Labour Chaos - Don’t Be Distracted

A Government that had, no more than a year ago, been returned to power with 411 MPs, has this week been exposed as a clueless shambles, with its leader clearly not in control of his Parliamentary troops, and despite its main opposition, the Tories, showing that they are, in every political department, yet worse. But our free and fearless press has failed to identify the cause.

Morgan McSweeney - out of excuses

Their attention was seized by Rachel Reeves, the under-fire Chancellor of the Exchequer, appearing tearful and upset in the Commons yesterday. All the otherwise unemployable talking heads instantly knew more about this than anyone else, including Ms Reeves. But they still failed to nail the culprit.

It wasn’t about Ms Reeves, although she has been made the scapegoat for so long that it has clearly had a deleterious effect on her. The leader of this particular incarnation of Team Shambles is Keir Starmer, for whom former BBC man Jon Sopel had especially harsh words: “The political ineptitude and mismanagement of this is epic. The whips office, the Downing St operation, and DWP should be hanging heads in shame. And truly disastrous for Keir Starmer and what’s left of his authority”. Or was it really Keir Starmer?

The question has to be put, as Patrick Maguire of the Murdoch Times was a little nearer the target. “Keir Starmer told cabinet this morning that briefings against Morgan McSweeney must stop … PM said McSweeney had his full support and he ‘will not countenance’ criticism of him … Warned ministers: ‘We will not turn on our staff’ … Said Labour wouldn’t have won without McSweeney”. And a last sentence that identifies who really wrote that.

Labour “wouldn’t have won without McSweeney”? Without the heroic presence of the rank coward who won’t come forward and front up for his failings? The Big Man (ho ho ho) who, by the admission of his “friends”, worked to throw the 2019 General Election? Yeah, right.

The alleged political titan who made Labour so electable that 560,000 fewer voters put their cross next to the candidate representing The Red Team? And now the presence behind Starmer’s warning not to go after him. The problem for McSweeney and his cabal of nonentities is that they have been rumbled.

Abdi Duale - maybe change the background colour next time

Labour won as the Tory vote imploded, Reform UK split what was left, and turnout dropped to an abysmal 59.7%. There was no four dimensional chess on offer, just plain and shameless opportunism. Also, Labour’s poll numbers showed a worrying downturn in the last days of the campaign. What support remains is now being sprayed up the wall on a series of unpopular measures.

Whoever is in 11 Downing Street appears to be forbidden to ask the well off to pay a little more in tax. Is that Ms Reeves’ own choice, or is the McSweeney cabal behind that, too? Is that cabal behind all the threats of deselection made towards MPs who express a little more empathy towards the poor and vulnerable? We had a mere hint on that score yesterday.

McSweeney’s pal Abdi Duale, one of the “we won and the lefties lost tee hee hee” brigade, declared apropos something said in the Commons “This should be a cause for expulsion, no excuses”. Since when did he make the rules? Doesn’t New New Labour bother with due process any more?

This is, let us not forget, the crowd who loved to taunt Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership team with the claim that any other leader would be 20 points ahead in the polls. Even being one point ahead of Reform UK and its self-appointed Oberscheissenführer Nigel “Thirsty” Farage is, right now, something Starmer and his team can only dream of. And that, despite the stream of excuses from The Great Man, is directly down to McSweeney.

Writer and campaigner Francesca Martinez put it directly: “It's laughable how hard Labour are trying to avoid taxing the super rich … During Covid, it's estimated that the UK's richest increased their wealth by £890 billion … A tax of 0.6% would raise billions – and not push anyone into poverty … So does Labour now represent the super rich?”. Maybe that should be “Blue Labour”.

Whether “Blue” or “New New”, this incarnation of the cabal behind Labour has come to the end of its road. But won’t admit it. Or go with good grace.

Enjoy your visit to Zelo Street? You can help this truly independent blog carry on talking truth to power, while retaining its sense of humour, by becoming a Patron on Patreon at

https://www.patreon.com/Timfenton

Behold Lord Tobes Of Bellend

And so it came to pass that the time of year meant party leaders nominating a variety of the undeserving and otherwise underemployed as new members of the House of Lords, the Other Place that the current Government was so keen to abolish, but now, seemingly, isn’t. Labour has put forward thirty names, but most of them will escape scrutiny, thanks to Kemi Badenoch.

As ever, at times like this, the opposition rides to your rescue: Ms Badenoch, not content with making herself and her party look less credible with every week’s PMQs, has put forward one name guaranteed to put those of Charlotte Owen and Ross Kempsell, ennobled at the behest of disgraced former occasional PM Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson, in the shade.

Because the latest name in the Tory prospective peerage frame is none other than the loathsome Toby Young, who has for many years been full value for his nickname of Captain Bellend. I first observed the deep and sincere affection his peers in the media held for Tobes some years ago.

At the launch event for the HuffPost UK, Zelo Street was there in the auditorium, sitting in the back row as the launch presentation and debate began. Some 20 minutes later, the entrance door to my left opened, someone walked through it, and a chorus of booing ensued. What, I asked the bloke to my left, was all that about? “It’s OK, it’s only Toby Young” came the reply.

It got worse: Tobes was apparently having difficulty finding a seat. The disruption was brought to a swift end when Arianna Huffington recognised The Great Man, and no doubt also knew about all the snarky abuse that he had dispensed in her general direction. “Would you like to join us?” she asked, at which point Tobes thought better of making an even bigger arsehole of himself, and found himself a seat with remarkable swiftness.

That is the memory coming to the fore every time our free and fearless press attempts to polish the turd that is Captain Bellend: the foot-soldiers of this industry have a rather lower opinion of his munificence than their bosses. So most of the crap being spoken about him in reaction to the peerage nomination can be taken with one gigantic piece of salt.

Pride of place in that department goes to the increasingly desperate and downmarket Telegraph proclaiming “Free speech champion Toby Young awarded peerage”. As Billy Connolly once said, there’s going to be some swearing … FUCK OFF. Anyone and everyone has the right of free speech. But all too many on the right don’t like actions having consequences.

It gets worse, as a perusal of Tobes’ Wikipedia entry demonstrates: “Young has admitted using cocaine at the Groucho Club in central London, and also supplying drugs to others. He was subsequently expelled from membership of the club in late 2001 for writing about the cocaine use of friends he had supplied with the drug during a 1997 photo shoot for Vanity Fair”.

Any more minus points? “Young has come under criticism for comments he made on Twitter … These included what an Evening Standard editorial called ‘an obsession with commenting on the anatomy of women in the public eye’”. And how’s this for vanity? “Young is reported to have edited his own Wikipedia page 282 times over the course of six years”. Modest with it, eh?

Maybe this comment from Dawn Foster sums up Tobes’ true place in the establishment pantheon: “Young seems to think he is held in high regard by free school advocates. When I mentioned his name in the course of interviewing a former Department for Education employee for the piece, my interviewee headbutted the restaurant table in exasperation. I have found the sentiment, if not the gesture, to be common among his ideological comrades”.

That is merely reinforced by the knowledge that he was taken on, and then sacked, by the Times, under the editorship of Charles Wilson. This part of his career trajectory he shares with Bozo The Clown, someone else who is full of crap and gobby with it. He’s called Captain Bellend. Because he’s a bellend.

Lord Tobes of Bellend, of the borough of Leering in the county of Misogyny. Because they couldn’t find a horse called Incitatus.

Enjoy your visit to Zelo Street? You can help this truly independent blog carry on talking truth to power, while retaining its sense of humour, by becoming a Patron on Patreon at

https://www.patreon.com/Timfenton

Fawkes’ Sick Reeves Obsession

The greatest efforts of the perpetually thirsty Paul Staines and his rabble at the Guido Fawkes blog churned out post after post of knocking copy aimed at Labour’s deputy leader Angela Rayner. They would get her; she was going to be yet another scalp for The Great Guido. And little good it did them. Ms Rayner is still deputy leader; their smear campaign got them nowhere.

It is the kind of abject failure that the Fawkes massive is unable, or unwilling, to consider as it goes after yet another senior Labour politician who just happens to be a woman. This time, the target is Rachel Reeves, Chancellor of the Exchequer, and indeed the first female to hold that job. The pretext for this latest smear job is that Ms Reeves claims to be an economist.

In this she has some of those inconvenient things called facts in her favour: she has a Master’s degree in economics from the LSE. She is therefore correct in calling herself an economist. Much of the Fawkes moan about her is over her job titles since graduating. Big deal. As any fule kno, job title and what skills are actually required and used are very different things.

But that thought has not been allowed to enter chez Fawkes, as a succession of bad faith sneers has brought forth “Reeves Pushed ‘Economist’ Myth To Win Seat” (she won it as the Labour candidate, Fawkes folks), then “Pressure Piling On Reeves Over CV Farce” (it wasn’t), and then “Starmer Keeps Schtum On Reeves LinkedIn Fiddling”. Which got them precisely nowhere.

But they had to pretend that their obsession was justified, and so we got “Guardian Gets Excuses In Early For Reeves”, telling readers “The press is piling pressure on Reeves”, with a link that cites Themselves. And on it went, the next effort titled “Tories Target Chancellor Over Career Edits”. Except that her career had not been edited. So was that the end of it? You wish.

Later the same morning came “Labour Veteran: CV Edits Are A Good Thing”. That afternoon bought an alleged “Exclusive”, with “Retail Banking Reeves Signed Legal Documents Claiming To Be Economist”. Which she was, and is. On it went, the following morning bringing “Reeves Reeling From Economist Claim Fallout”. Which she wasn’t. Yet the obsession continued.

The next day brought “Latest Desperate Reeves Defence Line Deployed”, with The Great Guido still calming “Pressure is still piling on Rachel Reeves”, which it wasn’t. One day later, it was “Reeves’ Real Customer Relations Role Revealed”, then later the same day “Reeves’ Economist Myth In Labour Candidate Contest”, the Fawkes rabble now recycling old attacks.

But enough; you get the picture. And to make it worse, in the very next breath, the Fawkes blog is extolling the virtues, such as they be, of Reform UK Oberscheissenführer Nigel “Thirsty” Farage. A congenital liar, racist bigot, and con man. But this should surprise no-one: they were cheerleaders for disgraced former alleged PM Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson.

Rachel Reeves can still legitimately call herself an economist. Which is more than a whole succession of former Tory Chancellors could do. Like Winshton, who conceded that he did not know much about economics, but that shooting Montagu Norman would have been a good thing. There were others.

Long-serving Chancellor Neville Chamberlain was not an economist. Nor was Harold Macmillan. Nor were Selwyn Lloyd, Reggie Maudling, Tony Barber, Geoffrey Howe, John Major, Ken Clarke, George Osborne, or, indeed, Kwasi Kwarteng. And nor is Farage, the latest to be championed by The Great Guido. But that’s not the point: this is the kind of creepy obsession that would earn lesser mortals a visit from the Police and a suggestion to desist.

I am not Rachel Reeves’ greatest fan, and have passed adverse comment upon a variety of her decision making since Labour won this year’s General Election. But what the Fawkes rabble, whether encouraged by Staines, or by his successor Ross Kempsell, sorry, “Lord” Ross Kempsell, is doing, this sick and creepy obsession is bang out of order. But it should surprise no-one.

Because Guido Fawkes is part of the press establishment. This is how that establishment moves against its hate figures. I’ll just leave that one there.

Enjoy your visit to Zelo Street? You can help this truly independent blog carry on talking truth to power, while retaining its sense of humour, by becoming a Patron on Patreon at

https://www.patreon.com/Timfenton

So Farewell Then US Democracy

We may not like the verdict passed by voters in the USA, but it is their right, their call, and their majority preference that Combover Crybaby Donald Trump be returned to the White House for another term as President. What creative propaganda was fed to the electorate we may never know. What we do know is that Trump is not fit to serve a burger and fries, let alone his country.

His all too recognisable mental decline has been on view for some months. His mind is failing him, and those who have backed him to the hilt with their millions know it. They know he is not up to the job. Yet they supported his re-election; Trump is easily flattered, and his business empire almost bust. He gets some praise, some money, and his backers bend the USA to their will.

It is easy to look two years forward to the 2026 midterms, and reason that all will be corrected as the GOP loses waves of House and Senate seats, thus bringing into play those checks and balances for which the Constitution is rightly famous. But Trump has also told his fans that they will not have to vote ever again. He showed you who he was; believe him the first time.

For those in the USA who will suffer the bigotry, the misogyny, the uncaring authoritarianism, some did warn us, like Mehdi Hasan: “People - including top US journalists, perhaps especially top US journalists - don’t quite get how bad it’s going to be. How beyond term one it’ll be. How bad the Musks and RFKs will be. I don’t think even I fully accept how bad it’s going to be and I have been shouting how bad it’s going to be for years”.

Here on the other side of the North Atlantic, though, the problems will be very simply trade and defence. Trump is threatening swingeing tariffs on anything coming into the USA. Maybe NAFTA will not survive. So countries in Europe, inside the EU or not, will have to learn to do without that market.

That is, of course, easier said than done. But it must be done. It will not be easy to do, especially as, more or less at the same time, European countries that had seen the USA as The Great Protector, the one country that underpinned the NATO alliance, will have to learn to look after themselves, singly or, more likely, collectively. Which probably means via the EU.

Those countries will include Ukraine, as Trump has repeatedly voiced his backing for the gangsterist régime of Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin, and his disdain for the Government in Kyiv. US aid for Ukraine will wither away; either Europe allows the country to be annexed by Russia, or does something to prevent that. Trump’s USA will not ride to our rescue this time.

So where does that leave the UK, with its Government, headed by someone formerly so enthusiastically pro-EU, but now implacably opposed to closer ties with the European Club? Keir Starmer has to realise two things here: One, there is no point cosying up to Trump, who couldn’t give a crap about him. And two, he can’t ride the European Club horse and the Special Relationship horse at the same time. He has to choose one, and only one.

He must also learn to shut out the howling of our free and fearless press at even the mention of closer ties with the EU. Because he has little choice, when faced with an isolationist USA, but to mend fences with the EU, and forget his repeated refusal to countenance rejoining the bloc. In this, Trump and his gang have unintentionally done the UK a great service.

In the meantime, he will fulfil his promise for the USA to engage in no more wars, and instead keep those wars within his own country - a war on women’s rights, a war against ethnic minorities, a war against anyone opposed to his power grab, and a war against the freedom of speech he falsely promotes.

And those countries that have embraced neoliberalism can, in the meantime, reflect on its failure to deliver Trump’s opponents the White House. We might usefully consider re-reading The General Theory Of Employment Interest And Money, whose embrace saved the West from revolution after World War 2, while The New Great Dictator gets on with laying waste to the USA.

Europe needs to look after itself. And the UK has to choose - wisely.

Enjoy your visit to Zelo Street? You can help this truly independent blog carry on talking truth to power, while retaining its sense of humour, by becoming a Patron on Patreon at

https://www.patreon.com/Timfenton

Kate And A Media Obsession

The most telling giveaway of election coverage, the revelation that this is a campaign destined to develop not necessarily to their favourite team’s advantage, is when it vanishes from the front page. Today is one of those days, the impending loss of power by the Tories replaced by an even more inexplicable obsession - the Royals, or rather, the Royals the press likes.

That means Royalty that does not complain about the sick and creepy coverage served up by our free and fearless press. Which leads us to the return to duty of the Princess of Wales. The former Kate Middleton has had her share of creepy coverage over the years, only out-creeped by what was dished out to her sister Pippa, in the years before the latter married.

The Moniker coined - most likely by the Daily Mail, under the less than benign leadership of the legendarily foul mouthed Paul Dacre - and applied to Pippa was “Her Royal Hotness”, the kind of toe-curlingly embarrassing, borderline vomit inducing, and bang out of order leering misogyny that only the inmates of the Northcliffe House bunker can get away with nowadays.

So Kate has had treatment for an undisclosed form of cancer. So have millions of 42-year-old women, most of whom then pick themselves up and get back to work, family, home, and the rest. For them, there is no press coverage, and certainly not the fawning, creepy and obsessive diet served up this morning, telling readers in no uncertain terms what to think.

The crawling tone is set by papers like the Sunday Brexit, still called the Express, proclaiming “IT’S JUST KATE TO SEE YOU AGAIN … Princess steps out for first time in six months”, and the Murdoch Sun on Sunday simpering “Princess Back On Parade … Kate wows in return to duty after cancer shock … SUPER TROOPER”. Headline writer revealing their age.

But these were a mere hors d’oeuvres for a much more sick-making entrée: cue the Mail on Sunday telling readers “Day That Lifted The Nation’s Hearts … On cue, the sun broke through the showers to shine on her - and the whole world said in unison … It’s lovely to see you too, Kate”. The name on the by-line, to no surprise at all, is that of Sarah “Vain” Vine.

The underlying aggressiveness in the headline is so obvious: the whole world thinks like this, so if you don’t, not only are you not the Mail’s kind of people, you risk incurring the displeasure of the Vagina Monologue and his attack dogs if you so much as utter a peep in protest. Thus the fear of the press at any thought of the monarchy being binned is revealed for all to see.

Moreover, the MoS is not the worst in the crawl-fest: that honour goes to the increasingly desperate and downmarket Telegraph, and the irretrievably batshit Allison Pearson. “Our Fair Lady lifts nation’s spirits [headline writer even older than the Sun’s] … On a cold, grey day, Princess proves a tonic at Trooping the Colour on her return to public life after cancer treatment”.

BIG INTERCOURSING DEAL. Cue Ms Pearson.

“Two words. Thank you. Thank you Princess of Wales for being an absolute trouper and attending Trooping the Colour on a cold, grey day when lesser mortals with your illness would have stayed home, tucked up in their jim-jams [that would not have got past the subs in Bill Deedes’ day]. Thank you for sacrificing the privacy that is so much needed to get you back to full health”.

Whatever that means to those not in possession of servants, unfeasible amounts of money, the most upmarket of property portfolios, a Government prepared to step in and foot rather a lot of the bills, and a media class ready and willing to shit all over anyone who objects to the whole circus.

The Monarchy will endure for as long as it enjoys the support of the people over whom it continues to rule. Our free and fearless press shows that it is an integral part of an Establishment frightened at the thought of reality intruding and the Royals vanishing from view. After all, if they go, what part of the power structure not based on merit will go next? Best keep the proles in line.

Which means more fawning copy when deemed necessary. Ho hum.

Enjoy your visit to Zelo Street? You can help this truly independent blog carry on talking truth to power, while retaining its sense of humour, by becoming a Patron on Patreon at

https://www.patreon.com/Timfenton

Diane Abbott And Labour Lying

As dawn broke today, whatever the right-leaning part of our free and fearless press threw at them, Labour were out in the distance, and looking at a majority well into three figures come the General Election. By lunchtime, that same party was in deep doo-doo, and sinking deeper. A week was once a long time in politics; maybe that period is now a little shorter.

What happened can be put directly: long-serving MP Diane Abbott had made an assertion in an article that “Jewish, Irish & traveller people undoubtedly experienced prejudice but that they were not subject to racism ‘all their lives’”. There were howls of protest at her remarks, and allegations of anti-Semitism, with Irish and Traveller people not getting a look-in.

Labour launched an investigation into Ms Abbott’s comments. Since then, all enquiries as to whether she would be allowed to stand as an MP at the next General Election have been deflected: there was an investigation, we must wait for it to conclude. Keir Starmer was especially keen to point this out to whoever was asking. And then, today, came inconvenient reality.

The BBC’s Victoria Derbyshire launched the explosive device at 0739 hours: “I can reveal Labour’s investigation into suspended MP Diane Abbott’s racism comments finished 5 months ago. A source says she was given a ‘formal warning’ in Dec ’23. Ms Abbott was required to do an online ‘anti semitism course’ - which she did in Feb”. OH DEAR, KEIR. And there was more.

“Yet source says she still hasn’t been told if she can stand as a Labour candidate at election. I understand veteran MP is ‘angry, depressed & worn out’ by way she feels she’s been treated by Labour”. So not only Starmer, but every other Labour figure who echoes the line on the investigation not having concluded, had misled their audience. What was it Gordon Brown said?

His reproach of Damian McBride was short and to the point. “Don’t. It’s the lie that gets you”. Now it has got Starmer. So, having been caught with his pants well and truly alight, what to do? What would a sensible and pragmatic Prime Minister in waiting have done? What would a politician wanting to dispel thoughts of dishonesty have done? What would Nietzsche have done?

Sadly, it seems that the Labour leader’s office does not operate on such a lofty intellectual plane. Having already claimed that Ms Abbott’s suspension had nothing to do with him - restoration of the whip, with the chief whip reporting to him, has everything to do with him - the last thing Starmer needed was evasion, not owning up to having misled the electorate.

Instead, official radio silence has descended. Starmer would have known about the investigation concluding; he lied about that. The impression of forthright dishonesty is now inescapable. Rumours swirl about not making a decision on whether Ms Abbott can stand in time for her to run as an independent, as former leader Jeremy Corbyn has done.

Those rumours are now caught up in further rumours about long-serving Labour MPs being asked to retire, so pro-Starmer favourites from the NEC can be gifted safe seats. And all the while, right-wing newspapers and other media outlets are forming up a damning characterisation of a Prime Minister in waiting as not only dishonest, but evasive, devious and untrustworthy.

Will today’s revelation blow Labour off course? Don’t bet against it.

Enjoy your visit to Zelo Street? You can help this truly independent blog carry on talking truth to power, while retaining its sense of humour, by becoming a Patron on Patreon at

https://www.patreon.com/Timfenton

Buckland Elphicke Attack BACKFIRES

As if seasoned media watchers needed reminding, the right-leaning part of our free and fearless press shills shamelessly for the Tory Party - no matter how corrupt, inept or dysfunctional it gets - while failing to do its homework, so desperate is it to take its readers for mugs. Today has brought an excellent example from both the Murdoch and Rothermere empires.

Natalie Elphicke has crossed the aisle and joined Labour. Therefore she has become disloyal to the cause, a turncoat. As such, all the dirt the press has accumulated on her can now be dished. This analysis is not supporting her - her views are particularly distasteful - but her attackers are lower still. Worse, they and their main source have missed something rather important.

Still, let’s consider the press offerings, however lame they are. The Sunday Times claims “Elphicke ‘asked lord chancellor for favour over husband’s trial’ … Defector MP wanted case moved to lessen publicity”. Looks like those all-important quotation marks are doing some rather heavy lifting there.

Over at the Mail on Sunday, we get “As Starmer faces backlash over Natalie Elphicke’s defection, another bombshell … TURNCOAT MP ASKED MINISTER TO PULL STRINGS FOR HUSBAND’S SEX ABUSE TRIAL”. TURNCOAT! TRAITAH!! Telling readers what to think once more, and remember, the Mail titles were the ones that refused to be persuaded of New Labour’s case back in 1997. They were Tory then, and will be next time.

So, predictably, we also get “The claims are likely to prove embarrassing for Sir Keir, a former Director of Public Prosecutions”. What the merry fuck has his time as DPP got to do with it? Over to the BBC: “Natalie Elphicke, the new Labour MP for Dover, has been accused of lobbying ministers over her then-husband Charlie's sexual assault case”. Yes? Yes yes? Yes yes yes?

“Ms Elphicke is accused of asking Sir Robert Buckland, the then Justice Secretary, to help move the date of the case, apparently to avoid publicity. A spokesman for Ms Elphicke, who defected from the Conservatives last week, said the claims were ‘nonsense’". And then the $64,000 question. “Labour questioned why they were not raised earlier”. I’ll bet they did.

Let’s have a little more detail on that question. “A Labour Party spokesman had said: ‘Natalie Elphicke totally rejects that characterisation of the meeting … If Robert Buckland had any genuine concerns about the meeting, then he should have raised them at the time, rather than making claims to the newspapers now Natalie has chosen to join the Labour Party”. Quite.

Darren Guy was one of those not persuaded by the timing of this allegedly exclusive piece of allegedly investigative journalism. “Its amazing how the tory press ignored her while she was sitting on the ‘correct’ bench but turned on her the minute she was sitting on the ‘wrong’ bench. Makes you wonder what else they have on current tory MPs but are keeping quiet about it”.

Liz Gerard mused “Buckland and the Tories now have questions to answer. He may have acted properly, but they shielded her”, and John Crace was on the same page: “Curious that Robert Buckland didn’t remember Natalie Elphicke had lobbied him over her husband’s court case when she was still a Tory MP”. LBC host James O’Brien was yet more unimpressed.

“This is an incredible illustration of how completely bent the Tories are & how completely commonplace it is now. Here, they’re saying, is a ‘scandal’ we have kept secret for four years - please use it to attack Labour, who knew absolutely nothing about it”. The potential blowback for Buckland is worse.

If Ms Elphicke has broken the law, he has potentially broken it too - for covering up her alleged misbehaviour. And with the Tories 30 points behind Labour in the opinion polls to add to a shockingly bad series of local and Mayoral election results (plus another of those Parliamentary by-election upsets), all that an already weary electorate is going to see is yet more Tory Sleaze. The same thing that did for John Major all those years ago.

Crap politics, meet crap journalism. The electorate has stopped listening.

Enjoy your visit to Zelo Street? You can help this truly independent blog carry on talking truth to power, while retaining its sense of humour, by becoming a Patron on Patreon at

https://www.patreon.com/Timfenton

Laurence Fox - A Complete Shit

Was he, one wondered, just an amiable eccentric who wasn’t really a racist bigot, but merely misunderstood? Former minor thesp, didn’t-even-get-started musician, multiple failed litigant - as in loser of lawsuits - and appallingly bad at politics politician Laurence Fox has now provided the answer in no style at all. There is nothing amiable or merely eccentric about him.

Dear Larry. Dear Dear Larry. Dear hopefully nicked Larry

The Great Man got himself into an argument with broadcaster Narinder Kaur. Sadly for Dear Dear Larry, he couldn’t just leave it at the stage of agreeing to disagree, and posted an explicit upskirt photo of her on Twitter, X, or whatever Muskrat’s calling it this week. He shouldn’t have posted it, and the platform should have taken it down sharpish. Neither event happened.

Which means that both Fox and Twitter could be in serious trouble: as Ms Kaur has now told, “Police are involved now”. Posting material like that is potentially illegal, and potentially punishable by a custodial sentence. Fox’s recent conduct makes him eminently well-qualified for being banged up for a few weeks down The Scrubs. Even the right-wing press is unimpressed.

So it was that the Mail told readers “Broadcaster Narinder Kaur has thanked people for their support amid the ongoing police probe into Laurence Fox over an 'upskirt photo' he shared of her online … Former actor Laurence Fox posted the explicit image of Ms Kaur on X, formerly Twitter, without her consent on Wednesday evening amid a spat about their political views”.

What say the Rozzers? “A spokesperson for the Met Police told MailOnline: 'We have been made aware of a post on social media regarding an up-skirting offence and we are currently investigating the circumstances.’” Also, “There was outrage after Mr Fox posted the photo, which was taken and shared online without the consent of Good Morning Britain contributor Ms Kaur, to X. He has since deleted the post”. Mighty courageous of him.

And the potential offence? “The Voyeurism (Offences) Act 2019 applies to anyone operating equipment or records an image under another person's clothing without reasonable belief of their consent, to view their genitals or buttocks. It is a criminal offence where the purpose is to obtain sexual gratification or to cause humiliation, distress or alarm. The maximum sentence if found guilty is two years in prison”. And there is more.

His next hotel stay?

“'Revenge porn', the sharing private, sexual photos or videos of another person without their consent with the purpose of causing embarrassment or distress, is a sexual offence under the Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015”.

Larry having to sign the Sex Offenders Register? So did those possibilities make him stop and think? Sadly, neither event occurred. Instead, Dear Dear Larry has since issued a rambling non-apologia. He’s honestly very very sorry. But he isn’t actually sorry at all. Because he’s a total shit.

Here’s his schtick. “I would like to apologise to [Narinder Kaur]. Although it’s not my fault she forgot to wear any pants with a load of paps about, I shouldn’t have sunk to her level. She doesn’t deserve mockery for being a nice woman seeking fame. And she is just that. A nice woman. Seeking fame … She gets away with it because she is a woman and she is brown. Those are the woke rules; that if you are brown or a woman, you can do no wrong”.

How very North Minehead By-Election of him: “I am not a racialist but, and this is a big but …”. On he rambled. “Her motivation seems to me to always try to say anything which will get her some attention and approval. As you may have noticed, I’m not here to seek approval or to make friends. I’m here to expose the terrible ideas and virulent hypocrisy which are wrecking the social fabric”. Disagreement is now “wrecking the social fabric”.

But enough already. At the very minimum, Fox should be given a Police Caution for what he’s done, and thereby become the owner of a criminal record. Or maybe a couple of months’ porridge. Especially as he’s signed off with the creepy suggestion that he and Ms Kaur meet for a coffee.

The time of Laurence Fox was for a time, but not for all time. Just rejoice at that news.

Enjoy your visit to Zelo Street? You can help this truly independent blog carry on talking truth to power, while retaining its sense of humour, by becoming a Patron on Patreon at

https://www.patreon.com/Timfenton

Rayner And Cops - Who Wrote The Letter?

For people merely reporting the news, the perpetually thirsty Paul Staines and his rabble at the Guido Fawkes blog seem very familiar with the claims now being investigated by Greater Manchester Police regarding what Labour’s deputy leader Angela Rayner may or may not have done wrong. More familiar, it seems, than the Tory MP who made the complaint.

If James Daly didn't write his own letter ...

One has to wade through an awful lot of creepy and obsessive bad faith knocking copy - the thought enters that, had the target been Fawkes fave (yes, it’s her again) Nadine Dorries, she would have already have called her detractors for alleged stalking - to find that the Tory MP concerned was James Daly, who sits for Bury North (until the election, after which he won’t).

The Great Guido, in a superb example of geographical ignorance, describes him as a “local” MP, despite Bury North not only not bordering Ashton-Under-Lyne, Ms Rayner’s constituency, but also being some distance from it. But the Fawkes massive knows rather more about the complaint being made to the unfortunate cops about what Ms Rayner did or did not do.

So much, in fact, that the Fawkes blog dedicated a long-ish and tedious post to the matter last week, telling those not yet asleep that “Most commentators are focusing on the electoral roll aspect”, but “with a 12-month limit for proceedings to commence after the crime was committed - this means that the police probably won’t recommend … that Rayner be prosecuted”.

Shouldn’t that be “allegedly” committed? But do go on. “A perjury charge would also be disproportionate in isolation”. Would it now? Have Staines and his pals been taking legal advice? Carry on. “What then was her motive for pretending publicly on the electoral roll that she lived at her old house? It was almost certainly to avail [sic] of the substantial council house discount”.

Was it now? “By misrepresenting where she was living she could, prima facie, have obtained a financial benefit of £16,975”. They have been taking legal advice, haven’t they? And the conclusion from all of the above?

... then who done it?

“The substantive issue for the police is nothing to do with capital gains tax, or taxes on rental income or any other of the myriad of potential HMRC related issues. This is about gaining a pecuniary advantage by misrepresenting her living arrangements. This is a more serious issue than making false declarations under PPERA, the police will in all likelihood be more interested in following the money”. Well, that’s that, then. Or rather, not when James Daly presented himself for a little light media grilling the other day.

With a little prompting from Labour’s Chris Bryant, Daly duly blustered “The matter is with Greater Manchester Police”. Bryant wasn’t having that. “What do you think she’s done wrong?” Come on James! “I’ve just answered that question”. Oh no he hadn’t. What were the concerns that he’d put to the Police? “The information that [GMP] released to the Times, and I think that those are the broad framing of the matters that they are considering”.

He still wouldn’t, or couldn’t, say what she’s supposed to have done wrong. Beth Rigby intervened. “You wrote to the Police. Did you not put concerns or allegations? Didn’t you write to them about it? Am I misunderstanding … what did you ask them? Why won’t you say?” But he still wouldn’t answer.

“I asked the Police to investigate certain matters that were in the public domain … regarding certain things”. Ms Rigby tried again. “Did you ask them to investigate tax matters … electoral roll issues?”. Then we came close to an admission: “I think there are a number of matters, and I think some of the issues that you’ve raised, are included within that”. He THINKS so.

But he doesn’t want to discuss the matter because there’s a Police investigation. Why? Is anything here sub judice? Maybe he should ask the Fawkes rabble to get him up to speed, as they seem to know more than he does. Meanwhile, another Tory MP - Mark Menzies - is generating headlines for yet more alleged misbehaviour. Not that The Great Guido is telling you.

Did Daly write his own letter? And if he didn’t, who did? I doubt that the Fawkes massive done it. But they may know who did. No pressure, now.

Enjoy your visit to Zelo Street? You can help this truly independent blog carry on talking truth to power, while retaining its sense of humour, by becoming a Patron on Patreon at

https://www.patreon.com/Timfenton

GB News - Cuts Incoming

For some reason, the perpetually thirsty Paul Staines and his rabble at the Guido Fawkes blog, usually so keen to report anything and everything happening at Gammon Broadcasting™ News (“Bacon’s News Channel”), have come over all silent on the subject. Their last post mentioning GB News was on the 26th of last month. Cat got your tongue, O Great Guido?

Or maybe not

What the Fawkes folks know all too well, but the rest of us are just beginning to notice, is that GB News is in deep financial trouble - that is, it will be as soon as one or more of its backers ceases to be prepared to see their money sprayed up the wall. Losses in the year to 2023 had grown from 2022’s £30.7 million to a whopping £42.4 million. This year is unlikely to be any better.

On top of that, Paul Marshall, one of those looking on as his money is sprayed up the wall, has apparently decided to join the bidding war for the bundle containing the increasingly desperate and downmarket Telegraph and the increasingly alt-right Spectator magazine. As a result, he is, it seems, about to quit the board of the company that owns the broadcaster.

This from Sky News: “Sir Paul Marshall, the hedge fund tycoon, is preparing to step down from the board of GB News' parent company as he eyes a renewed bid to acquire The Daily Telegraph. Sky News has learned that Sir Paul, the co-founder of Marshall Wace and largest shareholder in the television news channel, is expected to hand over his board seat at All Perspectives to Lord Agnew, chair of the UnHerd Ventures vehicle”.

Do go on. “The potential board changes at All Perspectives come as GB News prepares to make an unspecified number of job cuts as part of a corporate reorganisation. Employees were informed about a round of prospective redundancies at a meeting on Tuesday, according to insiders”.

There was more. “GB News remains heavily loss-making, although it has been gaining momentum with its audience figures in recent months, boosted in particular by the former UKIP leader Nigel Farage's role as a presenter on the channel”. The Mr Thirsty effect. But there was a downside.

“[GB News] has been at loggerheads for months with Ofcom, the media regulator, over its use of prominent politicians as presenters … Ofcom concluded last month that GB News had breached impartiality rules, but that it would not impose sanctions”. Also, “In 2022 … Discovery sold its 25% stake for £8m … implying a 60% reduction in the company's value at the time … Spokespeople for GB News and Sir Paul declined to comment on Thursday”.

So who might be for the chop? Hmmm, that’s an interesting one. Farage they need for brand recognition, as well as his ability to talk well, but lie badly. After economics editor Liam Halligan left, other specialist pundits may follow - those like the low moaning sound of “royal” specialist Angela Levin, and former replacement teaboy to the Great Guido, Tom Harwood.

Maybe some of those Tory MPs, whose presence suggests there is a more serious connection between The Blue Team and GB News, could be for the chop. Or former Tory MPs, like 30p Lee Anderson. After it was revealed by Byline Times - small wonder the likes of The Great Guido hate them - that the Government is spraying taxpayers’ money up the wall on GB News advertising, there may have to be even more cuts if that tap is turned off.

How much taxpayer money? “Despite GB News often platforming racists and conspiracy theorists, and facing record numbers of Ofcom investigations, more than £1 million of UK taxpayer money has been spent on almost 10,500 ads since the channel launched in summer 2021”. That much.

So far, the official stance is to talk up the broadcaster’s prospects. Last December, “Angelos Frangopoulos, GB News' chief executive, said: ‘GB News is in an accelerated growth phase, beating targets across its platforms. We are always evaluating strategic and investment opportunities.’” Very brave words, Minister. Brave but utterly futile. GB News is bust.

They thought they’d won the war when the Murdochs pulled the plug on TalkTV. The reality was that they were next. Just rejoice at that news.

Enjoy your visit to Zelo Street? You can help this truly independent blog carry on talking truth to power, while retaining its sense of humour, by becoming a Patron on Patreon at

https://www.patreon.com/Timfenton

Guido Fawked - Investigation Hypocrisy

Nothing has put the rank hypocrisy of the perpetually thirsty Paul Staines and his rabble at the Guido Fawkes blog in sharper focus than their sick and obsessive pursuit of Labour’s deputy leader Angela Rayner. Today has brought an excellent example of this, as one of their favourites has been caught peddling misinformation bordering on malicious dishonesty.

Behold the judge of standards in public life

Susan Hall, the increasingly desperate Tory candidate for the London Mayoral election next month, has been gratuitously slagging off her Labour opponent, incumbent Sadiq Khan, claiming that Khan is about to implement policies that he is not. The pièce de résistance in Ms Hall’s pantheon of misinformation is the totally false claim that Khan will hit motorists with a pay per mile scheme.

This from the Standard: “In recent days Ms Hall has repeatedly attacked Labour’s Mr Khan for ‘planning a new pay-per-mile tax’, which she calls ‘his Ulez 2.0’ … The mayor has admitted asking TfL to explore the concept, but has promised it will not be pursued, saying: ‘As long as I am mayor, we’re not going to have pay-per-mile’”. Then it got worse.

“Fact-checking campaigners have criticised Conservative mayoral candidate Susan Hall’s campaign as ‘deceptive' for a leaflet saying Sadiq Khan will bring in a pay-per-mile system for drivers … Images of the leaflet, which claims the mayor wants to bring in ‘another tax on drivers’, were published online by Full Fact”. Then it got worse still.

As Adam Bienkov at Byline Times has told, “The Conservative Party has been accused of running a campaign against Sadiq Khan which is based on a ‘barefaced lie’ which will ‘panic’ Londoners into handing over their personal data … Hall’s campaign have sent out leaflets to Londoners which are designed to look exactly like driving penalty notices”. There was more.

Susan Hall - may be celebrating prematurely

The leaflets have a QR code. “Anyone scanning the code will be taken to a website requesting they fill out a ‘petition’ against the new ‘tax’, which then collects their data”. Also, “The Conservative Party is not mentioned at all aside from a small print reference to ‘CCHQ’”. It’s Zac Goldsmith 2.0.

And has sparked an investigation by the ICO: “The Information Commissioner's Office say they are now considering complaints about the Conservative party's Sadiq Khan leaflets”. So, O Great Guido, given the headline “Police Reconsidering Rayner Case After Criticism”, and knowing the legendary Fawkes appetite for consistency and even-handedness, where is the equivalent headline for Ms Hall, following her misleading leaflets?

But you know the answer: of Ms Hall’s deliberate attempt to smear her way to the Mayoralty, there is nothing. Nil. Nix. Nada. Zip. Zilch. Zero. Not a sausage. Bugger all. But there is a crude attempt to smear SNP leader Humza Yousuf using the old Guilt By Association ploy, or to be more specific, the old Guilt By Claiming He Is His Brother In Law’s Keeper ploy.

And there are two more instalments this morning of Staines’ continuing sad obsession with Ms Rayner, bringing back memories of the right-wing media pile-on against Keir Starmer over what was called Beer And Currygate in a failed attempt to make it sound like a story. And when Starmer was cleared of any wrongdoing, The Usual Suspects inferred He Done It Anyway.

So it will be the same for Ms Rayner. So will the Fawkes hypocrisy.

Enjoy your visit to Zelo Street? You can help this truly independent blog carry on talking truth to power, while retaining its sense of humour, by becoming a Patron on Patreon at

https://www.patreon.com/Timfenton

The Right’s Sick Rayner Obsession

One senses immediately whether a politician is genuine, unselfish, enthusiastic, an asset to their party, someone who can persuade others to stand in their corner, who empathises readily not only with voters, but their whole family group. Labour’s deputy leader Angela Rayner is one such. It is why she is now the target of some seriously obsessive behaviour.

Evening all

Ms Rayner is the one who must step in if Keir Starmer were to become indisposed. Unlike her party leader, who all too often looks a little stiff, too upright, visibly ill at ease with some lines of questioning, she is a natural. The thought has no doubt entered with the right that Labour’s poll numbers would improve under her leadership, if such a thing were possible.

Right now, the Tories are looking at a General Election thrashing; if Ms Rayner were in charge, they would be looking at a Canada-style wipeout. Hence the attempts to pull her down a peg or two, many of which have come from the inmates of the Northcliffe House bunker, where the disciples of the legendarily foul mouthed Paul Dacre have leapt from gutter to sewer.

First came the claim that Ms Rayner was wont to do a Basic Instinct-style flashing of now disgraced former alleged Prime Minister Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson. The Mail has suggested she owned up to having done this. But this was a vicious and malicious pack of lies; she had done no such thing. Even the perpetually thirsty Paul Staines and his rabble at the Guido Fawkes blog showed this wasn’t possible. But now The Great Guido is also smearing.

Maybe someone has goaded Staines, telling him the hard truth that he is not as influential as he thinks he is, that he is no longer strong, if he ever was in the first place. Maybe the Fawkes massive wants to show that they still have what it takes to bring someone down. But here a credibility problem enters.

As Tory MP Michael “Wiggy” Fabricant told last Thursday, “On the 13th March 2024, I posted on X a comment on a Guido article which claimed that Dale Vince, a Labour Party donor, is a supporter of Hamas, a proscribed terrorist organisation. This post referenced an article published by the website GuidoFawkes which included an edited clip of an interview with Dale Vince that had been taken out of context”. Ah, Fawkes and context. Do go on.

“The full clip of the interview makes it very clear that Dale does not support Hamas or its actions on October 7th last year. I am very pleased to hear this. Accordingly, I have now deleted that tweet, apologise[d] to Dale, and hope this now sets the record very clear”. Folks might not believe Staines.

But the Mail titles are still smearing, hence today’s Mail on Sunday thundering “MoS unearths photos taken by Labour’s deputy [leader] that expose truth about house row … IN HER OWN TWEETS … THE PROOF RAYNER HAS BEEN LYING”. Mail titles using words like “truth” and “proof”, then calling “liar” on someone else? Another credibility problem. But not for one Mail hack.

The MoS’ not even slightly celebrated blues artiste Whinging Dan Hodges was more than prepared to bat for his supper. “We now know Angela Rayner lied [no independent citation]. So what happened to Keir Starmer's fine words about honesty and integrity” he told, once more missing the question mark.

Dan Neidle told Desperate Dan “Your statement here is not correct. Married couples have one main residence for CGT purposes. Whether *she* lived in Vicarage Road during the marriage isn’t terribly relevant to the tax”. What say Hodges? “She says the second property was her ‘home’”. Neidle was unmoved. “Doesn’t change the tax”. Another observer was also unmoved.

“A photo on Facebook hardly proves that one way or the other”. Which is the MoS’ clincher. And another onlooker mused “Question Dan Hodges needs to answer is why he started another thread on this after being told by Dan Neidle that he was wrong on the law”. Hodges had sniffed “Question Angela Rayner needs to answer is if she does have advice saying everything was in the rules, why did she continue to lie about where she was actually living”.

The Mail on Sunday is not the law. Nor is The Great Guido. And maybe they should sort out their sick obsession. We see you, Tory errand boys.

Enjoy your visit to Zelo Street? You can help this truly independent blog carry on talking truth to power, while retaining its sense of humour, by becoming a Patron on Patreon at

https://www.patreon.com/Timfenton

Mail Editors - You’re Sick, Get Help

Not for the first time, today has brought the disturbing sight of a national newspaper indulging in the kind of creepy obsession that, were it coming from an individual with no power or influence, might already have resulted in a visit from the law enforcement agencies, together with the direct suggestion that the individual concerned occupy their time in some other way.

To no surprise at all, the newspaper (for some value of newspaper, given what it splashes on its front page today has Sweet Fanny Adams to do with the major anxieties of the people) is the Rothermere Daily Mail. And, also unsurprisingly, the subjects of the Mail’s creepy obsession are the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. Which illustrates the press’ Royal dichotomy.

“Royal Special One”, at the top of the page, tells “The image the world has been waiting to see: smiling Kate out walking with William”. Is it really Kate? It’s a bit of a blurry image. Still, on to “Royal Special Two”, with the Mail capitals out, meaning this is something telling readers what to think. “HARRY AND MEGHAN ARE DOWNGRADED BY PALACE”. Eh?

The alleged story, under the by-line of Rebecca English, who is claimed to be the paper’s “Royal Editor”, goes on “HARRY and Meghan were ‘downgraded’ on the official Buckingham Palace website last night … Despite acrimoniously stepping down [false premise] as senior working royals in January 2020, full profiles of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex separately had remained up alongside of the rest of the Royal Family until this morning”. Do go on.

“Tonight those pictures and biographies briefly vanished completely. Within half an hour they were replaced with a significantly smaller, joint biography at the very bottom of the page - below the Duke of York … The Sussexes' entry now reads that they have stepped back as working royals, with just a couple of short paragraphs on each of them”. Which tells us what, exactly?

It tells us that the Mail, under the less than benign leadership of its editor-in-chief, the legendarily foul mouthed Paul Dacre, not only considers the Royal pecking order more important than anything else, but that the paper has someone poring over even a small change to the Buck House website.

Stop f***ing making it about me, c***

And then comes another false premise: “Despite growing public anger at the Sussexes' continued inclusion, Buckingham Palace has always side-stepped questions about why their details remained online”. Growing public anger? Isn’t the Mail getting confused here? “Public anger”, growing or otherwise, is not the same as Dacre getting radged at Haz suing the paper.

So the first discovery of the alleged “downgrade” may have been made elsewhere. But only the Mail has made it, and a blurry image of Wills and Kate, which is already arousing suspicion as to its authenticity, into a story covering the front page to the exclusion of any actual news.

It even puts former Screws and Daily Mirror editor Piers Morgan, who arguably allowed his obsession with the Duchess of Sussex to get him the sack from ITV Good Morning Britain, in the shade. A couple who had an entry on a website still have an entry on that website, but the entry is now smaller than the one they had before. That beats cost of living crises, war in Ukraine, tens of thousands blown to bits in Gaza, and of course climate change.

Because the Mail titles are still prepared to give a hearing to those who deny that it’s happening. But not when they have their Sussex obsession to parade, while screaming to the world that they have no sense of self-awareness and reminding us at every turn of their iron rule “if our targets refuse to deal with us, then we will deal with them”.

That lack of self-awareness means no mention of broken infrastructure, not even a front page item defending the Government the Mail has been cheering on for the past fourteen years, or anything about all those refugees crossing the channel in small boats. Nothing on potholes, food banks, crumbling schools, the NHS on its back, and a population increasingly skint.

But the whole front page given over to a blurry Royal snap, and another obsessive attack on a couple who won’t be reading it. Sick indeed.

Enjoy your visit to Zelo Street? You can help this truly independent blog carry on talking truth to power, while retaining its sense of humour, by becoming a Patron on Patreon at

https://www.patreon.com/Timfenton

Guido Fawked - Wootton v Rayner

It is not only the inmates of the Northcliffe House bunker who harbour a creepy obsession with Labour’s deputy leader Angela Rayner, as has been demonstrated in no style at all by the perpetually thirsty Paul Staines and his rabble at the Guido Fawkes blog recently. What has also been demonstrated is The Great Guido’s stinking hypocrisy when events go against them.

Behold The Great Guido's new hero

The alleged “journalists” chez Fawkes have yet to post another attack on Ms Rayner today: this may not be unconnected to one plank of their defence being kicked away yesterday by an outbreak of reality. The subject on which the attacks have been made is an unsubstantiated claim that Ms Rayner somehow avoided paying tax on the sale of a former council house.

Rather than investigate the claim thoroughly, there has been a succession of highly charged headlines implying guilt on Ms Rayner’s part, from “Tories Reckon Rayner Dodged Tax”, and “Angela Rayner’s Dodgy Council House Dealings Explained”, via the not at all subtle “'F***ing Liar Angela Rayner'”, the quote marks doing some seriously heavy lifting, to the equally charged “Lying Angela Rayner Can’t Hide From Media Forever”.

As Sir Sean nearly said, I think we got the point. But then, yesterday, came an item from the Manchester Evening News, headlined “Labour MP Angela Rayner cleared after police investigation … A complaint was made to GMP about the Ashton-under-Lyne MP” and telling that “Angela Rayner has been cleared by police following a complaint by another Greater Manchester MP”.

Do go on. “Labour's deputy leader and Ashton-under-Lyne MP has denied claims of wrongdoing relating to where she was registered as living after her marriage in 2010. Conservatives have also accused Ms Rayner of hypocrisy after it was revealed last month that she sold her ex-council house in Stockport at a profit of £48,500”. Labour MPs not allowed to do that, then?

The Tories should have stopped and thought at the news that “According to the Mail on Sunday”. But “Bury North MP James Daly asked GMP to look into whether Ms Rayner gave the correct information in official documents and to investigate whether she broke electoral rules”. Police say NFA.

Evening all

At which point, Fawkes watchers may have experienced a measure of Déjà Vu. Like the headline “Metropolitan Police Investigation of Dan Wootton Finds No Evidence, Met Decides No Further Action”, going on to tell “In the summer of last year a number of lurid allegations were made by Byline Times about Dan Wootton … Wootton has lawyered up against Byline News”.

Is it News or Times, Fawkes folks? Sloppy sub-journalism. Must do better. But there was more: “Dan Wootton’s lawyers have sent a letter to Byline Times, its editor Peter Jukes, and the journalists Dan Evans and Tom Latchem, informing them that Dan will be going after them for a ruinously large sum in damages and costs”. And quoting ZXC v Bloomberg.

This, of course, is a studied response and nothing to do with Wootton having instructed Griffin Law, the domain of Staines’ pal Donal Blaney, he of Young Britons’ Foundation fame. The Great Guido also claims “Byline Times maliciously chose to name Dan for political reasons” and talks of an “attempt to destroy Dan’s reputation”. However, one item is missing.

And that is the minor point that Gammon Broadcasting™ News (“Bacon’s News Channel”) has decided to dispense permanently with the deeply unpleasant Wootton’s services (so have the Mail titles), but neither has been in receipt of any communication telling them that poor Desperate Dan has been subject to an attempt to destroy The Great Man’s reputation.

Yet, as I type, there has been no word from the Fawkes rabble telling that Ms Rayner has also been told by the cops that there will be No Further Action. But it is highly likely that there will be more bad faith attacks on the Labour deputy leader, whether from Staines and his assembled creeps, or the right-leaning part of our free and fearless press, or both.

Once, the Fawkes blog was really independent. No longer. Staines always wanted to be part of the establishment club. What an unprincipled crawler.

Enjoy your visit to Zelo Street? You can help this truly independent blog carry on talking truth to power, while retaining its sense of humour, by becoming a Patron on Patreon at

https://www.patreon.com/Timfenton

Harry Humiliates Mirror - And Morgan

Hot on the heels of former Screws and Daily Mirror editor Piers Morgan having his piss-poor show cancelled by the Murdoch mafiosi in another round of cost-cutting at broadcast media noise floor occupant TalkTV has come the news that Morgan’s former manor, the Mirror titles, have been given what The Italian Job’s Mr Bridger might have called A Good Going Over.

Evening all

Worse for The Great Man, this has been dealt out by someone Morgan hates with a passion: along with his legal team, the Duke of Sussex has concluded his lawsuit against Reach, the current owners of the Mirror, very much to his satisfaction and on his terms. As Press Gazette has reported, “Prince Harry has settled the remaining parts of his phone hacking claim against the publisher of the Daily Mirror, the High Court has heard”. There was more.

“The Duke of Sussex, 39, sued Mirror Group Newspapers (MGN) for damages, claiming journalists at its publications were linked to methods including phone hacking, so-called ‘blagging’ - gaining information by deception - and use of private investigators for unlawful activities”. And more.

“In December, a judge ruled that phone hacking became ‘widespread and habitual’ at MGN titles in the late 1990s and was practised ‘even to some extent’ during the Leveson Inquiry into press standards in 2011 … Thirty-three articles in Harry’s claim were examined during the trial last year, with 15 articles found to have been the product of unlawful information gathering”.

And then comes the bad news for the Mirror: “A further 115 articles were in his claim, which may have been the subject of a further trial … However, during a hearing in London on Friday, his barrister David Sherborne confirmed a settlement had been reached between the duke and MGN”.

It had? “Sherborne said the publisher will pay Harry ‘a substantial additional sum by way of damages’ as well as his legal costs, and that it would make an interim payment of £400,000”. To which Byline Investigates added “Earlier in the hearing this morning at the High Court, the judge ordered MGN to pay around £2 million for losing the 'generic' part of the case about systemic crime and lies at the paper between 1998 -2011”. Ouch! And it gets worse.

And what's more, Ron ...

Harry’s statement told “Everything we said was happening at Mirror Group was in fact happening, and indeed, far worse, as the court ruled in an extremely damaging judgment. As the judge has said only this morning, we have uncovered and proved the shockingly dishonest way in which the Mirror acted for so many years, and then sought to conceal the truth”.

And then came the burn. “Harry, via Sherborne, said Morgan ‘knew perfectly well what was going on’ and that his “contempt for the court’s ruling and his continued attacks ever since demonstrate why it was so important to obtain a clear and detailed judgment”. Remember that the Mirror’s lawyers declined to call Morgan as a witness. Could be something to do with unreliability.

Moreover, it’s not over yet: as the BBC report has noted, “the prince vowed to continue his ‘mission’ to shine a light on press intrusion ‘through to the end’”, adding “he didn’t come for the money - he came for vindication and now has his sights on Associated Newspapers, publisher of the Daily Mail, and News Group newspapers, which publishes the Sun”. Mail and Sun, eh?

Remember that when those titles splash another round of bad faith smears against Haz and Megs. Remember that Morgan used to be an “editor at large” for Mail Online, and that his deal to front the now defunct Piers Morgan Uncensored was reckoned to result in him trousering a cool fifty million from the Murdoch mafiosi. And don’t forget what campaigning group Hacked Off have told us about possible ramifications from the Harry v Mirror action.

Like this part of Harry’s statement: “It is now for the police to pursue charges of perjury against any senior employees or ex-employees at the publisher who misled the first part of the Leveson Inquiry in their denials of knowledge of phone hacking”. Maybe aimed at the Mirror. And the Mail. And the Sun.

Why does our free and fearless press keep hating on the Duke and Duchess of Sussex? You might wish to ask that. I couldn’t possibly comment.

Enjoy your visit to Zelo Street? You can help this truly independent blog carry on talking truth to power, while retaining its sense of humour, by becoming a Patron on Patreon at

https://www.patreon.com/Timfenton