In 2 weeks, Diane Abbott could be Home Secretary, in charge of immigration & passports, drugs policy, crime, the fire service, counter-terrorism and the police service. The woman who, incidentally, said of the IRA cause, "every defeat of the British state is a victory for all of us".

In 1989 she supported an early day motion calling for "the abolition of conspiratorial groups like MI5 and Special Branch which are not accountable to the British people".

In 2015 the Socialist Campaign for a Labour Victory website issued a statement of demands including "disband MI5". John McDonnell is a signatory to their cause.

So there is anti-MI5 form at the very top of Labour. Of course they've both changed their minds since then and McDonnell signed it "in error".

Ah the politics of fear, but who is currently trying to forget the ten years he was in the government. Why if he thought early release was such a bad idea did he not include it in the Conservatives manifesto or do you think he is just trying to take advantage of the current bad situation despite the father asking for it not to become an excuse for draconian action.

Politics of fear? Indisputable facts reflecting the genuine views of Labour leadership. I've said it many times, you're seeing 'lite' Corbyn/McDonnell/Abbott while they're in positions of power to make them more palatable to the general public. If they ever achieved a decent majority their real views would soon be inflicted on us all.

Anyway, early release was already changed in 2012 from Labour's Extended Sentence law which granted and automatic, no-parole review release after half the term, to consideration for release by the parole board after two thirds of term. I'm not sure how enforcing the sentences of convicted criminals could be considered 'draconian'. I would say the current position is rather lenient, if anything.

The responsibility for Khan's release seems to lie with both the Labour-introduced law, and the conclusions and outcome of the appeal, headed by Justice Leveson. However - I don't personally see 'blame' lying anywhere, it was just a sorry conspiracy of events. Although I never agreed with it, I can see why Labour introduced the change at the time, though with the benefit of hindsight it was a mistake.

I'd sooner have a bloke who's shagged around a bit, told a few white lies in the past and made a few un-PC gaffes, than a man who - for his entire adult life - has supported terrorist groups, sided against the UK and the West time after time, and who consorted with Soviets during the cold war. A man who has appointed his ex, the anti-West racist Abbott, and his close friend, the Marxist ideologue McDonnell to the front Labour bench.

Let's not forget, Jeremy Corbyn:
- Invited IRA members to the Houses of Parliament weeks after the Brighton bombing.
- Protested against the trial of one of the (guilty) IRA Brighton bombers.
- Fails - time after time - to apologise for the rampant antisemitism in Labour.
- Will NEVER condemn terrorism without drawing some moral equivalence with a Western action - he couldn't even condemn feckin ISIS without referencing the British Army during the Mau Mau uprising.
- Lied about meeting with the IRA.
- Wants a united Ireland.
- Laid a wreath for the Munich terrorists.
- Promotes Marxist politics of envy. Remember, according to Marx, Socialism leads to Communism.

As usual, the left ignore the inconvenient truth. If those clowns ever get within farting distance of No.10, we're all in trouble.

We will have to start fact checking you like they have to with Johnson. I would also remind you that his ex “friend” who he visited at night , took on trade trips and received over £100,000 in public money. A few PC gaffes are you for real he called out single mothers and the working class in the most derogatory terms.
The man is a buffoon who would throw anyone under a bus for his own advantage. He gets more like Trump everyday that passes and the fact checking would make him so proud of his UK student.
Which party receives money from the Russians and is currently blocking a report on their meddling in the UK elections.

sorry, where is YOUR evidence about these lies?

And despite the above list, Corbyn is still the more honest broker of the 2 candidates.
I've said all along that I dont like Corbyn or some of his policies but, Johnson is not telling "white lies" he is in utter denial of anything that has occurred in the last 10 years, some of which, he spent in the cabinet - although he was sacked from that post for incompetence and now he's been promoted.

Where have you been I think it is a given that he lies for example:
40 New Hospitals - no not true
50,000 New Nurses - no it isn’t
Biggest investment in the NHS - no it isn’t
The problem is he just keeps repeating these lies despite them being disproved many times.

No one has told more lies in this campaign than Labour - as the leader he has to take some responsibility for trying to deceive the electorate. He is anything but an honest broker - the stunt on the NHS last week smacks of desperation.

Now they are going to use the road fund licence to reduce rail fairs - I thought them nationalising everything would bring costs down as removes all the profit element - surely that is sufficient to see prices falling or is that yet another lie from Labour?

If you want to see the future of what the unions will be like when Labour reintroduce legislation to increase their power take a look at South West Trains - 27 days of strikes - happy days!!

Come on Sal, did you watch Johnson being interviewed by Marr (he's too frightened for a proper probing by Andrew Neil), the guy absolved himself for anything and everything that has happened over the last 10 years and wants to be judged only on the last 120 days ??
It's a bloody disgrace.

I've posted before about the deep cuts that the Tories have made, and they now expect the electorate to forget what has happened and be grateful for some promised increases in Education and police spending.

The "stunt" on nursing numbers would be embarrassing if some primary school kids had come up with them but, no, we've had the PM and most of his cabinet trying to justify how 30,000 extra nurses plus 20,000 currently employed would equal 50,000 new nurses ?? and money put aside for "feasibility studies" (seed money) will equal 40 new hospitals, despite funding not being in place and not being in their spending plans.

Every party exaggerates and makes wild spending plans in the run up to an election but, these jokers are pretending things are actually happening when the definitely are not.

Labour's spending plans have been costed at twenty eight times than those of the Conservatives. 28 times and the conservatives are being accused on here of over egging the pudding. Jeez

What is Johnson supposed to say - he didn't decide the direction of travel under Cameron or May. Labour left the country with a huge financial hole - something had to be done. Do you honestly think any party would want to implement austerity - its a massive vote loser - it say much that they were prepared to do it. What would you have suggested? I don't hear Corbyn defending much of what Blair/Brown did - in fact he rebelled against most of it. I don't see how you blame Johnson for the mess that Brexit became under May or not scrapping Tuition fees under Cameron etc.

Building 40 more hospitals is a long term project over the next 20 years - seed money for scoping where a need has been identified seems perfectly sensible to me. Will they ever get built - more chance if the economy is thriving - even you can't see that under Labour.

Will there be 50,000 more nurses - will Labour build 100,000 council house - more chance of 50,000 more nurses. How many trees are they going to plant? - Labour are not credible on any subject you wish to cover - are they really going to find £85bn from the rich and corporations?. Corbyn heads up this lot so you cannot absolve him of any responsibility.

I will leave you will a couple of Churchill's quotes

"You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity"

"you cannot multiply wealth by dividing it"