Apart from the fact it’s twitter and nobody gives a shit, these claims are interesting. As far as I can tell he’s just publishing these claims without evidence though, so could be bullshit. Nevertheless if you look at Starmers followers, there does seem to be an awful lot of bot like accounts following him.
So we’ve got the BBC saying “everything is cool” based on the DPP marking its own homework, with one of Keir’s pals leading the inquiry.
That’s all right then 
Unless, of course, you try and imagine what went on at the CPS.
Hmm. Interesting case has just arrived. Could implicate one of Britain’s most famous in a child sex scandal. Shall we kick it up the chain? Nah, not important.
I’m interested in who this Damien from Brighton actually is and how does he run these hourly audits of Starmer’s account; and how he is certain it’s replacing lost real followers with fake followers
As @Donkey_Schlong says “ As far as I can tell he’s just publishing these claims without evidence though, so could be bullshit.“
There are plenty who just want to believe but until proven otherwise…
1 Like
Agree, I’m tending towards thinking this is definitely bullshit now.
This guy’s behaviour is more than a bit off. Blocking people who ask questions, refusing to disclose his auditing tool.
It’s quite a tempting premise though. It’s fact that labour have been haemmoraging members since Starmer became leader. Would probably expect that to be reflected in twitter followers to some degree too and wouldn’t be surprised if there were efforts afoot to disguise Starmers unpopularity.
They also gained fuck tons of members because of Cult of Corbyn.
Labour Membership pre-Corbyn: 190k
Labour Membership now: 430k
Conservative Membership: 200k
Means fuck all.
Twitter have got an API for making data requests, and even if this particular data is not available, you can screen scrape it easily enough.
All you really need to do is
- Pull his followers
- Look for people with low follower counts
- Look for groups of people with high mutual follow counts
- Look for people that only joined Twitter recently
- Look for the same tweet (not a retweet) coming from those followers.
These sort of shenanigans are nothing new to the Labour right. During the Owen Smith debacle you had loads of bot accounts spouting exactly the same tweet.
FFS 
Reading this type of shit about twitter makes me glad I don’t use it.
1 Like
Here:
1 Like
I see Piers corbyn was in attendance
A scorcher of a piece by Jonathan Cook.
3 Likes
Excellent piece.
What boils my piss about all this is that Johnson was clearly right. Starmer was in charge at a time when Saville could have been prosecuted, and he did choose not to do so. This fake outrage is so transparent, it reminds me of Alistair “Cunt” Campbell storming into a BBC studio when they reported an interview which confirmed that Blair knew Iraq had no WMD before invading.
He’s also dead right about the contrast with the shocking media collusion in the demolition of Corbyn. Starmer might get through this in the eyes of the public, probably will, but he isn’t going to get anywhere with the Labour faithful.
Did he make that explicit choice? ie. He was presented with the evidence, and the likelihood of conviction, and then chose not to pursue?
I don’t know, but it’s indisputable that while he was in charge of the DPP, Saville was not prosecuted. Knowing what we know now after the inquiry into Saville’s historic crimes and the widespread knowledge of them at the time they were committed, it’s impossible to believe that the head of the DPP could have been unaware of them.
2 Likes
And that’s the bind Starmer is in. No personal involvement implies no personal knowledge, which is just ridiculous for a case of this import. I would say that the likeliest sequence of events went down as follows.
2009
Savile case has landed on the desk, boss
I’m not touching that with a fucking bargepole
2013
Mistakes were made, yadda yadda yadda
It’s not impossible by any stretch.
Police investigate and present evidence, CPS prosecute based on what the police present.
I think you guys are confusing what the police do and what the CPS do.
1 Like
If Starmer wasn’t personally involved when the case came about in 2009, then he wasn’t doing his job.
That is the bind the Labour leader finds himself in.
1 Like
But they don’t get involved until the police present the evidence.
Do you remember when Savile was arrested and questioned on this in 2009? The CPS advised there was not enough evidence to convict. If that’s the case, and they lose the case, he then cannot be charged again.
There were huge issues all the way through this, from the 60’s through to the late 00’s. To pin it all on Starmer is disingenuous, and is just pushing an agenda. Funny how you’ll chase an agenda against someone you don’t like, yet criticise the one against your chum Jezza.
1 Like
I’m not saying he’s anything special in that regard. Doubtless for Savile to get away with what he did, he’d have needed loads of people to look the other way.
There wasn’t really much evidence to prosecute Assange. Less, really. It didn’t stop Starmer nicking him and he’s still in Belmarsh now.
Finally, as I’ve said before and the article alludes to, Corbyn was supposedly responsible for every bit of bad business in the Labour Party, an organisation comprised of members that pay in.
If he’s responsible because he led the Labour Party, something Starmer has tried to weaponise himself, then Starmer, leading a professional organisation with employees can’t duck this.
1 Like
But I don’t think he has, he apologised for it in the past. Saying that he is a paedophile protector, or whatever those people are calling him, is complete tosh.
I’m trying to work out what the end game is for this? Do you think he should resign over this?
Why?