So, did ‘forensic’ former barrister Keir Starmer ‘accidentally’ misquote Corbyn 3 times in a few seconds to justify suspension? (video)

TV appearance this morning used three straw men that are exposed by a simple comparison with what Corbyn actually said

Keir Starmer made the rounds of breakfast TV studios this morning to justify the suspension of Jeremy Corbyn from the Labour Party.

And three times in a few seconds, he misrepresented what Corbyn had said as he tried to support his decision:

The EHRC explicitly said in its report that Labour members are perfectly entitled to express opinions about the scale of antisemitism in the party – and that MPs have enhanced protection under laws that protect free speech – so Corbyn was well within his rights to do so without disciplinary action against him.

But facts matter, so let’s be absolutely clear:

  • Corbyn did not deny antisemitism in the Labour Party exists or is a problem
  • Corbyn did not say claims are ‘just’ exaggerated
  • Corbyn did not say claims are ‘just’ factional

So, was the ‘forensic’ barrister just being sloppy in his phrasing as he managed three times in about 7 seconds to associate Corbyn with things he hadn’t said? You decide.

The SKWAWKBOX needs your help. The site is provided free of charge but depends on the support 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 or here to set up a monthly donation via GoCardless (SKWAWKBOX will contact you to confirm the GoCardless amount). Thanks for your solidarity so SKWAWKBOX can keep bringing you information the Establishment would prefer you not to know about.

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


  1. The examples of Anti Semitism in the Report are often the product of data mining and taken out of context to such a degree that you cannot believe any of them without closer investigation.
    “Harassment” consists of disagreeing with people or denying that you are Anti Semitic. Stitching people up on Anti Semitism charges is seen as Anti -Semitic, as it “lacks transparency” & supposedly makes it difficult for the accusers to complain & these are said to be “more likely to be Jewish”. This does not seem borne out by the facts whereby accusers (such as Euan Phillips) are more likely not to be -although their victims often are. To say there is ANY Anti-Semitism at all in the Labour Party is questionable.

  2. Corbyn has made a total balls up of the way he has handled the antiSemitism garbage thrown at him by the Zionists and the right wing of the Party, but he still deserves our support.

    1. Says Jack the shill, who along with his buddies has been falsely discrediting Jeremy for the past fifteen months or so. In OTHER words, in the process of lying about Jeremy and falsely discrediting him, he then says ‘but he still deserves our support’.

      Yeah, sure Jack, he needs YOUR ‘support’ like a hole in the head! But I’m sure it amused your buddies and any Blairites reading through the comments no end!

      1. I am often critical of my son, but that does not mean that I don’t love him.

      2. jack t is a ideologue looks like he made a total balls up of his post

    2. Steve Richards, “I am often critical of my son but that does not mean that I don’t love him”

      That is way above the head of White Flag Man, please stop trying to confuse him. He is convinced that anyone who suggests that Jeremy could have done even a little bit better is being paid by some mysterious paymaster.

  3. No ‘accidentally’ about it. It’s out there, the party leader said it on national television, it must be true. Make no mistake, Corbyn will be expelled. Probably not on AS charges, though that’s what will be implied, but ‘bringing the party into disrepute’, the coverall reason.

  4. I don’t believe he was “just” being sloppy with his words or, in more parliamentary language, that he “just” mis-spoke.
    And even if he did – does nobody else but him – and possibly Nandy – get to excuse themselves on those grounds?
    I haven’t heard him comment yet on her “little slip.”

  5. Given Stalin’s profession is about the understand and use of language and nuance I think it’s very safe to assume he knew exactly what he was doing.

  6. Snake-like writhing by Starmer. Interesting that he tends to either hide or to appear offering his agreement and support for Boris (The Beast) Johnson, but when it’s a matter of trying to crush a loyal decent left-wing Labour colleague he’s out and about with high energy and enthusiasm eager to perform his grim task and willing to twist the facts to suit his purpose. I wouldn’t be surprised if his next move was to suggest that JC, as with witches in the middle ages, is thrown in a pond to establish once and for all if he is an anti-Semite: If he sinks he isn’t, and if he floats he is. It’s very apt indeed, as Starmer has ushered in a new era of McCarthyism, where bizarre unfounded accusations are selectively levelled at anyone he wants to get rid of. First it was Long-Bailley. Now it’s JC. Who next?

  7. Corbyn out, members invited to leave and a super complaint against multiple MPs who could have the whip withdrawn and ultimately be deselected…

    I wonder what Party membership figures will be like in 7 months time?

    Are CLPs going to take this lying down? Just as well for Starmer they are suspended and conference is not for nearly a year.

    Labour’s right has unleashed an AS monster as divisive as Brexit.

    Of one thing we can be sure: whoever wins the next election the zionist party (CFI, LFI) will have a large majority.

    1. I don’t think Brexit was ever far from the thoughts of the new new Labour liberals. Even when Corbyn said he voted remain they didn’t believe him.

  8. Sorry this is off topic – and lazy – but has anyone read the EHRC report thoroughly?
    Was there any mention whatever of Al Jazeera’s “The Lobby?”
    I wrote to the EHRC when their inquiry was first announced to insist that no investigation that failed to address that evidence could be considered in any way impartial or fair.
    Have they simply ignored it, and if so can they be said to have acted reasonably? Or honestly, or to have shown any good faith whatever?

    1. David McNiven – “The Lobby” is only referred to on pages 28 and 109 but not re your submission. Both pages are the exact wording re a reference by a councillor. They refer to it as a “trope”. The councillor uses the words but in the report it does not appear to be the documentary. It is an extract from a facebook post. The extract is 6 lines. There are “…” x 2 suggesting that it may be a longer post.

      They use it as an eg of the councillors “conduct” and that Facebook post “created a hostile environment”.

      I am exhausted and un breakfasted but am grateful for your question. In a hungry tired state, my view is that is only one eg of poor justice. Seems to me quite tenuous from the extract. And their view of it extraordinarily over the top. No wonder Starmer’s diktat yesterday was to get everyone to accept it without question.

      Hope to post photos of the two pages later. Must have breakfast and a break.

      Oh btw. No reference to you nor your letter. Not surprising. Other people also had not a word about their submissions.

      Very shoddy and certainly dodgy. But it is as so many bodies set up by the state, deliberately misnamed, obscenely misdirected and in my opinion in this case, deliberately meant to curb expressions of inconvenient opinions.

      Think of it. How many black people have been murdered by the police? How many deaths did WMD Iraq Blair cause? How many other injustices right here? But we are led to believe that words and opinions cause a “hostile environment” by the same people who defend the right to slander Muslims daily and slander them with drawings they consider offensive. Surely if a drawing of someone others consider gravely upsetting. Why go out of one’s way to defend upsetting them? Yet the same pretend guardians of Human Rights pretend to care about antisemitism?

      And another thing, IF words and meanings are SO offensive creating “an hostile environment” … never mind the lack of meaning justice for the Windrush deported, … if SO very offensive, why go trawling through decades of social media posts to find it? Very odd and suspicious behaviour. Surely one blocks spam etc. because you have no interest in it. Why go in search of “offence”.

      But most repellent is that armies of MSM & co are campaigning with fervour about words all day, every day these last four years . Have we seen a fraction of that fervour re poverty? murders by the state? lack of justice for poor people? inequities in health? the rampant banditry of the private outfits SERCO, ATOS, Carillion, G4S, A4E the rape of our NHS by stealth? It is plain nasty wicked inconsistent machinations.

      FINALLY, The remit of the investigation did NOT include the motives of the complainants. That is despite the fact the the internal Labour report found clear evidence of deliberate sabotage. How so? Surely that should have been central evidence.

      But again, after that report, sat on until Starmer deceived the membership to seize power. Can anyone point out any sustained unpacking of its findings by OUR side?…

      No. Me neither. I did see a photo of people looking jolly at some alternative carnival a few weeks ago though. Not a jot was heard IN THE PUBLIC about that by people at the centre of it. WHY? Because it is expected to just disappear. It is like seeing a flood approaching and waiting until the last minute to drown. Feed rats. They will learn to love you and play happy families. That seems to be the pathetic fancy.

      1. Thanks lundiel. Excuse my many typos. Should check b4 sending. Just to clarify – “Not a jot was heard IN THE PUBLIC about that by people at the centre of it. WHY?”

        I was referring to the internal report that revealed DISGUSTING undermining of Labour by Starmer’s lot THROUGHOUT the last four years.

        We must do everything possible to return their type of “LOYALTY”. Will take lots of discipline and strategy and DETERMINATION to regain our party. Not the wet limp tosh McClusky was spouting 30 mins ish ago on LBC then a caller called Lawrence and a union member calling for Jeremy to apologise for “insubordination”.

        Seriously, was he awake to witness the constant insubordination by Hodge, Starmer, Streeting, Coyle, Thornberry, that awful Trevor Phillips and as awful the crude “KNIFE JEREMY IN THE FRONT” Jess Phillips…. None of them even got a warning letter. Jeremy has nothing for which to apologise re the report. As far as the remit of the report goes, it is well within the right of ANYONE to give their opinion. In particular, the KEY issue of motives of the complainants was NOT examined. Sinister motives have already been looked at in the internal report. A FULL PUBLIC READING of it should be arranged. Then ZOOM meetings and LBC and Talkradio detailed presentation of its findings. Then a sustained demand for action by the Starmer man who is “LEADER” for the time being.

        Love for Labour means saving the party from parasitic operators who do not care for membership or union money. Their main aim is to prevent meaningful change. They have access to tons of money from dubious sources. Money does not guarantee success. Ask Bernie. Closer to home but different values, shallow duds like Ummuna… never rated him when others were alway fawning over what is clearly another egotistical careerist. Ask Soubrey and the other TINGE CUCKS or what ever they call themselves now…

        Anyway, there i go again, only meant to thank lundiel and clarify that the internal report needed to and STILL NEEDS to be highlighted by Jeremy.

        ps Heard a Sky interview clip on LBC few minutes ago. Relieved Jeremy spoke with appropriate energy. And much better rebutting. More assertive. Only let down i heard was the damp stuff about calming down. McCluck was wittering on about that same claptrap. Poss thats why Jeremy repeated it. There are times to be sedate. This is not such a time. Now we need laser like clarity. Open things up. Take the battle to Starmer. Advance! No retreat!! Take no prisoners!!! NEVER too late 🌹🌹🌹

      2. Thanks for that, the pdf isn’t searchable in my reader.
        They weren’t referencing the Al Jazeera series anyway, just a single use of “the lobby” to mean “the Jewish lobby” – which they hold to be an “antisemitic trope.”
        Like I give a fuck any more – way to spread antisemitism, retards.
        I hadn’t expected any reference to my submission but it was criminal of the EHRC to avoid all mention of the documentary that proves our accusers were bought and paid for to serve Israel’s land thefts and murders of Palestinian children.
        In less tabloid times proof on video of spies being recruited to serve a foreign power might result in jail or worse.
        But that was before UN resolutions were only good for wrapping fish and chips.

      3. AGREED but have you heard ANY of our lot even mention the Massot crime? Never mind a sustained repetition of it. Jeremy’s team should not leave it up to anyone else to bring those things ACTIVELY to public knowledge. To sit back and wait is pathetic and defeatist. Guess Allan Howard was saying don’t do it they will rip you a part etc etc etc. Ken is still alive. George returned from the US Senate alive, enlivened and TRIUMPHANT. Question: Do you think they will try what they did to George again? They were serious charges with potentially serious consequences. George Galloway RELISHED the opportunity to defend himself.

        Just heard McDonald wittering. Now 18:06 LBC Rentoul agreeing with Pierce that whats left of the “so called Left” in the PLP are confused, surprised and muted re defending Jeremy. Not a jot from Burgon. We must develop new people.

  9. Surely Starmer’s deliberately misquoting Corbyn will only help in Corbyn’s case against his suspension. He can try as hard as he can to justify the suspension the only people that believe him are the Labour right wing and the majority of MSM.
    I know it’s EHRC rules that there should be no leaks but I’ve been amazed there was none from those involved. This has got me thinking that Starmer had already decided to suspend Corbyn and had informed the complainants what he was going to do.

    The paying off of the Panorama lot
    The leaked report investigation outcome not being published till next year.

    Perhaps I’m making a sweeping statement here. We know if the ECHR report hadn’t gone the way Starmer and shameful Labour MPs CAA BOD and JLM had wanted there definitely would have been a leak.
    One more thing the leaking of the CAAs list of Labour MPs they are now demanding be suspended to the far right Guido Fawkes site who was responsible for that, CAA or someone from inside the party? If it’s the latter, it’s not the first time this has happened. Why would a supposed Labour Party employee be willing to leak it to the hateful Staines and his site.
    I look forward to Starmer and his dynamic team setting up an investigation into this.

    1. Yes pressure should be put on starmer to stop sitting on report that highlights the sabotage by the right wingers in PLP. also Mathews McNichol , Also why does not some able and articulate take on James O’Brian at LBC who constantly at any opportunity tries to monster Corbyn

  10. Go Fund Me collected over £300,000 to cover Jeremy’s legal costs if John Ware followed through on his threat to sue so the money is there and I would like to see Jeremy use it to take legal action against the party and/or Keir Starmer. for this. I have already subscribed to the fund and am more than willing to do so again. However Jeremy has Labour running through him like a Blackpool in a stick of rock so I think he would hate to do this and it is this love of his party which his critics are counting on.

    1. Smartboy – ” I think he would hate to do this …” Correct.
      “…and it is this love of his party”

      What sort of “love” allows a parasite to break into your house, infest and infect your love, but allows the infecting and infesting to continue❓❓❓ I hope i never fall prey to “love” like that. That is NOT love. Crucial mistake that if Tories steal the label “Labour” they are allies. No. They never were.

      Sadly, you are spot on with the last bit – “it is this “LOVE” of his party which his critics are counting on.” WORSE yet, tragically i fear they are right. A nightmare in broad daylight.

      1. I am really angry about what has been done to Jeremy Signposts – but I do believe he loves the Labour movement but probably not the party as I said previous . However Jeremy knows that the best way to serve the movement is through the party and that is why he has put up with the snubs and the sneers over the years. I’m giving it a couple of weeks and if he is not reinstated I’m off not that that would matter to the powers that be as there are probably millionaire businessmen queueing up to bankroll it now that they have exiled the best leader we ever had and PM we never had.

      2. Smartboy putting up with “snubs and the sneers” should have ceased immediately on gaining the Leadership. Definitely ceased after the first coup. Unbelievable to continue putting up after the second coup and all revealed in the internal report.

        Yes “love”. Battered wives ” love” their abusers too. Sone sacrifice everything … even their children in service to the abuser they “love”. It NEVER ends well. The distress lingers forever. One only needs listen to victims speak out on the radio… the children that is.

        We need to neglect and understand what worthwhile “love” is. We need continuous assessment. Ask, are the events of this week the product of love? Was 39 year history in the party, observing the murderous infestation of Iraq Blair, Brown saying “i will never believe another word you say again!”, Iraq Blair’s response after the inquiries, Cheri Blair saying after the David Kelly inq “WE CAN GET A GOOD NIGHTS SLEEP NOW.”

        Smartboy, all the evidence of the nature of that lot were clear. It is not all Jeremy’s fault. The whole team and left groups failed. The appeasement frightened culture is real. I witnessed it since getting involved here and in my own CLP Jeremy supporting groups. At every turn one heard White Flag Man’s refrain – “the media will rip us apart”.

        Think of it. All the endless grand plans, yet at every turn not wanting to upset the MSM and Right wing. Explain that.

        There was a huge get together of “Left” groups in my CLP … about 80 people attended poss more. As a newbie, only 2nd time i’d met any of them, i mentioned the plight of Chris Williamson. I was cautioned not to mention Chris as a certain careerist person in our group thought he deserves what happened to him. People who were happy to spout about Kashmir and Venezuela, thought Chris was expendable.

        That’s a funny type of love Smartboy. And hoe many years does it take to realise that. ANSWER – A lifetime, if none dare give views differing from the self comforting hospice like soothing words. Palliative care is for those with no options left. The Labour movement and party should not be a hospice movement. Our attitude and culture should be dynamic ALIVE to TRANSFORM our country, not passively go along with monsters hoping for crumbs.‼️🌹🌹

      3. ‘snubs and sneers’! That’s a bit of an understatement smartboy. Smears galore, along with endless vilification and demonisation, sometimes bordering on dehumanisation (but there was always plenty of THAT in the Comment sectin of the Mail and the Express and the Sun!).

        And trust signpost – true to form – to contrive a way to discredit Jeremy out of what you said about Jeremy’s love for the party. After thirty-seven years as an MP, and nine years as a councillor prior to that, the Labour Movement/Party is obviously a massive part of him, his being.

        And signpost is just fascist poison at work!

  11. According to YouGov, both the party and Stalin have taken a hit. Either he decided to throw everything to taking control of the party or he’s an idiot who didn’t understand the consequences of his actions…..You decide.

    1. lundiel, haven’t you heard? Starmer is forensic.

      He forensically examines every choice and decides what’s best for HIM, not in the short term of course but down the line when he will be part of the revolving door club.

  12. Why does Jeremy Corbyn repeat the lie of AS being a problem in the Labour party….talk about Stockholm syndrome.I am sick of being trampled by those I admire and wonder why waving the white flag can work.Insanity is to continue to repeat the same appalling mistakes when you know better.Appeasement never works.

      1. Spot on lundiel. People who would not know a real job if it sat on their faces. They have ZERO experience in dealing with real problems.

        That’s why they scorn the heartlands for everything especially as they don’t spout Proust nor Foucault. I kid you not, a few weeks ago BloJob & Cumcums did another evil to children … not the lack of food anyway, the prompt from one of my lot was to suggest another book reading on related to the issue. I could understand even White Flag Man not believing it. Even i was stunned by the promptness and nature of the response. Tories do another fundamental evil. What do the ever virtue signalling fancy “Left” advise? Read another book.

    1. Spouting yur falsehoods again Joe! As you know of course, what Jeremy said is that whilst there is anti-semitism in the party – as there is right across society – the problem has been greatly exaggerated. The following is from an ITV News article:

      Mr Corbyn said the scale of the problem in Labour was “dramatically overstated for political reasons by our opponents inside and outside the party”.

      He also said – referring to the survey conducted for the authors of Bad News For Labour – that whilst a perception has been created that a third of LP members have been reported for anti-semitism, the actual figure is 0.3%.

      But you never miss an opportunity to try and dupe readers of skwawkbox do you, so that you can falsely disparage Jeremy. Just like your good mate signpost!

      1. Correction: Jeremy was ‘alluding’ to the survey, not referring to it, and it was 0.03%, not 0.3%. This is what he said:

        “All I pointed out was there was a public perception of a third of Labour Party members under suspicion of antisemitism – the reality is very different, it was 0.03%. But that is 0.03% too many.”

  13. 18:27 LBC JVL fellow speaking up for Jeremy HALLELUJAH 🎉🎉🎉
    Speaking very well. The caller before was also EXCELLENT. A fellow back from USA was also superb on LBC with Iain Dale yesterday.
    MIKE from JVL 18:30 just ended he was EXCELLENT!!! MORE of you please over the weekend too. Every day but NEVER the ghastly brow eaters on LBC two men and one woman. Again better to describe.

    Those prepared to speak should only go on Iain Dale or Andrew Pierce’s progs on LBC or BloJob’s sister. Why? Because they give you a chance to speak. On Talkradio – i would only recommend Mike Graham. Ash if he had his own program. Eamon Holmes and George sadly no longer there, but they were very excellent. Though too much magazine. I prefer pure political / current issues or history analysis. Cannot stand hearing about shallow trash like the banal doings of people who furlough their staff yet pay themselves millions.

    ps u do not have to like the views of the above presenters. we only need to give our views clearly. our views must be heard. ps ps they will never be heard properly on any BBC current affairs prog especially BBC R4 or 5Live. Poisonous. Do not indulge them. Even BloJob and Cumcums know that.

    1. get to some one articulate to have a go at motor mouth James o brain on LBC

  14. I was sent a email by HQ to international Labour and I wonder if any others felt the same appalling sense of shock that “Evans help us” must be unhinged or having a breakdown to draft such an insulting email on how to run the next CLP meeting.I.replied to the branch Secretary to inform her that I had left the Labour party as I felt it was no longer a home for a long time socialist working class ex councillor and activist(in my younger life).I explained that I did not recognise these people and who are they?…I read a very lovely reply from the branch Secretary and a. fond farewell….Compare the draconian email from HQ and realise that although the majority of the membership are decent ordinary people..the very soul of the Labour establishment are little more than unhinged power freaks on a trip to oblivion.Jeremy Corbyn personified all that Socialism should be and motivated hundreds of thousands of ordinary decent people.Unfortunately he was no leader but did the very best he could amongst a evil inside of the party itself. So very sad and so many lost to the witchunt.

  15. Attlee was not exactly a charismatic leader. Churchill once described as a very modest man who has much to be modest about. yet he won the election and transformed society. yes he did not have right press monstering him. The electorate were not brain washed like they are today. Why we obsessed with so called charismatic leaders . look what happed under Thatcher Blair Even Hitler?? What need are good fair policies, A excellent range of ministers and a less ego centric facilitator at the top.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: