Sheila Edwards

So much for her news sources…

“Charmless” is a compliment in her case.

Not sure I’ve heard that particular phrase before but I daresay it’ll now be used frequently by right wing media, by Tory and Reform followers and others intent on bringing down the Labour Party. Classic bullying tactics from Badenoch.

He’s a disgrace and the BBC is a disgrace for keeping him in post.

#BbcQuestionTime Are there really people who value the opinion of Nadine Dorries?

She is a loathsome bully, setting an example that her front bench are only too happy to follow. Her one word questions are merely an add on to a tirade of repetitive verbal abuse. There’s some welcome retaliation from Starmer this week.

If I valued your opinion I might be upset. Guess away you’re wide of the mark in many ways.

Epstein files mention Nigel farage 42 times. Keep sharing. Instagram, bbc news etc won't help with spreading this truth.

I’m real. My critical thinking is very likely to stand up to scrutiny and my reading comprehension has been thoroughly tested. I even have a good knowledge of UK politics over at least 50 years. I can happily live with your hatred.

I agree about the political expediency but not too sure he was aware of the risk to national security and that’s where the vetting failed.

The issue is now about Mandelson passing on state secrets to Epstein. That is where the vetting really failed. I remember Profumo’s involvement in the Keeler affair; Profumo, a Cabinet member resigned, retiring from public life. Macmillan stayed, but the scandal probably led to an election defeat.

Ah - a first name, a spot of online patronising! “Sounds like”, not fact then. I’m also not too sure how you “forensically” ignore something.

Brutus…

And not all people hate him… I don’t, but his judgement is flawed at times and the MSM take any opportunity to focus on his failures rather than his successes. It’s an age of discontent and Starmer is the current fall guy. I just hope someone else will take his place as a target - Farage perhaps???

Or they wanted him in post

Perhaps because he saw him as being a “friend” for Trump, known for his smooth operation and deviousness but not for the corruption just revealed. Pragmatism or poor judgement by Starmer- both probably. The vetting certainly failed but this is no reason for Starmer to be hanged, drawn and quartered.

On present showing, you’re probably right but Labour have been so beset by disasters - some real, others concocted, some of their own making, others not - that they’ve had little opportunity to publicise achievements. There may be a chance of success if the MSM stops rejoicing in constant criticism.

If you’re out on a limb, I’m there with you. Mandelson was appointed to build a relationship with the Trump government, a role for which he may have had the necessary deviousness. Vetting was inadequate, Starmer’s judgement flawed but he should not be the whipping boy for Epstein and Mandelson

Starmer might just have a chance if the MSM and other interested parties were not rubbing their hands with glee over the latest issue for which he can dragged through the mire.

He made him Ambassador because he thought he would be the one to build a good relationship with theTrump government. A pragmatic move which has gone spectacularly wrong. Trump is too unpredictable to be won over by anyone and there were already too many questions about Mandelson’s known past record.

And is there any chance of all the infected organs getting together to make one functioning human being. Very bleak chance and thank goodness for that…

Because Trump thinks he’s still running the American version of the Apprentice. Countries of the world are his current game show.

Just so predictable 🥱

Katya Adler and Chris Mason on BBC News at Ten. She was clear, informative, objective and to the point; Chris Mason used the opportunity to criticise Starmer’s stance. He could have focussed on Starmer’s unequivocal support of Greenland at PMQs but he chose not to… Bias??

I think Starmer is facing an unenviable dilemma for an international politician, in the face of an unpredictable foreign leader intent on building an empire at any cost. What should he do when what he knows to be right conflicts with what may help his country? Does the end justify the means?

Absolutely true. United as a country we stand but divided by politically motivated disagreement, we fall.

It is opposition for opposition’s sake.

Badenoch at PMQs, whose main skill is making bitchy personal attacks - and while she stays in the public eye,she will encourage this nastiness amongst all who support her. The members of the Opposition benches cheering her on are colluding.

Laura Kuenssberg has done her very best to damage any shred of self belief that Starmer may still have. Struggling to find anything positive in her interview; any achievements have been passed over or swept aside. The negativity of the MSM at its very worst.

A ridiculous waste of money and whatever the intention, the effect will be to incite division and racial tension.