this post was submitted on 09 Jan 2025
169 points (98.8% liked)

UK Politics

3176 readers
165 users here now

General Discussion for politics in the UK.
Please don't post to both !uk_politics@feddit.uk and !unitedkingdom@feddit.uk .
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.

Posts should be related to UK-centric politics, and should be either a link to a reputable news source for news, or a text post on this community.

Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.

If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread. (These things should be publicly discussed)

Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.

Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.

!ukpolitics@lemm.ee appears to have vanished! We can still see cached content from this link, but goodbye I guess! :'(

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Liz Truss has sent a legal letter to Keir Starmer demanding he stops making “false and defamatory” claims that she crashed the economy.

The former prime minister sent a six-page “cease and desist” letter accusing Starmer of harming her reputation and contributing to her losing her South West Norfolk seat in the general election.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] flamingos 79 points 6 days ago (1 children)

accusing Starmer of harming her reputation and contributing to her losing her South West Norfolk seat in the general election.

I too hate it when I'm faced with the consequences of my actions.

[–] Dkarma@lemmy.world 1 points 5 days ago

Isn't that the point of trash talking your political opponent?

[–] GreatAlbatross 54 points 6 days ago (3 children)

C&D sounds like a good way to scare someone who was wasn't previously a Barrister, Bencher, Director of Public Prosecutions, and didn't have a knighthood for services to law and criminal justice.

[–] Emperor 18 points 6 days ago

Yeah, yeah, he knows some legal mumbo jumbo but the Truster is powered by an idiotic self-belief.

[–] CrabAndBroom@lemmy.ml 16 points 6 days ago

Imagine how good Keir Starmer's lawyer must be lol.

[–] nova_ad_vitum@lemmy.ca 5 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Defamation laws in the UK are a bit silly though.

[–] SouthEndSunset@lemm.ee 4 points 6 days ago (1 children)
[–] cynar@lemmy.world 6 points 6 days ago (1 children)

They are treated, effectively, as guilty until proven innocent.

[–] svcg@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 5 days ago

This gives a bit of a false impression. Specifically, it is for the defendant to show that a defamatory statement is substantially true, rather than the complainant/plaintiff to show it is false. This is essentially because truth is a defence against defamation in the same way self-defence is a defence against assault.

Essentially, the complainant must prove that:

  1. the defendant made a defamatory statement (i.e. a statement of a fact that - if true - would harm your reputation),
  2. you suffered a material loss as a result of harm to your reputation, and
  3. it was the defendant's statement that was the cause.

The defendant may argue in defence that:

  1. it was substantially true,
  2. they honestly believed it was true and had a reasonably good reason for doing so, and/or
  3. it was in the public interest to say so.

The burden of proof is still "on the balance of probability" rather than "beyond reasonable doubt" in each case.

This kind of makes a little bit of sense though, right? If I tell the world that you like to put your thumb in your bum and then sniff it, you'd probably feel it should be on me to provide evidence rather than on you to prove that you've literally never done that in your life.

We are definitely lacking in anti-SLAPP legislation, but then so are many states.

[–] sp3tr4l@lemmy.zip 46 points 6 days ago (2 children)

He should just mail her back an expired head of lettuce.

[–] ThatWeirdGuy1001@lemmy.world 11 points 6 days ago

I still think of that pretty regularly and I live in the shit show that is America.

Makes me chuckle every single time.

[–] Zier@fedia.io 8 points 6 days ago

I was actually thinking he should send her a wilted salad.

[–] Mr_Blott 38 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Is that the Liz Truss that crashed the economy, or the Liz Truss that deliberately crashed the economy so her fucking posh boy crony cunts could capitalise on it?

[–] sunbeam60@lemmy.one 5 points 6 days ago

Why not both?

[–] Emperor 38 points 6 days ago (1 children)

She really is the git that keeps on giving.

[–] Mim@lemmy.zip 7 points 6 days ago (1 children)
[–] Emperor 7 points 6 days ago (1 children)
[–] Mim@lemmy.zip 3 points 6 days ago

Wasn't sure as it's jsust one character.

[–] rayquetzalcoatl 9 points 5 days ago

Shouldn't have crashed the economy then

[–] Zip2 24 points 6 days ago
[–] FelixCress@lemmy.world 28 points 6 days ago (2 children)
[–] Emperor 20 points 6 days ago

Lettuce never forget.

[–] Mrkawfee 11 points 5 days ago

She really is a fucking muppet

[–] Z3k3@lemmy.world 22 points 6 days ago (1 children)

contributing to her losing her South West Norfolk seat in the general election.

Political opponent says political opponents is bad at job and someone else should have it. Sighting evidence

Sigh why can't these fuckwits just go away like their constituents asked

[–] gnutrino@programming.dev 11 points 6 days ago (2 children)
[–] Zip2 9 points 6 days ago

Yeah, but you can see it too.

[–] Z3k3@lemmy.world 6 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Thank you. Tried 4 tines to get it to look right. Got bored and had to go back to work

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] MrSulu@lemmy.ml 19 points 6 days ago

She clearly was accountable for tanking the economy, but has no other reasonable defence.

[–] Luvs2Spuj@lemmy.world 9 points 5 days ago (1 children)

She is one of the few people I would shout at if I saw her out and about. She should be in prison.

[–] WhatYouNeed@lemmy.world 2 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Would, you call her:

a) cunt!

b) bitch!

c) lettuce!

[–] Dkarma@lemmy.world 4 points 5 days ago

Somehow I feel like lettuce is the biggest insult in the uk

[–] Nester 17 points 6 days ago (3 children)

Well, to be fair it wasn't just her. Kwasi Kwarteng helped too!

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] BioDriver@beehaw.org 12 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Then maybe she shouldn’t have crashed the economy.

[–] Emperor 8 points 6 days ago

You crash one economy....

[–] TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 6 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

Of all the people to send an unenforceable cease and desist letter to LMAO

I'd think the ex Barrister, Queens Counsel (basically a group of exceptionally talented senior lawyers) lawyer, and ex director of public prosecutions for the CPS would be someone you'd think hm, I probably can't intimidate him in this manner. Truss never ceases to amaze me.

My mind can't even begin to imagine how good Starmer's legal defence team would be.

Of all PMs, he is surely the one you'd be insane to enter a legal battle with.

[–] Flamekebab@piefed.social 11 points 6 days ago (3 children)

I'd love to see legal action over this; "No, it's not defamatory - it's a matter of record. Jog on."

[–] HumanPenguin 9 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (2 children)

It's purely about making the government waste money.

Or more specifically, making the government hesitate to allow lettuce to force them to waste taxpayers' money in court. She knows full well what ever answer is returned. Looks bad to a large % of voters.

If kier is smart. He will stand up in parliament and state that. Something like.

" She is desperate to make a name for herself, having bankrupted the UK. Either by her own reclass economic actions or by forcing the government to fight expensive libel suits, she has no chance of winning.

So the answer is simple. From now on, I will only address her undeniable economic stupidity in parliament. Where the courts have no jurisdiction over the claims of politicians.

If she wants to silence the truth. She will need to convince one of you MPs to stand up for her proven stupid economic lettuce rot. And risk your seats on the claims as she did."

But more eloquently.

[–] Hossenfeffer 6 points 6 days ago (3 children)

But more eloquently.

So maybe something like: "She can shove her cease and desist up her arse and fuck off while she's doing it!"?

[–] fakeman_pretendname 5 points 6 days ago

"Perhaps the honourable lady would consider repositioning the 'cease and desist letter' about her person, perhaps so as to protect it from sunlight?"

i.e shove it where the sun doesn't shine

[–] HumanPenguin 5 points 6 days ago

In parliment it would require something like.

She can reverse ingest her letter while procreating with a donkey.

[–] mannycalavera 2 points 6 days ago

Yes that will do

[–] SouthEndSunset@lemm.ee 5 points 6 days ago (1 children)

As much as I’m not a fan of Starmer (Changes his mind too much and he’s a red Tory), he does have a mature way of dealing with these people. Look at how he handles Musk.

[–] HumanPenguin 3 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Sorta agree.

Def a red tory. Or more to the point believes in the capatalistic properganda most of the western world dose. But its getting harder to beleave anyone that dosent can win.

Not sure changing your mind is a bad thing. In fact id suggest not being willing to is more of a fault. IE i personally think it is impirtant to describe why the changea are in error. Rather then indicate a strict following of your ideals without following evidence. Is some how advantages to society.

But yeah. Ob the whole I agree. He isnlikely to handle this as well as anyone can.

[–] SouthEndSunset@lemm.ee 2 points 6 days ago (1 children)

You’ve got a point about changing your mind. Showing you can learn or accept fault is strength of character. It’s just the number of times he’s done it and the things he’s changed his mind about that bug me. I’d have to look examples up though.

[–] HumanPenguin 2 points 6 days ago

Yeah.

I also thinkjitbis imporrant for government to recognise and id the reasons for changes.

He and his government seem to be ignoring openess. At the same level as the start of the last gov.

[–] CrabAndBroom@lemmy.ml 4 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I'd love it to go to court and backfire so that it becomes illegal to trash talk your opponent. It'd kind of fuck up all political discourse but it would super fuck the Tories since that's all they do.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] echodot 2 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

It's the very definition of a frivolous lawsuit. It won't see the inside of a courtroom except to get kicked out again.

This isn't the US you can't just sue for whatever random thing you want you actually have to have a case.

[–] mannycalavera 9 points 6 days ago

As PM she was the First Lord Of The Treasury (amongst the many other titles she got as a PM: Queen of the Andals and the First Men, Lady of the Seven Kingdoms, and Protector of the Realm) so how is she not responsible for the economy?

[–] AFC1886VCC@reddthat.com 10 points 6 days ago

Thin skinned Liz strikes again

load more comments
view more: next ›