Sir David Davis is uniting the Commons against Mandelson
I wonder what further measures they can take against Mandelson. Expulsion from the Lords, a prison sentence, execution even?
Silly comment
He should be removed from Labour and the Lords
For what? Writing yum yum in a birthday card?
This is hysteria.
Maybe if you listen to the house debate you would see mps anger and more importantly the Epstein victims family tearful interviews about Mandelson
By the sounds of it, the “debate” is less of a debate than a tawdry display of schmaltz-stirring.
What is tawdy is Mandelson representing our country
An appointment widely considered very savvy politics, and which seems to have actually paid off for the UK, at least until last week.
I dislike Mandelson as much as the next man, but his excessive loyalty to Epstein is the least of his offences, and Britain is in a geopolitical crisis.
Tell that to the Epstein's family victims who condemned him in tears this weekend
In your excitability, your posts give the impression that Mandelson should be held responsible for the abuse that Epstein's victims suffered. I don't think anybody is accusing Mandelson of that. If Mandelson had never existed, I don't imagine it would have made any difference to Epstein's victims.
Mandelson was a poor appointment by Starmer, especially with the benefit of hindsight. But that's about all there is to it.
There is nothing excitable about the victims families tears even if you find this difficult
Indeed Ed Davey is speaking on this now
Unfortunately discussing the victims’ families tears does not serve to improve the country - the Mandelson appointment was an error, the PM probably knows and accepts this and is running out of rope, everyone has had their pound of flesh (however much it is fun to jab at Starmer on here for it).
This debate however shows, in my mind, how unserious our political class has got. There will inevitably be shroud waving and MPs lining up to emote, do doubt we will have tearful personal stories from MPs as has become a habit and it won’t change a damn thing in the country or the world but will make MPs feel worthy.
As TSE pointed out earlier, this time would be better used on matters such as drone incursions into Poland, sending RAF planes and other kit to aid our ally. Or debating the new google data centre’s future energy needs in relation to closing off North Sea drilling, frankly anything that MPs can achieve to make the country run better and grow.
This however is easy vanity, Mandelson has paid the price, Starmer is paying a price, others in his team will pay a price and yet nothing said today will ensure that the majority of those responsible with Epstein, namely a lot of high profile Americans, will pay a price as it’s not in the remit of Parliament.
Yes. My point, eloquently expanded.
I agree, but everyone seemed happy to pile in on partygate, which was equally trivial.
Disagree.
Johnson and his team asked the country to make enormous sacrifices that - it was revealed - they themselves were not willing to make.
I disagree with this. For the most part they did make those sacrifices but, as for most people, they bent the rules on occasion. Most people did. Some did not.
The bigger issue was the rules themselves, which were often moronic and not up to date with out knowledge of the virus.
They did not bend the rules on occasion. There was a broad ignoring of the rules among some No. 10 staff and Johnson personally repeatedly broke the rules.
There were problems with the rules. Whose responsibility is that? Johnson's again.
Sir David Davis is uniting the Commons against Mandelson
I wonder what further measures they can take against Mandelson. Expulsion from the Lords, a prison sentence, execution even?
Silly comment
He should be removed from Labour and the Lords
For what? Writing yum yum in a birthday card?
This is hysteria.
Maybe if you listen to the house debate you would see mps anger and more importantly the Epstein victims family tearful interviews about Mandelson
By the sounds of it, the “debate” is less of a debate than a tawdry display of schmaltz-stirring.
What is tawdy is Mandelson representing our country
An appointment widely considered very savvy politics, and which seems to have actually paid off for the UK, at least until last week.
I dislike Mandelson as much as the next man, but his excessive loyalty to Epstein is the least of his offences, and Britain is in a geopolitical crisis.
Tell that to the Epstein's family victims who condemned him in tears this weekend
In your excitability, your posts give the impression that Mandelson should be held responsible for the abuse that Epstein's victims suffered. I don't think anybody is accusing Mandelson of that. If Mandelson had never existed, I don't imagine it would have made any difference to Epstein's victims.
Mandelson was a poor appointment by Starmer, especially with the benefit of hindsight. But that's about all there is to it.
There is nothing excitable about the victims families tears even if you find this difficult
Indeed Ed Davey is speaking on this now
Unfortunately discussing the victims’ families tears does not serve to improve the country - the Mandelson appointment was an error, the PM probably knows and accepts this and is running out of rope, everyone has had their pound of flesh (however much it is fun to jab at Starmer on here for it).
This debate however shows, in my mind, how unserious our political class has got. There will inevitably be shroud waving and MPs lining up to emote, do doubt we will have tearful personal stories from MPs as has become a habit and it won’t change a damn thing in the country or the world but will make MPs feel worthy.
As TSE pointed out earlier, this time would be better used on matters such as drone incursions into Poland, sending RAF planes and other kit to aid our ally. Or debating the new google data centre’s future energy needs in relation to closing off North Sea drilling, frankly anything that MPs can achieve to make the country run better and grow.
This however is easy vanity, Mandelson has paid the price, Starmer is paying a price, others in his team will pay a price and yet nothing said today will ensure that the majority of those responsible with Epstein, namely a lot of high profile Americans, will pay a price as it’s not in the remit of Parliament.
Yes. My point, eloquently expanded.
I agree, but everyone seemed happy to pile in on partygate, which was equally trivial.
Disagree.
Johnson and his team asked the country to make enormous sacrifices that - it was revealed - they themselves were not willing to make.
I disagree with this. For the most part they did make those sacrifices but, as for most people, they bent the rules on occasion. Most people did. Some did not.
The bigger issue was the rules themselves, which were often moronic and not up to date with out knowledge of the virus.
Boris wrote the bloody rules.
The only way you can excuse him for this is if you think/consider that all the actual rules were written by his minders and he was simply relaying stuff to the nation. That he was a messenger. He was not a messenger. He was not some prize bull being led as if at a show by a nose ring carefully handled so as to not crash into china pots . He was the Prime Minister; everyone else could bend or break the rules because they were not the Prime Minister. But when you're at the top of the tree Caesar's wife applies.
Item 9163 on the long list of Vance's lies. His ability to tell lies while sounding reasonable is far superior to Trump's.
I'm not sure where he's getting his information, but JD Vance is lying about The Nation magazine. We'd welcome donations from anyone who respects our editorial independence, but we're not funded, not one dime, by Soros or Open Society Foundation. https://x.com/sunraysunray/status/1967657717348360234
This, in the context of calling for federal investigations into liberal media.
Sir David Davis is uniting the Commons against Mandelson
I wonder what further measures they can take against Mandelson. Expulsion from the Lords, a prison sentence, execution even?
Silly comment
He should be removed from Labour and the Lords
For what? Writing yum yum in a birthday card?
This is hysteria.
Maybe if you listen to the house debate you would see mps anger and more importantly the Epstein victims family tearful interviews about Mandelson
By the sounds of it, the “debate” is less of a debate than a tawdry display of schmaltz-stirring.
What is tawdy is Mandelson representing our country
An appointment widely considered very savvy politics, and which seems to have actually paid off for the UK, at least until last week.
I dislike Mandelson as much as the next man, but his excessive loyalty to Epstein is the least of his offences, and Britain is in a geopolitical crisis.
Tell that to the Epstein's family victims who condemned him in tears this weekend
In your excitability, your posts give the impression that Mandelson should be held responsible for the abuse that Epstein's victims suffered. I don't think anybody is accusing Mandelson of that. If Mandelson had never existed, I don't imagine it would have made any difference to Epstein's victims.
Mandelson was a poor appointment by Starmer, especially with the benefit of hindsight. But that's about all there is to it.
There is nothing excitable about the victims families tears even if you find this difficult
Indeed Ed Davey is speaking on this now
Unfortunately discussing the victims’ families tears does not serve to improve the country - the Mandelson appointment was an error, the PM probably knows and accepts this and is running out of rope, everyone has had their pound of flesh (however much it is fun to jab at Starmer on here for it).
This debate however shows, in my mind, how unserious our political class has got. There will inevitably be shroud waving and MPs lining up to emote, do doubt we will have tearful personal stories from MPs as has become a habit and it won’t change a damn thing in the country or the world but will make MPs feel worthy.
As TSE pointed out earlier, this time would be better used on matters such as drone incursions into Poland, sending RAF planes and other kit to aid our ally. Or debating the new google data centre’s future energy needs in relation to closing off North Sea drilling, frankly anything that MPs can achieve to make the country run better and grow.
This however is easy vanity, Mandelson has paid the price, Starmer is paying a price, others in his team will pay a price and yet nothing said today will ensure that the majority of those responsible with Epstein, namely a lot of high profile Americans, will pay a price as it’s not in the remit of Parliament.
Yes. My point, eloquently expanded.
I agree, but everyone seemed happy to pile in on partygate, which was equally trivial.
Disagree.
Johnson and his team asked the country to make enormous sacrifices that - it was revealed - they themselves were not willing to make.
I disagree with this. For the most part they did make those sacrifices but, as for most people, they bent the rules on occasion. Most people did. Some did not.
The bigger issue was the rules themselves, which were often moronic and not up to date with out knowledge of the virus.
Boris wrote the bloody rules.
The only way you can excuse him for this is if you think/consider that all the actual rules were written by his minders and he was simply relaying stuff to the nation. That he was a messenger. He was not a messenger. He was not some prize bull being led as if at a show by a nose ring carefully handled so as to not crash into china pots . He was the Prime Minister; everyone else could bend or break the rules because they were not the Prime Minister. But when you're at the top of the tree Caesar's wife applies.
I'll add one thing, which I said at the time:
I'm blooming glad that I didn't have any responsibility for the decisions that had to be made during Covid. It was like a wartime situation, with the health and lives of many thousands of civilians in your hands. There were no good decisions to be made, just poor ones, and it was inevitable that the resultant inquiries would be filled with hindsight. The stress levels must have been immense.
Add in the fact he himself had been very ill, and you know what? If it helped reduce the stress, and help them make better decisions, then let them party on.
Starmer, of course, flew *very* close to the wind himself. Unnecessarily. With none of the responsibility.
Can't we just sack the entire Labour Front Bench and have Lord Mandelbrot as PM and he can hand choose his Cabinet? I bet it would be 5000% better than the chancers, dummies and time servers we have now.
Sir David Davis is uniting the Commons against Mandelson
I wonder what further measures they can take against Mandelson. Expulsion from the Lords, a prison sentence, execution even?
Silly comment
He should be removed from Labour and the Lords
For what? Writing yum yum in a birthday card?
This is hysteria.
Maybe if you listen to the house debate you would see mps anger and more importantly the Epstein victims family tearful interviews about Mandelson
By the sounds of it, the “debate” is less of a debate than a tawdry display of schmaltz-stirring.
What is tawdy is Mandelson representing our country
An appointment widely considered very savvy politics, and which seems to have actually paid off for the UK, at least until last week.
I dislike Mandelson as much as the next man, but his excessive loyalty to Epstein is the least of his offences, and Britain is in a geopolitical crisis.
Tell that to the Epstein's family victims who condemned him in tears this weekend
In your excitability, your posts give the impression that Mandelson should be held responsible for the abuse that Epstein's victims suffered. I don't think anybody is accusing Mandelson of that. If Mandelson had never existed, I don't imagine it would have made any difference to Epstein's victims.
Mandelson was a poor appointment by Starmer, especially with the benefit of hindsight. But that's about all there is to it.
There is nothing excitable about the victims families tears even if you find this difficult
Indeed Ed Davey is speaking on this now
Unfortunately discussing the victims’ families tears does not serve to improve the country - the Mandelson appointment was an error, the PM probably knows and accepts this and is running out of rope, everyone has had their pound of flesh (however much it is fun to jab at Starmer on here for it).
This debate however shows, in my mind, how unserious our political class has got. There will inevitably be shroud waving and MPs lining up to emote, do doubt we will have tearful personal stories from MPs as has become a habit and it won’t change a damn thing in the country or the world but will make MPs feel worthy.
As TSE pointed out earlier, this time would be better used on matters such as drone incursions into Poland, sending RAF planes and other kit to aid our ally. Or debating the new google data centre’s future energy needs in relation to closing off North Sea drilling, frankly anything that MPs can achieve to make the country run better and grow.
This however is easy vanity, Mandelson has paid the price, Starmer is paying a price, others in his team will pay a price and yet nothing said today will ensure that the majority of those responsible with Epstein, namely a lot of high profile Americans, will pay a price as it’s not in the remit of Parliament.
Yes. My point, eloquently expanded.
I agree, but everyone seemed happy to pile in on partygate, which was equally trivial.
Partygate seems neither comparable or trivial. We've recently had more revelations about Johnson holding gatherings in breach of the rules as well.
Partygate was certainly not trivial on the doorstep. When I was canvassing in the West Country one old boy burst into tears when the topic came up.
And I am sure that you can find many similarly aghast at Mandelson - victims of childhood sexual abuse for instance. The point upthread is that there are serious issues affecting the country yet parliament is wasting three hours on this. I felt the same about partygate.
Partygate was critically important because if we have another national emergency we need people to trust the establishment when asked to make significant personal sacrifices - from going to war or abandoning homes ahead of a flood, or rationing food.
The COVID rules may have been silly*, but that was in the main an honest misjudgment. That will happen again if the big flood doesn't actually materialise, or a harvest does eventually come in. But we expect our leaders to make those decisions to the best of their ability and to abide by they own instructions.
*no indoor mixing was one of the more sensible ones IMO, particularly at the time the parties
Sir David Davis is uniting the Commons against Mandelson
I wonder what further measures they can take against Mandelson. Expulsion from the Lords, a prison sentence, execution even?
Silly comment
He should be removed from Labour and the Lords
For what? Writing yum yum in a birthday card?
This is hysteria.
Maybe if you listen to the house debate you would see mps anger and more importantly the Epstein victims family tearful interviews about Mandelson
By the sounds of it, the “debate” is less of a debate than a tawdry display of schmaltz-stirring.
What is tawdy is Mandelson representing our country
An appointment widely considered very savvy politics, and which seems to have actually paid off for the UK, at least until last week.
I dislike Mandelson as much as the next man, but his excessive loyalty to Epstein is the least of his offences, and Britain is in a geopolitical crisis.
Tell that to the Epstein's family victims who condemned him in tears this weekend
In your excitability, your posts give the impression that Mandelson should be held responsible for the abuse that Epstein's victims suffered. I don't think anybody is accusing Mandelson of that. If Mandelson had never existed, I don't imagine it would have made any difference to Epstein's victims.
Mandelson was a poor appointment by Starmer, especially with the benefit of hindsight. But that's about all there is to it.
There is nothing excitable about the victims families tears even if you find this difficult
Indeed Ed Davey is speaking on this now
Unfortunately discussing the victims’ families tears does not serve to improve the country - the Mandelson appointment was an error, the PM probably knows and accepts this and is running out of rope, everyone has had their pound of flesh (however much it is fun to jab at Starmer on here for it).
This debate however shows, in my mind, how unserious our political class has got. There will inevitably be shroud waving and MPs lining up to emote, do doubt we will have tearful personal stories from MPs as has become a habit and it won’t change a damn thing in the country or the world but will make MPs feel worthy.
As TSE pointed out earlier, this time would be better used on matters such as drone incursions into Poland, sending RAF planes and other kit to aid our ally. Or debating the new google data centre’s future energy needs in relation to closing off North Sea drilling, frankly anything that MPs can achieve to make the country run better and grow.
This however is easy vanity, Mandelson has paid the price, Starmer is paying a price, others in his team will pay a price and yet nothing said today will ensure that the majority of those responsible with Epstein, namely a lot of high profile Americans, will pay a price as it’s not in the remit of Parliament.
Yes. My point, eloquently expanded.
I agree, but everyone seemed happy to pile in on partygate, which was equally trivial.
Disagree.
Johnson and his team asked the country to make enormous sacrifices that - it was revealed - they themselves were not willing to make.
I disagree with this. For the most part they did make those sacrifices but, as for most people, they bent the rules on occasion. Most people did. Some did not.
The bigger issue was the rules themselves, which were often moronic and not up to date with out knowledge of the virus.
They did not bend the rules on occasion. There was a broad ignoring of the rules among some No. 10 staff and Johnson personally repeatedly broke the rules.
There were problems with the rules. Whose responsibility is that? Johnson's again.
BIB - I agree that this is true. And it shouldn't have happened, but it was and is trivia in the same way that todays 'rage' over Mandelson is. Johnson, I genuinely believe, tried his best, but he's a bit thick, and not good at details. The birthday 'party' incident was rubbish, and certainly not the hedonistic shit that some of the staffers pulled. But of course Johnson fucked up by trying to deny everything at first and then was boiled like a frog.
Sydney McLaughlin-Levrone is probably going to break the 400 metres world record pretty soon. She just ran 48.30 without trying particularly hard in a semi-final. The WR is 47.60.
Sir David Davis is uniting the Commons against Mandelson
I wonder what further measures they can take against Mandelson. Expulsion from the Lords, a prison sentence, execution even?
Silly comment
He should be removed from Labour and the Lords
For what? Writing yum yum in a birthday card?
This is hysteria.
Maybe if you listen to the house debate you would see mps anger and more importantly the Epstein victims family tearful interviews about Mandelson
By the sounds of it, the “debate” is less of a debate than a tawdry display of schmaltz-stirring.
What is tawdy is Mandelson representing our country
An appointment widely considered very savvy politics, and which seems to have actually paid off for the UK, at least until last week.
I dislike Mandelson as much as the next man, but his excessive loyalty to Epstein is the least of his offences, and Britain is in a geopolitical crisis.
Tell that to the Epstein's family victims who condemned him in tears this weekend
In your excitability, your posts give the impression that Mandelson should be held responsible for the abuse that Epstein's victims suffered. I don't think anybody is accusing Mandelson of that. If Mandelson had never existed, I don't imagine it would have made any difference to Epstein's victims.
Mandelson was a poor appointment by Starmer, especially with the benefit of hindsight. But that's about all there is to it.
There is nothing excitable about the victims families tears even if you find this difficult
Indeed Ed Davey is speaking on this now
Unfortunately discussing the victims’ families tears does not serve to improve the country - the Mandelson appointment was an error, the PM probably knows and accepts this and is running out of rope, everyone has had their pound of flesh (however much it is fun to jab at Starmer on here for it).
This debate however shows, in my mind, how unserious our political class has got. There will inevitably be shroud waving and MPs lining up to emote, do doubt we will have tearful personal stories from MPs as has become a habit and it won’t change a damn thing in the country or the world but will make MPs feel worthy.
As TSE pointed out earlier, this time would be better used on matters such as drone incursions into Poland, sending RAF planes and other kit to aid our ally. Or debating the new google data centre’s future energy needs in relation to closing off North Sea drilling, frankly anything that MPs can achieve to make the country run better and grow.
This however is easy vanity, Mandelson has paid the price, Starmer is paying a price, others in his team will pay a price and yet nothing said today will ensure that the majority of those responsible with Epstein, namely a lot of high profile Americans, will pay a price as it’s not in the remit of Parliament.
Yes. My point, eloquently expanded.
I agree, but everyone seemed happy to pile in on partygate, which was equally trivial.
Partygate seems neither comparable or trivial. We've recently had more revelations about Johnson holding gatherings in breach of the rules as well.
Partygate was certainly not trivial on the doorstep. When I was canvassing in the West Country one old boy burst into tears when the topic came up.
And I am sure that you can find many similarly aghast at Mandelson - victims of childhood sexual abuse for instance. The point upthread is that there are serious issues affecting the country yet parliament is wasting three hours on this. I felt the same about partygate.
Partygate was critically important because if we have another national emergency we need people to trust the establishment when asked to make significant personal sacrifices - from going to war or abandoning homes ahead of a flood, or rationing food.
The COVID rules may have been silly*, but that was in the main an honest misjudgment. That will happen again if the big flood doesn't actually materialise, or a harvest does eventually come in. But we expect our leaders to make those decisions to the best of their ability and to abide by they own instructions.
*no indoor mixing was one of the more sensible ones IMO, particularly at the time the parties
Of course one of the silliest things was that you could work in the office all day but as soon as work stopped you could no longer mix. Which was mad. If you weren't infected between 9 and 5, 5-6 probably wasn't going to do it.
I know I am probably in a minority of one, but I genuinely think Johnson tried his best. He was not at the hedonistic parties that have come to represent partygate to the public, but I suspect a lot of people think he was.
Sydney McLaughlin-Levrone is probably going to break the 400 metres world record pretty soon. She just ran 48.30 without trying particularly hard in a semi-final. The WR is 47.60.
Sir David Davis is uniting the Commons against Mandelson
I wonder what further measures they can take against Mandelson. Expulsion from the Lords, a prison sentence, execution even?
Silly comment
He should be removed from Labour and the Lords
For what? Writing yum yum in a birthday card?
This is hysteria.
Maybe if you listen to the house debate you would see mps anger and more importantly the Epstein victims family tearful interviews about Mandelson
By the sounds of it, the “debate” is less of a debate than a tawdry display of schmaltz-stirring.
What is tawdy is Mandelson representing our country
An appointment widely considered very savvy politics, and which seems to have actually paid off for the UK, at least until last week.
I dislike Mandelson as much as the next man, but his excessive loyalty to Epstein is the least of his offences, and Britain is in a geopolitical crisis.
Tell that to the Epstein's family victims who condemned him in tears this weekend
In your excitability, your posts give the impression that Mandelson should be held responsible for the abuse that Epstein's victims suffered. I don't think anybody is accusing Mandelson of that. If Mandelson had never existed, I don't imagine it would have made any difference to Epstein's victims.
Mandelson was a poor appointment by Starmer, especially with the benefit of hindsight. But that's about all there is to it.
There is nothing excitable about the victims families tears even if you find this difficult
Indeed Ed Davey is speaking on this now
Unfortunately discussing the victims’ families tears does not serve to improve the country - the Mandelson appointment was an error, the PM probably knows and accepts this and is running out of rope, everyone has had their pound of flesh (however much it is fun to jab at Starmer on here for it).
This debate however shows, in my mind, how unserious our political class has got. There will inevitably be shroud waving and MPs lining up to emote, do doubt we will have tearful personal stories from MPs as has become a habit and it won’t change a damn thing in the country or the world but will make MPs feel worthy.
As TSE pointed out earlier, this time would be better used on matters such as drone incursions into Poland, sending RAF planes and other kit to aid our ally. Or debating the new google data centre’s future energy needs in relation to closing off North Sea drilling, frankly anything that MPs can achieve to make the country run better and grow.
This however is easy vanity, Mandelson has paid the price, Starmer is paying a price, others in his team will pay a price and yet nothing said today will ensure that the majority of those responsible with Epstein, namely a lot of high profile Americans, will pay a price as it’s not in the remit of Parliament.
Yes. My point, eloquently expanded.
I agree, but everyone seemed happy to pile in on partygate, which was equally trivial.
Disagree.
Johnson and his team asked the country to make enormous sacrifices that - it was revealed - they themselves were not willing to make.
I disagree with this. For the most part they did make those sacrifices but, as for most people, they bent the rules on occasion. Most people did. Some did not.
The bigger issue was the rules themselves, which were often moronic and not up to date with out knowledge of the virus.
Boris wrote the bloody rules.
The only way you can excuse him for this is if you think/consider that all the actual rules were written by his minders and he was simply relaying stuff to the nation. That he was a messenger. He was not a messenger. He was not some prize bull being led as if at a show by a nose ring carefully handled so as to not crash into china pots . He was the Prime Minister; everyone else could bend or break the rules because they were not the Prime Minister. But when you're at the top of the tree Caesar's wife applies.
I'll add one thing, which I said at the time:
I'm blooming glad that I didn't have any responsibility for the decisions that had to be made during Covid. It was like a wartime situation, with the health and lives of many thousands of civilians in your hands. There were no good decisions to be made, just poor ones, and it was inevitable that the resultant inquiries would be filled with hindsight. The stress levels must have been immense.
Add in the fact he himself had been very ill, and you know what? If it helped reduce the stress, and help them make better decisions, then let them party on.
Starmer, of course, flew *very* close to the wind himself. Unnecessarily. With none of the responsibility.
OMG, are people still trying to equate Currygate with Partygate? Johnson broke the rules during the early period when it was, as you say, like a wartime situation, but then he also broke the rules later on when things were more under control. He just didn't see the rules as applying to him or to his staff.
Sir David Davis is uniting the Commons against Mandelson
I wonder what further measures they can take against Mandelson. Expulsion from the Lords, a prison sentence, execution even?
Silly comment
He should be removed from Labour and the Lords
For what? Writing yum yum in a birthday card?
This is hysteria.
Maybe if you listen to the house debate you would see mps anger and more importantly the Epstein victims family tearful interviews about Mandelson
By the sounds of it, the “debate” is less of a debate than a tawdry display of schmaltz-stirring.
What is tawdy is Mandelson representing our country
An appointment widely considered very savvy politics, and which seems to have actually paid off for the UK, at least until last week.
I dislike Mandelson as much as the next man, but his excessive loyalty to Epstein is the least of his offences, and Britain is in a geopolitical crisis.
Tell that to the Epstein's family victims who condemned him in tears this weekend
In your excitability, your posts give the impression that Mandelson should be held responsible for the abuse that Epstein's victims suffered. I don't think anybody is accusing Mandelson of that. If Mandelson had never existed, I don't imagine it would have made any difference to Epstein's victims.
Mandelson was a poor appointment by Starmer, especially with the benefit of hindsight. But that's about all there is to it.
There is nothing excitable about the victims families tears even if you find this difficult
Indeed Ed Davey is speaking on this now
Unfortunately discussing the victims’ families tears does not serve to improve the country - the Mandelson appointment was an error, the PM probably knows and accepts this and is running out of rope, everyone has had their pound of flesh (however much it is fun to jab at Starmer on here for it).
This debate however shows, in my mind, how unserious our political class has got. There will inevitably be shroud waving and MPs lining up to emote, do doubt we will have tearful personal stories from MPs as has become a habit and it won’t change a damn thing in the country or the world but will make MPs feel worthy.
As TSE pointed out earlier, this time would be better used on matters such as drone incursions into Poland, sending RAF planes and other kit to aid our ally. Or debating the new google data centre’s future energy needs in relation to closing off North Sea drilling, frankly anything that MPs can achieve to make the country run better and grow.
This however is easy vanity, Mandelson has paid the price, Starmer is paying a price, others in his team will pay a price and yet nothing said today will ensure that the majority of those responsible with Epstein, namely a lot of high profile Americans, will pay a price as it’s not in the remit of Parliament.
Yes. My point, eloquently expanded.
I agree, but everyone seemed happy to pile in on partygate, which was equally trivial.
Disagree.
Johnson and his team asked the country to make enormous sacrifices that - it was revealed - they themselves were not willing to make.
I disagree with this. For the most part they did make those sacrifices but, as for most people, they bent the rules on occasion. Most people did. Some did not.
The bigger issue was the rules themselves, which were often moronic and not up to date with out knowledge of the virus.
Boris wrote the bloody rules.
The only way you can excuse him for this is if you think/consider that all the actual rules were written by his minders and he was simply relaying stuff to the nation. That he was a messenger. He was not a messenger. He was not some prize bull being led as if at a show by a nose ring carefully handled so as to not crash into china pots . He was the Prime Minister; everyone else could bend or break the rules because they were not the Prime Minister. But when you're at the top of the tree Caesar's wife applies.
I'll add one thing, which I said at the time:
I'm blooming glad that I didn't have any responsibility for the decisions that had to be made during Covid. It was like a wartime situation, with the health and lives of many thousands of civilians in your hands. There were no good decisions to be made, just poor ones, and it was inevitable that the resultant inquiries would be filled with hindsight. The stress levels must have been immense.
Add in the fact he himself had been very ill, and you know what? If it helped reduce the stress, and help them make better decisions, then let them party on.
Starmer, of course, flew *very* close to the wind himself. Unnecessarily. With none of the responsibility.
OMG, are people still trying to equate Currygate with Partygate? Johnson broke the rules during the early period when it was, as you say, like a wartime situation, but then he also broke the rules later on when things were more under control. He just didn't see the rules as applying to him or to his staff.
Can't we just sack the entire Labour Front Bench and have Lord Mandelbrot as PM and he can hand choose his Cabinet? I bet it would be 5000% better than the chancers, dummies and time servers we have now.
I stand by that. It would be 5000% better
Just a shame about his “billionaire pedo blind spot” the size of Texas
Off topic, but I think many of you will appreciate this travel suggestion:
Much has been done to educate the public about the dangers these snakes pose to the ecosystem. The water management district still hosts the annual the Florida python challenge, in partnership with the Florida Fish and Wildlife System. The 10-day marathon is held every August and draws competitors from around the world to compete for up to $30,000 (£23,582) in prize money. It's simple: whoever catches the longest Burmese python, wins.
Comments
There were problems with the rules. Whose responsibility is that? Johnson's again.
The only way you can excuse him for this is if you think/consider that all the actual rules were written by his minders and he was simply relaying stuff to the nation. That he was a messenger.
He was not a messenger.
He was not some prize bull being led as if at a show by a nose ring carefully handled so as to not crash into china pots .
He was the Prime Minister; everyone else could bend or break the rules because they were not the Prime Minister. But when you're at the top of the tree Caesar's wife applies.
His ability to tell lies while sounding reasonable is far superior to Trump's.
I'm not sure where he's getting his information, but JD Vance is lying about The Nation magazine. We'd welcome donations from anyone who respects our editorial independence, but we're not funded, not one dime, by Soros or Open Society Foundation.
https://x.com/sunraysunray/status/1967657717348360234
This, in the context of calling for federal investigations into liberal media.
I'm blooming glad that I didn't have any responsibility for the decisions that had to be made during Covid. It was like a wartime situation, with the health and lives of many thousands of civilians in your hands. There were no good decisions to be made, just poor ones, and it was inevitable that the resultant inquiries would be filled with hindsight. The stress levels must have been immense.
Add in the fact he himself had been very ill, and you know what? If it helped reduce the stress, and help them make better decisions, then let them party on.
Starmer, of course, flew *very* close to the wind himself. Unnecessarily. With none of the responsibility.
Can't we just sack the entire Labour Front Bench and have Lord Mandelbrot as PM and he can hand choose his Cabinet? I bet it would be 5000% better than the chancers, dummies and time servers we have now.
The COVID rules may have been silly*, but that was in the main an honest misjudgment. That will happen again if the big flood doesn't actually materialise, or a harvest does eventually come in. But we expect our leaders to make those decisions to the best of their ability and to abide by they own instructions.
*no indoor mixing was one of the more sensible ones IMO, particularly at the time the parties
A bit like Starmer is getting now...
I know I am probably in a minority of one, but I genuinely think Johnson tried his best. He was not at the hedonistic parties that have come to represent partygate to the public, but I suspect a lot of people think he was.
NEW THREAD
Just a shame about his “billionaire pedo blind spot” the size of Texas
AND
OUST STARMER!
See a fascinating eco system, and compete to restore it to closer to its original state. What's not to like?
https://x.com/mercedesamgf1/status/1967984900570788027
Mercedes F1 team offering industrial placement roles for 2026.