Join the Labour Party and save your country!
Comments
-
Were running out of hope if we're insisting Rayner is a 'liability' to the Labour Party
“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
Why?
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
If that's the worst Ashcroft can cobble together from a bit of neighborhood hearsay and some public documents, I don't think they'll lose any sleep.
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
Because there's no evidence to support the belief she's a liability
“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
You sure about that?
Calling Tories "Scum" was a good start: the current property profits/ tax avoidance thing will likely dent her rep for being an honest gobshyte and will hardly endear her to the hard left.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Yup.
“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
i'm not even remotely leftie and i rather like her, self-made, succeeded despite a tough start
also enjoy her obvious contempt for the some of the scum, especially when they resort to petty misogyny
my bike - faster than god's and twice as shiny0 -
-
Intriguing theory emerging on some right wing media
The country's in too bad a state for the Labour Party to fix in one term so the country will blame them and swing back to the Tories
“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
-
Good to hear them staying positive
0 -
You seem to be taking a similar line to Rayner and attacking those who question whether she did wrong, rather than answering or refuting the allegations. Some might see that as her having something to hide.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
I admire your leftie optimism. There's probably more to come in this little issue.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
I can relate to the self made thing as well. However trying to bluff her way out of likely tax avoidance may not have been the wisest move.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Just like you, I have absolutely no knowledge of the evidence, and I'm not too bothered either way. Just amused at your level of interest, that's all.
0 -
Given you seem to be a newly converted leftie, maybe get acquainted with the facts and the issue and try to defend her. If you can.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
CBA, as it's of little interest to me.
You are under the misapprehension that anyone who wants to get rid of these incompetent goons is a leftie.
Anyway, I seem to have touched a nerve.
Do carry on with your campaign though, if you think you have the evidence.
0 -
You're interested enough to have a pop at me about it, while claiming that you CBA 😉 . Simply shows the weakness of your argument, if indeed there is one at all. What makes you think she did nothing wrong?
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
None of us are in a position to confirm or deny the allegations, which are based on... not very much as far as I can tell. Some different addresses over a period when two families were merging. Do you have anything else?
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
🤣🤣🤣 I'd have thought you'd be applauding anyone doing tax avoidance! 🤣🤣🤣
The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
Fair point, although in her case it was allegedly unintentional 😊
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Let's have another look at the graphic I posted upthread and see how plausible her story is. Clearly if you have any evidence that any of the facts below are incorrect, then say so.
For info in case anyone doesn't get the tax point, any profits on sale of what is known as your Principal Private Residence (PPR) is tax free - as many of us from selling our houses. Profit on sale of any other property is taxable. Also, married couples can only have one PPR between them.
So, she bought her house in Vicarage road in 2007. She got married to her current husband in 2010 - he lived in a separate house a mile away but despite being newly married, she carried on living in her Vicarage Road house separately from her husband. Apparently she also lived separately from her children who were also re-registered to her husband's address: in addition to her giving her address on the birth certificate as her husband's address. And her alleged occupation of Vicarage Road (separate from her new husband) was the case for 5 years, so hardly a temporary transitional arrangement.
In order to have her Vicarage Road sale classed as tax free, she would have to claim that it was her principal private residence, despite her husband and her children living in as separate house a mile away. However, if as it appears she was actually living at her husband's house as her main residence than the sale of the Vicarage Road property would have been taxable.
Add to that, the husband did not live at Vicarage Road and married couples can only have one PPR.
While reports from neighbours near each property about never seeing her at Vicarage Road but seeing her on a regular basis at the husband's house are not conclusive, they are persuasive and nobody we are aware of has come forward to contradict these.
Is nobody else just a little bit sceptical about Rayner's version of events?
Let's hear your defences of Rayner based on what we know. I know that none of you are lefties or Labour supporters, but I'm sure there will be quite a few people coming forward to defend her for some reason or other 😉
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]1 -
Oh my god, who cares it's £3k. She'll pay it back if she has to or she won't. big deal.
This government lined the pockets of its mates with very dodgy no oversight PPE contracts to the tune of billions and you don't even flutter an eyelid, Get a grip.
1 -
-
-
So you can't mount a defence based on the facts. OK.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
So what? Not bothered about principles Rick?
If this was a Tory MP in the same situation, you'd be on it like a seagull on a bag of chips.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]1 -
Whataboutery. I guess you also don't want to try and defend her position based on the known facts.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
-
According to the known facts she might have a couple of grand to pay from before she was in parliament or she might not. It's pretty low wattage.
0
