First to say I can't see Starmer resigning over this.
An atomic bomb wouldn't remove Starmer
What about a redhead?
I think this all increases the chances of Ange being next.
It makes her financial arrangements seem a bit meh, and allows her to say we've had enough of the old boy's club.
Rayner is now best-placed
As I posted as the old thread was closing.
The obvious one is Angela.
She has behaved dutifully and perfectly since resignation.
Labour has a number of very competent ministers in place she would be well advised to keep
Cooper Mahmood Healy McFadden Both Alexanders Nandy Phillipson Ed M Emma Reynolds Jarvis
Some of the new intake.
Likes of Haigh and Thornbury return.
Compares very well with threadbare Shadow Cabinet of failures like Philp, Patel Stride, Atkins, Couthino.
Badenoch probably be gone before Starmer coronation for Cleverly.
Labour edge left. Tories edge centre.
“dutifully and perfectly since resignation”.
Has she paid her tax due?
If Angela Rayner is the answer, the wrong question is definitely being asked.
She’s no Mandelson, who can keep coming back again until yet another scandal finally kills her off almost three decades later.
Angela Rayner is not the answer to any question relating to the government of this country. Maybe “how can we fuck things up more”.
The question is, who do we put our money on? Not who would be best, or who would we like, but who will win?
If it helps I'm a Labour member and if/when the vote comes I'll be judging 2 things:
Who would be the better PM? Who would more likely beat Reform?
Assuming a Streeting v Rayner choice, I'm clear on the answer to the 1st. Streeting. But on the 2nd I'm not sure at all. And if I end up concluding it's Rayner I can see myself (reluctantly) prioritising that and voting for her.
Nothing (for me) is more important than preventing Farage and his gang getting their filthy mitts on this country.
Far be it from me to suggest solutions to Labours quandary but Rayner is so far from your desire to beat Reform as you can get. Honestly - Labour supporters and members need to read the fucking room. Your only hope is a Cooper ticket with Streeting as Chancellor maybe. This fascination and love for Rayner is perplexing. She’s clearly thick as shit. And a proven tax dodger.
Northern accent = thick as shit
Thank goodness none of my university exams were orals, or it would have been an instant fail.
Nope. You’re making that stretch, not me. JRM Is as thick as shit. As is Jenrick. Hague wasn’t. Neither is Burnham. She’s objectively as thick as shit. You just like her because she’s northern. And in your mind that means she’s beyond criticism.
JRM is brighter than Burnham, even if with less common touch
Really? I had no idea Burnham was such a dumbarse.
Yes I know Ydoethur you think JRM is an idiot but with his fortune of over £100 million, including founding a successful hedge fund, his Oxbridge degree and his weekly show on GB news and his lovely family home in Somerset shared with his wife and 6 children Jacob of course will not give a shift what you think!
Making a lot of money and being successful does not prevent someone being an idiot of course. Peter Mandelson did both (on his terms) for a long time.
I don't think Mandelson is an idiot.
I think he's a grasping, mendacious... [that's quite enough]
First to say I can't see Starmer resigning over this.
An atomic bomb wouldn't remove Starmer
What about a redhead?
I think this all increases the chances of Ange being next.
It makes her financial arrangements seem a bit meh, and allows her to say we've had enough of the old boy's club.
Rayner is now best-placed
As I posted as the old thread was closing.
The obvious one is Angela.
She has behaved dutifully and perfectly since resignation.
Labour has a number of very competent ministers in place she would be well advised to keep
Cooper Mahmood Healy McFadden Both Alexanders Nandy Phillipson Ed M Emma Reynolds Jarvis
Some of the new intake.
Likes of Haigh and Thornbury return.
Compares very well with threadbare Shadow Cabinet of failures like Philp, Patel Stride, Atkins, Couthino.
Badenoch probably be gone before Starmer coronation for Cleverly.
Labour edge left. Tories edge centre.
“dutifully and perfectly since resignation”.
Has she paid her tax due?
If Angela Rayner is the answer, the wrong question is definitely being asked.
She’s no Mandelson, who can keep coming back again until yet another scandal finally kills her off almost three decades later.
Angela Rayner is not the answer to any question relating to the government of this country. Maybe “how can we fuck things up more”.
The question is, who do we put our money on? Not who would be best, or who would we like, but who will win?
If it helps I'm a Labour member and if/when the vote comes I'll be judging 2 things:
Who would be the better PM? Who would more likely beat Reform?
Assuming a Streeting v Rayner choice, I'm clear on the answer to the 1st. Streeting. But on the 2nd I'm not sure at all. And if I end up concluding it's Rayner I can see myself (reluctantly) prioritising that and voting for her.
Nothing (for me) is more important than preventing Farage and his gang getting their filthy mitts on this country.
Far be it from me to suggest solutions to Labours quandary but Rayner is so far from your desire to beat Reform as you can get. Honestly - Labour supporters and members need to read the fucking room. Your only hope is a Cooper ticket with Streeting as Chancellor maybe. This fascination and love for Rayner is perplexing. She’s clearly thick as shit. And a proven tax dodger.
Northern accent = thick as shit
Thank goodness none of my university exams were orals, or it would have been an instant fail.
Nope. You’re making that stretch, not me. JRM Is as thick as shit. As is Jenrick. Hague wasn’t. Neither is Burnham. She’s objectively as thick as shit. You just like her because she’s northern. And in your mind that means she’s beyond criticism.
JRM is brighter than Burnham, even if with less common touch
Really? I had no idea Burnham was such a dumbarse.
Yes I know Ydoethur you think JRM is an idiot but with his fortune of over £100 million, including founding a successful hedge fund, his Oxbridge degree and his weekly show on GB news and his lovely family home in Somerset shared with his wife and 6 children Jacob of course will not give a shift what you think!
Making a lot of money and being successful does not prevent someone being an idiot of course. Peter Mandelson did both (on his terms) for a long time.
Mandelson showed some poor judgement, he certainly isn't an idiot either
Where does the line between poor judgement and f*****' traitor dissect?
Exactly. It wasn’t poor judgement. He knew exactly what he was doing, what rules were being broken and what the consequences would be. He just thought he would never be caught. In that respect he’s an idiot.
First to say I can't see Starmer resigning over this.
An atomic bomb wouldn't remove Starmer
What about a redhead?
I think this all increases the chances of Ange being next.
It makes her financial arrangements seem a bit meh, and allows her to say we've had enough of the old boy's club.
Rayner is now best-placed
As I posted as the old thread was closing.
The obvious one is Angela.
She has behaved dutifully and perfectly since resignation.
Labour has a number of very competent ministers in place she would be well advised to keep
Cooper Mahmood Healy McFadden Both Alexanders Nandy Phillipson Ed M Emma Reynolds Jarvis
Some of the new intake.
Likes of Haigh and Thornbury return.
Compares very well with threadbare Shadow Cabinet of failures like Philp, Patel Stride, Atkins, Couthino.
Badenoch probably be gone before Starmer coronation for Cleverly.
Labour edge left. Tories edge centre.
“dutifully and perfectly since resignation”.
Has she paid her tax due?
If Angela Rayner is the answer, the wrong question is definitely being asked.
She’s no Mandelson, who can keep coming back again until yet another scandal finally kills her off almost three decades later.
Angela Rayner is not the answer to any question relating to the government of this country. Maybe “how can we fuck things up more”.
The question is, who do we put our money on? Not who would be best, or who would we like, but who will win?
If it helps I'm a Labour member and if/when the vote comes I'll be judging 2 things:
Who would be the better PM? Who would more likely beat Reform?
Assuming a Streeting v Rayner choice, I'm clear on the answer to the 1st. Streeting. But on the 2nd I'm not sure at all. And if I end up concluding it's Rayner I can see myself (reluctantly) prioritising that and voting for her.
Nothing (for me) is more important than preventing Farage and his gang getting their filthy mitts on this country.
Far be it from me to suggest solutions to Labours quandary but Rayner is so far from your desire to beat Reform as you can get. Honestly - Labour supporters and members need to read the fucking room. Your only hope is a Cooper ticket with Streeting as Chancellor maybe. This fascination and love for Rayner is perplexing. She’s clearly thick as shit. And a proven tax dodger.
Northern accent = thick as shit
Thank goodness none of my university exams were orals, or it would have been an instant fail.
Nope. You’re making that stretch, not me. JRM Is as thick as shit. As is Jenrick. Hague wasn’t. Neither is Burnham. She’s objectively as thick as shit. You just like her because she’s northern. And in your mind that means she’s beyond criticism.
JRM is brighter than Burnham, even if with less common touch
Really? I had no idea Burnham was such a dumbarse.
Yes I know Ydoethur you think JRM is an idiot but with his fortune of over £100 million, including founding a successful hedge fund, his Oxbridge degree and his weekly show on GB news and his lovely family home in Somerset shared with his wife and 6 children Jacob of course will not give a shift what you think!
Making a lot of money and being successful does not prevent someone being an idiot of course. Peter Mandelson did both (on his terms) for a long time.
Mandelson showed some poor judgement, he certainly isn't an idiot either
You seem to find it impossible to accept that people can be both intelligent and idiots at the same time, despite countless examples proving that point (twitter has certainly helped reveal that).
If someone has tremendously poor judgement and a ego the size of a planet which gives them unearned confidence on every subject they opine on even if they are quite ignorant outside their own specialised field, are they not an idiot even if they possess a Phd, can orate like Demosthenes in his prime, and display otherwise swiftness of thought?
The answer is obviously yes, and doesn't mean discounting where they might actually have some quality otherwise. It may not have been his precise point, but Clarendon's acknowledgement that Cromwell had what would have been significant virtues despite thinking him to be incredible wicked, bears contemplating.
First to say I can't see Starmer resigning over this.
An atomic bomb wouldn't remove Starmer
What about a redhead?
I think this all increases the chances of Ange being next.
It makes her financial arrangements seem a bit meh, and allows her to say we've had enough of the old boy's club.
Rayner is now best-placed
As I posted as the old thread was closing.
The obvious one is Angela.
She has behaved dutifully and perfectly since resignation.
Labour has a number of very competent ministers in place she would be well advised to keep
Cooper Mahmood Healy McFadden Both Alexanders Nandy Phillipson Ed M Emma Reynolds Jarvis
Some of the new intake.
Likes of Haigh and Thornbury return.
Compares very well with threadbare Shadow Cabinet of failures like Philp, Patel Stride, Atkins, Couthino.
Badenoch probably be gone before Starmer coronation for Cleverly.
Labour edge left. Tories edge centre.
“dutifully and perfectly since resignation”.
Has she paid her tax due?
If Angela Rayner is the answer, the wrong question is definitely being asked.
She’s no Mandelson, who can keep coming back again until yet another scandal finally kills her off almost three decades later.
Angela Rayner is not the answer to any question relating to the government of this country. Maybe “how can we fuck things up more”.
The question is, who do we put our money on? Not who would be best, or who would we like, but who will win?
If it helps I'm a Labour member and if/when the vote comes I'll be judging 2 things:
Who would be the better PM? Who would more likely beat Reform?
Assuming a Streeting v Rayner choice, I'm clear on the answer to the 1st. Streeting. But on the 2nd I'm not sure at all. And if I end up concluding it's Rayner I can see myself (reluctantly) prioritising that and voting for her.
Nothing (for me) is more important than preventing Farage and his gang getting their filthy mitts on this country.
Far be it from me to suggest solutions to Labours quandary but Rayner is so far from your desire to beat Reform as you can get. Honestly - Labour supporters and members need to read the fucking room. Your only hope is a Cooper ticket with Streeting as Chancellor maybe. This fascination and love for Rayner is perplexing. She’s clearly thick as shit. And a proven tax dodger.
Northern accent = thick as shit
Thank goodness none of my university exams were orals, or it would have been an instant fail.
Nope. You’re making that stretch, not me. JRM Is as thick as shit. As is Jenrick. Hague wasn’t. Neither is Burnham. She’s objectively as thick as shit. You just like her because she’s northern. And in your mind that means she’s beyond criticism.
JRM is brighter than Burnham, even if with less common touch
Really? I had no idea Burnham was such a dumbarse.
Yes I know Ydoethur you think JRM is an idiot but with his fortune of over £100 million, including founding a successful hedge fund, his Oxbridge degree and his weekly show on GB news and his lovely family home in Somerset shared with his wife and 6 children Jacob of course will not give a shift what you think!
Making a lot of money and being successful does not prevent someone being an idiot of course. Peter Mandelson did both (on his terms) for a long time.
Mandelson showed some poor judgement, he certainly isn't an idiot either
Where does the line between poor judgement and f*****' traitor dissect?
Exactly. It wasn’t poor judgement. He knew exactly what he was doing, what rules were being broken and what the consequences would be. He just thought he would never be caught. In that respect he’s an idiot.
He's about to move onto the "I'm an idiot" stage of the shameless person's defence, having already used up the "I have poor judgement", which did not hold up after the first Epstein conviction anyway.
Time for him to update his memoirs to say he wasn't that great after all.
Even if you approve of pubs and disapprove of unaffordable children, this seems a tough sell.
Reform would still end the 2 child benefit cap for those with British parents working full time
The majority of families affected are British, and well over half are working households.
Of the families that aren't working there's a pretty good chunk of single parents and either disabled adults, or a disabled child.
Doesn't look to be a huge number of those undeserving foreigners.
Yet he seems to be spending pretty much the full amount that the 2 child limit is meant to cost.
Not sure the maths adds up.
What I am impressed with is that when most politicians suggest a change in the law, and then the Government introduces it, they try to claim credit. U-turning, and promising to reverse it does appear to be "doing politics differently"
Starmer's been beaten to sacking his hand picked US Ambassador by Kemi, then beaten in sacking him from the party and the House of Lords by Mandy himself. What has Slalom got left to actually throw him out of?
Yes the Mandelson photos will likely boost Reform and the Greens in Gorton and Denton. Though Labour made a sensible choice picking a female local councillor as their candidate
Reform deserve to benefit from Labour's Epstein adjacency. As Nigel explained today. Nigel is only mentioned 37 times which is within the threshold for not really being in the Epstein files.
I’m sure I missed the memo somewhere. What is the point in releasing the Epstein coms without showing who sent them?
I saw one of the emails today where the emailer asked how many compromising pics Epstein had of him and it was all emoji laughs etc. surely the point is to see who was in that world so ensure the person who sent that has to justify it as a joke or a fear?
Starmer's been beaten to sacking his hand picked US Ambassador by Kemi, then beaten in sacking him from the party and the House of Lords by Mandy himself. What has Slalom got left to actually throw him out of?
Didn’t Korma start off as Captain Hindsight? I’m sure he’ll come up with some retrospective BS to show he was on the case rhe whole time.
Starmer's been beaten to sacking his hand picked US Ambassador by Kemi, then beaten in sacking him from the party and the House of Lords by Mandy himself. What has Slalom got left to actually throw him out of?
I’m sure I missed the memo somewhere. What is the point in releasing the Epstein coms without showing who sent them?
I saw one of the emails today where the emailer asked how many compromising pics Epstein had of him and it was all emoji laughs etc. surely the point is to see who was in that world so ensure the person who sent that has to justify it as a joke or a fear?
The point is that the DOJ is legally obliged to release the files. The DOJ, though, is in the hands of scofflaws, who assume they have wiggle room to redact the names of the wealthy and powerful.
Who can Starmer blame for Mandelson's appointment?
His paunchy paws are all over it
It’s a question what Starmer knew at the time. Or what can be proved he knew. And it’s not easy to get to that to be honest. Or failing that, merely a slap for should have known better and been more diligent as we would have been.
For preservation of true history, {I didn’t like it} but PB consensus liked the appointment. back Bench Conservative MPs stood up in commons said it was good appointment. What did Starmer know at tgst time that we didn’t, what the Conservatives didn’t?
Did UKs security Services not know the detail held in the Epstein Files? Is this the first time anyone’s found out the true depth of PantyPetes collusion with Epstein? Is this the first time anyone’s found out UK Business Secretary was carrying out what looks like insider trading using levers of governmental power in UK, with an investment financier friend?
What was known about Mandelson by the general public on the day of his appointment was enough to disqualify him from any important government position
He had been fired twice for impropriety
Then we knew he was friends with a paedo billionaire crook
Then the Prime Minister appointed him
The default assumption must be that 'due diligence' over the Mandelson appointment with security services and secret information gatherers would have to be exceptionally thorough given his past and his known connections.
The other default assumption must be that between them MI5, MI5, Special Branch, GCHQ and the overseas intelligence agencies with whom we had a good relationship will have known quite a lot of what we now know, and, safe to say, quite a lot more that we don't. Human nature is what it is.
Which is the bit or bits in the process which have gone wrong and why is a central question. There seem to me no possibilities that are not quite disconcerting.
Are you sure the snoopy services are that good? They would have to have tapped into these emails at the time they were being sent?
For example the smoking gun here, PantyPete sharing info he shouldn’t have with a financier friend. You are claiming to us the snoopy services have been sitting on this? You saying they put it into the dossier they showed Starmer?
I will repeat.
Email bounces through servers, completely unencrypted. A river of postcards. Due to the way the servers work, they leave a copy on each server, until erased.
For many, many years, intelligence services have hovered these up. It takes little effort and produces a huge pile of stuff to sift through.
Everyone does this.
Did the security services look at Mandy’s emails? We don’t know.
But for far less sensitive jobs, they are trawled.
And I repeat. 🙂 You are explicitly stating Snoopy Services knew all this before the releases, if not more besides.
I’m not disputing the IT involved, you are right. But it still requires Snoopy Services to snoop in the right places.
What is against your position - if Snoopy Services hold something serious, they would flag it up wouldn’t they?
First to say I can't see Starmer resigning over this.
An atomic bomb wouldn't remove Starmer
What about a redhead?
I think this all increases the chances of Ange being next.
It makes her financial arrangements seem a bit meh, and allows her to say we've had enough of the old boy's club.
Rayner is now best-placed
As I posted as the old thread was closing.
The obvious one is Angela.
She has behaved dutifully and perfectly since resignation.
Labour has a number of very competent ministers in place she would be well advised to keep
Cooper Mahmood Healy McFadden Both Alexanders Nandy Phillipson Ed M Emma Reynolds Jarvis
Some of the new intake.
Likes of Haigh and Thornbury return.
Compares very well with threadbare Shadow Cabinet of failures like Philp, Patel Stride, Atkins, Couthino.
Badenoch probably be gone before Starmer coronation for Cleverly.
Labour edge left. Tories edge centre.
“dutifully and perfectly since resignation”.
Has she paid her tax due?
If Angela Rayner is the answer, the wrong question is definitely being asked.
She’s no Mandelson, who can keep coming back again until yet another scandal finally kills her off almost three decades later.
Angela Rayner is not the answer to any question relating to the government of this country. Maybe “how can we fuck things up more”.
The question is, who do we put our money on? Not who would be best, or who would we like, but who will win?
If it helps I'm a Labour member and if/when the vote comes I'll be judging 2 things:
Who would be the better PM? Who would more likely beat Reform?
Assuming a Streeting v Rayner choice, I'm clear on the answer to the 1st. Streeting. But on the 2nd I'm not sure at all. And if I end up concluding it's Rayner I can see myself (reluctantly) prioritising that and voting for her.
Nothing (for me) is more important than preventing Farage and his gang getting their filthy mitts on this country.
Far be it from me to suggest solutions to Labours quandary but Rayner is so far from your desire to beat Reform as you can get. Honestly - Labour supporters and members need to read the fucking room. Your only hope is a Cooper ticket with Streeting as Chancellor maybe. This fascination and love for Rayner is perplexing. She’s clearly thick as shit. And a proven tax dodger.
Northern accent = thick as shit
Thank goodness none of my university exams were orals, or it would have been an instant fail.
Nope. You’re making that stretch, not me. JRM Is as thick as shit. As is Jenrick. Hague wasn’t. Neither is Burnham. She’s objectively as thick as shit. You just like her because she’s northern. And in your mind that means she’s beyond criticism.
JRM is brighter than Burnham, even if with less common touch
Really? I had no idea Burnham was such a dumbarse.
Yes I know Ydoethur you think JRM is an idiot but with his fortune of over £100 million, including founding a successful hedge fund, his Oxbridge degree and his weekly show on GB news and his lovely family home in Somerset shared with his wife and 6 children Jacob of course will not give a shift what you think!
Making a lot of money and being successful does not prevent someone being an idiot of course. Peter Mandelson did both (on his terms) for a long time.
I don't think Mandelson is an idiot.
I think he's a grasping, mendacious... [that's quite enough]
He is one of those people who regards all information, no matter how personal or confidential, as a tradeable token.
Epstein's advice to Mandelson in the aftermath of the 2010 election is fascinating.
Epstein seems to be the one pushing for a Lab/Lib coalition and Mandelson is pushing back and saying it would be a mutual suicide pact and saying that Blair is advising against it. Epstein responds that Blair has to think of the party but Mandelson's personal interest wouldn't be served by being in "a mere opposition party". It sounds like Epstein didn't want to lose his access to the heart of government.
Why the hell was Epstein's opinion on British politics being considered at all?
From what I recall, even if there were those on the LD side who would have preferred a coalition with Labour rather than the Conservatives, the truth was such a coalition would have struggled - Conservatives plus DUP had 314, Labour plus LD 315 so it would have needed Plaid (3), SDLP (3) and Alliance (1) to have just about had a majority with those elected under the SF banner not attending.
The politics of propping up a tired unpopular 13 year old Government wouldn't have looked good (of course neither did going into coalition with the Conservatives as it turned out). In addition, Clegg had publicly committed to speaking first to the party with the most votes and the Conservatives outpolled Labour 36-29 or by two million if you prefer.
Everyone knew Labour couldn't remain in Government except it seems Epstein.
I’m sure I missed the memo somewhere. What is the point in releasing the Epstein coms without showing who sent them?
I saw one of the emails today where the emailer asked how many compromising pics Epstein had of him and it was all emoji laughs etc. surely the point is to see who was in that world so ensure the person who sent that has to justify it as a joke or a fear?
The point is that the DOJ is legally obliged to release the files. The DOJ, though, is in the hands of scofflaws, who assume they have wiggle room to redact the names of the wealthy and powerful.
Not enough focus is on Trump's economic policies. He makes sure attention is elsewhere.
But the US is running a huge fiscal deficit whilst the economy is growing. Trump has made it clear he wants cuts to interest rates. This is classic short term populist economic policy. It can't end well and it's the biggest economy in the world. The precious metal market is crazy right now. I seem to remember Trump also relaxed lending rules for small banks during his first term. We seem to have forgotten that 2008 ever happened.
Indeed:
The US is running a Federal deficit of 6% of GDP, despite bringing in $25-30bn per months in from tariffs.
Not only that but President Trump would like to reduce interest rates and to mail multi thousand dollar 'tariff rebate cheques' to everyone.
A few Republicans -a very few, like Rand Paul- have noticed that this properly bonkers, and will end in (at the very least) a nasty bout of inflation.
It's literally the kind of shit that you'd expect from a Peronist government in Argentina.
Now we know that Mandelson was giving/selling official secrets when he was Business Sec.
Does anyone doubt that he would be willing to do the same when he was Ambassador ?
If so what was he giving/selling and to whom ?
There is no evidence he was selling official secrets.
I assume he was getting something in return for all the info he was giving Epstein.
Whether that was the odd $75k, access to other friends of Epstein or just useful info.
I have worked for over 25 years with people who work in sport, banking, business, politics, TV, and other high, profile industries, and I am not surprised there are people who like to show off by giving inside info to show they are important/in the know.
Mandelson feels like that kind of person, he is known to be a shameless name dropper.
Mandelson has always had a lust for money though.
Sure he enjoyed showing off how important he was but every scandal he's been involved in has also involved money.
First to say I can't see Starmer resigning over this.
An atomic bomb wouldn't remove Starmer
What about a redhead?
I think this all increases the chances of Ange being next.
It makes her financial arrangements seem a bit meh, and allows her to say we've had enough of the old boy's club.
Rayner is now best-placed
As I posted as the old thread was closing.
The obvious one is Angela.
She has behaved dutifully and perfectly since resignation.
Labour has a number of very competent ministers in place she would be well advised to keep
Cooper Mahmood Healy McFadden Both Alexanders Nandy Phillipson Ed M Emma Reynolds Jarvis
Some of the new intake.
Likes of Haigh and Thornbury return.
Compares very well with threadbare Shadow Cabinet of failures like Philp, Patel Stride, Atkins, Couthino.
Badenoch probably be gone before Starmer coronation for Cleverly.
Labour edge left. Tories edge centre.
“dutifully and perfectly since resignation”.
Has she paid her tax due?
If Angela Rayner is the answer, the wrong question is definitely being asked.
She’s no Mandelson, who can keep coming back again until yet another scandal finally kills her off almost three decades later.
Angela Rayner is not the answer to any question relating to the government of this country. Maybe “how can we fuck things up more”.
The question is, who do we put our money on? Not who would be best, or who would we like, but who will win?
If it helps I'm a Labour member and if/when the vote comes I'll be judging 2 things:
Who would be the better PM? Who would more likely beat Reform?
Assuming a Streeting v Rayner choice, I'm clear on the answer to the 1st. Streeting. But on the 2nd I'm not sure at all. And if I end up concluding it's Rayner I can see myself (reluctantly) prioritising that and voting for her.
Nothing (for me) is more important than preventing Farage and his gang getting their filthy mitts on this country.
Far be it from me to suggest solutions to Labours quandary but Rayner is so far from your desire to beat Reform as you can get. Honestly - Labour supporters and members need to read the fucking room. Your only hope is a Cooper ticket with Streeting as Chancellor maybe. This fascination and love for Rayner is perplexing. She’s clearly thick as shit. And a proven tax dodger.
Northern accent = thick as shit
Thank goodness none of my university exams were orals, or it would have been an instant fail.
Nope. You’re making that stretch, not me. JRM Is as thick as shit. As is Jenrick. Hague wasn’t. Neither is Burnham. She’s objectively as thick as shit. You just like her because she’s northern. And in your mind that means she’s beyond criticism.
JRM is brighter than Burnham, even if with less common touch
Really? I had no idea Burnham was such a dumbarse.
Yes I know Ydoethur you think JRM is an idiot. Yet with his fortune of over £100 million, including founding a successful hedge fund, his Oxbridge degree, his former job as an MP and Cabinet Minister and his weekly show on GB news and his lovely family home in Somerset shared with his wife and 6 children Jacob of course will not give a shit what you think!
His hedge fund, founded with his wife's money, his Oxbridge degree, which given its low classification is a piece of paper, his talk show on a disgraced news channel that functions as a Russian propaganda piece and his family home in Somerset again bought with his wife's money.
I'm sure he won't care what I say about him.
But his track record of failure, incompetence, arrogance and bad judgement in politics are not counterbalanced by examples that tend to show he is, in fact, an idiot.
And do you know, I don't care if he doesn't care what I know (not think, because it's a fact not an opinion). He still doesn't have two brain cells to rub together, and symbolises all that is wrong with this country - that it's who you know not what you know.
No after university he worked at Rothschild and Lloyd George Emerging Markets and founded Somerset Capital with former colleagues and Crispin Odey and the company is still going strong and he is still a partner in it. He got a good upper second from Trinity College hardly a 'low classification'. His GB news show gets a lot of viewers and even if his home is partly his wife's they are a devoted couple.
He was also a hard working constituency MP who played a key part in helping deliver Brexit whether you liked it or not.
Though continue your all too frequent chippy whinging if you wish!
Before I retired, I regularly recommended his Emerging Markets fund. I don’t know whether it’s still as good.
First to say I can't see Starmer resigning over this.
An atomic bomb wouldn't remove Starmer
What about a redhead?
I think this all increases the chances of Ange being next.
It makes her financial arrangements seem a bit meh, and allows her to say we've had enough of the old boy's club.
Rayner is now best-placed
As I posted as the old thread was closing.
The obvious one is Angela.
She has behaved dutifully and perfectly since resignation.
Labour has a number of very competent ministers in place she would be well advised to keep
Cooper Mahmood Healy McFadden Both Alexanders Nandy Phillipson Ed M Emma Reynolds Jarvis
Some of the new intake.
Likes of Haigh and Thornbury return.
Compares very well with threadbare Shadow Cabinet of failures like Philp, Patel Stride, Atkins, Couthino.
Badenoch probably be gone before Starmer coronation for Cleverly.
Labour edge left. Tories edge centre.
“dutifully and perfectly since resignation”.
Has she paid her tax due?
If Angela Rayner is the answer, the wrong question is definitely being asked.
She’s no Mandelson, who can keep coming back again until yet another scandal finally kills her off almost three decades later.
Angela Rayner is not the answer to any question relating to the government of this country. Maybe “how can we fuck things up more”.
The question is, who do we put our money on? Not who would be best, or who would we like, but who will win?
If it helps I'm a Labour member and if/when the vote comes I'll be judging 2 things:
Who would be the better PM? Who would more likely beat Reform?
Assuming a Streeting v Rayner choice, I'm clear on the answer to the 1st. Streeting. But on the 2nd I'm not sure at all. And if I end up concluding it's Rayner I can see myself (reluctantly) prioritising that and voting for her.
Nothing (for me) is more important than preventing Farage and his gang getting their filthy mitts on this country.
Far be it from me to suggest solutions to Labours quandary but Rayner is so far from your desire to beat Reform as you can get. Honestly - Labour supporters and members need to read the fucking room. Your only hope is a Cooper ticket with Streeting as Chancellor maybe. This fascination and love for Rayner is perplexing. She’s clearly thick as shit. And a proven tax dodger.
Northern accent = thick as shit
Thank goodness none of my university exams were orals, or it would have been an instant fail.
Nope. You’re making that stretch, not me. JRM Is as thick as shit. As is Jenrick. Hague wasn’t. Neither is Burnham. She’s objectively as thick as shit. You just like her because she’s northern. And in your mind that means she’s beyond criticism.
It does depend on what sort of PM we want, though. Since Thatcher and Blair, the UK model has centralised power in its leader such that it is often called ‘presidential’ - yet ironically, until Trump showed what is possible by stretching the boundaries, our PMs have had more power than any US president. Reagan was also thick as **** yet ran a decent presidency by picking people be trusted and letting them make most of the decisions, content just to be the front man. There’s no theoretical reason why a British government couldn’t run like that - it’s just that we’ve forgotten, not having been alive back in the day, how collective cabinet government actually might work.
I usually agree with you because I think politically we are in the same neck of the woods but it's more complex.
The role of the Prime Minister isn't just "primus inter pares" but he or she is an almost de facto spokesperson for "the nation" by which I mean their view or opinion is constantly sought on every subject whether of relevance to Government or not it seems.
At the same time, the role of Foreign Secretary has become as devalued as that of the American Secretary of State or even the Russian Foreign Minister. Foreign policy has moved directly to the Prime Minister - this started, I think, with the coming of summits such as the G20, G7, NATO, EU etc where the leaders met and talked which wasn't the case in times past when you had Foreign Ministers to do that kind of thing.
It's also a nice diversion from what might seem the trivialities of domestic politics to be on the world stage with Presidents and other Prime Ministers in nice conference halls, hotels and the like.
The modern PM is therefore de facto Foreign Secretary leaving the Chancellor and the Home Secretary to deal with the tough questions of money and domestic matters.
Air travel killed the role of Foreign Secretary. Previously diplomacy in an age of slower travel required being out of the country for longer continuous periods, so it couldn't be done routinely by the PM.
But still. If the role of PM was weakened then the position of Foreign Secretary, as the representative of the Cabinet government abroad, would be rejuvenated.
You mean, in the way that those 19th century Prime Ministers Palmerston, Disraeli, and Salisbury* never ever meddled in foreign affairs?
Or, to bring it a little further forward, Lloyd George, McDonald, or Baldwin?
And of course, the Prime Minister of the late 1930s wisely left all of the manoeuverings over Nazi Germany to his foreign Secretary.
* Salisbury of course is a tricky one from that point of view because he actually was his own foreign secretary.
In the 19th century and early 20th century you still had Foreign Secretaries who were important figures in their own right in international diplomacy, although the Prime Minister meddled from time-to-time.
On his return from Munich, Chamberlain presented his famous piece of paper after disembarking from a plane, of course, which rather was my point.
Even if you approve of pubs and disapprove of unaffordable children, this seems a tough sell.
Reform would still end the 2 child benefit cap for those with British parents working full time
The majority of families affected are British, and well over half are working households.
Of the families that aren't working there's a pretty good chunk of single parents and either disabled adults, or a disabled child.
Doesn't look to be a huge number of those undeserving foreigners.
Yet he seems to be spending pretty much the full amount that the 2 child limit is meant to cost.
Not sure the maths adds up.
What I am impressed with is that when most politicians suggest a change in the law, and then the Government introduces it, they try to claim credit. U-turning, and promising to reverse it does appear to be "doing politics differently"
As the Independent reported in December:
Mr Farage seized headlines when he announced that he would scrap the two child benefit cap, months before Labour decided to do it in last month’s Budget.
But the Reform UK leader later clarified that this was only for “working British people, meaning a couple who both work 37.5 hours a week”.
New Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) analysis shows that of the 470,000 households affected by the two-child limit (in receipt of Universal Credit with three or more children, of whom the third was born after 6 April 2017), just 3,700 – less than 0.8 per cent of the total – have two adults working full-time.
Sky reporting that the government is to lay an amendment to tomorrows debate agreeing to release some but not all documents
The question now is will labour mps defeat the amendment
The Epstein files are held by the US DOJ not the UK government
What Big G is referring to is the dossier on Mandleson ahead of the appointment, part of which would be a security brief.
And from Conservative front bench point of view, what’s in the security brief should mean serious questions to Panty in an interview - on basis you DONT HAVE TO RELY ON HIS ANSWERS the answers would be in the brief, testing his honesty.
The security brief can be redacted and not shared publicly, but can be shared with the opposition front benches and other MPs. No excuse why the whole dossier including security aspects cannot be shared with MPs.
Will Hutton being interviewed by Andrew Neil on Times Radio had a bit of a chuckle about Reform UK selecting Matt Goodwin, because he's such a divisive figure. Hutton could be right, but on the other hand, Goodwin has a formidable social media presence, which he seems to be deploying skillfully in this campaign. There may be a lot of people to dislike the cut of his gib, but there may well be a cohort of formerly politically unengaged people who are exposed to Goodwin's platforms.
Starmer's been beaten to sacking his hand picked US Ambassador by Kemi, then beaten in sacking him from the party and the House of Lords by Mandy himself. What has Slalom got left to actually throw him out of?
Kemi is having a much better 2026 than Starmer.
Bad news for Labour.
Kemi was dismantled, spat out and eviscerated at her last Pmq even Tories admit that.
Not sure if you're being serious but if you are you ought to provide convincing evidence.
Yes, clearly Starmers willful ignorance is not unique.
I meant evidence for genocide.
And saying lots of innocent people have died won't cut it. That's true of any war. There's room for reasonable disagreement on Israel's actions but I find it hard to believe that any intelligent well informed person cannot see the enormous global bullshit machine that is the Gaza cause.
It probably shouldn't surprise us since unfortunately the world's two biggest religions are rooted in opposition to Jews, something a committed Christian like you will be well aware of.
Starmer's been beaten to sacking his hand picked US Ambassador by Kemi, then beaten in sacking him from the party and the House of Lords by Mandy himself. What has Slalom got left to actually throw him out of?
Kemi is having a much better 2026 than Starmer.
Bad news for Labour.
True, but we do have 11/12ths of it still to go. The Gorton & Denton by-election seems unlikely to look good for the Conservatives. The local elections are going to be a struggle. We shall see how she handles adversity!
Starmer's been beaten to sacking his hand picked US Ambassador by Kemi, then beaten in sacking him from the party and the House of Lords by Mandy himself. What has Slalom got left to actually throw him out of?
Kemi is having a much better 2026 than Starmer.
Bad news for Labour.
Kemi was dismantled, spat out and eviscerated at her last Pmq even Tories admit that.
Who can Starmer blame for Mandelson's appointment?
His paunchy paws are all over it
It’s a question what Starmer knew at the time. Or what can be proved he knew. And it’s not easy to get to that to be honest. Or failing that, merely a slap for should have known better and been more diligent as we would have been.
For preservation of true history, {I didn’t like it} but PB consensus liked the appointment. back Bench Conservative MPs stood up in commons said it was good appointment. What did Starmer know at tgst time that we didn’t, what the Conservatives didn’t?
Did UKs security Services not know the detail held in the Epstein Files? Is this the first time anyone’s found out the true depth of PantyPetes collusion with Epstein? Is this the first time anyone’s found out UK Business Secretary was carrying out what looks like insider trading using levers of governmental power in UK, with an investment financier friend?
What was known about Mandelson by the general public on the day of his appointment was enough to disqualify him from any important government position
He had been fired twice for impropriety
Then we knew he was friends with a paedo billionaire crook
Then the Prime Minister appointed him
The default assumption must be that 'due diligence' over the Mandelson appointment with security services and secret information gatherers would have to be exceptionally thorough given his past and his known connections.
The other default assumption must be that between them MI5, MI5, Special Branch, GCHQ and the overseas intelligence agencies with whom we had a good relationship will have known quite a lot of what we now know, and, safe to say, quite a lot more that we don't. Human nature is what it is.
Which is the bit or bits in the process which have gone wrong and why is a central question. There seem to me no possibilities that are not quite disconcerting.
Are you sure the snoopy services are that good? They would have to have tapped into these emails at the time they were being sent?
For example the smoking gun here, PantyPete sharing info he shouldn’t have with a financier friend. You are claiming to us the snoopy services have been sitting on this? You saying they put it into the dossier they showed Starmer?
I will repeat.
Email bounces through servers, completely unencrypted. A river of postcards. Due to the way the servers work, they leave a copy on each server, until erased.
For many, many years, intelligence services have hovered these up. It takes little effort and produces a huge pile of stuff to sift through.
Everyone does this.
Did the security services look at Mandy’s emails? We don’t know.
But for far less sensitive jobs, they are trawled.
Are there not email services you can use that - provided your recipient also uses such a service - the email will be encrypted from end-to-end?
First to say I can't see Starmer resigning over this.
An atomic bomb wouldn't remove Starmer
What about a redhead?
I think this all increases the chances of Ange being next.
It makes her financial arrangements seem a bit meh, and allows her to say we've had enough of the old boy's club.
Rayner is now best-placed
As I posted as the old thread was closing.
The obvious one is Angela.
She has behaved dutifully and perfectly since resignation.
Labour has a number of very competent ministers in place she would be well advised to keep
Cooper Mahmood Healy McFadden Both Alexanders Nandy Phillipson Ed M Emma Reynolds Jarvis
Some of the new intake.
Likes of Haigh and Thornbury return.
Compares very well with threadbare Shadow Cabinet of failures like Philp, Patel Stride, Atkins, Couthino.
Badenoch probably be gone before Starmer coronation for Cleverly.
Labour edge left. Tories edge centre.
“dutifully and perfectly since resignation”.
Has she paid her tax due?
If Angela Rayner is the answer, the wrong question is definitely being asked.
She’s no Mandelson, who can keep coming back again until yet another scandal finally kills her off almost three decades later.
Angela Rayner is not the answer to any question relating to the government of this country. Maybe “how can we fuck things up more”.
The question is, who do we put our money on? Not who would be best, or who would we like, but who will win?
If it helps I'm a Labour member and if/when the vote comes I'll be judging 2 things:
Who would be the better PM? Who would more likely beat Reform?
Assuming a Streeting v Rayner choice, I'm clear on the answer to the 1st. Streeting. But on the 2nd I'm not sure at all. And if I end up concluding it's Rayner I can see myself (reluctantly) prioritising that and voting for her.
Nothing (for me) is more important than preventing Farage and his gang getting their filthy mitts on this country.
Far be it from me to suggest solutions to Labours quandary but Rayner is so far from your desire to beat Reform as you can get. Honestly - Labour supporters and members need to read the fucking room. Your only hope is a Cooper ticket with Streeting as Chancellor maybe. This fascination and love for Rayner is perplexing. She’s clearly thick as shit. And a proven tax dodger.
Northern accent = thick as shit
Thank goodness none of my university exams were orals, or it would have been an instant fail.
Nope. You’re making that stretch, not me. JRM Is as thick as shit. As is Jenrick. Hague wasn’t. Neither is Burnham. She’s objectively as thick as shit. You just like her because she’s northern. And in your mind that means she’s beyond criticism.
JRM is brighter than Burnham, even if with less common touch
Really? I had no idea Burnham was such a dumbarse.
Yes I know Ydoethur you think JRM is an idiot. Yet with his fortune of over £100 million, including founding a successful hedge fund, his Oxbridge degree, his former job as an MP and Cabinet Minister and his weekly show on GB news and his lovely family home in Somerset shared with his wife and 6 children Jacob of course will not give a shit what you think!
His hedge fund, founded with his wife's money, his Oxbridge degree, which given its low classification is a piece of paper, his talk show on a disgraced news channel that functions as a Russian propaganda piece and his family home in Somerset again bought with his wife's money.
I'm sure he won't care what I say about him.
But his track record of failure, incompetence, arrogance and bad judgement in politics are not counterbalanced by examples that tend to show he is, in fact, an idiot.
And do you know, I don't care if he doesn't care what I know (not think, because it's a fact not an opinion). He still doesn't have two brain cells to rub together, and symbolises all that is wrong with this country - that it's who you know not what you know.
No after university he worked at Rothschild and Lloyd George Emerging Markets and founded Somerset Capital with former colleagues and Crispin Odey and the company is still going strong and he is still a partner in it. He got a good upper second from Trinity College hardly a 'low classification'. His GB news show gets a lot of viewers and even if his home is partly his wife's they are a devoted couple.
He was also a hard working constituency MP who played a key part in helping deliver Brexit whether you liked it or not.
Though continue your all too frequent chippy whinging if you wish!
Before I retired, I regularly recommended his Emerging Markets fund. I don’t know whether it’s still as good.
I can personally attest that being a very good investment chap does’nt automatically make you sensible in normal life. I ran brilliantly performing portfolios and I’m an absolute horror.
Starmer's been beaten to sacking his hand picked US Ambassador by Kemi, then beaten in sacking him from the party and the House of Lords by Mandy himself. What has Slalom got left to actually throw him out of?
Kemi is having a much better 2026 than Starmer.
Bad news for Labour.
Kemi was dismantled, spat out and eviscerated at her last Pmq even Tories admit that.
We haven't had a paid astroturfer for a while. It's sweet.
Starmer's been beaten to sacking his hand picked US Ambassador by Kemi, then beaten in sacking him from the party and the House of Lords by Mandy himself. What has Slalom got left to actually throw him out of?
Kemi is having a much better 2026 than Starmer.
Bad news for Labour.
Kemi was dismantled, spat out and eviscerated at her last Pmq even Tories admit that.
Kemi’s living in your head somewhat. Are you ok hun?
Yes the Mandelson photos will likely boost Reform and the Greens in Gorton and Denton. Though Labour made a sensible choice picking a female local councillor as their candidate
Reform deserve to benefit from Labour's Epstein adjacency. As Nigel explained today. Nigel is only mentioned 37 times which is within the threshold for not really being in the Epstein files.
All depends on context
Even if it is only one mention but that is Farage writing "Dear Jeffrey, thanks for the wonderful weekend, where do you find all those lovely young ladies? " then he would be in deep do-do.
On the other hand if it is Mandelson writing to Epstein saying, "that Farage is an awful oik, don't let him anywhere near your island" then Farage is probably not in any sort of trouble.
Starmer's been beaten to sacking his hand picked US Ambassador by Kemi, then beaten in sacking him from the party and the House of Lords by Mandy himself. What has Slalom got left to actually throw him out of?
Kemi is having a much better 2026 than Starmer.
Bad news for Labour.
Kemi was dismantled, spat out and eviscerated at her last Pmq even Tories admit that.
First to say I can't see Starmer resigning over this.
An atomic bomb wouldn't remove Starmer
What about a redhead?
I think this all increases the chances of Ange being next.
It makes her financial arrangements seem a bit meh, and allows her to say we've had enough of the old boy's club.
Rayner is now best-placed
As I posted as the old thread was closing.
The obvious one is Angela.
She has behaved dutifully and perfectly since resignation.
Labour has a number of very competent ministers in place she would be well advised to keep
Cooper Mahmood Healy McFadden Both Alexanders Nandy Phillipson Ed M Emma Reynolds Jarvis
Some of the new intake.
Likes of Haigh and Thornbury return.
Compares very well with threadbare Shadow Cabinet of failures like Philp, Patel Stride, Atkins, Couthino.
Badenoch probably be gone before Starmer coronation for Cleverly.
Labour edge left. Tories edge centre.
“dutifully and perfectly since resignation”.
Has she paid her tax due?
If Angela Rayner is the answer, the wrong question is definitely being asked.
She’s no Mandelson, who can keep coming back again until yet another scandal finally kills her off almost three decades later.
Angela Rayner is not the answer to any question relating to the government of this country. Maybe “how can we fuck things up more”.
The question is, who do we put our money on? Not who would be best, or who would we like, but who will win?
If it helps I'm a Labour member and if/when the vote comes I'll be judging 2 things:
Who would be the better PM? Who would more likely beat Reform?
Assuming a Streeting v Rayner choice, I'm clear on the answer to the 1st. Streeting. But on the 2nd I'm not sure at all. And if I end up concluding it's Rayner I can see myself (reluctantly) prioritising that and voting for her.
Nothing (for me) is more important than preventing Farage and his gang getting their filthy mitts on this country.
Far be it from me to suggest solutions to Labours quandary but Rayner is so far from your desire to beat Reform as you can get. Honestly - Labour supporters and members need to read the fucking room. Your only hope is a Cooper ticket with Streeting as Chancellor maybe. This fascination and love for Rayner is perplexing. She’s clearly thick as shit. And a proven tax dodger.
Ok, coming from you that's convinced me. It has to be Rayner. Sorry Wes.
The irony is, if this is what *finally* ends Starmer's premiership (as the historically low polls, constant u-turns, economy, anger of his own MPs, etc don't seem to have), Kingmaker Mandelson's long-term protege will ascend straight to No 10.
That just shows how cunning and clever Mandleson really is, coming up with this devious plot to deliver the UK our first gay PM. And such selflessness, willing to sacrifice his peerage, title and reputation in order to bring it about?
First gay PM? LOL.
I don't think Streeting is going to get it, from what I am hearing about the chaos engulfing the NHS/PHE merger. He seems to be taking the Jacob Rees-Mogg line on 'the Lord commands and it gets done' except it doesn't...
NHS/DHSC merger? PHE was split and merged into different things back in 2021, in a chaotic process led by Dido Harding.
Who can Starmer blame for Mandelson's appointment?
His paunchy paws are all over it
It’s a question what Starmer knew at the time. Or what can be proved he knew. And it’s not easy to get to that to be honest. Or failing that, merely a slap for should have known better and been more diligent as we would have been.
For preservation of true history, {I didn’t like it} but PB consensus liked the appointment. back Bench Conservative MPs stood up in commons said it was good appointment. What did Starmer know at tgst time that we didn’t, what the Conservatives didn’t?
Did UKs security Services not know the detail held in the Epstein Files? Is this the first time anyone’s found out the true depth of PantyPetes collusion with Epstein? Is this the first time anyone’s found out UK Business Secretary was carrying out what looks like insider trading using levers of governmental power in UK, with an investment financier friend?
What was known about Mandelson by the general public on the day of his appointment was enough to disqualify him from any important government position
He had been fired twice for impropriety
Then we knew he was friends with a paedo billionaire crook
Then the Prime Minister appointed him
The default assumption must be that 'due diligence' over the Mandelson appointment with security services and secret information gatherers would have to be exceptionally thorough given his past and his known connections.
The other default assumption must be that between them MI5, MI5, Special Branch, GCHQ and the overseas intelligence agencies with whom we had a good relationship will have known quite a lot of what we now know, and, safe to say, quite a lot more that we don't. Human nature is what it is.
Which is the bit or bits in the process which have gone wrong and why is a central question. There seem to me no possibilities that are not quite disconcerting.
Are you sure the snoopy services are that good? They would have to have tapped into these emails at the time they were being sent?
For example the smoking gun here, PantyPete sharing info he shouldn’t have with a financier friend. You are claiming to us the snoopy services have been sitting on this? You saying they put it into the dossier they showed Starmer?
I will repeat.
Email bounces through servers, completely unencrypted. A river of postcards. Due to the way the servers work, they leave a copy on each server, until erased.
For many, many years, intelligence services have hovered these up. It takes little effort and produces a huge pile of stuff to sift through.
Everyone does this.
Did the security services look at Mandy’s emails? We don’t know.
But for far less sensitive jobs, they are trawled.
Are there not email services you can use that - provided your recipient also uses such a service - the email will be encrypted from end-to-end?
Yes
{PGP has entered the chat}
But nearly no-one uses them.
This is why the move to end-to-end encryption by default on various platforms is such a big deal for the spy agencies. As email dies, they are faced with every message sent being protected by top notch crypto.
Who can Starmer blame for Mandelson's appointment?
His paunchy paws are all over it
It’s a question what Starmer knew at the time. Or what can be proved he knew. And it’s not easy to get to that to be honest. Or failing that, merely a slap for should have known better and been more diligent as we would have been.
For preservation of true history, {I didn’t like it} but PB consensus liked the appointment. back Bench Conservative MPs stood up in commons said it was good appointment. What did Starmer know at tgst time that we didn’t, what the Conservatives didn’t?
Did UKs security Services not know the detail held in the Epstein Files? Is this the first time anyone’s found out the true depth of PantyPetes collusion with Epstein? Is this the first time anyone’s found out UK Business Secretary was carrying out what looks like insider trading using levers of governmental power in UK, with an investment financier friend?
What was known about Mandelson by the general public on the day of his appointment was enough to disqualify him from any important government position
He had been fired twice for impropriety
Then we knew he was friends with a paedo billionaire crook
Then the Prime Minister appointed him
The default assumption must be that 'due diligence' over the Mandelson appointment with security services and secret information gatherers would have to be exceptionally thorough given his past and his known connections.
The other default assumption must be that between them MI5, MI5, Special Branch, GCHQ and the overseas intelligence agencies with whom we had a good relationship will have known quite a lot of what we now know, and, safe to say, quite a lot more that we don't. Human nature is what it is.
Which is the bit or bits in the process which have gone wrong and why is a central question. There seem to me no possibilities that are not quite disconcerting.
Are you sure the snoopy services are that good? They would have to have tapped into these emails at the time they were being sent?
For example the smoking gun here, PantyPete sharing info he shouldn’t have with a financier friend. You are claiming to us the snoopy services have been sitting on this? You saying they put it into the dossier they showed Starmer?
I will repeat.
Email bounces through servers, completely unencrypted. A river of postcards. Due to the way the servers work, they leave a copy on each server, until erased.
For many, many years, intelligence services have hovered these up. It takes little effort and produces a huge pile of stuff to sift through.
Everyone does this.
Did the security services look at Mandy’s emails? We don’t know.
But for far less sensitive jobs, they are trawled.
Are there not email services you can use that - provided your recipient also uses such a service - the email will be encrypted from end-to-end?
Not plain email.
It is why some people used to leave emails in draft on gmail and share logins rather than pressing send.
There is PGP, but since it involves dealing with encryption keys at both ends prior to sending a message, it never caught on. [Also, it cannot hide the sender and recipient]
Nowadays a secure message client is better if you've got anything private to say. Though _probably_ not Whatsapp.
Who can Starmer blame for Mandelson's appointment?
His paunchy paws are all over it
It’s a question what Starmer knew at the time. Or what can be proved he knew. And it’s not easy to get to that to be honest. Or failing that, merely a slap for should have known better and been more diligent as we would have been.
For preservation of true history, {I didn’t like it} but PB consensus liked the appointment. back Bench Conservative MPs stood up in commons said it was good appointment. What did Starmer know at tgst time that we didn’t, what the Conservatives didn’t?
Did UKs security Services not know the detail held in the Epstein Files? Is this the first time anyone’s found out the true depth of PantyPetes collusion with Epstein? Is this the first time anyone’s found out UK Business Secretary was carrying out what looks like insider trading using levers of governmental power in UK, with an investment financier friend?
What was known about Mandelson by the general public on the day of his appointment was enough to disqualify him from any important government position
He had been fired twice for impropriety
Then we knew he was friends with a paedo billionaire crook
Then the Prime Minister appointed him
The default assumption must be that 'due diligence' over the Mandelson appointment with security services and secret information gatherers would have to be exceptionally thorough given his past and his known connections.
The other default assumption must be that between them MI5, MI5, Special Branch, GCHQ and the overseas intelligence agencies with whom we had a good relationship will have known quite a lot of what we now know, and, safe to say, quite a lot more that we don't. Human nature is what it is.
Which is the bit or bits in the process which have gone wrong and why is a central question. There seem to me no possibilities that are not quite disconcerting.
Are you sure the snoopy services are that good? They would have to have tapped into these emails at the time they were being sent?
For example the smoking gun here, PantyPete sharing info he shouldn’t have with a financier friend. You are claiming to us the snoopy services have been sitting on this? You saying they put it into the dossier they showed Starmer?
I will repeat.
Email bounces through servers, completely unencrypted. A river of postcards. Due to the way the servers work, they leave a copy on each server, until erased.
For many, many years, intelligence services have hovered these up. It takes little effort and produces a huge pile of stuff to sift through.
Everyone does this.
Did the security services look at Mandy’s emails? We don’t know.
But for far less sensitive jobs, they are trawled.
Are there not email services you can use that - provided your recipient also uses such a service - the email will be encrypted from end-to-end?
Only for the cognoscenti.
All over the world politicians - mostly arts graduates - are waking up to the realisation that when you 'delete' a message you don't actually destroy it, you just lose access to it. The same applies to tweets. If Elon Musk ever runs out of money he could always sell a file of deleted tweets to the highest bidder.
Yes the Mandelson photos will likely boost Reform and the Greens in Gorton and Denton. Though Labour made a sensible choice picking a female local councillor as their candidate
Reform deserve to benefit from Labour's Epstein adjacency. As Nigel explained today. Nigel is only mentioned 37 times which is within the threshold for not really being in the Epstein files.
All depends on context
Even if it is only one mention but that is Farage writing "Dear Jeffrey, thanks for the wonderful weekend, where do you find all those lovely young ladies? " then he would be in deep do-do.
On the other hand if it is Mandelson writing to Epstein saying, "that Farage is an awful oik, don't let him anywhere near your island" then Farage is probably not in any sort of trouble.
Not enough focus is on Trump's economic policies. He makes sure attention is elsewhere.
But the US is running a huge fiscal deficit whilst the economy is growing. Trump has made it clear he wants cuts to interest rates. This is classic short term populist economic policy. It can't end well and it's the biggest economy in the world. The precious metal market is crazy right now. I seem to remember Trump also relaxed lending rules for small banks during his first term. We seem to have forgotten that 2008 ever happened.
Indeed:
The US is running a Federal deficit of 6% of GDP, despite bringing in $25-30bn per months in from tariffs.
Not only that but President Trump would like to reduce interest rates and to mail multi thousand dollar 'tariff rebate cheques' to everyone.
A few Republicans -a very few, like Rand Paul- have noticed that this properly bonkers, and will end in (at the very least) a nasty bout of inflation.
It's literally the kind of shit that you'd expect from a Peronist government in Argentina.
That tariff income is about 1-1.2% of GDP, which is a lot more than most people expected. But Trump has been intent on spending it all several times over.
Yes the Mandelson photos will likely boost Reform and the Greens in Gorton and Denton. Though Labour made a sensible choice picking a female local councillor as their candidate
Reform deserve to benefit from Labour's Epstein adjacency. As Nigel explained today. Nigel is only mentioned 37 times which is within the threshold for not really being in the Epstein files.
All depends on context
Even if it is only one mention but that is Farage writing "Dear Jeffrey, thanks for the wonderful weekend, where do you find all those lovely young ladies? " then he would be in deep do-do.
On the other hand if it is Mandelson writing to Epstein saying, "that Farage is an awful oik, don't let him anywhere near your island" then Farage is probably not in any sort of trouble.
Context is king.
Absolutely, but I don't believe it is either.
Anyway fair play to Farage he has confirmed that he has never met Epstein, which is a positive.
Remember, this scandal initially broke just days before a high-profile State visit to the United Kingdom by President Trump. It involved the US ambassador to Washington. But did neither Keir Starmer nor anyone else think to ask the Americans ‘what else have you got on this’?
It simply beggars belief. Starmer is a former Director of Public Prosecutions. What’s more, in that position he had a major role directly liaising with the US intelligence services in the fight against terror. Yet we are meant to believe his lack of curiosity meant he didn’t even bother asking what information they held about his most senior diplomat befriending a notorious paedophile and placing himself directly at the heart of what many now suspect was a Russian honeytrap operation?
Who can Starmer blame for Mandelson's appointment?
His paunchy paws are all over it
It’s a question what Starmer knew at the time. Or what can be proved he knew. And it’s not easy to get to that to be honest. Or failing that, merely a slap for should have known better and been more diligent as we would have been.
For preservation of true history, {I didn’t like it} but PB consensus liked the appointment. back Bench Conservative MPs stood up in commons said it was good appointment. What did Starmer know at tgst time that we didn’t, what the Conservatives didn’t?
Did UKs security Services not know the detail held in the Epstein Files? Is this the first time anyone’s found out the true depth of PantyPetes collusion with Epstein? Is this the first time anyone’s found out UK Business Secretary was carrying out what looks like insider trading using levers of governmental power in UK, with an investment financier friend?
What was known about Mandelson by the general public on the day of his appointment was enough to disqualify him from any important government position
He had been fired twice for impropriety
Then we knew he was friends with a paedo billionaire crook
Then the Prime Minister appointed him
The default assumption must be that 'due diligence' over the Mandelson appointment with security services and secret information gatherers would have to be exceptionally thorough given his past and his known connections.
The other default assumption must be that between them MI5, MI5, Special Branch, GCHQ and the overseas intelligence agencies with whom we had a good relationship will have known quite a lot of what we now know, and, safe to say, quite a lot more that we don't. Human nature is what it is.
Which is the bit or bits in the process which have gone wrong and why is a central question. There seem to me no possibilities that are not quite disconcerting.
Are you sure the snoopy services are that good? They would have to have tapped into these emails at the time they were being sent?
For example the smoking gun here, PantyPete sharing info he shouldn’t have with a financier friend. You are claiming to us the snoopy services have been sitting on this? You saying they put it into the dossier they showed Starmer?
I will repeat.
Email bounces through servers, completely unencrypted. A river of postcards. Due to the way the servers work, they leave a copy on each server, until erased.
For many, many years, intelligence services have hovered these up. It takes little effort and produces a huge pile of stuff to sift through.
Everyone does this.
Did the security services look at Mandy’s emails? We don’t know.
But for far less sensitive jobs, they are trawled.
Are there not email services you can use that - provided your recipient also uses such a service - the email will be encrypted from end-to-end?
Not plain email.
It is why some people used to leave emails in draft on gmail and share logins rather than pressing send.
There is PGP, but since it involves dealing with encryption keys at both ends prior to sending a message, it never caught on. [Also, it cannot hide the sender and recipient]
Nowadays a secure message client is better if you've got anything private to say. Though _probably_ not Whatsapp.
From what I understand from discussions of how the Ukrainian resistance is communicating, even with a secure messaging service there's a lot that can be done by looking at metadata - sizes of messages sent, and that sort of thing.
Yes the Mandelson photos will likely boost Reform and the Greens in Gorton and Denton. Though Labour made a sensible choice picking a female local councillor as their candidate
Reform deserve to benefit from Labour's Epstein adjacency. As Nigel explained today. Nigel is only mentioned 37 times which is within the threshold for not really being in the Epstein files.
All depends on context
Even if it is only one mention but that is Farage writing "Dear Jeffrey, thanks for the wonderful weekend, where do you find all those lovely young ladies? " then he would be in deep do-do.
On the other hand if it is Mandelson writing to Epstein saying, "that Farage is an awful oik, don't let him anywhere near your island" then Farage is probably not in any sort of trouble.
Context is king.
Absolutely, but I don't believe it is either.
Anyway fair play to Farage he has confirmed that he has never met Epstein, which is a positive.
Although apparently he barely knew Nathan Gill.
Not so much of a positive when he is so far up Trump's colon, when Trump was bezzie mates with Epstein for umpteen years.
Sky reporting that the government is to lay an amendment to tomorrows debate agreeing to release some but not all documents
The question now is will labour mps defeat the amendment
The Epstein files are held by the US DOJ not the UK government
Maybe the daughter of a former Labour MP and Mossad spy.
Cough.
Look! A squirrel!
You will have to explain that for me. Both my points are factual and CIA former agents are suggesting an Israeli link with Epstein. Cough, Eduad Barak.
I have made it clear today that Mandelson is most likely a traitor. I was the first on here to suggest this scandal (the one from 2009/2010 is as big as Profumo).
"Peter Mandelson faces criminal investigation over Epstein emails
Former cabinet minister, who is ‘retiring’ from Lords, will be questioned by police about allegations he leaked sensitive information to paedophile financier" (£)
Remember, this scandal initially broke just days before a high-profile State visit to the United Kingdom by President Trump. It involved the US ambassador to Washington. But did neither Keir Starmer nor anyone else think to ask the Americans ‘what else have you got on this’?
It simply beggars belief. Starmer is a former Director of Public Prosecutions. What’s more, in that position he had a major role directly liaising with the US intelligence services in the fight against terror. Yet we are meant to believe his lack of curiosity meant he didn’t even bother asking what information they held about his most senior diplomat befriending a notorious paedophile and placing himself directly at the heart of what many now suspect was a Russian honeytrap operation?
Do you remember when he was bigging himself up pre-election about how as DPP he was totally involved with global intelligence and so had made the hard decisions and knew the stresses and difficulties? Now obvs Rishi should have shot back that he actually had the experience of ordering troops to actionthings but I remember Starmer rampers suggesting that Starmer had a wide view and grip of intelligence. Obvs not over his own appointments.
Yes the Mandelson photos will likely boost Reform and the Greens in Gorton and Denton. Though Labour made a sensible choice picking a female local councillor as their candidate
Reform deserve to benefit from Labour's Epstein adjacency. As Nigel explained today. Nigel is only mentioned 37 times which is within the threshold for not really being in the Epstein files.
All depends on context
Even if it is only one mention but that is Farage writing "Dear Jeffrey, thanks for the wonderful weekend, where do you find all those lovely young ladies? " then he would be in deep do-do.
On the other hand if it is Mandelson writing to Epstein saying, "that Farage is an awful oik, don't let him anywhere near your island" then Farage is probably not in any sort of trouble.
Context is king.
Absolutely, but I don't believe it is either.
Anyway fair play to Farage he has confirmed that he has never met Epstein, which is a positive.
Although apparently he barely knew Nathan Gill.
Not so much of a positive when he is so far up Trump's colon, when Trump was bezzie mates with Epstein for umpteen years.
Some of that shit will stick.
In the files, it seems to be in connection with Bannon and/or Brexit.
Yes the Mandelson photos will likely boost Reform and the Greens in Gorton and Denton. Though Labour made a sensible choice picking a female local councillor as their candidate
Reform deserve to benefit from Labour's Epstein adjacency. As Nigel explained today. Nigel is only mentioned 37 times which is within the threshold for not really being in the Epstein files.
All depends on context
Even if it is only one mention but that is Farage writing "Dear Jeffrey, thanks for the wonderful weekend, where do you find all those lovely young ladies? " then he would be in deep do-do.
On the other hand if it is Mandelson writing to Epstein saying, "that Farage is an awful oik, don't let him anywhere near your island" then Farage is probably not in any sort of trouble.
Context is king.
Absolutely, but I don't believe it is either.
Anyway fair play to Farage he has confirmed that he has never met Epstein, which is a positive.
Although apparently he barely knew Nathan Gill.
Not so much of a positive when he is so far up Trump's colon, when Trump was bezzie mates with Epstein for umpteen years.
Some of that shit will stick.
I don't believe it will.
Trump has explained that the last tranche of Epstein material exonerate him and legacy media would seem to agree.
SouthamObserver has finally found a take on the governments troubles with Epstein
Johnson and Farage being closely and demonstrably involved with Epstein and Russian money is too much to hope for. Things that brilliant just do not happen.
I can't think why, but today I remembered that John Prescott was once left in charge of the country while Blair had a short holiday and Prescott showed the cameras a crab in a jar which he announced he had named 'Peter'.
"Peter Mandelson faces criminal investigation over Epstein emails
Former cabinet minister, who is ‘retiring’ from Lords, will be questioned by police about allegations he leaked sensitive information to paedophile financier" (£)
"Peter Mandelson faces criminal investigation over Epstein emails
Former cabinet minister, who is ‘retiring’ from Lords, will be questioned by police about allegations he leaked sensitive information to paedophile financier" (£)
As funny as this all is… what we have seen is supposed emails from Mandy. I’m a bit old fashioned and we don’t know if they were from him (probable) but could also be manipulated by Epstein or others to use.
I am very uncomfortable with the current torch and pitchfork situation removing his peerage etc (I really don’t like him) because I believe in innocent until proven guilty and he has as much protection under the law as anyone and so shouldn’t be penalised until proven to have been a legally bad ‘un.
I would bet one of my kidneys he was bad but please let’s allow justice and procedure to win not mob justice.
Sky reporting that the government is to lay an amendment to tomorrows debate agreeing to release some but not all documents
The question now is will labour mps defeat the amendment
The Epstein files are held by the US DOJ not the UK government
Maybe the daughter of a former Labour MP and Mossad spy.
Cough.
Look! A squirrel!
You will have to explain that for me. Both my points are factual and CIA former agents are suggesting an Israeli link with Epstein. Cough, Eduad Barak.
I have made it clear today that Mandelson is most likely a traitor. I was the first on here to suggest this scandal (the one from 2009/2010 is as big as Profumo).
I was agreeing with you. No one is really mentioning this daughter, and the points you raise, and the part she plays and maybe continues to play. Maybe. Allegedly. Perhaps.
We’re chasing squirrels at the moment, whilst not really appreciating any Mossad/FSB involvement. Maybe. Allegedly. Perhaps.
Sorry to be a spoilsport but doesn't the police investigation basically kill this scandal? At least for the time being? It will take forever and no one can comment until it's concluded.
If there's some sort of parliamentary motion to effectively kill the investigation by releasing all the docs then I can see this escalating - but that would be extraordinary and only really justifiable if you think the police/CPS will be next to useless into holding Mandelson (and others) to timely account. Though that might be a reasonable position to take tbh...*
*Just been reading an article about the death of a firefighter in Edinburgh three years ago and the apparent lack of progress into working out why he died is infuriating - actual lives depend on the answer.
Who can Starmer blame for Mandelson's appointment?
His paunchy paws are all over it
It’s a question what Starmer knew at the time. Or what can be proved he knew. And it’s not easy to get to that to be honest. Or failing that, merely a slap for should have known better and been more diligent as we would have been.
For preservation of true history, {I didn’t like it} but PB consensus liked the appointment. back Bench Conservative MPs stood up in commons said it was good appointment. What did Starmer know at tgst time that we didn’t, what the Conservatives didn’t?
Did UKs security Services not know the detail held in the Epstein Files? Is this the first time anyone’s found out the true depth of PantyPetes collusion with Epstein? Is this the first time anyone’s found out UK Business Secretary was carrying out what looks like insider trading using levers of governmental power in UK, with an investment financier friend?
What was known about Mandelson by the general public on the day of his appointment was enough to disqualify him from any important government position
He had been fired twice for impropriety
Then we knew he was friends with a paedo billionaire crook
Then the Prime Minister appointed him
The default assumption must be that 'due diligence' over the Mandelson appointment with security services and secret information gatherers would have to be exceptionally thorough given his past and his known connections.
The other default assumption must be that between them MI5, MI5, Special Branch, GCHQ and the overseas intelligence agencies with whom we had a good relationship will have known quite a lot of what we now know, and, safe to say, quite a lot more that we don't. Human nature is what it is.
Which is the bit or bits in the process which have gone wrong and why is a central question. There seem to me no possibilities that are not quite disconcerting.
Are you sure the snoopy services are that good? They would have to have tapped into these emails at the time they were being sent?
For example the smoking gun here, PantyPete sharing info he shouldn’t have with a financier friend. You are claiming to us the snoopy services have been sitting on this? You saying they put it into the dossier they showed Starmer?
I will repeat.
Email bounces through servers, completely unencrypted. A river of postcards. Due to the way the servers work, they leave a copy on each server, until erased.
For many, many years, intelligence services have hovered these up. It takes little effort and produces a huge pile of stuff to sift through.
Everyone does this.
Did the security services look at Mandy’s emails? We don’t know.
But for far less sensitive jobs, they are trawled.
Are there not email services you can use that - provided your recipient also uses such a service - the email will be encrypted from end-to-end?
Yes.
Protonmail is the obvious choice. If you use it, and so does your recipient, it will be encrypted.
Sorry to be a spoilsport but doesn't the police investigation basically kill this scandal? At least for the time being? It will take forever and no one can comment until it's concluded.
If there's some sort of parliamentary motion to effectively kill the investigation by releasing all the docs then I can see this escalating - but that would be extraordinary and only really justifiable if you think the police/CPS will be next to useless into holding Mandelson (and others) to account. Though that might be a reasonable position to take tbh...*
*Just been reading an article about the death of a firefighter in Edinburgh three years ago and the apparent lack of progress into working out why he died is infuriating - actual lives depend on the answer.
“ Sorry to be a spoilsport but doesn't the police investigation basically kill this scandal? At least for the time being? It will take forever and no one can comment until it's concluded.”
Who can Starmer blame for Mandelson's appointment?
His paunchy paws are all over it
It’s a question what Starmer knew at the time. Or what can be proved he knew. And it’s not easy to get to that to be honest. Or failing that, merely a slap for should have known better and been more diligent as we would have been.
For preservation of true history, {I didn’t like it} but PB consensus liked the appointment. back Bench Conservative MPs stood up in commons said it was good appointment. What did Starmer know at tgst time that we didn’t, what the Conservatives didn’t?
Did UKs security Services not know the detail held in the Epstein Files? Is this the first time anyone’s found out the true depth of PantyPetes collusion with Epstein? Is this the first time anyone’s found out UK Business Secretary was carrying out what looks like insider trading using levers of governmental power in UK, with an investment financier friend?
What was known about Mandelson by the general public on the day of his appointment was enough to disqualify him from any important government position
He had been fired twice for impropriety
Then we knew he was friends with a paedo billionaire crook
Then the Prime Minister appointed him
The default assumption must be that 'due diligence' over the Mandelson appointment with security services and secret information gatherers would have to be exceptionally thorough given his past and his known connections.
The other default assumption must be that between them MI5, MI5, Special Branch, GCHQ and the overseas intelligence agencies with whom we had a good relationship will have known quite a lot of what we now know, and, safe to say, quite a lot more that we don't. Human nature is what it is.
Which is the bit or bits in the process which have gone wrong and why is a central question. There seem to me no possibilities that are not quite disconcerting.
Are you sure the snoopy services are that good? They would have to have tapped into these emails at the time they were being sent?
For example the smoking gun here, PantyPete sharing info he shouldn’t have with a financier friend. You are claiming to us the snoopy services have been sitting on this? You saying they put it into the dossier they showed Starmer?
I will repeat.
Email bounces through servers, completely unencrypted. A river of postcards. Due to the way the servers work, they leave a copy on each server, until erased.
For many, many years, intelligence services have hovered these up. It takes little effort and produces a huge pile of stuff to sift through.
Everyone does this.
Did the security services look at Mandy’s emails? We don’t know.
But for far less sensitive jobs, they are trawled.
Are there not email services you can use that - provided your recipient also uses such a service - the email will be encrypted from end-to-end?
Yes.
Protonmail is the obvious choice. If you use it, and so does your recipient, it will be encrypted.
I remember my intro to Protonmail being from my old Russian and similar clients. I’m not sure if it was a good or bad thing still.
Who can Starmer blame for Mandelson's appointment?
His paunchy paws are all over it
It’s a question what Starmer knew at the time. Or what can be proved he knew. And it’s not easy to get to that to be honest. Or failing that, merely a slap for should have known better and been more diligent as we would have been.
For preservation of true history, {I didn’t like it} but PB consensus liked the appointment. back Bench Conservative MPs stood up in commons said it was good appointment. What did Starmer know at tgst time that we didn’t, what the Conservatives didn’t?
Did UKs security Services not know the detail held in the Epstein Files? Is this the first time anyone’s found out the true depth of PantyPetes collusion with Epstein? Is this the first time anyone’s found out UK Business Secretary was carrying out what looks like insider trading using levers of governmental power in UK, with an investment financier friend?
What was known about Mandelson by the general public on the day of his appointment was enough to disqualify him from any important government position
He had been fired twice for impropriety
Then we knew he was friends with a paedo billionaire crook
Then the Prime Minister appointed him
The default assumption must be that 'due diligence' over the Mandelson appointment with security services and secret information gatherers would have to be exceptionally thorough given his past and his known connections.
The other default assumption must be that between them MI5, MI5, Special Branch, GCHQ and the overseas intelligence agencies with whom we had a good relationship will have known quite a lot of what we now know, and, safe to say, quite a lot more that we don't. Human nature is what it is.
Which is the bit or bits in the process which have gone wrong and why is a central question. There seem to me no possibilities that are not quite disconcerting.
Are you sure the snoopy services are that good? They would have to have tapped into these emails at the time they were being sent?
For example the smoking gun here, PantyPete sharing info he shouldn’t have with a financier friend. You are claiming to us the snoopy services have been sitting on this? You saying they put it into the dossier they showed Starmer?
I will repeat.
Email bounces through servers, completely unencrypted. A river of postcards. Due to the way the servers work, they leave a copy on each server, until erased.
For many, many years, intelligence services have hovered these up. It takes little effort and produces a huge pile of stuff to sift through.
Everyone does this.
Did the security services look at Mandy’s emails? We don’t know.
But for far less sensitive jobs, they are trawled.
Are there not email services you can use that - provided your recipient also uses such a service - the email will be encrypted from end-to-end?
Not plain email.
It is why some people used to leave emails in draft on gmail and share logins rather than pressing send.
There is PGP, but since it involves dealing with encryption keys at both ends prior to sending a message, it never caught on. [Also, it cannot hide the sender and recipient]
Nowadays a secure message client is better if you've got anything private to say. Though _probably_ not Whatsapp.
From what I understand from discussions of how the Ukrainian resistance is communicating, even with a secure messaging service there's a lot that can be done by looking at metadata - sizes of messages sent, and that sort of thing.
Yes. You can make pretty good guesses at content and the relationships between people based on their message patterns. Meta does this.
Not enough focus is on Trump's economic policies. He makes sure attention is elsewhere.
But the US is running a huge fiscal deficit whilst the economy is growing. Trump has made it clear he wants cuts to interest rates. This is classic short term populist economic policy. It can't end well and it's the biggest economy in the world. The precious metal market is crazy right now. I seem to remember Trump also relaxed lending rules for small banks during his first term. We seem to have forgotten that 2008 ever happened.
Indeed:
The US is running a Federal deficit of 6% of GDP, despite bringing in $25-30bn per months in from tariffs.
Not only that but President Trump would like to reduce interest rates and to mail multi thousand dollar 'tariff rebate cheques' to everyone.
A few Republicans -a very few, like Rand Paul- have noticed that this properly bonkers, and will end in (at the very least) a nasty bout of inflation.
It's literally the kind of shit that you'd expect from a Peronist government in Argentina.
More surprising is that it hasn't proved very inflationary so far.
Sorry to be a spoilsport but doesn't the police investigation basically kill this scandal? At least for the time being? It will take forever and no one can comment until it's concluded.
If there's some sort of parliamentary motion to effectively kill the investigation by releasing all the docs then I can see this escalating - but that would be extraordinary and only really justifiable if you think the police/CPS will be next to useless into holding Mandelson (and others) to account. Though that might be a reasonable position to take tbh...*
*Just been reading an article about the death of a firefighter in Edinburgh three years ago and the apparent lack of progress into working out why he died is infuriating - actual lives depend on the answer.
“ Sorry to be a spoilsport but doesn't the police investigation basically kill this scandal? At least for the time being? It will take forever and no one can comment until it's concluded.”
Remember, this scandal initially broke just days before a high-profile State visit to the United Kingdom by President Trump. It involved the US ambassador to Washington. But did neither Keir Starmer nor anyone else think to ask the Americans ‘what else have you got on this’?
It simply beggars belief. Starmer is a former Director of Public Prosecutions. What’s more, in that position he had a major role directly liaising with the US intelligence services in the fight against terror. Yet we are meant to believe his lack of curiosity meant he didn’t even bother asking what information they held about his most senior diplomat befriending a notorious paedophile and placing himself directly at the heart of what many now suspect was a Russian honeytrap operation?
Yes the Mandelson photos will likely boost Reform and the Greens in Gorton and Denton. Though Labour made a sensible choice picking a female local councillor as their candidate
Reform deserve to benefit from Labour's Epstein adjacency. As Nigel explained today. Nigel is only mentioned 37 times which is within the threshold for not really being in the Epstein files.
All depends on context
Even if it is only one mention but that is Farage writing "Dear Jeffrey, thanks for the wonderful weekend, where do you find all those lovely young ladies? " then he would be in deep do-do.
On the other hand if it is Mandelson writing to Epstein saying, "that Farage is an awful oik, don't let him anywhere near your island" then Farage is probably not in any sort of trouble.
Context is king.
Surely he is now Peter Mountbatten-Windsor?
Formerly known as the prince of darkness. Apols if someone else has already nicked this off twitter.
Yes the Mandelson photos will likely boost Reform and the Greens in Gorton and Denton. Though Labour made a sensible choice picking a female local councillor as their candidate
Reform deserve to benefit from Labour's Epstein adjacency. As Nigel explained today. Nigel is only mentioned 37 times which is within the threshold for not really being in the Epstein files.
All depends on context
Even if it is only one mention but that is Farage writing "Dear Jeffrey, thanks for the wonderful weekend, where do you find all those lovely young ladies? " then he would be in deep do-do.
On the other hand if it is Mandelson writing to Epstein saying, "that Farage is an awful oik, don't let him anywhere near your island" then Farage is probably not in any sort of trouble.
CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. (AP) — NASA's long-awaited moonshot with astronauts is off until at least March because of hydrogen fuel leaks that marred the dress rehearsal of its giant new rocket.
Not enough focus is on Trump's economic policies. He makes sure attention is elsewhere.
But the US is running a huge fiscal deficit whilst the economy is growing. Trump has made it clear he wants cuts to interest rates. This is classic short term populist economic policy. It can't end well and it's the biggest economy in the world. The precious metal market is crazy right now. I seem to remember Trump also relaxed lending rules for small banks during his first term. We seem to have forgotten that 2008 ever happened.
Indeed:
The US is running a Federal deficit of 6% of GDP, despite bringing in $25-30bn per months in from tariffs.
Not only that but President Trump would like to reduce interest rates and to mail multi thousand dollar 'tariff rebate cheques' to everyone.
A few Republicans -a very few, like Rand Paul- have noticed that this properly bonkers, and will end in (at the very least) a nasty bout of inflation.
It's literally the kind of shit that you'd expect from a Peronist government in Argentina.
More surprising is that it hasn't proved very inflationary so far.
Gas prices had dropped about 15% in the last year, which helped. (Albeit that is now beginning to reverse, which could get ugly.)
Amazon, Walmart and co also swallowed some of the increased pricing.
Who can Starmer blame for Mandelson's appointment?
His paunchy paws are all over it
It’s a question what Starmer knew at the time. Or what can be proved he knew. And it’s not easy to get to that to be honest. Or failing that, merely a slap for should have known better and been more diligent as we would have been.
For preservation of true history, {I didn’t like it} but PB consensus liked the appointment. back Bench Conservative MPs stood up in commons said it was good appointment. What did Starmer know at tgst time that we didn’t, what the Conservatives didn’t?
Did UKs security Services not know the detail held in the Epstein Files? Is this the first time anyone’s found out the true depth of PantyPetes collusion with Epstein? Is this the first time anyone’s found out UK Business Secretary was carrying out what looks like insider trading using levers of governmental power in UK, with an investment financier friend?
What was known about Mandelson by the general public on the day of his appointment was enough to disqualify him from any important government position
He had been fired twice for impropriety
Then we knew he was friends with a paedo billionaire crook
Then the Prime Minister appointed him
The default assumption must be that 'due diligence' over the Mandelson appointment with security services and secret information gatherers would have to be exceptionally thorough given his past and his known connections.
The other default assumption must be that between them MI5, MI5, Special Branch, GCHQ and the overseas intelligence agencies with whom we had a good relationship will have known quite a lot of what we now know, and, safe to say, quite a lot more that we don't. Human nature is what it is.
Which is the bit or bits in the process which have gone wrong and why is a central question. There seem to me no possibilities that are not quite disconcerting.
Are you sure the snoopy services are that good? They would have to have tapped into these emails at the time they were being sent?
For example the smoking gun here, PantyPete sharing info he shouldn’t have with a financier friend. You are claiming to us the snoopy services have been sitting on this? You saying they put it into the dossier they showed Starmer?
I will repeat.
Email bounces through servers, completely unencrypted. A river of postcards. Due to the way the servers work, they leave a copy on each server, until erased.
For many, many years, intelligence services have hovered these up. It takes little effort and produces a huge pile of stuff to sift through.
Everyone does this.
Did the security services look at Mandy’s emails? We don’t know.
But for far less sensitive jobs, they are trawled.
Are there not email services you can use that - provided your recipient also uses such a service - the email will be encrypted from end-to-end?
Yes.
Protonmail is the obvious choice. If you use it, and so does your recipient, it will be encrypted.
Ah, yes, I'd forgotten about that, although that makes it rather more like a messaging service.
Presumably you have to use their web service or client for it to work properly.
Yes the Mandelson photos will likely boost Reform and the Greens in Gorton and Denton. Though Labour made a sensible choice picking a female local councillor as their candidate
Reform deserve to benefit from Labour's Epstein adjacency. As Nigel explained today. Nigel is only mentioned 37 times which is within the threshold for not really being in the Epstein files.
All depends on context
Even if it is only one mention but that is Farage writing "Dear Jeffrey, thanks for the wonderful weekend, where do you find all those lovely young ladies? " then he would be in deep do-do.
On the other hand if it is Mandelson writing to Epstein saying, "that Farage is an awful oik, don't let him anywhere near your island" then Farage is probably not in any sort of trouble.
Context is king.
Surely he is now Peter Mountbatten-Windsor?
Formerly known as the prince of darkness. Apols if someone else has already nicked this off twitter.
Yes the Mandelson photos will likely boost Reform and the Greens in Gorton and Denton. Though Labour made a sensible choice picking a female local councillor as their candidate
Reform deserve to benefit from Labour's Epstein adjacency. As Nigel explained today. Nigel is only mentioned 37 times which is within the threshold for not really being in the Epstein files.
All depends on context
Even if it is only one mention but that is Farage writing "Dear Jeffrey, thanks for the wonderful weekend, where do you find all those lovely young ladies? " then he would be in deep do-do.
On the other hand if it is Mandelson writing to Epstein saying, "that Farage is an awful oik, don't let him anywhere near your island" then Farage is probably not in any sort of trouble.
Context is king.
So… what do the mentions of Farage say?
I think they're mostly Epstein eulogising about his thighs.
Sky reporting that the government is to lay an amendment to tomorrows debate agreeing to release some but not all documents
The question now is will labour mps defeat the amendment
The Epstein files are held by the US DOJ not the UK government
Maybe the daughter of a former Labour MP and Mossad spy.
Cough.
Look! A squirrel!
You will have to explain that for me. Both my points are factual and CIA former agents are suggesting an Israeli link with Epstein. Cough, Eduad Barak.
I have made it clear today that Mandelson is most likely a traitor. I was the first on here to suggest this scandal (the one from 2009/2010 is as big as Profumo).
I was agreeing with you. No one is really mentioning this daughter, and the points you raise, and the part she plays and maybe continues to play. Maybe. Allegedly. Perhaps.
We’re chasing squirrels at the moment, whilst not really appreciating any Mossad/FSB involvement. Maybe. Allegedly. Perhaps.
I believe Epstein's political tentacles touched all sorts of unpleasant people.
How better to generate kompromat on dumb-f***, venal movers and shakers than put them in bed with a thirteen year old Russian girl and roll the camera.
Comments
I think he's a grasping, mendacious... [that's quite enough]
If someone has tremendously poor judgement and a ego the size of a planet which gives them unearned confidence on every subject they opine on even if they are quite ignorant outside their own specialised field, are they not an idiot even if they possess a Phd, can orate like Demosthenes in his prime, and display otherwise swiftness of thought?
The answer is obviously yes, and doesn't mean discounting where they might actually have some quality otherwise. It may not have been his precise point, but Clarendon's acknowledgement that Cromwell had what would have been significant virtues despite thinking him to be incredible wicked, bears contemplating.
Time for him to update his memoirs to say he wasn't that great after all.
Of the families that aren't working there's a pretty good chunk of single parents and either disabled adults, or a disabled child.
Doesn't look to be a huge number of those undeserving foreigners.
Yet he seems to be spending pretty much the full amount that the 2 child limit is meant to cost.
Not sure the maths adds up.
What I am impressed with is that when most politicians suggest a change in the law, and then the Government introduces it, they try to claim credit. U-turning, and promising to reverse it does appear to be "doing politics differently"
I can answer the question for Kemi, Ed, Nige and Zack
The question now is will labour mps defeat the amendment
I saw one of the emails today where the emailer asked how many compromising pics Epstein had of him and it was all emoji laughs etc. surely the point is to see who was in that world so ensure the person who sent that has to justify it as a joke or a fear?
Bad news for Labour.
The DOJ, though, is in the hands of scofflaws, who assume they have wiggle room to redact the names of the wealthy and powerful.
I’m not disputing the IT involved, you are right. But it still requires Snoopy Services to snoop in the right places.
What is against your position - if Snoopy Services hold something serious, they would flag it up wouldn’t they?
https://youtu.be/1gkHwU4DRA8?si=9LGv_94nMKfZESWL
The US is running a Federal deficit of 6% of GDP, despite bringing in $25-30bn per months in from tariffs.
Not only that but President Trump would like to reduce interest rates and to mail multi thousand dollar 'tariff rebate cheques' to everyone.
A few Republicans -a very few, like Rand Paul- have noticed that this properly bonkers, and will end in (at the very least) a nasty bout of inflation.
It's literally the kind of shit that you'd expect from a Peronist government in Argentina.
Sure he enjoyed showing off how important he was but every scandal he's been involved in has also involved money.
On his return from Munich, Chamberlain presented his famous piece of paper after disembarking from a plane, of course, which rather was my point.
Mr Farage seized headlines when he announced that he would scrap the two child benefit cap, months before Labour decided to do it in last month’s Budget.
But the Reform UK leader later clarified that this was only for “working British people, meaning a couple who both work 37.5 hours a week”.
New Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) analysis shows that of the 470,000 households affected by the two-child limit (in receipt of Universal Credit with three or more children, of whom the third was born after 6 April 2017), just 3,700 – less than 0.8 per cent of the total – have two adults working full-time.
https://www.thecanary.co/uk/news/2026/01/07/farage-suddenly-loves/
And from Conservative front bench point of view, what’s in the security brief should mean serious questions to Panty in an interview - on basis you DONT HAVE TO RELY ON HIS ANSWERS the answers would be in the brief, testing his honesty.
The security brief can be redacted and not shared publicly, but can be shared with the opposition front benches and other MPs. No excuse why the whole dossier including security aspects cannot be shared with MPs.
This is a typical video short - 163,000 views and 1066 comments?
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/n0sHCcNHk1A
She wants all the correspondence relating to Mandelson's vetting
And saying lots of innocent people have died won't cut it. That's true of any war. There's room for reasonable disagreement on Israel's actions but I find it hard to believe that any intelligent well informed person cannot see the enormous global bullshit machine that is the Gaza cause.
It probably shouldn't surprise us since unfortunately the world's two biggest religions are rooted in opposition to Jews, something a committed Christian like you will be well aware of.
One line to cover off issues of national security.
Common practice
Even if it is only one mention but that is Farage writing "Dear Jeffrey, thanks for the wonderful weekend, where do you find all those lovely young ladies? " then he would be in deep do-do.
On the other hand if it is Mandelson writing to Epstein saying, "that Farage is an awful oik, don't let him anywhere near your island" then Farage is probably not in any sort of trouble.
Context is king.
{PGP has entered the chat}
But nearly no-one uses them.
This is why the move to end-to-end encryption by default on various platforms is such a big deal for the spy agencies. As email dies, they are faced with every message sent being protected by top notch crypto.
It is why some people used to leave emails in draft on gmail and share logins rather than pressing send.
There is PGP, but since it involves dealing with encryption keys at both ends prior to sending a message, it never caught on.
[Also, it cannot hide the sender and recipient]
Nowadays a secure message client is better if you've got anything private to say. Though _probably_ not Whatsapp.
In the absence of @Mexicanpete @Roger and @bondegezou you could quickly become PB's most vilified poster. Congratulations and thank you.
All over the world politicians - mostly arts graduates - are waking up to the realisation that when you 'delete' a message you don't actually destroy it, you just lose access to it. The same applies to tweets. If Elon Musk ever runs out of money he could always sell a file of deleted tweets to the highest bidder.
Look! A squirrel!
Anyway fair play to Farage he has confirmed that he has never met Epstein, which is a positive.
Although apparently he barely knew Nathan Gill.
It simply beggars belief. Starmer is a former Director of Public Prosecutions. What’s more, in that position he had a major role directly liaising with the US intelligence services in the fight against terror. Yet we are meant to believe his lack of curiosity meant he didn’t even bother asking what information they held about his most senior diplomat befriending a notorious paedophile and placing himself directly at the heart of what many now suspect was a Russian honeytrap operation?
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-15524377/Mandelson-Epstein-biggest-political-scandal-lifetime-writes-DAN-HODGES-senior-Whitehall-source-told-murky-truth-dont-believe-Prime-Minister.html#
Some of that shit will stick.
I have made it clear today that Mandelson is most likely a traitor. I was the first on here to suggest this scandal (the one from 2009/2010 is as big as Profumo).
https://x.com/disclosetv/status/2018805508808089952
Trump: "Epstein conspired against me. They conspired against me so I'd lose the election, or worse."
@MrHarryCole
Who will decide what the threshold is?
Very panicky amendment by No10 tonight
Starting to smell of panic
https://x.com/MrHarryCole/status/2018800490453327916
Former cabinet minister, who is ‘retiring’ from Lords, will be questioned by police about allegations he leaked sensitive information to paedophile financier" (£)
https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/peter-mandelson-quit-lords-epstein-files-tddzx6q83
Trump has explained that the last tranche of Epstein material exonerate him and legacy media would seem to agree.
Farage operates in a similar orbit.
Johnson and Farage being closely and demonstrably involved with Epstein and Russian money is too much to hope for. Things that brilliant just do not happen.
https://bsky.app/profile/jwsidders.bsky.social/post/3mdxz7wt5o22t
That's not the proper Trinity.
I am very uncomfortable with the current torch and pitchfork situation removing his peerage etc (I really don’t like him) because I believe in innocent until proven guilty and he has as much protection under the law as anyone and so shouldn’t be penalised until proven to have been a legally bad ‘un.
I would bet one of my kidneys he was bad but please let’s allow justice and procedure to win not mob justice.
We’re chasing squirrels at the moment, whilst not really appreciating any Mossad/FSB involvement. Maybe. Allegedly. Perhaps.
If there's some sort of parliamentary motion to effectively kill the investigation by releasing all the docs then I can see this escalating - but that would be extraordinary and only really justifiable if you think the police/CPS will be next to useless into holding Mandelson (and others) to timely account. Though that might be a reasonable position to take tbh...*
*Just been reading an article about the death of a firefighter in Edinburgh three years ago and the apparent lack of progress into working out why he died is infuriating - actual lives depend on the answer.
Protonmail is the obvious choice. If you use it, and so does your recipient, it will be encrypted.
You are Boris Johnson, where’s my £10.
It seems unlikely.
Apols if someone else has already nicked this off twitter.
If Starmer amendment is defeated which means his mps have voted with Kemi then how can he continue as PM
High stakes for him tomorrow
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/science/nasa-delays-astronauts-lunar-trip-until-march-after-rockets-hydrogen-leaks-mar-fueling-test
Amazon, Walmart and co also swallowed some of the increased pricing.
Presumably you have to use their web service or client for it to work properly.
How better to generate kompromat on dumb-f***, venal movers and shakers than put them in bed with a thirteen year old Russian girl and roll the camera.