By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
The Sky news reporting on Mandleson whose partner takes money from Epstein and then Epstein lobbies for a change of govt. policy on banker bonuses. Mandelson seemingly trying to get changes to the govt policy.
Really makes you wonder just how deceitful our politics is. It really feeds the desire to get shot of the lot of them.
Can only see yet more drift to the extremes in UK politics.
Oh, and that nonce Andrew and Fergie in hock to him, wtaf
The utter stench of corruption on 14:55 - Feb 2 by DJR
I am currently reading a book called "The Fraud: Keir Starmer, Morgan McSweeney, and the Crisis of British Democracy".
In it is stated that Morgan McSweeney is a long-term protege of Mandelson. It also states that Mandelson has been quoted as saying of McSweeney. "I don't know who and how and when he was invented, but whoever it was ... they will find their place in heaven."
This would appear to explain reports at the time of Mandelson's resignation as US ambassador that McSweeney pushed for his appointment as ambassador.
I therefore wonder if some of the fall-out, which undoubtedly will affect Starmer, will also fall on McSweeney, who has proven to be rather Teflon-like so far given all that has gone wrong since Labour came to power.
In this connection, I have just come across this which I haven't yet had a chance to listen to.
I listened to the podcast. Sam Coates thinks the soft left may use this to get rid of McSweeney if, as expected, Labour don't do well in the May elections.
But I suppose McSweeney falling on his sword voluntarily or even being made the scapegoat may not help Starmer much in long run as Starmer and McSweeney are "hand in glove".
0
The utter stench of corruption on 19:56 - Feb 2 with 1180 views
The utter stench of corruption on 17:31 - Feb 2 by DJR
It certainly seems to me that there is a case for saying he may well have committed the offence of misconduct in public office, which would apply to a minister.
The offence is triable only on indictment (ie. in the Crown Court), and the maximum sentence is life imprisonment.
The offence is committed when:
a public officer acting as such
wilfully neglects to perform their duty and/or wilfully misconducts themselves
to such a degree as to amount to an abuse of the public's trust in the office holder
without reasonable excuse or justification
As regards offences relating to market abuse and the like, I must admit I don't know enough about them to comment, but no doubt possible offences may be suggested in the media.
[Post edited 2 Feb 17:35]
From the Guardian.
Met Police says it will review ‘number’ of reports relating to alleged misconduct in a public office
The Met police has said it will review any reports relating to alleged misconduct in public office, after the release of millions of court documents in relation to Jeffrey Epstein. The force said it will then decide if it meets the threshold for investigation.
In a statement, commander Ella Marriott said: “We are aware of the further release of millions of court documents in relation to Jeffrey Epstein by the United States Department of Justice.
“Following this release and subsequent media reporting, the Met has received a number of reports relating to alleged misconduct in public office. The reports will all be reviewed to determine if they meet the criminal threshold for investigation.
“As with any matter, if new and relevant information is brought to our attention we will assess it, and investigate as appropriate.”
[Post edited 2 Feb 19:56]
0
The utter stench of corruption on 20:42 - Feb 2 with 1134 views
The utter stench of corruption on 19:56 - Feb 2 by DJR
From the Guardian.
Met Police says it will review ‘number’ of reports relating to alleged misconduct in a public office
The Met police has said it will review any reports relating to alleged misconduct in public office, after the release of millions of court documents in relation to Jeffrey Epstein. The force said it will then decide if it meets the threshold for investigation.
In a statement, commander Ella Marriott said: “We are aware of the further release of millions of court documents in relation to Jeffrey Epstein by the United States Department of Justice.
“Following this release and subsequent media reporting, the Met has received a number of reports relating to alleged misconduct in public office. The reports will all be reviewed to determine if they meet the criminal threshold for investigation.
“As with any matter, if new and relevant information is brought to our attention we will assess it, and investigate as appropriate.”
[Post edited 2 Feb 19:56]
The same Met that ruled they wouldn't investigate Andrew?
The same Met who initially refused to investigate the Downing St parties?
We are pathetic in the UK at holding powerful people to account How many years since Grenfell anyone? Swiss plod arrested the bar owners days after the bar fire.
I'll not be holding my breath but at least Mandleson's reputation is thrashed. Cant see how McSweeney can survive this, likely fall guy for Mandleson's appointment.
The utter stench of corruption on 20:43 - Feb 2 by bluelagos
The same Met that ruled they wouldn't investigate Andrew?
The same Met who initially refused to investigate the Downing St parties?
We are pathetic in the UK at holding powerful people to account How many years since Grenfell anyone? Swiss plod arrested the bar owners days after the bar fire.
I'll not be holding my breath but at least Mandleson's reputation is thrashed. Cant see how McSweeney can survive this, likely fall guy for Mandleson's appointment.
If it can be proved that Mandelson leaked sensitive information as a Minister during the financial crisis, then I am inclined to think he is bang to rights, especially as the public interest hurdle would also seem to be satisfied.
Indeed, one email seems pretty conclusive proof that he was doing this.
Given that, there would seem to be much less of an evidential hurdle than in the case of Andrew.
But given how things often work out, you are right to be sceptical.
1
The utter stench of corruption on 13:59 - Feb 3 with 996 views
The utter stench of corruption on 14:08 - Feb 1 by Nthsuffolkblue
Whilst correct, there is also a degree to which the MSM relies on hits/sales/etc. They will focus on what they can gain those from - what they perceive to be attractive to those who are interacting with them in that way. Even before social media, the amount of coverage given to something like Bhopal was disproportionately small compared with the scale of the disaster and coverage given to some smaller-scale industrial disasters.
That was covered in the end of that cycle -
the media spots a huge spike in viewership/readership figures and makes sure it reports on those crimes in future - 'those people' share it even more...
0
The utter stench of corruption on 14:03 - Feb 3 with 993 views
Slightly confused why the paedophile Jeffrey Epstein and his circle of rich people who appear to have enjoyed very illegal and morally reprehensible things is getting intermingled with immigrants according to your post?
Because it's a simple example of how the viscious circle works and how it's fed by us.
You can see that, of course.
0
The utter stench of corruption on 15:12 - Feb 3 with 949 views
The utter stench of corruption on 22:07 - Feb 2 by DJR
If it can be proved that Mandelson leaked sensitive information as a Minister during the financial crisis, then I am inclined to think he is bang to rights, especially as the public interest hurdle would also seem to be satisfied.
Indeed, one email seems pretty conclusive proof that he was doing this.
Given that, there would seem to be much less of an evidential hurdle than in the case of Andrew.
But given how things often work out, you are right to be sceptical.
The Cabinet Office have now referred material to the police which adds a bit of oomph to the prospect of prosecution.
This from a No.10 spokesperson.
"An initial review of the documents released in relation to Jeffrey Epstein by the US Department of Justice has found that they contain likely market sensitive information surrounding the 2008 financial crash and the official activities thereafter to stabilise the economy.
Only people operating in an official capacity had access to this information in strict handling conditions to ensure it was not available to anyone who could potentially benefit from it financially.
It appears these safeguards were compromised.
In light of this information, the Cabinet Office has referred this material to the police and it is rightly for the police to determine whether to investigate."
Cynically, one could say that it is in Starmer and McSweeney's interests to throw the book at Mandelson. But even if they survive, this is yet another blow to the credibility of the Government.
The utter stench of corruption on 15:12 - Feb 3 by DJR
The Cabinet Office have now referred material to the police which adds a bit of oomph to the prospect of prosecution.
This from a No.10 spokesperson.
"An initial review of the documents released in relation to Jeffrey Epstein by the US Department of Justice has found that they contain likely market sensitive information surrounding the 2008 financial crash and the official activities thereafter to stabilise the economy.
Only people operating in an official capacity had access to this information in strict handling conditions to ensure it was not available to anyone who could potentially benefit from it financially.
It appears these safeguards were compromised.
In light of this information, the Cabinet Office has referred this material to the police and it is rightly for the police to determine whether to investigate."
Cynically, one could say that it is in Starmer and McSweeney's interests to throw the book at Mandelson. But even if they survive, this is yet another blow to the credibility of the Government.
The utter stench of corruption on 15:12 - Feb 3 by DJR
The Cabinet Office have now referred material to the police which adds a bit of oomph to the prospect of prosecution.
This from a No.10 spokesperson.
"An initial review of the documents released in relation to Jeffrey Epstein by the US Department of Justice has found that they contain likely market sensitive information surrounding the 2008 financial crash and the official activities thereafter to stabilise the economy.
Only people operating in an official capacity had access to this information in strict handling conditions to ensure it was not available to anyone who could potentially benefit from it financially.
It appears these safeguards were compromised.
In light of this information, the Cabinet Office has referred this material to the police and it is rightly for the police to determine whether to investigate."
Cynically, one could say that it is in Starmer and McSweeney's interests to throw the book at Mandelson. But even if they survive, this is yet another blow to the credibility of the Government.
[Post edited 3 Feb 15:14]
I’m sure he’ll be sacrificed (and rightly so) but there’s a view that this is more a function of the system than just a rogue operator. Monbiot has been quite scathing in particular, and also a lot time critic of both Mandleson and the government departments he worked in. This from him in 2009 is fascinating given the extra details we now know.
The utter stench of corruption on 15:12 - Feb 3 by DJR
The Cabinet Office have now referred material to the police which adds a bit of oomph to the prospect of prosecution.
This from a No.10 spokesperson.
"An initial review of the documents released in relation to Jeffrey Epstein by the US Department of Justice has found that they contain likely market sensitive information surrounding the 2008 financial crash and the official activities thereafter to stabilise the economy.
Only people operating in an official capacity had access to this information in strict handling conditions to ensure it was not available to anyone who could potentially benefit from it financially.
It appears these safeguards were compromised.
In light of this information, the Cabinet Office has referred this material to the police and it is rightly for the police to determine whether to investigate."
Cynically, one could say that it is in Starmer and McSweeney's interests to throw the book at Mandelson. But even if they survive, this is yet another blow to the credibility of the Government.
[Post edited 3 Feb 15:14]
Another bit of backtracking to save their skins?
"Keir Starmer has asked officials to draw up legislation that would strip Peter Mandelson of his peerage. Yesterday No 10 said that Starmer wanted Mandelson kicked out of the House of Lords for good, but you can be expelled from the Lords and remain a peer because removing a peerage requires an act of parliament and there is no precedent for a bill like this being passed just to de-peer an individual.
Yesterday No 10 suggested that passing a law to stop Mandelson being able to call himself Lord Mandelson would be too complicated or time-consuming. Today No 10 says Starmer has asked officials to show him how it could be done!"
On the other hand.
The Conservatives are not backing calls for legislation to strip Peter Mandelson of his peerage, my colleague Jessica Elgot reports.
"Understand Tories won’t create or back a bill to remove Mandelson’s peerage. There is unease among politicians in Westminster about the precedent of a government using its large majority to go after individuals, no matter how egregious. But mechanisms should still be there to expel him."
0
The utter stench of corruption on 15:37 - Feb 3 with 913 views
The utter stench of corruption on 15:30 - Feb 3 by Swansea_Blue
I’m sure he’ll be sacrificed (and rightly so) but there’s a view that this is more a function of the system than just a rogue operator. Monbiot has been quite scathing in particular, and also a lot time critic of both Mandleson and the government departments he worked in. This from him in 2009 is fascinating given the extra details we now know.
I was in the Cabinet Office from 1987-2011 and when you say the system I think you must mean governments ministers and their special advisers, not civil servants who only do their bidding.
The sad thing for me over that period was the breaking down of the distinction between the public and the private, which I suppose was a function of an increasingly privatised public realm.
And to be fair to Mrs Thatcher, anything she did was out in the open, something that became the case much less from Blair onwards.
Indeed, to her credit she was very supportive of the civil service and much less reliant on special advisers, not something you could say of later governments.
EDIT: My role in the Cabinet Office was to give effect to policy but I found it galling to find that policy was often driven by some bright spark not long out of university who knew nothing about the world.
[Post edited 3 Feb 15:59]
4
The utter stench of corruption on 16:15 - Feb 3 with 862 views
The utter stench of corruption on 20:05 - Feb 3 by BanksterDebtSlave
Shame that he won't be in the company of some bankers/financiers.
I have had the misfortune of spending two evenings with Peter Mandelson.
The first, when I was a junior event organiser. He was incredibly arrogant and rude - he was the star turn at a diplomatic event - and caused a big fuss over having to queue for his coat at the cloakroom afterwards, eventually vaulting over the table to claim it for himself.
The second, about fifteen years later, at an Oxbridge college dinner where he was again expecting to be the star turn. Didn't appreciate a few conversational pushbacks from me (who happened to be sitting opposite), and went very icy indeed. Could tell he had a temper as well as a very high opinion of himself.
I have always found him to be a sinister and problematic individual, and my very limited interactions with him didn't alter that.
2
The utter stench of corruption on 04:43 - Feb 4 with 530 views
The utter stench of corruption on 22:46 - Feb 3 by ZapatasMoustache
I have had the misfortune of spending two evenings with Peter Mandelson.
The first, when I was a junior event organiser. He was incredibly arrogant and rude - he was the star turn at a diplomatic event - and caused a big fuss over having to queue for his coat at the cloakroom afterwards, eventually vaulting over the table to claim it for himself.
The second, about fifteen years later, at an Oxbridge college dinner where he was again expecting to be the star turn. Didn't appreciate a few conversational pushbacks from me (who happened to be sitting opposite), and went very icy indeed. Could tell he had a temper as well as a very high opinion of himself.
I have always found him to be a sinister and problematic individual, and my very limited interactions with him didn't alter that.
Talking of sinister
Trump is so guilty and such a piece of shit to any woman who challenges him
6
The utter stench of corruption on 06:48 - Feb 4 with 453 views
The utter stench of corruption on 06:16 - Feb 4 by ElderGrizzly
Talking of sinister
Trump is so guilty and such a piece of shit to any woman who challenges him
I'm not sure I can truely articulate my absolute disgust for that man. Are there still any here who defend him? A few used to come out of the woodwork but I think even they've decided to keep their heads down now.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
