Forums
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
saddo
27 Mar 26 10:59
Joined:
Date Joined: 04 Dec 05
| Topic/replies: 55,849 | Blogger: saddo's blog
I thought our resident social justice warriors would have been all over this. What a lying sleaze ball we have running the country. Laugh

Post your reply

Text Format: Table: Smilies:
Forum does not support HTML
Insert Photo
Cancel
Page 1 of 2  •  Previous 1 | 2 | Next
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 60
By:
Shrewd_dude
When: 27 Mar 26 11:10
Tried to start a thread about this a couple of days ago.

Wasn't sure of Morgan Mcw.eeney was the banned word or pa.nts on fire was.
By:
PorcupineorPineapple
When: 27 Mar 26 11:12
Their defence of the "robbery" is ridiculous.


But surely the coppers have taken Mandelson's phone in their investigation, and so will have all the messages with McSweeney anyway. Only delaying the inevitable.
By:
saddo
When: 27 Mar 26 11:16
It's Labour innit, the SJWs will be looking the other way Grin
By:
Shrewd_dude
When: 27 Mar 26 11:16
Not really.

Whats on Mandelsons phone seized as part of a criminal process will only become public if he is prosecuted for a crime.

What was on Mcweeneys phone relates to Starmers terrible decision to appoint Starmer.

Two very seperate things.
By:
Shrewd_dude
When: 27 Mar 26 11:18
*appoint Mandelson
By:
saddo
When: 27 Mar 26 11:18
Clinging on to his job like a drowning man clutching a straw, pitiful stuff.
By:
Shrewd_dude
When: 27 Mar 26 11:36
Porky seems quite content that it might all come out in the wash in a couple of years if Mandelson gets prosecuted and If the Mandelson/Mcsweeney/Starmer messages are relevant to a criminal prosecution.

No doubt he will be on here defending the boobie whisperer by then anyway.
By:
Cider
When: 27 Mar 26 11:37
the met are part of that team. which we all knew beforehand anyway.

these fools expect the plebs to believe Mcswindle had his 'phone' stolen, with all of the government secrets and contacts on it, and it was treated the same as the rest us and just given a crime reference number for the insurance.

and as is evident to absolutely anyone, messages haven't been saved to the sim for about 15 years. any new device will have the whatsapp history etc. he hasn't lost all of his contacts Plain
By:
Cider
When: 27 Mar 26 11:44
the met were involved in trying to save 'huw' and the bbc weren't they, I seem to recall

all in it together
By:
Cider
When: 27 Mar 26 11:51
The delicious irony obviously, is that something that the proles do know an awful lot about, and likely much more than these fools, is mobile phones Laugh
By:
saddo
When: 27 Mar 26 11:53
If this was a Tory scandal, one poster on here would started 23 threads on it by mow.
But, not a word. Grin
By:
Cider
When: 27 Mar 26 11:55
one can only laugh
By:
Shrewd_dude
When: 27 Mar 26 12:02
It looks like an open door for the 'led by donkeys' 'lads'.

Any odds on their new project?
By:
PorcupineorPineapple
When: 27 Mar 26 12:06
What's the big controversy about the Mandelson appointment that we're awaiting?

I mean, what will we know that we don't already?





I keep saying Starmer should have been up front from the start and said something like "we know about Peter's good and bad sides, but we know he has links to those in Washington and can use those links to benefit us." Acting all coy and and undermined was ridiculous.
By:
saddo
When: 27 Mar 26 12:22
The relative silence is deafening, wd for trying, porcy. The syndrome lads must
be watching the news like we watched Dr Who as kids, from behind a cushion.
By:
Shrewd_dude
When: 27 Mar 26 12:23
Whether Starmer appointed a paedo becus da politics?
By:
PorcupineorPineapple
When: 27 Mar 26 12:47
Saddo - you've become very weird of late. Used to be able to have a discussion even if I often didn't agree. Now you just want to flounce. Get a grip lad (in a nice way).
By:
PorcupineorPineapple
When: 27 Mar 26 12:51
shrewdie - Well, I don't think he'd been convicted of that before had he? And he's not being investigated for it now. Only the usual dodgy deals and misuse of info. Which is sort of precisely the kind of thing that you could say would make him a good fit for the job. I mean, if he does get convicted for child abuse, and it comes out that Starmer knew about it, then fair does, but that seems to be spinning the current situation off a fair bit doesn't it.
By:
Shrewd_dude
When: 27 Mar 26 12:55
I am spinning it porcy.

Because that doesn't stop you from saying a war has been started because of similar rumours.
By:
PorcupineorPineapple
When: 27 Mar 26 13:13
eh?
By:
Escapee
When: 27 Mar 26 13:23

Whether Starmer appointed a paedo becus da politics?


It's blatantly obvious that mandy got the job precisely because he was part of the Trump/Epstein pedo ring.


What is sad is so many on here only want to 'Hold to account' a subset of the criminals based on their own political bias, They run a mile from "Holding to account" any maga figure.

How did they get so mentally disfigured to be completely blind to child S.A. so obviously committed by their hero?

By:
Shrewd_dude
When: 27 Mar 26 13:24
I will try and break it down for you porcy.

According to you the war in Iran is is to keep sexual Epstein allegations off the news for Trump.

According to you any suggestion of sexual Epstein allegations relating to Mandelson and him being appontied by Starmer will require an investigation or conviction before we can 'spin' it.

Is that correct?
By:
Cider
When: 27 Mar 26 13:41
The immediate issue us Starmer lying to parliament about not knowing of Mandy's ongoing relationship with Epstein. That's the here and now, an in this country.

No wonder he has subsequently given up the pretence of trying to answer any questions. Global statesman, nee superstar forensic lawyer :)
By:
PorcupineorPineapple
When: 27 Mar 26 13:42
ah ok

Yes, one of the reasons - imo - was to distract from the increasing clamour to release the files, and the fact that mainstream channels were now starting to report on the statement that Trump himself abused a kid.


Has there been any significant leak of Mandelson being involved in the abuse? I'm all for arresting him and throwing away tghe key if so. But I was always under the impression, Mandelson was more in the "good connection who provides valuable info" side of things.


You can spin away all you like though. Free country. But try not to be so offended if someone comes on and wants to talk about the facts as they are though.
By:
Cider
When: 27 Mar 26 13:43
lol
By:
Shrewd_dude
When: 27 Mar 26 13:47
ah ok

Yes, one of the reasons - imo - was to distract from the increasing clamour to release the files, and the fact that mainstream channels were now starting to report on the statement that Trump himself abused a kid.


So the investigations and convictions only matter, when........ enlighten us, I'm struggling here?
By:
Cider
When: 27 Mar 26 13:48
He isn't even aware of the hypocrisy contained within the same post Grin
By:
Cider
When: 27 Mar 26 13:52
Everything the mainstream claim about Trump must be assumed to be true though. Obviously :)

It's not like they would carve up his speeches to deliberately mislead people on critical matters, or anything like that!
By:
Escapee
When: 27 Mar 26 13:55

So the investigations and convictions only matter, when........ enlighten us, I'm struggling here?


when they are NOT investigating Trump and his cohorts.

You should know this as you run a mile from posting any sort of condemnation for ALL the pedos.

You're only concerned about the non maga pedos.




People wonder why Glitter and saville got away with it for so long, look inside yourselves for the answer, why do you look the other way?

By:
Cider
When: 27 Mar 26 13:58
Why did Huw get away with it? Why did they give him a lump of money? Why was he protected by the met? Why did he get let off with a slap on the (non w@nking) wrist?
By:
Cider
When: 27 Mar 26 13:59
Why were the mainstream, and liberalists on here, so desperate to protect him?
By:
PorcupineorPineapple
When: 27 Mar 26 13:59

Mar 27, 2026 -- 1:47PM, Shrewd_dude wrote:


ah okYes, one of the reasons - imo - was to distract from the increasing clamour to release the files, and the fact that mainstream channels were now starting to report on the statement that Trump himself abused a kid.So the investigations and convictions only matter, when........ enlighten us, I'm struggling here?


When the guy being accused is the same guy covering up maybe?

By:
PorcupineorPineapple
When: 27 Mar 26 14:00
cider - as before, go on then. State your case.
By:
Cider
When: 27 Mar 26 14:01
You also think Starmer is lying then, PP?

But you still support him as PM, I believe?
By:
PorcupineorPineapple
When: 27 Mar 26 14:01

Mar 27, 2026 -- 1:52PM, Cider wrote:


Everything the mainstream claim about Trump must be assumed to be true though. Obviously :)It's not like they would carve up his speeches to deliberately mislead people on critical matters, or anything like that!


It's not the mainstream media though. There are police reports, there are politicians of both sides who say he's covering up. Some real Maga-types who would have gone to the wall for him. Are they mainstream media or is that a bit inconvenient for you?

By:
Shrewd_dude
When: 27 Mar 26 14:03
Tin foil porcy.
By:
Cider
When: 27 Mar 26 14:03
I'm not fussed about Trump. I have no idea what is true and what's not, same as you. Palpably you want it both ways, for the people you support, only the supposed facts count. For the people you don't, anything goes.
By:
PorcupineorPineapple
When: 27 Mar 26 14:05

Mar 27, 2026 -- 2:01PM, Cider wrote:


You also think Starmer is lying then, PP?But you still support him as PM, I believe?


In that he knew Mandelson knew Epstein?

Yeah, almost certainly. But again, I think he reasoned that when you look at all these other people in Washington who also knew Epstein, then their paths will have crossed and he might have some dirt on them which could be useful for us. Therefore...


Support him as PM?

Not particularly. But I don't see any realistic alternatives. Would have loved Burnham to have got a seat. But Rayner's flawed and Cameron mk2 is a ridiculous shout. I've stated before, I'd be laying 2026 for him to leave. Not cos I want him to stay, but cos I think the odds aren't great, and, if he was going, it'd have happened a few weeks ago when this first broke. If they do find evidence that Mandy was a fiddler and Starmer knew and covered it up then certainly he'd be gone, but there are some gargantuan ifs in there.

By:
Escapee
When: 27 Mar 26 14:05

Why were the mainstream, and liberalists on here, so desperate to protect him?


Can you point to a single post on here where anyone is defending him?


Thankyou in Advance.


P.S.
I could find 10,000 posts on here with people desperate to defend Trump and deflect from the abundance of evidence that
shows he was a major player in this pedo ring.


P.P.S. prosecute all the pedos... anyone being selective about which pedos to prosecute is a wrong un.

Page 1 of 2  •  Previous 1 | 2 | Next
sort by:
Show
per page

Post your reply

Text Format: Table: Smilies:
Forum does not support HTML
Insert Photo
Cancel
‹ back to topics
www.betfair.com