
this could end in a prosecution you know. If someone has misled the govt\PM into believing security vetting was passed.
Or worse still if they knew it wasn't, and they accepted a risk to have someone on board without vetting on behalf of the govt or signed off on accepting that risk by pretending PM was ok with it.
Or worse still if they knew it wasn't, and they accepted a risk to have someone on board without vetting on behalf of the govt or signed off on accepting that risk by pretending PM was ok with it.
also - famously into a fridge
