mynameisjeff

This is why they went after him.

I have to say this … even if it’s unpopular. Again, I don’t know if he’s innocent or guilty but it’s impossible to get anything but a kangaroo Court in the UK. They arrest conservatives for free speech. They’ve basically sentenced him to death, for over 20 year old allegations, with zero evidence, only he said, she said, evidence. They’re about to do the same to the Tate brothers. Who have not been charged with anything in the USA, and are being held with no bail, all on charges from the commie UK. While they hold a U.S. citizenship. Again don’t send me nasty grams, I don’t care what you think about the Tate brothers, but they’ll never get a fair trial in the Commie UK / either charge them in the USA and give them a fair trail and their day in court, but if you send them to the communist UK, they’ll get their lives cancelled, guilty or innocent. The UK never does this to liberals only to people who speak out and are conservative The UK charged Julian Assange falsely of rape for years. Never forget what they’ll do.

Democrats are trying to make this out as looking bad for hesketh. It’s quite the opposite, under his leadership soldiers niw have balls to carry out their job without fear of upsetting someone

Have people watched the David Walliams documentary? What did you think? He hasn't actually broken the law but he's guilty of having a 'soft spot' for younger females, that isn't a crime Or is any of it true, I think we need to hear from the man himself The media make a documentary and we just assume it's true, it could be but he has the right to reply We're living in strange times

I’ve done exactly this, and I haven’t looked back! I’ve been welcomed into the Liberal Democrats with open arms. No judgement, no hostility, just decent people who genuinely want to make a difference. To any Green Party members who feel their party has lost its way, you don’t have to put up with it. There’s a political home for you in the Liberal Democrats, where people are brought together rather than pushed apart.

I see that Clare McGlynn has said about the Crime and Policing Act 2026 offences: “These new pornography laws are targeting the content on mainstream porn sites, which normalise and minimise violence against women and girls. The target is the sort of material where ‘Daddy’ creeps into the bedroom of his very young-looking daughter and starts having sex with her, on the basis that this is legitimising incest. The law is also targeting material such as ‘4-foot-6’ porn – this is the average height of a 10-year-old girl – which sends a message that it’s acceptable to find sex with children sexually arousing, minimising the harms of child sexual abuse.” I also note that she shall be giving oral evidence from 2:30pm tomorrow on the implementation and impact of the Online Safety Act, before the Communications and Digital Committee. I shall be watching keenly, as you can too, here: parliamentlive.tv/Guide

For those who don't know the Russell Brand case... Imagine being sentenced to 10.5 YEARS in prison for alleged offenses dating back as far as 22 YEARS AGO, in a case where the police say there was zero CCTV footage, zero forensic evidence, and digital enquiries were limited because SOOOOO much time had passed, and prosecutors themselves acknowledge that the passage of time limited the available evidence, and yet STILL a jury convicts you in a case built primarily on testimony, and then you get to sentencing and the judge acknowledges the work you have done helping people overcome addiction, including paying for their treatment, acknowledges that your children will lose the presence of their father, and also accepts that there is no sound evidential basis to conclude you pose a future risk, and still sentences you to 10.5 YEARS in prison, again following convictions reached without CCTV or forensic evidence, and now you’re left asking how the testimony and supporting material established the disputed acts beyond reasonable doubt despite those gaps, and how the court justified a sentence that will take years out of your children’s childhoods for offenses from nearly two decades earlier, which is roughly where Russell Brand is tonight.

I don't see why Mr Brand wasn't given weekend to say goodbye to his kids tbh. He will be severely punished but I don't feel his kids should be. No one seems to suggest he is a current danger to anyone. If he was he would've been remanded in custody prior and during the trial.

No one: Absolutely no one: 65% of U.S. Congress: