Charlie Chalk

@vialbaboy @Gabriel_Pogrund Angela Rayner doesn’t have that defence though, does she? She failed to employ a tax advisor and she owes HMRC £40k+. Rayner has always been paid by the public purse, Tice has made his own money. One is a leach, one is a clever entrepreneur

@Gabriel_Pogrund I would love to have seen Tice’s reaction had Angela Rayner’s defence been ‘well I’ve overpaid tax over here, so they balance each other out and there’s ’no story’ 🙄🙄

The argument here is that, by issuing incorrectly and unlawfully large dividends, Tice may have ended up paying more income tax than due – and in such a way that meant HMRC received equivalent or more cash to what the company was required to pay. No tax adviser has ever outlined how the “more” possibility might work. The “equal” is conceptually possible, but let us not forget that: a) Any “extra” tax he did pay would have been received by HMRC far later than had the company paid up front — conferring a benefit on him and one that is not permitted b) the dividends also went to his offshore trust, whose affairs he has refused to discuss c) all of this is legally speaking irrelevant to the money the company owed and owes — and on which interest would and a penalty could be due

@Gabriel_Pogrund But he doesn’t owe any tax. It was signed off by a chartered accountant. This is a non story

Oh. And this all relates to our last story re at least £92k in withholding tax. The latest relates to £100k corporation tax that was not paid and there’s no suggestion anyone ended up compensating for this somehow later on.

@hknormington @KevinASchofield They left as they couldn’t bear to sit through his lies

@KevinASchofield The PM answered loads of questions, a load of Labour MPs left to get on with actual work, unlike those on the opposition benches.

Senior Labour insider points out how empty the Labour benches have become, despite the fact that Keir Starmer is fighting for his political life. Ominous.

@Miatsf @AngelaRayner Good one 🤣

May 7th. Vote Labour.

@PeterStefanovi2 Delivering us friends of paedophiles, every time

“Whatever noise they make nothing is going to distract me from delivering for our country” a defiant Keir Starmer tells MP’s at #PMQs

@errjustsaying @JohnSlinger Slinger should put his money where his mouth is and resign if McSweeney pulls down the PM

@JohnSlinger We’ll see …

I continue to strongly support the Prime Minister.

@JohnSlinger Then you’re as bad as he is. When Starmer is dragged out kicking and screaming, you then need to resign as well

@HumzaYousaf This is a terrible, despicable thing. This was done to 250,000 white girls by organised gangs of Pakistani men and allowed by the state. Why highlight this one rape and ignore 250,000 children?

“Bloody Muslim bitch.” That is what John Ashby shouted at his victim as he raped her And while doing it screamed anti-Muslim abuse This did not happen in a vacuum This is what happens when hate is mainstreamed When cowards in suits pretend their words have no consequences

@Neets21 He appointed 2 men who were close friends with a paedophile. Surely you don’t condone that?

Absolutely sick of the relentless attack on Starmer. It’s almost as if the media don’t want someone who puts the interests of the country first. Wonder why……..💰💰💰💰💰 #ToryHypocrisy #ScumMedia

@Gav_Griffiths @kelvmackenzie In that case then, it’s fine to advertise for non Muslims as I don’t think they’re like minded

@kelvmackenzie I don’t know why anyone is surprised by this. When you’re flat sharing don’t you want to share with like minded people?

Thanks to the Telegraph I learn landlords in London are advertising for Muslim-only tenants on Facebook and Gumtree. It’s illegal. The ads say things like “ for 2 Muslim boys” or “ 2 Muslim girls” or “ Muslims preferred”. The areas covered include Newham, Barking, East Ham, Dagenham, Walthamstow, Redbridge. When the Telegraph called up the landlords And asked if non-Muslims would be considered, one said “ go away” and another said no and put the phone down. Other ads say only Punjabi or Gujarati speaking tenants or people from Kerala. Why Facebook and Gumtree are taking such ads when they are clearly illegal under the 2010 Equality Act is beyond me. Imagine the outcry from Muslims if an ad had said Catholic, Jew or Methodist tenants only.

@Bbmorg Yeah, endorsing pedophile apologist, compromising national security and protecting Chinese/russian spies is all completely acceptable

Starmer’s many haters on X are shouting that there is evidence of wrong doing by Starmer when they know there is not.

@CW_Watchdog @MatthewStadlen @DPJHodges @Steven_Swinford He’s first to demand resignations from Conservative PMs. The last to think a paedophile enabling Labour PM should resign. He has no shame or ethics

@CharlieChalk15 @MatthewStadlen @DPJHodges @Steven_Swinford Birds of a feather flock together. Beginning to think Stadlens hard drive needs checking.

****THE OLLY ROBBINS BOMBSHELL EVIDENCE**** * Number 10 applied 'constant pressure' to the foreign office to clear Mandelson's appointment and took no interest in his vetting. The message was 'get this done' * The Cabinet Office argued that there was no need to vet Mandelson at all. The Foreign Office insisted that there needed to be security vetting * No 10 took a 'dismissive approach' to the vetting process. There was 'constant chasing' from Starmer's private office in No 10 over Mandelson * Mandelson was given access to the FCDO building and granted 'higher classification briefings' before he was granted security clearance * Sir Keir Starmer tried to get his then director of communications Matthew Doyle an ambassadorship. Robbins was told not to inform David Lammy, the then foreign sec. Robbins resisted on grounds that Doyle did not have the credentials to become an ambassador. Doyle was subsequently found to have given public support to a sex offender * Robbins directly contradicted Starmer's claim that he would not have appointed Mandelson if he had known he failed his vetting. Robbins says that it would have been 'very difficult' to block him given the pressure from No 10 * He pointed to the fact that the appointment had been announced, the King had been informed, agrement had been secured with the US - all before the vetting had taken place * He says that blocking Mandelson's appointments would have 'damaged US-UK relations' and caused issues with Donald Trump and his administration * Starmer's central charge against Robbins is that he failed to tell him that Mandelson had not cleared his vetting. Robbins says he did not see the vetting report. He was given a verbal briefing by the foreign office's security team that UK Security Vetting considered Mandelson's vetting to be borderline although it was 'leaning against'. The foreign office security team considered that the security risk could be managed. He agreed. Mandelson was granted developed vetting * Robbins's case is two-fold: 1) He couldn't have told Starmer something he didn't know and 2) He was the ultimate arbiter of whether Mandelson should be granted DV status * Robbins says that when Mandelson was sacked he tried to get hold of the Mandelson UKSV vetting document. He was told by the Cabinet Office that he needed a UK national security justification to access it

@MatthewStadlen Maybe you should just set up a Fanzone for him? I wouldn’t bother with the merch though, you’ll be the only member

Still don’t think Starmer is going anywhere.

@MatthewStadlen @DPJHodges @Steven_Swinford You seem to think Mandelson should have passed and appointed as Ambassador?

“Lied”? Really? You’ve been accusing Starmer of lying on loop, Dan. You even inadvertently accepted yesterday that you’d previously accused Starmer of lying without evidence. There is clearly confusion - including, extraordinarily by Starmer himself - over the question of whether Mandelson did or did not fail security vetting. Robbins makes clear that he didn’t fail it.

@MatthewStadlen @DPJHodges @Steven_Swinford

@MatthewStadlen @Steven_Swinford Matthew, haven’t you been watching? The PM’s office didn’t care if he failed his vetting

@Steven_Swinford Steven, have you been watching? Mandelson didn’t fail his vetting.

It’s a complete mystery that a man who endorsed 2 paedophile enablers is thoroughly disliked and has lied and lied and lied to Parliament? Why can’t people just see the real Keir? Which do you think is his favourite rent boy? And how is Nick Brown? Party of paedophiles

You’re all cowards and @hepworthclare has blocked me for pointing out that Starmer endorses those who befriend paedophiles. You’re all complicit, you’re all a disgrace, you’re all part of the problem by defending him

@Hepworthclare He’s endorsed 2 men who had close friendships with paedophiles. Starmer himself has 3 rent boys on trial for arson. Paedophilia and exploiting minors are not ‘mistakes’ - anyone involved should be hung by their balls

Nick Robinson #r4today & others just won't let it go . Determined to bring Starmer down. Why ? I get he lacks 'rizz' I get he's made mistakes -so have other PMs. From the day he became Leader - the hostility has been manifestly palpable. Yet Farage & others get a free pass. Why?

@BethRigby Are you still going to be kissing Starmer’s backside after this? Your devotion to him must have some limits, surely?

🚨Robbins says clearly there was pressure from the PM's private office over this appointment. He refuses to name any official, rather the says "officials were only putting pressure on if they felt the pressure". He says there was constant chasing and no interests in vetting. Paints picture of No 10 that didn't care about vetting, just wanted to get Mandelson into post......