Read on Twitter
The intro to Jess "me me me" Phillip's excruciatingly poor article on the Johnny Depp libel case is such an exercise in self-obsessed narcissism it makes a brilliant unintentional self-parody.
1/
1/
Nobody sensible would argue that Phillips is being directly paid by Murdoch or Israel for her shit opinions, and her obscene behaviour.
She's a self-serving career politician who knew that her only route back towards the top of Labour politics was to wreck it from within.
2/
She's a self-serving career politician who knew that her only route back towards the top of Labour politics was to wreck it from within.
2/
She got her reward for her wrecking behaviour, in her return to a junior shadow ministerial position.
She knew she had no future in politics as long as genuine socialists were running the show, so for 5 years she smeared, abused, insulted, and internally wrecked.
3/
She knew she had no future in politics as long as genuine socialists were running the show, so for 5 years she smeared, abused, insulted, and internally wrecked.
3/
She's openly bragged about abusing Britain's first black female MP (who receives as much online abuse as all other female MPs combined), and cackled away with a bunch of other vile white liberals as her own party colleague was mocked on the TV.
4/
4/
The presence of a person like Jess Phillip's in Starmer's team sends a very clear message to black people in the Labour movement.
Labour doesn't give a shit about you. You're not welcome. This is a place for smug, elitist, white liberals to mock and abuse people like you.
5/
Labour doesn't give a shit about you. You're not welcome. This is a place for smug, elitist, white liberals to mock and abuse people like you.
5/
Returning to the article, it's a gross example of side-taking.
Phillips overtly sympathises with Amber Heard throughout the article, but then later insists that all victims of domestic violence must be believed, no matter what their reputations.
6/
Phillips overtly sympathises with Amber Heard throughout the article, but then later insists that all victims of domestic violence must be believed, no matter what their reputations.
6/
Depp has testified to the court that Heard physically attacked him, so surely Phillips should be believing the victim here too?
But no. This isn't how Phillips' brand of liberal identity politics works.
7/
But no. This isn't how Phillips' brand of liberal identity politics works.
7/
According to the liberal identity politics version of feminism, the female is always the victim, and the male is always the perpetrator.
Women always need to be believed, men always need to be suspected of lying.
8/
Women always need to be believed, men always need to be suspected of lying.
8/
Of course women are far more likely to suffer domestic violence than men, but just because male victims are a minority when it comes to physical and psychological violence in the home, doesn't mean their testimony should be ignored, as Phillips is so desperate to do.
9/
9/
Why would Phillips has written such a one-sided article on an ongoing libel case, when she should surely have waited for the verdict before spewing her vapid nonsense?
Her party leader is an ex-barrister & DPP. Does she seriously think she's impressing him with this shit?
10/
Her party leader is an ex-barrister & DPP. Does she seriously think she's impressing him with this shit?
10/
What's most alarming is that Phillips isn't just mouthing off in a newspaper column for the cash. She's written this narcissistic, one-sided, cascade of drivel about an ongoing libel case as Labour's Shadow Minister for Domestic Violence!
11/
11/
