The huge sell out...

So let me ask this question : IF Angela Raynor was there and Keir Starmer lied and said that she was not there (which of course he did not ), but never the less, let us imagine that Starmer did tell a lie and state that she was not there, exactly what difference would it have made. ?

If Raynor was there, but Keir Starmer said that she was not there, would it then have made a perfectly legal meeting illegal. ?

Or is it a case that the usual Tory Apologists are miffed and pissed off at the FACT that Bumbling Boris got fined for breaking the rules, and you cannot find any way to get at Keir Starmer to vent your revenge or anger, because Starmer did nothing wrong.

Your all full of shit ... insinuating that it was all somehow fixed because the Durham County PCC is Labour, suggesting that because Starmer said nothing, because no one asked him, he therefore must be a liar.

Utter desparation - utterly clutching at straws, this is gutter politics

Not at all, Boris Johnson was hounded out of office because of a piece of birthday cake, those in the media, politics and police/judiciary who hounded him out of office then stood back whilst Starmer and his common foul mouthed floozy had a curry piss up with no action taken.

Johnson was an idiot to allow himself to be put in that position, Starmer  was even worse because he did the same but with alcohol but claimed it was a "work" meeting. Perhaps if he wasn't pissed during work meetings he might come up with better ideas than his current (for this week) plan to put the limits of immigration into the UK in the hands of the EU. 

Your video here from YouTube is produced by Novara Media, a far left alternative media organisation which supported Jeremy Corbyn but is critical of Keir Starmer, an odd choice by you The Squeezed Middle.

I will repeat here what I have stated previously, that any politician who is not in government can change their policies, also that any politician either in, or out of government should be able to change their party manifesto, just as long as they do not go into an election with a manifesto with pledges, and then break from the policy set out in that manifesto.

To date, Keir Starmer has not gone into an election with a manifesto, or a set of promises, and then reneged or gone back on what was stated in such a manifesto.

Saying that he believes the water industry ought to be in state hands, and then changing his mind and then saying "we need to be pragmatic" IS NOT TELLING LIES, its called changing policy or changing priorities. If Keir Starmer said before next years election that he will take water back into state hands, and if this was worded in the manifesto, and if after winning that election he then reneged on that policy - Then, and only then would I accept that he is a liar.

The deadline for Keir Starmer to NOT alter or change any promise, pledge or commitment is the publishing of the election manifesto prior to a general election.

Rishi Sunak is going to fail on his Five Pledges, does that make him a liar ? 

NOW you are all morally puffed up about lies??

🤣🤣🤣

I dont know which are funnier, yours or the Brexit bunch.

It's Starmer's u-turns and duplicity which are difficult to understand, Sid. He changes his mind according to the wind direction. 

Like Blair he was legally trained which means he will swallow the UN rule book  hook, line and sinker.
No EU group is going to give us a better deal because we are not in their club and they are likely getting more numbers than us. 
I don't think he is as devious as Blair yet he will swallow the green issues and using the nanny state put more taxes into driving your car in one way or another.