You are reading a single comment by @Eejit and its replies. Click here to read the full conversation.
  • Can someone explain to me the corruption argument? A Labour Peer and Labour Member offers Labour leadership help, which they accept, and which Labour declares, according to the rules. There is no suggestion of a quid pro quo. Lord Ali is not a third party bidding for a contract. There is no advantage to him doing this. He's already a peer. There's no hiding of the help. There is no pretending to lose phones. Where's the corruption?

    If you wanted to say 'this is a shitty look for a person taking winter fuel payments and bad politics' then I'll agree with you 100%. But bad politics and corruption are different things and if you want to call something corruption you need to provide your evidence.

  • I couldn't give a fuck about any of this

    or

    If you wanted to say 'this is a shitty look for a person taking winter fuel payments and bad politics' then I'll agree with you 100%

    Choose one.

  • There's no contradiction there. I don't personally give a fuck about bad optics, that doesn't mean I don't recognise them as bad optics.

    Also, because it's not worth a separate reply: leading questions aren't evidence. Poetry less so

About

Avatar for Eejit @Eejit started