StevenEDU

@scattysmum @DPJHodges Pannick advised Boris Johnson during the PPC investigation into whether Johnson knowingly misled Parliament regarding COVID-19 lockdown parties. Pannick argued that the committee's approach was "unlawful". Leading to a 90 day suspension and his resignation. Very much proven?

@StevenM_STUK @DPJHodges Actually he didn't.. it was never proven... see Lord Pannick

BTW, the vote is now a “Win/Win” for Kemi Badenoch. Either Labour MPs refuse to refer Starmer. In which case they’re directly implicated in, and toxified by, the scandal. Or they vote to refer. And Starmer is brought down.

@TimesRadio @afneil @StigAbell @KateEMcCann Lesson learnt: bullies like Andrew Neil resort to getting people sacked to boost his fragile ego.

Lesson learned: never ask @afneil for a higher tip! “I called the owner later that night, and he was fired in the morning.” @StigAbell | @KateEMcCann

@Bru1g @Peston Id do a little more reading into Boris instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainer/priv…

He's a bloody mile away from proving anything! And don't forget that with Boris Johnson, the goalposts were moved from deliberately misleading to include inadvertently misleading because they couldn't prove his actions was deliberate. Starmer is toast. His MPs follow the party whip knowing the people mistrust everything Starmer says (and become tarred with the same brush), or failing to support him and he'll get destroyed. 🍿 🍿 🍿 😁

Has the PM proved he didn’t mislead MPs over Mandelson appointment? open.substack.com/pub/peston/p/h…

@BenGrahamUK No evidence to support this

Keir Starmer whipping MPs to block a referral to the Privileges Committee sets a dangerous precedent. MPs are elected to exercise judgement, not just follow orders to protect the leader. When careers depend on loyalty, scrutiny disappears. That’s not accountability. That’s manipulation.

@KemiBadenoch Desperate political move rushed to squeeze in before local elections.

Rubbish. The only advice that matters is the advice Starmer was given BEFORE appointing Mandelson. Not the hasty justification written a year later…AFTER the appointment had blown up, AFTER I asked Starmer about it at PMQs, and AFTER Mandelson had been sacked. The Cabinet Secretary, Chris Wormald promised in this letter to keep the issue "under review" and consider "any further evidence". But even he was SACKED before he could carry out a proper investigation. We all heard Olly Robbins say No.10 was putting pressure to appoint Mandelson. That’s why the PM falsifying Robbin’s account at PMQs is so bad. This letter is a very weak post-hoc justification to provide cover for Starmer. In fact, it’s irrelevant.

@DPJHodges Well not really instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainer/priv…

Being in the House today, what's telling is the synergy of the spin: a) "Can't remove (Boris/Keir) because of (Ukraine/Iran)" b) "People aren't interested in this. Their focus is on (recovering from Covid/recovering from the Trump recession)" c) "It's only (cake/one silly mistake)"

@scottishimage @ZiaYusufUK Or he’s innocent and no cover up. I bet that’s not what you want though

@ZiaYusufUK if kier is innocent let him face the music or will labour MPs enable a cover up , ultimately voters will have their say

Friendly note to Labour MPs ahead of the vote tomorrow to decide if Starmer should face an ethics probe: If you vote against it, Reform will carpet bomb your constituency to ensure all your constituents know you voted to save the most unpopular PM of all time. Vote wisely.

@EddyZacianLand @ZiaYusufUK @nadhimzahawi Evidence or just vibes?

@ZiaYusufUK @nadhimzahawi There's apparently a 3 line whip tomorrow to vote against it

@TheTVGrump @ZiaYusufUK Multiple offences from BJ. Quit before the final outcome, being such a brave old soul instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainer/priv…

@ZiaYusufUK When he was in the same position, Boris Johnson gave his MPs a free vote. Starmer’s bricking it.

@ZiaYusufUK Unelected bureaucrat says what?

@Breteyne @DPJHodges Do tell me about the rampant corruption

@StevenM_STUK @DPJHodges Bigger issues than rampant corruption. I don’t think so

@DaveKent101 Because aged 14 and it’s the severity of the action rather than a violent rape of an innocent person.

Why is it that a British man gets life for raping a Sikh woman but when an illegal migrant rapes a British girl, he gets let off with a ‘Consent Course’? Rape is rape and should be punished consistently for ALL offenders. Could our Judiciary be any more blatantly two tier?🤔🤔🤨

@adams119919 @therealmissjo Except he’s not the most hated except by strangely triggered individuals like you,

@therealmissjo Citizen Journalists around the world are wondering why 3 foreign nationals go to extreme lengths to commit arson on the most hated British Prime Minister of all time, Hopefully this will be the final nail in his coffin and he will resign from his cabinet and do us all a favour 🤔

Today at 1030, Court 2 at the Old Bailey will see the trial of the two Ukrainian men and one Romanian man for their arson attack on Keir Starmer’s properties and car. The judge is Sir Neil Garnham. Let’s talk about Sir Neil for a minute: he was the lawyer for the Met Police in the Leveson Inquiry. Starmer was the Director of Public Prosecutions at the time. Sir Neil acted for the government in the Litvinenko poisoning case. It must be difficult to find a judge that is not linked to Starmer and I suspect that this case will be closely scrutinised.

@DonnaLouise1212 The rumours you made up, you mean?

🚨 TRIAL STARTS TODAY at the Old Bailey 🔥 The 3 Ukrainian rent boys — Roman Lavrynovych (21), Petro Pochynok (35) & Stanislav Carpiuc (27) — finally face jury over the arson attacks on Keir Starmer’s homes and car. They’ve all pleaded not guilty… but the rumours won’t go away. What really happened? 👀

@rumamay @scattysmum @DPJHodges Boris repeatedly misled the house instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainer/priv…

@StevenM_STUK @scattysmum @DPJHodges But Starmer got away with his party.

@scattysmum @DPJHodges He resigned before the final report was published. Repeatedly misled the house. instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainer/priv…

He was retrospectively fined after Met Police found he didn't host any parties that were outside the realms of his job, under pressure from Khan. Just as conveniently, his Durham gathering was not deemed a party (despite in fragrant breach of the rules) by the Labour PCC (who was present) & chief Constable who conveniently got an enhanced extended contract straight after

@scattysmum @DPJHodges Breaking his own Covid rules and having parties was in breach of his own Covid rules. The fact he was fined as such shows the police felt it sufficient.

There were bigger issues at stake when Boris Johnson was PM, but that didn't stop Starmer or the media focussing on cake & Pincher (who had been exonerated by Police ) Starmer was at the forefront of calling for Boris' resignation for much less than the deep corruption at the heart of Starmer & co

@DPJHodges 18 tweets up to this point today on nearly exactly the same topic. Rothermere must really be cracking the whip to get a result….

Tory sources tell me they have been careful up to this point not to been seen to be pressuring the Speaker, and that they have been allowing the procedures of the House to play out. But that they will now begin focussing forensically on the detailed case against Starmer.

@terrychelton @DPJHodges @lesleybaker4234 Well and Boris did breach parliamentary procedure numerous times.

@DPJHodges @lesleybaker4234 The direct opposite of what labour did to Boris . But labour are a different animal.

@Askrigg_lad It’s in court.

The posts today are all about the three rent boys - but what’s happening to the two Manchester Airport police beating thugs? Is there a news blackout on ALL of them?