Not really good enough for me though. I said 8 months ago I didn't agree with his appointment after his association with Epstein, so why was he chosen by Starmer - it demonstrates really poor judgement as well as not taking child abuse seriously enough, at the heart of British Politics. I also have concerns that someone seen as gay is some sort of defence by some is even more concerning, especially as we know some politicians in the past have been into young boys. Not suggesting this individual was, but highlighting why safeguarding should be kicking in, knowing his past associations. I know people like to focus on places like Rochdale and Rotherham, but I also focus on why were children allowed to be moved from care homes in London to a place down on the South Coast that was rife in abuse, the owners died before they could be brought to justice. Yes, Trump and Andrew should be dealt with, they will not be though, so let's not shift this away from what we can be dealing with and that is asking questions about what is going on at the heart of Westminster. So is it next week, we have a state visit for someone seriously linked to Epstein, someone who will no doubt be hosted by a politician who had association with Epstein, and hosted by a King whose brother is also linked by a photgraph, seems to me we are overlooking a massive problem here... Including our very own Prime Minister who hand picked one of those individuals. Something we can and should be dealing with, by association even if he is innocent of any crime.
I've never liked Mandelson - always found him to be a bit of a slimey **** - but that's just a personal opinion. However, apart from initially falling for Epstein's protestations of innocence on his original indictment (as plenty of people did btw) - he's not, as I see it, actually done anything wrong ... or at least anything wrong that is in the public domain at this point... I suspect he'll have no choice but to fall on his sword now ... and, with hindsight, Starmer may now regret having appointed him as US ambassador in the first place...
An Epstein buddy is probably the perfect person to be ambassador to the US right now to be honest. Can chat and laugh with Trump about all the children they diddled together while agreeing lower tariffs.
'I am, and always have been, a member of the Labour family – and when times get tough, families pull together.' https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2009/feb/18/peter-mandelson-quotes Note the date... please log in to view this image Scroll down, note the dates, the timeline begins in 2005 but are said to have started as far back as 2002... https://www.npr.org/2025/07/25/nx-s1-5478620/jeffrey-epstein-crimes-timeline-legal-case If he had any association whatsoever with Epstein from 2005 onwards, he can't play the innocence card. He needs to prove he did not stay in New York in 2009, it can't be that difficult due the office he held and the diaries that would have been kept.
I think Mandleson should go. If Rayner has been ousted for messing up her stamp duty, then somebody who had openly cozied up to a known **** and sex trafficker has no place in Govt.
I think Mandleson should go. If Rayner has been ousted for messing up her stamp duty, then somebody who had openly cozied up to a known **** and sex trafficker has no place in Govt.
I think Mandleson should go. If Rayner has been ousted for messing up her stamp duty, then somebody who had openly cozied up to a known **** and sex trafficker has no place in Govt.
Yeah site was hanging, thought it was me at first but then saw your post three times and thought, ah it's the actual site.
Yeah you said similar yesterday. It’s almost like you are his defence barrister. Lord Mandelson goes on to write that Epstein was known for "taking you by surprise... in one of his glorious homes he likes to share with his friends (yum yum)" He was at it. He was hanging around with him far too long not to know what was going on. He even referred to Epstein as his best mate.
Margaret Thatcher wined and dined Augusto Pinochet ... do you think she was guilty by association then?
I can see why they are trying to smooth it over, because mandleson is a seasoned negotiator and the UK are trying to keep the Trump administration onside as they try to wrangle around the tariff and trade deals. Also there’s a certain irony that both Trump and Mandleson are both affiliated with Epstein, so that makes them uncomfortable bed fellows. Also having just got rid of Rayner, another high profile resignation is a disaster for Labour. That said, the morally right thing for him is to go.
Mandelson's position is frankly untenable ... and he should go .... and I think he will ... it's just a matter of time ...
