| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ 13:13 - Feb 9 with 6774 views | ElderGrizzly |
Massie, who is behind the Epstein Transparency Act, has threatened the DoJ he will read out the unredacted names of all those communicating with Epstein in the files.
He has ‘privilege’ due to how Congress works (a bit how Parliament is here)
Also Maxwell is in a hearing soon, but is likely to ‘plead the 5th’ to all questions. [Post edited 9 Feb 13:13]
|  | | |  |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 15:50 - Feb 10 with 1221 views | GlasgowBlue |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 15:46 - Feb 10 by ElderGrizzly |
Isn’t Starmer’s line on all this, that Mandelson lied repeatedly about these things.
So incompetence or naivety on his or his ‘vetting’ peoples part, but not intentionally appointed knowing these things |
This is what his vetting team showed Starmer before the appointment. |  |
| |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 16:13 - Feb 10 with 1161 views | ElderGrizzly |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 15:50 - Feb 10 by GlasgowBlue |
This is what his vetting team showed Starmer before the appointment. |
And Starmer apparently challenged Mandelson on these points and he lied to him?
It’s a mess, but I still don’t think it’s intentional. Not from Starmer anyway | | | |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 16:26 - Feb 10 with 1127 views | DJR |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 16:13 - Feb 10 by ElderGrizzly |
And Starmer apparently challenged Mandelson on these points and he lied to him?
It’s a mess, but I still don’t think it’s intentional. Not from Starmer anyway |
I posted this a day or so ago from the Guardian.
"One well-placed source said the documents would show that the Cabinet Office’s propriety and ethics team had warned of the serious reputational risk of appointing Mandelson given his publicly known links with Epstein."
If I had received that sort of advice, I wouldn't have gone anywhere near him, whatever he might say. |  | | |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 16:29 - Feb 10 with 1116 views | itfcjoe |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 15:32 - Feb 10 by DJR |
A lawyer having seen that should have run a mile (and I say that as a lawyer, part of a profession noted for its caution and standards of integrity).
And presumably much more will emerge as more information is released.
They are no longer in control (as they had hoped to be) of what will emerge and effectively it seems to me to be death by a thousand cuts. [Post edited 10 Feb 15:35]
|
At the time of the appointment, despite all this being known, the only paper who cared was the FT - everyone now happy to come out and claim incredulity at Mandelson being appointed but the same people were happy in the main because they knew a certain type of President and team around him, would see Mandelson as the right appointment - 'takes a thief to catch a thief' and all that.
Just lots of hypocrites about now in the right wing rags |  |
| |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 16:29 - Feb 10 with 1111 views | Blueschev |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 16:13 - Feb 10 by ElderGrizzly |
And Starmer apparently challenged Mandelson on these points and he lied to him?
It’s a mess, but I still don’t think it’s intentional. Not from Starmer anyway |
Given Starmer's former profession it's laughable that he just took Mandelson's word for it despite the evidence before him. He has to go. It's an insult to the public and awful for democracy in this country. |  | | |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 16:34 - Feb 10 with 1090 views | DJR |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 16:29 - Feb 10 by itfcjoe |
At the time of the appointment, despite all this being known, the only paper who cared was the FT - everyone now happy to come out and claim incredulity at Mandelson being appointed but the same people were happy in the main because they knew a certain type of President and team around him, would see Mandelson as the right appointment - 'takes a thief to catch a thief' and all that.
Just lots of hypocrites about now in the right wing rags |
I don't think it's a right/left thing.
The gasps on the Labour benches at PMQs when Starmer admitted he knew that Mandelson had carried on seeing Epstein even after he had been imprisoned were audible. | | | |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 16:38 - Feb 10 with 1076 views | BlacknGoldnBlue |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 16:29 - Feb 10 by Blueschev |
Given Starmer's former profession it's laughable that he just took Mandelson's word for it despite the evidence before him. He has to go. It's an insult to the public and awful for democracy in this country. |
The whole Epstein saga shows that people in power with money and connections can get away with anything (rape, abuse and murder).
The UK government and politics is exactly the same. The Westminster bubble exists and they'll decide when Starmer goes and who will replace him.. It really doesn't matter what we think or how laughable it is. Look at what previous PM's have got away with...
We are irrelevant in their games and lives! |  |
| |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 16:41 - Feb 10 with 1042 views | itfcjoe |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 16:34 - Feb 10 by DJR |
I don't think it's a right/left thing.
The gasps on the Labour benches at PMQs when Starmer admitted he knew that Mandelson had carried on seeing Epstein even after he had been imprisoned were audible. |
Am talking more the Murdoch/Telegraph press that dominate the media
https://www.thetimes.com/artic
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/po
https://www.gbnews.com/politic
Even the Guardian leading with the China stuff, when it was well known that he had stayed in Epstein's place post his arrest - the FT were reporting it, and as Kemi said on last weeks PMQs it was easily found on Google
https://www.theguardian.com/po
Was it ever mentioned in the house? No.
Why? When it was such a shocking thing that makes him totally unsuitable - but everyone was aware of it?!
Because he is someone with a great contact book, who hangs around in the same world as Trump and his cohorts.
As was noted on the News Agents, does anyone think Mandelson would have been appointed had Kamala won the Presidency? | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 16:54 - Feb 10 with 988 views | GlasgowBlue |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 16:13 - Feb 10 by ElderGrizzly |
And Starmer apparently challenged Mandelson on these points and he lied to him?
It’s a mess, but I still don’t think it’s intentional. Not from Starmer anyway |
He is the former DPP ffs. | |
| |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 16:57 - Feb 10 with 981 views | Blueschev |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 16:41 - Feb 10 by itfcjoe |
Am talking more the Murdoch/Telegraph press that dominate the media
https://www.thetimes.com/artic
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/po
https://www.gbnews.com/politic
Even the Guardian leading with the China stuff, when it was well known that he had stayed in Epstein's place post his arrest - the FT were reporting it, and as Kemi said on last weeks PMQs it was easily found on Google
https://www.theguardian.com/po
Was it ever mentioned in the house? No.
Why? When it was such a shocking thing that makes him totally unsuitable - but everyone was aware of it?!
Because he is someone with a great contact book, who hangs around in the same world as Trump and his cohorts.
As was noted on the News Agents, does anyone think Mandelson would have been appointed had Kamala won the Presidency? |
I do wonder if there was a train of thought at the time of "none of this will come out with Trump in the White House, he's the worst one"? Who knows. | | | |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 16:59 - Feb 10 with 953 views | itfcjoe |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 16:57 - Feb 10 by Blueschev |
I do wonder if there was a train of thought at the time of "none of this will come out with Trump in the White House, he's the worst one"? Who knows. |
I imagine it was just the realpolitik of trying to deal with what was a major and important ally that he had to be talked into it.
For Starmer to fall for it and be forced out would be crazy for me, when he’s had to go against principles to make this appointment no doubt | |
| |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 17:07 - Feb 10 with 926 views | DJR |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 16:41 - Feb 10 by itfcjoe |
Am talking more the Murdoch/Telegraph press that dominate the media
https://www.thetimes.com/artic
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/po
https://www.gbnews.com/politic
Even the Guardian leading with the China stuff, when it was well known that he had stayed in Epstein's place post his arrest - the FT were reporting it, and as Kemi said on last weeks PMQs it was easily found on Google
https://www.theguardian.com/po
Was it ever mentioned in the house? No.
Why? When it was such a shocking thing that makes him totally unsuitable - but everyone was aware of it?!
Because he is someone with a great contact book, who hangs around in the same world as Trump and his cohorts.
As was noted on the News Agents, does anyone think Mandelson would have been appointed had Kamala won the Presidency? |
Of course, there is a great deal of hypocrisy and political opportunism going on, and it may well be that many at the time accepted the political nature of the appointment with scant regard for the morality.
Maybe that's just the nature of the political and media beast.
But that doesn't really absolve Starmer. | | | |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 17:18 - Feb 10 with 889 views | DJR |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 16:59 - Feb 10 by itfcjoe |
I imagine it was just the realpolitik of trying to deal with what was a major and important ally that he had to be talked into it.
For Starmer to fall for it and be forced out would be crazy for me, when he’s had to go against principles to make this appointment no doubt |
I posted something elsewhere about the existing US ambassador and David Miliband being the two on the shortlist that Sue Gray drew up.
If you were going to go down non-civil servant route, Miliband would have been the much safer option but also vastly experienced and a bit of a charmer to boot, and also lived in the US. [Post edited 10 Feb 17:21]
| | | |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 17:33 - Feb 10 with 834 views | Mullet |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 17:18 - Feb 10 by DJR |
I posted something elsewhere about the existing US ambassador and David Miliband being the two on the shortlist that Sue Gray drew up.
If you were going to go down non-civil servant route, Miliband would have been the much safer option but also vastly experienced and a bit of a charmer to boot, and also lived in the US. [Post edited 10 Feb 17:21]
|
But not a man who Trump would necessarily warm to, or listen to when he needed reminding of the dirt on him. It’s quite clear why Mandelson was appointed and why he and others would have manipulated and leveraged his path to the post.
It’s easy with hindsight, and it’s unpalatable but I think Starmer was lied to as well as knowing deep down he was taking a political risk. That’s now blown up in his face. But if it brings him down, given what Tories did and survived prior, then it will be incredibly damaging for British politics.
The real pressure needs to be on the paedophiles, traitors and sex offenders etc on the list and we now have momentum to push harder on justice. Especially if we do the right thing and offer up Mandelson, Andrew and any other Brit who needs looking at.
While he’s been disappointing in some things, poor at communicating in others, the country needs some stability and continuity. Allowing this government to be a revolving door of the power hungry like the last one, will be incredibly damaging too.
We know the depravity and desire to punish it is there, I think that’s where to focus the ire and question for justice. |  |
| |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 17:35 - Feb 10 with 834 views | baxterbasics |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 17:33 - Feb 10 by Mullet |
But not a man who Trump would necessarily warm to, or listen to when he needed reminding of the dirt on him. It’s quite clear why Mandelson was appointed and why he and others would have manipulated and leveraged his path to the post.
It’s easy with hindsight, and it’s unpalatable but I think Starmer was lied to as well as knowing deep down he was taking a political risk. That’s now blown up in his face. But if it brings him down, given what Tories did and survived prior, then it will be incredibly damaging for British politics.
The real pressure needs to be on the paedophiles, traitors and sex offenders etc on the list and we now have momentum to push harder on justice. Especially if we do the right thing and offer up Mandelson, Andrew and any other Brit who needs looking at.
While he’s been disappointing in some things, poor at communicating in others, the country needs some stability and continuity. Allowing this government to be a revolving door of the power hungry like the last one, will be incredibly damaging too.
We know the depravity and desire to punish it is there, I think that’s where to focus the ire and question for justice. |
I am inclined to agree with second para, Starmer knew the risk given the history and rolled the dice anyway. |  |
| |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 18:25 - Feb 10 with 766 views | SuperKieranMcKenna |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 16:29 - Feb 10 by Blueschev |
Given Starmer's former profession it's laughable that he just took Mandelson's word for it despite the evidence before him. He has to go. It's an insult to the public and awful for democracy in this country. |
Yeah, vetting aside - imagine giving a high profile job to someone who was widely known as the ‘Prince of Darkness’.
Unless he thought he was employing Ozzy Osborne, that’s f**kwittery of the highest order. |  | | |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 18:35 - Feb 10 with 727 views | DJR |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 17:33 - Feb 10 by Mullet |
But not a man who Trump would necessarily warm to, or listen to when he needed reminding of the dirt on him. It’s quite clear why Mandelson was appointed and why he and others would have manipulated and leveraged his path to the post.
It’s easy with hindsight, and it’s unpalatable but I think Starmer was lied to as well as knowing deep down he was taking a political risk. That’s now blown up in his face. But if it brings him down, given what Tories did and survived prior, then it will be incredibly damaging for British politics.
The real pressure needs to be on the paedophiles, traitors and sex offenders etc on the list and we now have momentum to push harder on justice. Especially if we do the right thing and offer up Mandelson, Andrew and any other Brit who needs looking at.
While he’s been disappointing in some things, poor at communicating in others, the country needs some stability and continuity. Allowing this government to be a revolving door of the power hungry like the last one, will be incredibly damaging too.
We know the depravity and desire to punish it is there, I think that’s where to focus the ire and question for justice. |
When it comes to Trump, the UK was always pushing at own open door. His mother is Scottish and he loves the Royal Family. Throw in a State visit and he's almost putty in the UK's hands.
Indeed, Starmer is far from a charmer and gets on very well with Trump even though he is a "lefty". In any event, Trump seems to get on with anyone who is prepared to tickle massage his ego.
The UK has ended up with the best trade deal of all nations, and I don't think things would have been any different if Mandelson hadn't been appointed.
And the idea that Mandelson was appointed because he could dish the dirt would seem to me to be preposterous.
As it is, I would have stuck with existing US ambassador given the following from an article I read, and one can only conclude that the real reason for Mandelson's appointment was that he was McSweeney's mentor, which reflects very badly on Starmer.
"Before Mandelson's controversial appointment, Dame Karen Pierce, 66, had established herself as an exceptionally effective diplomat in Washington. With a distinguished career spanning decades, including two previous tours in the American capital and a highly successful tenure as Britain's top diplomat at the United Nations, Pierce had earned the nickname The Trump Whisperer for her remarkable rapport with the former president.
Donald Trump himself described Pierce as fab, and her diplomatic skills proved invaluable during turbulent political moments. When David Lammy faced difficulties over historical tweets criticising Trump, it was Pierce who stabilised relations. Most notably, she secured an extended dinner meeting between Prime Minister Keir Starmer and Trump shortly after the latter survived an assassination attempt, laying the groundwork for what became an unlikely diplomatic connection."
[Post edited 10 Feb 19:01]
| | | |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 18:58 - Feb 10 with 687 views | Mullet |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 18:35 - Feb 10 by DJR |
When it comes to Trump, the UK was always pushing at own open door. His mother is Scottish and he loves the Royal Family. Throw in a State visit and he's almost putty in the UK's hands.
Indeed, Starmer is far from a charmer and gets on very well with Trump even though he is a "lefty". In any event, Trump seems to get on with anyone who is prepared to tickle massage his ego.
The UK has ended up with the best trade deal of all nations, and I don't think things would have been any different if Mandelson hadn't been appointed.
And the idea that Mandelson was appointed because he could dish the dirt would seem to me to be preposterous.
As it is, I would have stuck with existing US ambassador given the following from an article I read, and one can only conclude that the real reason for Mandelson's appointment was that he was McSweeney's mentor, which reflects very badly on Starmer.
"Before Mandelson's controversial appointment, Dame Karen Pierce, 66, had established herself as an exceptionally effective diplomat in Washington. With a distinguished career spanning decades, including two previous tours in the American capital and a highly successful tenure as Britain's top diplomat at the United Nations, Pierce had earned the nickname The Trump Whisperer for her remarkable rapport with the former president.
Donald Trump himself described Pierce as fab, and her diplomatic skills proved invaluable during turbulent political moments. When David Lammy faced difficulties over historical tweets criticising Trump, it was Pierce who stabilised relations. Most notably, she secured an extended dinner meeting between Prime Minister Keir Starmer and Trump shortly after the latter survived an assassination attempt, laying the groundwork for what became an unlikely diplomatic connection."
[Post edited 10 Feb 19:01]
|
Then I don’t think you quite understand how ken like Trump and Mandelson operate or just how volatile Trump is. To suggest he was just going to give us whatever we wanted is far more preposterous than us having Mandelson with a gun in his back pocket and the network in place too. | |
| |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 19:05 - Feb 10 with 663 views | GlasgowBlue |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 18:25 - Feb 10 by SuperKieranMcKenna |
Yeah, vetting aside - imagine giving a high profile job to someone who was widely known as the ‘Prince of Darkness’.
Unless he thought he was employing Ozzy Osborne, that’s f**kwittery of the highest order. |
Another Peer gone due to links to a sex offender
| |
| |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 19:08 - Feb 10 with 663 views | DJR |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 18:58 - Feb 10 by Mullet |
Then I don’t think you quite understand how ken like Trump and Mandelson operate or just how volatile Trump is. To suggest he was just going to give us whatever we wanted is far more preposterous than us having Mandelson with a gun in his back pocket and the network in place too. |
We were never going to get all that we want (and we didn't) but my edit (which you might not have seen) suggested to me we already had someone at least as effective as Mandelson in place, and honest to boot. [Post edited 10 Feb 19:10]
| | | |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 19:32 - Feb 10 with 605 views | redrickstuhaart |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 17:35 - Feb 10 by baxterbasics |
I am inclined to agree with second para, Starmer knew the risk given the history and rolled the dice anyway. |
Which in the circumstances- namely trying to work miracles with an unhinged Trump- may have been a justifiable call. I am no fan of Mandelson, but he struck me immediately as the sort of fellow who could play Trump and his cronies like fiddles. | |
| |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 20:15 - Feb 10 with 562 views | GlasgowBlue |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 19:05 - Feb 10 by GlasgowBlue |
Another Peer gone due to links to a sex offender
|
And now an MSP
| |
| |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 20:18 - Feb 10 with 556 views | Mullet |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 19:08 - Feb 10 by DJR |
We were never going to get all that we want (and we didn't) but my edit (which you might not have seen) suggested to me we already had someone at least as effective as Mandelson in place, and honest to boot. [Post edited 10 Feb 19:10]
|
But we will never truly know because we are trying to retrofit opinions with new information. I think it’s very unlikely that Mandelson was put in without a sense or “better he’s our attack dog than theirs” | |
| |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 22:27 - Feb 10 with 473 views | ElderGrizzly |
Redacted, Trump was mentioned 38,000 times in the 50% released already
It’s now apparently over 1 million times in the unredacted versions.
| | | |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 11:30 - Feb 11 with 277 views | DJR |
| Epstein files could be about to go ‘nuclear’ on 19:05 - Feb 10 by GlasgowBlue |
Another Peer gone due to links to a sex offender
|
This will undoubtedly come up at PMQs but it is interesting to note that the daughter of Philip Gould (is there a pattern here?) was being economical with the truth this morning.
"'No 10 did not know before they made the decision to give him the peerage,' the schools minister, Georgia Gould, told Sky News when questioned about the Doyle peerage.
Challenged about the fact that a Sunday Times story reported on 27 December that Downing Street had investigated Doyle’s continued support for Sean Morton after he was charged with indecent child image offences, Gould said the announcement was made on 10 December."
This from an article on LBC on 27 December.
"The Sunday Times reports Downing Street was aware of the association between Mr Doyle and Morton and it was explicitly brought to the attention of Morgan McSweeney, Starmer’s chief of staff, and Jill Cuthbertson, McSweeney’s deputy, leading to an internal inquiry.
A No 10 spokeswoman said: “Questions regarding Matthew Doyle’s past acquaintance with Sean Morton were thoroughly investigated, including through several interviews with Matthew Doyle, prior to his appointment [to the Lords].”
It is understood that after careful consideration, No 10 was satisfied that a past acquaintance did not represent a bar to Mr Doyle receiving a peerage."
And it's hardly a ringing endorsement of the judgment of No.10. [Post edited 11 Feb 11:35]
| | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
