-
For some of the period Labour are referencing Starmer was the literal director of public proesecutions, so maybe they should slap his face on the fucking thing and then you’d be able to recognise a smear when you see one
Eejit-
I don't disagree that it's a terrible ad, just that it's racist.
-
some of the period Labour are referencing Starmer was the literal director of public proesecutions
Whilst this is true, it hardly seems relevant. The DPP / CPS brought the prosecutions and convicted the abusers.
The ad is talking about the resultant sentencing which has nowt to do with the DPP or CPS.
-
For some of the period Labour are referencing Starmer was the literal director of public proesecutions
That is the whole point of the terrible ad isn't it, weekly at PMQ's Starmer is accused of turning a blind eye to grooming gangs when DPP and for letting Jimmy Saville going unprosecuted, so this is a rebuttal that these things happen under the current PM. Where it is rubbish is that Labour have been taking the high ground and making the point that the cases were never brought to the CPS to make a decision, so had nothing to do with Starmer, now they appear to of sunk to the Tory level. If you go on social media, Starmer will frequently be getting criticized for enabling grooming gangs and that is all due to Tory soundbites.
aggi
mashton
greentricky
Yes, putting David Cameron on there would have made much more sense.