Three Strikes and You’re Out

DDL Ltd
Feb 10
3 min read

The Telegraph published an article on Sunday, 9th February about Deputy Prime Minister, Angela Rayner’s appearance on BBC’s Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg.

A new book about Sir Keir Starmer’s leadership claims that the Deputy Prime Minister texted an insulting remark about Sir Kier to a confidante during the party’s time in opposition.

‘Get In,’ authored by political journalists Gabriel Pogrund and Patrick Maguire, includes the line: “It could not be Starmer, she [Angela Rayner] said, because he was incapable of running a bath – never mind the opposition.”

The Deputy Prime Minister was asked directly whether she made the comment or not. The conversation was as follows:

Laura Kuenssberg: ‘A new book reports that you said he (Sir Keir Starmer) couldn’t run a bath. Did you say that?

This is a simple ‘Yes’ or ‘No’ question which provides an opportunity for Angela Rayner to simply say, ‘No.’ and deny the allegation.

We consider what she says:

Angela Rayner: ‘Well, I’m not, I’m not, you know, there’s a lot of things that were said in that book that I don’t, I don’t recognise to be honest and it’s tittle tattle’.

Angela Rayner does not answer the question. A simple ‘Yes’ or ‘No’ response would have set the issue to rest. A failure to answer the question shows that the question which was asked is a sensitive one.

Angela Rayner starts her response with a pause before repeating herself. The shortest answer is the best. As yet, she is unable to say ‘No’ which is the expected, and deny what she is accused of.

Rather, she says ‘there were a lot of things that were said...’ that she doesn’t recognise before adding ‘it’s tittle tattle’ which speaks to casual conversation and gossip. This seeks to minimise what has been alleged.

In saying there were a lot of things that were said that she doesn’t recognise, by default, there must be some things that she does recognise. She was asked if she ‘said’ the comment. The book claims that the Deputy prime Minister ‘texted’ the remark.

Laura Kuenssberg: Did you not say that?

The interviewer has to ask the question a second time.

Angela Rayner: And it’s tittle tattle. So, I don’t recognise what was, what was said in that book.

Angela Rayner has a second opportunity to deny the allegation and is unable to say, ‘No.’ She allows the allegation to stand which is unexpected. She repeats that ‘it’s tittle tattle’. We would consider what ‘it is,’ means to her? Now she doesn’t recognise what was said whereas previously there was a ‘lot’ she didn’t recognise.

Ms Rayner has gone from recognising some ‘things’ to alleging not recognising anything. The reason she gives via the word, ‘so’ for not recognising what was said is because it’s tittle tattle.

Angela Rayner has now had two opportunities to deny the allegation, has not answered the question and has said neither, ‘I did not say it’, or ‘I did not (as the book alleges) text what has been alleged.’

She also distances herself from ‘that’ book which she repeats from her answer to the first question.

When asked for a third time, she said: ‘There [were] lots of other things that people have said about me or anything else. And no, I don’t recognise ever saying that to anybody. But we all have frustrations when we’re at work sometimes, and I’m sure people have been frustrated with me at work sometimes.’

Despite being asked a third time, Angela Rayner does not deny what she has been alleged as having done. She has a need to deflect from the issue and focus the attention on herself before adding not ‘recognising’ ever ‘saying’ that to anybody. She is unable to bring herself to say the words and the use of the word ‘recognise’ still allows for the allegation to stand.

Might she ‘recognise’ saying it later on? She further weakens her stance by adding in the generic, ‘we all have frustrations when we’re at work sometimes.’

Was the Deputy Prime Minister frustrated with Sir Keir? She is unable to answer the questions despite being given three opportunities to offer a denial. Unnecessary words are used which aren’t needed. A simple ‘No’ would suffice.

Despite deflecting, she allows the allegation to stand. If she didn’t answer the question, then she did! No answer is an answer. Angela Rayner circumvents the truth.

Can Sir Keir trust his second in command?

Has Ms Rayner dodged a curveball?

Article Reference: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2025/02/09/labour-angela-rayner-keir-starmer-incapable-of-running-bath/

#DDLLtd #DeceptionDetectionLabLtd #ForensicStatement&LinguisticAnalysis #BBCSunday #GBNews