Strange times we live in. A British newspaper, the Daily Mail, has published a damaging allegation about the spouse of the US president*, but so far I haven’t seen a word in any British or American newspaper about a damaging allegation about the UK prime minister. Given the relative strength of the libel laws of the two countries, one would think that “the shape of the PM’s family” would be all over the American press.
I must stress that at this stage both allegations are merely allegations. If the one about Sir Keir Starmer turns out to be true, I am not sure it will make much difference. Gone are the days when Cecil Parkinson had to resign as a minister because he impregnated his secretary. Boris Johnson’s behaviour imitated that of a medieval lord siring a bastard child in every nearby village without eliciting any noticeable political effect other than mild envy. Given that Starmer’s popularity has already suffered one of the steepest falls in recent political history, it might actually improve his polling. And get people calling him by his first name.
The allegation against Mr Emhoff is a slightly different nature, as if substantiated it would almost certainly be a crime. I repeat that it has not yet been substantiated. On the other hand, as the Daily Wire‘s Mary Margaret Olohan pointed out,
The #MeToo allegation against Doug Emhoff has more corroboration than Christine Blasey Ford’s allegation against Brett Kavanaugh, which Kamala Harris herself aggressively defended.
*Edit: Commenter Barracoder reminded me that Kamala Harris is not the president of the United States. I literally, genuinely forgot that Joe Biden still holds the office of president.
Kamala isn’t the US president and hopefully never will be!
Sorry, I forgot about Joe Biden.
I literally, genuinely forgot that he still holds the office of president.
Two beer Kier,
Ali’s queer Kier,
Preferred the upper Tier,
Who knew he had the Gear?
St’Amour quite the Charmer,
Was it a fine Rear?
Or just expensive Gear?
“Holds”, not so much. Possibly “Occupies” in the same way that a comatose patient occupies a hospital bed, maybe.
It’s Obama by proxy that’s pulling the Whitehouse strings still connected to Nodding Joe.
Sir Keir Starmer has accepted more “gifts” (bribes) than any other Member of Parliament – this has been true for years. He is now going to give 13% of the value back – which means he gets to keep 87%
Conservative Central Office either did not know this before the election, or was too weak to use the information against the Labour Party. CCO always seems more comfortable attacking Conservatives than attacking the Labour Party – after all CCO wants to please the Guardian and the BBC, because they are “civilised liberal” people, not like us nasty Conservatives “out in the sticks” – far away from London.
K. Harris is a terrible candidate – both her beliefs, her fanatical Collectivism, and her behaviour.
However, the media are on her side (because the totally corrupt international establishment is on her side) and there is no chance the media will expose Democrat election rigging (mail-in ballots and all) – after France 24 (for example) eagerly supports the prosecution for President Trump for the “crime” of pointing out that Georgia was rigged in 2020.
And Georgia was rigged in 2020 as were other States.
“But journalists say…” – they have made their choice, chosen to side with the international totalitarians. Understood.
Not according to Guido…
I wonder whose paying his superinjunction costs?
Paul,
Nothing in their risible election campaign gave reason to suspect the Conservative party had any interest in another 5 years of running the country into the ground.
John G
It was reported yesterday that Lord Alli was being investigated by the House of Lords’ standards watchdog. Rarely has the expression ROFLMAO been more appropriate (for anyone unsure of my meaning I do not expect anything of consequence to come of this).
John Galt – Sir Keir Starmer has accepted gifts and “freebies” of much greater value than this.
John – did the leadership want to lose the election?
The (mad) timing of the election and the very strange campaign (such as walking out in the middle of the D. Day ceremonies), and the policies announced “let us bring back conscription”, “let us ban XYZ”, indicates that the leadership wanted to lose the election. It does NOT prove this charge beyond all reasonable doubt – but the evidence does, perhaps, point in that direction.
The worst election defeat for the Conservative party in 200 hundred years may (perhaps) have not been an accident.
So the question is why?
If one looks at who lost their seats in Parliament it includes many people who were very much a “problem” for the international establishment – people who were opponents of the project or agenda of the international establishment.
They are no longer in Parliament – and, therefore, have lost their platform to sound the alarm, to warn the public.
Getting them out of Parliament may, perhaps, have been the objective.
Paul:
I never understood the attraction Rishi Sunak had for Conservative MPs. He never cut an impressive figure at all, yet he came above Liz Truss in the MPs’ ballot, and the establishment got rid of her within seven weeks, so as to gift him the position.
If you had wanted an ineffectual little man to lead the Conservatives to electoral disaster, Rishi could have come from central casting. Who can forget him looking like a drowned rat in Downing Street announcing the doomed election? Liz Truss would at least have gone down fighting, Rishi seemed to think that banning smoking would be enough.
Remember, it’s not a conspiracy theory if it’s true.
I’m not exactly sure what the relevance is of the story about Emhoff. I mean it is salacious for sure, both with the nanny thing, which sounds like the plot of a porn movie, to the assault and battery which is far more disturbing. But he did that, not her. So I guess the best you can say is she showed poor judgement in selecting a partner and maybe that has some relevance in her ability (or in her case, inability) to govern.
But I guess that is the nature of politics. It isn’t about rational, logical choices but about vague emotional reactions. I guess the party who thinks the fact that she’d be the first black woman in the white house somehow makes her a more capable president can’t complain too much when other irrelevant stuff is used against her.
And it is worth saying that I could surely find three anonymous sources to assure me with utter conviction that Trump was in fact an alien from Jupiter — they saw the spaceship that brought him. And no doubt that story would get more air time than the Emhoff story.
Nonetheless, I also suppose Ms. “Believe All Women, even utterly unsubstantiated, vague accusations against Brett Kavanaugh” hardly has a right to complain too much about unsubstantiated charges against someone for political reasons.
Me? I’m old enough to vaguely remember when elections were about policy proposals and vision for the country.
Diversity hire. Many weak conservatives are desperate for something tangible they can prove to refute left-wing allegations of racism. And Rishi had the nice CV and was non-threatening.
Of course, the left never stop calling them racist and the media still call them mean bastards.
A strong right-winger responds to accusations of racism like, in the words of Bane from the Dark Knight Rises: ‘And this gives you power over me?!’
We know that most Conservative MPs are pretty weak.
JohnK
My own former MP, who did not vote for Mr Sunak, still said to me that Mr Sunak was a “very nice man who loves his family” – every other MP I spoke to said the same, the weird thing is that they all used exactly the same words (which thinking about it with hindsight – is weird).
“Loves his family” may well be true – but “very nice man” no – not after the exchange I watched between Mr Sunak and Andrew Bridgen in the House of Commons. Mr Sunak lied about the Covid “vaccines” – he said “categorically” (his word) that they were “safe” – he said this in 2024 after it was totally obvious that they were not safe.
“Very nide” people do not lie about matters of life and death.
Martin – yes, and, sadly, most of the better Conservative Members of Parliament lost-their-seats.
He was not lying. He meant that they had come to no harm.
Ah. They were a safe investment. That works.
I literally, genuinely forgot that Joe Biden still holds the office of president.
Seems the post is vacant. Maybe it is better this way.
This is a revelation. Any time I’ve seen Starmer, I’ve thought him a very cold fish.
The ‘NPC’ archetype. To think that Starmer could experience an emotion, even the most primal emotion, comes as something of a surprise.
Jacob – no it is not better, what it means is that there is no democratic check on the Deep State.
Not that Mr Biden provided such a check anyway – as he was a corrupt puppet installed by a rigged election.
America is now what Senator Conkling warned of so long ago – elections still happen, but unelected officials have more and more power, meaning that the people can elect conservatives – but they do not get conservative policies.
It must be added — in fact Paul himself added it above — that elections do happen, but, in the US, they are for show in more ways than one.
Maybe this is partly a consequence of the US having primary elections: that opens the door to a Presidential candidate who threatens the Establishment/Administrative State (Deep State, for short). Therefore, the Deep State must find a way of defending its privileges.
Paul:
That is very revealing information, as if they were reading from a script.
Really, I just fail to see what Conservative MPs saw in Sunak. He had only been an MP for a few years, and had risen to be Chancellor only because he was ready to put up with terms Sajiv Javed had refused.
Although we are not meant to notice these things, Britain got an Indian Hindu prime minister without anyone having voted for him. I think these things matter. If we had voted him in, fine, but not so good to have him imposed.
I do wonder why Sir Graham Brady decided to change the rules for the second election, or, as it turned out, non-election. The only two MPs to get over 100 nominations were Sunak and Johnson, who withdrew. The idea that he could have stood was utterly bizarre. Sunak was just a nowhere man, he came from nowhere and will be returning there. It was a very troubling interlude in the continuing decline of our once great nation.
Snorri – I wish I could dispute what you say on this matter, but I can not.
JohnK – I am baffled by all of it, I have no explanation.
Why should you remember, when he probably doesn’t?