Thank f**k for the space or it would have said Popeleo.

But Mandelson, come on man how can you think of anything other than Mandelson!

I'd have more respect for the media if they just had a bit of honestly and say they want farage as PM.

Wow, Robbins proved Starmer didn't lie or mislead parliament so they're just going down a different avenue to get Labour out of power.

James has joined the "get Starmer out regardless" media brigade, I honestly thought better of him.

Farage.

Not really.

How did he mislead parliament?

I'm sorry what should he have asked, what was Starmer to do when he got nowt back, phone them an say "there has to be something wrong, he can't have passed your tests" is that what you wanted or do what any sensible person would do and think "they've found nowt or they would surely have told me"?

You'd think but we all know they'll keep at it until they find he didn't use a paper ring hole reinforcer on the binder or something as trivial.

They'll get to the stage it'll be "why did they use black ink, surely thats racist, Starmer must resign".

Sorry for coming over aggressive its just I'm sick to death of the double standards Starmer and Labour recieve from the media, Starmer made a huge mistake in hiring Mandelson, he's apologised many time, now its "he lied he mislead parliament" no he didn't, where's the media now, still at it.

And that honest man backed everything Starmer had to say on the matter, the big question is and should always have been "who leaked the story to the press".

Some hacks seemed to have stopped reporting on today's select committee because he didn't throw them the red meat they wanted, pitiful.

So its changed from "Starmer was lying" to "why didn't he ask" even though Robbins has stated WHY he had no need to ask, next it'll be "why didn't you change the system so you HAD to ask", fucks sakes I wish they were as attentive about deform and had been about Johnson, definitely one rule for one!

Erm Robbins has already stated there was no need for anyone to ask what the outcome was, as far as Starmer was aware he passed the process, should he have went on the blower and said "are you sure, I'm a bit dubious you're not doing your job correctly, do it again"?

Its clear he wasn't lying, you can at least admit that?

And the facts are Starmer DIDN'T lie, Robbins has confirmed that on several occasions.

But its obvious he didn't, are you going to report that?

Yeah it means you think Starmer is lying even when its blatantly obvious he wasn't.

What did you expect?

So basically Keir Starmer was 100% correct about not knowing, needing to know and had no reason to ask, will the media and certain MPs now apologise?

Yeah I heard an hour or so of it on the radio, everything Robbins is saying backs up the PM that he was unaware and didn't need to know or even ask, lets see who apologises first?

The main stream media in the UK frantically trying to find a way of twisting this.

He was earning more as the head of DPP than the PM does now.

Is the media getting the blood they want or has Olly let them down so far?

I have, Peter Hearn has donated to the Labour party for years and once again there is zero, nil, nothing, no evidence to show he, or his companies, have gained financially or otherwise from these donations, you certainly picked the wrong donor bud.

But you've zero evidence, thats good to know.

But there is NO evidence of this with Starmer though, would you agree?