Current Affairs The Labour Party

[Hickson9]

I have no idea what there is to like about him. He's so obviously a careerist who's plotted a course to the leader's job. He shamelessly stuck the knife into Corbyn's back in a coup after agreeing to be part of Corbyn's shadow cabinet team, and then when his coup failed, accepted another offer to be in the shadow cabinet.

His 'taking the knee' the other day was a huge insult to the people seeking justice for Jean Charles Menezes...someone he allowed the Met to shoot dead without punishment. What an unspeakable hypocrite he is.

One decision in many he took whilst head of the CPS, and a decision based on insufficient evidence I believe.

Any figure in that role will have individual decisions that can be picked apart. There is also a large body of work that can be praised.

I understand the criticism about that decision but I don't think it should preclude him from being leader of the Labour Party now, and possibly an effective one.

 

[Jebus_lives]

I have no idea what there is to like about him. He's so obviously a careerist who's plotted a course to the leader's job. He shamelessly stuck the knife into Corbyn's back in a coup after agreeing to be part of Corbyn's shadow cabinet team, and then when his coup failed, accepted another offer to be in the shadow cabinet.

His 'taking the knee' the other day was a huge insult to the people seeking justice for Jean Charles Menezes...someone he allowed the Met to shoot dead without punishment. What an unspeakable hypocrite he is.

He didn't become DPP and head of the CPS until 2008. The decision to not to prosecute the Met in that instance was Sir Jen McDonald.

Easy mistake to make.

Edit: In truth the CPS did prosecute the Met over the shooting for endangering the public.

BBC NEWS | UK | Police guilty over Menezes case

news.bbc.co.uk

 

[Jebus_lives]

One decision in many he took whilst head of the CPS, and a decision based on insufficient evidence I believe.

Any figure in that role will have individual decisions that can be picked apart. There is also a large body of work that can be praised.

I understand the criticism about that decision but I don't think it should preclude him from being leader of the Labour Party now, and possibly an effective one.

It wasn't him.

 

[Connor]

Starmer is a massive helmet.

What a mistake the membership have made letting a tool like him become leader. Daft [Poor language removed].

Need to get out this focus group like thinking before taking a stand. The fact they we had 'LABOUR BACK PRITI PATEL PLAN' as a headline is a disgrace.

 

[roydo]

Need to get out this focus group like thinking before taking a stand. The fact they we had 'LABOUR BACK PRITI PATEL PLAN' as a headline is a disgrace.

What plan was that?

 

[Connor]

What plan was that?

The nonsense about throwing protesters in prison for ten years

It's a law anyway I'm sure but the optics are terrible

 

[davek]

He didn't become DPP and head of the CPS until 2008. The decision to not to prosecute the Met in that instance was Sir Jen McDonald.

Easy mistake to make.

Edit: In truth the CPS did prosecute the Met over the shooting for endangering the public.

BBC NEWS | UK | Police guilty over Menezes case

news.bbc.co.uk

Starmer approved the decision not to prosecute. It was ENTIRLEY in his hands to revisit that case and he didn't want to. "Insufficient evidence" is a BS shielding term to protect the state.

 

[davek]

Need to get out this focus group like thinking before taking a stand. The fact they we had 'LABOUR BACK PRITI PATEL PLAN' as a headline is a disgrace.

He's Blair without the charisma.

 

[Jebus_lives]

Starmer approved the decision not to prosecute. It was ENTIRLEY in his hands to revisit that case and he didn't want to. "Insufficient evidence" is a BS shielding term to protect the state.

He wasn't appointed to the role until 2008. The decision not to prosecute was in 2006.

 

[davek]

He wasn't appointed to the role until 2008. The decision not to prosecute was in 2006.

Jesus wept. Yes, the original decision was made then. Then it was revisted when Starmer was asked to proceed with prosecutions. He refused to.

The end.

 

[Jebus_lives]

Jesus wept. Yes, the original decision was made then. Then it was revisted when Starmer was asked to proceed with prosecutions. He refused to.

The end.

I'm sure you can elaborate on those decisions and the legal position for each.

Probably important for context I'm sure you'll agree?

 

[Connor]

He's Blair without the charisma.

Don't blame me, I voted for, oh, Starmer

 

[roydo]

The nonsense about throwing protesters in prison for ten years

It's a law anyway I'm sure but the optics are terrible

The BLM/Right wing loons recently?

Blimey. One pissed on a monument, the other lobbed a statue in Bristol docks. Shocked I tell you. Shocked.

 

[davek]

Don't blame me, I voted for, oh, Starmer

Tbf, I think it was more in hope than expectation with you on Starmer's possibilities.

 

[Jebus_lives]

The BLM/Right wing loons recently?

Blimey. One pissed on a monument, the other lobbed a statue in Bristol docks. Shocked I tell you. Shocked.

Seems to be a reference to this:

Labour backs Priti Patel plan to jail protesters for vandalising war memorials

Government considering proposed legislation that would result in 10-year prison sentences for vandals

www.independent.co.uk

Which doesn't quite fit the headline. It's much more a 'we back a law to prevent desecration of war graves and memorials'

Which is a bit like saying 'we back a law that prohibits kicking a dog in the face'

Of course they do, whether they back the bill in its entirety is a different matter.