Establishment fail as spy smear pushes Labour polling UP


After a couple of weeks of relentless attempts by the right-wing press – and senior Tories – to smear Jeremy Corbyn by association with a Czech ‘fantasist’ who was called a liar by the intelligence archive in his own country, a desperate Establishment may have been hoping to see a negative impact on Labour’s ‘voting intention’ polling.


In fact, this month’s polling numbers show a boost to Labour’s standing:

Lab feb polling.png

Even YouGov and Kantar – whose models are often the least generous to Labour – show an increase. One poll found that 6% of voters said they were more likely to vote for Corbyn specifically because of the smear.

And these numbers all pre-date Tory vice-chair Ben Bradley’s humiliating apology and charity donation for libelling Corbyn on Twitter with the ridiculous smear.

The next voting-intention figures from Survation – the most accurate pollsters in last year’s General Election – will be very interesting indeed.


The Establishment and its media arm have succeeded primarily in exposing their bankruptcy of ideas – and will be tearing out their hair if even this desperate smear has not only been ineffective, but actually achieved the opposite of what they intended.

And after such a depth of desperation, where have they left themselves to go?

The SKWAWKBOX needs your support. This blog is provided free of charge but depends on the generosity of its readers to be viable. If you can afford to, please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal. Thanks for your solidarity so this blog can keep bringing you information the Establishment would prefer you not to know about.

If you wish to reblog this post for non-commercial use, you are welcome to do so – see here for more.


  1. They’re old, they’re out of wind, their legs are gone and even they suspect it would take a miracle to come second.

  2. This smear has backfired spectacularly.

    The credibility of the right wing papers is lying in tatters.

    It will be interesting to see how this complete loss of credibility of the right wing press affects the results of the next General Election.

    It will clearly benefit Labour, the question is by how much?

      1. I thought my above ‘comment’ would appear further down the page.

  3. But where do they stand in relation to the Tories at the moment?

    And as for “complete loss of credibility”, I have no doubt that there are still millions of people that believe all the lies and fabrications and machinations of the right-wing press, much of it reiterated by the news broadcasters. Check out the latest edition of George Galloway’s Sputnik program on RT:


    1. Decades of inculcation is not undone overnight, Allan.

      But the establishment media is certainly and unintentionally doing a great job of undermining the impact of its own propaganda with this latest 1950s throwback hatchet job on Corbyn.

      The question is this: do the Tories lose more votes when the establishment attacks Corbyn or ignores him?

      I would argue it’s the former.

      But they just can’t help themselves.

      The Establishment is in a complete bind. They are placing the noose around their own collective neck and egging each other on in the process.

      It truly is a sight to behold.

  4. My ‘correction’ still stands, and I don’t understand why you wouldn’t just agree with the fact that what I said is correct, and instead patronise me with your opening comment. Absurd.

    But for the ongoing vilification and smearing and demonisation of JC (and his supporters of course, and particularly Momentum), the LP would probably be ahead in the polls by twenty/twenty-five percent or more.

    By the way, when do you think it – the right-wing press – will be “undone”? We should always keep a level head and describe and relate things as they are, and not paint an over-optimistic picture, and always keep it in mind that the PTB will do all and anything to retain their power and control.

    We all need to be working actively to get the truth out, and expose their lies and smears etc in the process.

    PS So how are we doing compared to the Tories at the moment anyone?

    1. If Mr Corbyn keeps playing the excellent hand he has been playing on Brexit then the Tories will be lucky to record 9 million votes at the next election, Allen.

      I didn’t answer your first question because it didn’t make any sense. Sorry.

      You’re not another one of those Progress stooges who have recently popped up here arguing Corbyn shoukd stick two fingers up the the 65% of constituencies that voted leave are you?

      1. Regards my first question, it was simple enough to understand. If, as you said, “decades of inculcation” can’t be “undone overnight”, then how long do you anticipate it will take before it is. It was of course a rhetorical question in response to your patronising, as you know all to well.

        As to your question – if one can call it that – I’ve noticed how you have invoked the ‘Progress’ slur on people in other threads on skwawkbox, just because they have a different opinion to yourself. Just the sort of thing a covert and duplicitous Progress or Labourfirst infiltrator would do. You certainly come across as someone who is versed in – and practices – propaganda techniques.

        Anyway, can you provide a link to your source that 65% of constituencies voted Leave. Thanks

      2. PS And would you care to name these “Progress stooges” who (YOU say) have “recently popped up” on skwawkbox? And could you explain what it was that I supposedly said that led you to say such a thing in relation to me – ie what was your justification for doing so? Or is it just a technique you use to try and undermine and dismiss anyone who disagrees with you or asks you awkward questions?

      3. How do I know you’re a Progress stooge?

        Most people who comment on this site are decent, intelligent comrades. We debate and discuss in a comradely way. We have our differences but discuss them in a cordial fashion.

        So when Progress agitators like you and Jake T pop up you stick out like a sore thumb.

        You all start off making fake leftish comments to try to hoodwink others but when tested on key issues you just can’t help showing your true purple colours.

        Bugger off to the Lib Dems, Allan. That is where you belong.

        No further replies, I won’t waste any more time on a Progress stooge like you.

    1. Sorry Dave, I didn’t mean to twist your melon.

      In n the last couple of weeks the right wing of the Labour Party/Progress have been on maneorvres in the comments section and I’m just flushing a few of them out.

      I’m normally respectful when I comment but I think with those fakes you need to give them the full treatment.

    2. Spoken like a true propagandist IA. Turn it all on its head, eh. You of course are the one that is doing – and has done – exactly what you accuse me of doing. But then that’s what you propagandists do.

      And how very convenient that in the process of your little rant, you ommitted to give a link to the source of your claim that 65% of constituencies voted to leave. And as we both know, you won’t at any point be doing so precisely because it is fabrication on your part and, as such, there is no source.

      As skwawkbox reaches more and more people it was inevitable that shills would be sent in to try and control the narrative – and act as if they are old hands who have been here all along – and I have had my suspicions regarding several people (who could of course be just one person), and Internal Affairs is one of them, and the fact that he or she has been disseminating falsehoods – ie the 65% of constituencies voted leave falsehood – is all you need to know.

  5. And needless to say, IA provided no proof whatsoever to justify his or her claim that I am a Progress stooge, as he or she put it, precisely because there isn’t any. But THAT’S what shills/propagandists do. They conjure something up out of thin air, and then conveniently withdraw from the discussion when challenged to provide proof.

  6. As anyone reading through the interaction between IA and myself can see, I had of course said nothing to warrant his charge of Progess stooge at the point where he makes it. So why did he or she make it?

    And why did he or she disseminate the falsehood on this, and at least one other thread (on skwawkbox) that I know of, that 65% of constituencies voted leave (and on the other thread, also the falsehood that 70% of Labour held constituencies voted leave). Only someone with an agenda would do such a thing.

  7. I think that Theresa May has actually said that Corbyn has a case to answer in respect of an allegation for which there is no evidence whatsoever.

    What will she say next, can Jeremy Corbyn account for his movements around the time of the Kennedy assassination?

    1. Yes, exactly! And note the timing that this popped up, just a couple of months after May made her ‘Russia interference’ speech (her Mansion House speech in November). Just coincidence of course!

      1. Make that THREE months. And it’s funny how no-one ever provides any actual examples of what these Ruskies were saying on facebook or in their tweets or wherever, either HERE (since May made the claims in her speech), or in the US.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: