nside the Mandelson vetting fiasco - our deep dive this weekend
* Cat Little, the permanent secretary at the cabinet office, spent weeks attempting to extract Mandelson's vetting report from the foreign office but to no avail
* Olly Robbins, who has now been sacked as perm sec of the foreign office, has been accused of obstructing the release of the document
* Little eventually obtained the document from UK Security Vetting on March 25. It was explosive. The Times has been told it was not a borderline case but an explicit recommendation that Mandelson should not be cleared
* The summary Little obtained is said to have drawn on Mandelson's interviews with vetting officers - which were deeply personal, interviews with his friends, details of his business interests and even information from his bank accounts. The recommendation was not caveated
* At this point Little informed Antonia Romeo, the Cabinet Secretary. They did two things. First, they attempted to get more clarity from Robbins as to why he had given Mandelson clearance. It was not forthcoming
All these people acting independently off their own bat with no mention to their boss.....Sounds like a sacking offence.
None of this would explain how Starmer knew this on 4th Feb:
Badenoch: ‘Did the official security vetting that he received mention Mandelson’s ongoing relationship with the paedophile Jeffrey Epstein?’ Starmer: ‘Yes, it did’
SFAICS he has lied since if he knew then, and was lying then (in the sense that he could not know this without being briefed on the vetting) if he didn't know then.
Starmer doesn't lie he simply omits crucial information and cavaets statements in such a way that you hear one thing and he is actually saying something slightly different e.g. "formally informed".....people take that as I was told, no that is I was sat down in a formal meeting in which we went through the documentation.
His upgraded football tickets were a classic where every statement on them a lawyer down to a tee, but there the common man you what....what the f##k is he on about, is he in the private box or not....so in the end his comms team had to dig him out of it.
Yes. Look at his polling
74% disapproval. It’s extraordinarily bad
The entire country has concluded he’s a lying and hypocritical c*** and there’s no coming back from that verdict. Especially as he really is a lying etc etc and keeps proving it time and again
There is no way Labour can go into an election led by this verminous man. It would be suicidal. So then the question is: when and how does he go?
The problem Starmer has compared to a Blair or Boris, they managed to defy gravity for a lot longer despite having their own issues with the truth because they had some charisma (and in Blair's case a decent economy and general belief at the time times ran ok).
Also, they had basic political sense. They didn’t make endless unforced errors like Starmer does. He is utterly inept at politics. He doesn’t understand human nature because he’s so weird
And then, the voice
Oh dear. It feels almost cruel constantly attacking him but the fact is he shouldn’t be prime minister. He’s not up to the job. And that is really bad for everyone in the UK
I said all this six years ago, bet that he wouldn't be PM at the next GE on the back of it... and lost.
He is a complete shyster, speaks fluent legalese, but that impresses fellow legal types; lying but being able to logically talk your way out of it is seen as an attribute today, unfortunately
He's far more capable of the job than than the last 4 incumbent and not as capable as Cameron or Blair
Thats the problem
Name better credible options?
Streeting, Rayner, Cooper, Farage, Badenoch, Hunt, Stride, Rupert Lowe, Emily Thornberry, Robert Jenrick, Jeremy Corbyn
I think Iran and US can't agree terms that are acceptable to both parties and both parties would prefer to delay than accept a compromise, even though the delay damages both parties.
The claim that nobody at the heart of government — ie close to Starmer — knew Mandelson had flunked his security vetting is unravelling at a rate of knots. Starmer’s head of comms was alerted by the media last September. Sources tell me multiple folks in the Cabinet Office (where the UK Security Vetting unit is based) had known for quite some time. Cat Little, Cabinet Office Permanent Secretary, even had a copy of the UK Sec Vet January 2025 document concluding Mandelson was unfit to be US ambassador. She informed the new cabinet secretary Antonia Romeo. Soon there were about a dozen lawyers and officials crawling all over it. Such matters don’t stay secret for long in the upper echelons of Whitehall. But it seems the PM was still in the dark … until last Tuesday. Mmmmmm
I thought this was supposed to be so top top top top secret, that literally nobody had access to it outside Robbins, and even then the way it has been reported they made it sound like you had to go into a deep air gapped bunker in order to read it.
This draws it closer to Starmer because, if dozens of lawyers are involved, then it is inconceivable the Attorney General was not involved
One Richard Hermer, Starmer's close ally
I think the line is now, yes they had it, it was super sensitive, they then had to keep it secret until the lawyers said it was ok otherwise something something something...that's today's line anyway.
They had to make sure that the Prime Minister had sufficient security clearance to be told that he’d appointed someone he knew to be a dodgy git?
The claim that nobody at the heart of government — ie close to Starmer — knew Mandelson had flunked his security vetting is unravelling at a rate of knots. Starmer’s head of comms was alerted by the media last September. Sources tell me multiple folks in the Cabinet Office (where the UK Security Vetting unit is based) had known for quite some time. Cat Little, Cabinet Office Permanent Secretary, even had a copy of the UK Sec Vet January 2025 document concluding Mandelson was unfit to be US ambassador. She informed the new cabinet secretary Antonia Romeo. Soon there were about a dozen lawyers and officials crawling all over it. Such matters don’t stay secret for long in the upper echelons of Whitehall. But it seems the PM was still in the dark … until last Tuesday. Mmmmmm
I thought this was supposed to be so top top top top secret, that literally nobody had access to it outside Robbins, and even then the way it has been reported they made it sound like you had to go into a deep air gapped bunker in order to read it.
This draws it closer to Starmer because, if dozens of lawyers are involved, then it is inconceivable the Attorney General was not involved
One Richard Hermer, Starmer's close ally
Get some fresh air. Take a walk on the pier. I can hardly face your disappointment when this whole edifice collapses. Listen to Any Questions and add a little of your own common sense and you'll find yourself much further on than AF Neil and his turgid tittle tattle
The claim that nobody at the heart of government — ie close to Starmer — knew Mandelson had flunked his security vetting is unravelling at a rate of knots. Starmer’s head of comms was alerted by the media last September. Sources tell me multiple folks in the Cabinet Office (where the UK Security Vetting unit is based) had known for quite some time. Cat Little, Cabinet Office Permanent Secretary, even had a copy of the UK Sec Vet January 2025 document concluding Mandelson was unfit to be US ambassador. She informed the new cabinet secretary Antonia Romeo. Soon there were about a dozen lawyers and officials crawling all over it. Such matters don’t stay secret for long in the upper echelons of Whitehall. But it seems the PM was still in the dark … until last Tuesday. Mmmmmm
I thought this was supposed to be so top top top top secret, that literally nobody had access to it outside Robbins, and even then the way it has been reported they made it sound like you had to go into a deep air gapped bunker in order to read it.
This draws it closer to Starmer because, if dozens of lawyers are involved, then it is inconceivable the Attorney General was not involved
One Richard Hermer, Starmer's close ally
I think the line is now, yes they had it, it was super sensitive, they then had to keep it secret until the lawyers said it was ok otherwise something something something...that's today's line anyway.
They had to make sure that the Prime Minister had sufficient security clearance to be told that he’d appointed someone he knew to be a dodgy git?
I think as others have said, he was in lawyer don't ask, don't tell, I can't be held responsible if it never crossed my desk.
The claim that nobody at the heart of government — ie close to Starmer — knew Mandelson had flunked his security vetting is unravelling at a rate of knots. Starmer’s head of comms was alerted by the media last September. Sources tell me multiple folks in the Cabinet Office (where the UK Security Vetting unit is based) had known for quite some time. Cat Little, Cabinet Office Permanent Secretary, even had a copy of the UK Sec Vet January 2025 document concluding Mandelson was unfit to be US ambassador. She informed the new cabinet secretary Antonia Romeo. Soon there were about a dozen lawyers and officials crawling all over it. Such matters don’t stay secret for long in the upper echelons of Whitehall. But it seems the PM was still in the dark … until last Tuesday. Mmmmmm
I thought this was supposed to be so top top top top secret, that literally nobody had access to it outside Robbins, and even then the way it has been reported they made it sound like you had to go into a deep air gapped bunker in order to read it.
This draws it closer to Starmer because, if dozens of lawyers are involved, then it is inconceivable the Attorney General was not involved
One Richard Hermer, Starmer's close ally
Get some fresh air. Take a walk on the pier. I can hardly face your disappointment when this whole edifice collapses. Listen to Any Questions and add a little of your own common sense and you'll find yourself much further on than AF Neil and his turgid tittle tattle
I know these are difficuit days for you but that is politics.
We are witnessing a Johnson style fall from grace for Starmer
I would just add sadly I cannot walk the length of Llandudno pier anymore
nside the Mandelson vetting fiasco - our deep dive this weekend
* Cat Little, the permanent secretary at the cabinet office, spent weeks attempting to extract Mandelson's vetting report from the foreign office but to no avail
* Olly Robbins, who has now been sacked as perm sec of the foreign office, has been accused of obstructing the release of the document
* Little eventually obtained the document from UK Security Vetting on March 25. It was explosive. The Times has been told it was not a borderline case but an explicit recommendation that Mandelson should not be cleared
* The summary Little obtained is said to have drawn on Mandelson's interviews with vetting officers - which were deeply personal, interviews with his friends, details of his business interests and even information from his bank accounts. The recommendation was not caveated
* At this point Little informed Antonia Romeo, the Cabinet Secretary. They did two things. First, they attempted to get more clarity from Robbins as to why he had given Mandelson clearance. It was not forthcoming
All these people acting independently off their own bat with no mention to their boss.....Sounds like a sacking offence.
None of this would explain how Starmer knew this on 4th Feb:
Badenoch: ‘Did the official security vetting that he received mention Mandelson’s ongoing relationship with the paedophile Jeffrey Epstein?’ Starmer: ‘Yes, it did’
SFAICS he has lied since if he knew then, and was lying then (in the sense that he could not know this without being briefed on the vetting) if he didn't know then.
Starmer doesn't lie he simply omits crucial information and cavaets statements in such a way that you hear one thing and he is actually saying something slightly different e.g. "formally informed".....people take that as I was told, no that is I was sat down in a formal meeting in which we went through the documentation.
His upgraded football tickets were a classic where every statement on them a lawyer down to a tee, but there the common man you what....what the f##k is he on about, is he in the private box or not....so in the end his comms team had to dig him out of it.
Yes. Look at his polling
74% disapproval. It’s extraordinarily bad
The entire country has concluded he’s a lying and hypocritical c*** and there’s no coming back from that verdict. Especially as he really is a lying etc etc and keeps proving it time and again
There is no way Labour can go into an election led by this verminous man. It would be suicidal. So then the question is: when and how does he go?
The problem Starmer has compared to a Blair or Boris, they managed to defy gravity for a lot longer despite having their own issues with the truth because they had some charisma (and in Blair's case a decent economy and general belief at the time times ran ok).
Also, they had basic political sense. They didn’t make endless unforced errors like Starmer does. He is utterly inept at politics. He doesn’t understand human nature because he’s so weird
And then, the voice
Oh dear. It feels almost cruel constantly attacking him but the fact is he shouldn’t be prime minister. He’s not up to the job. And that is really bad for everyone in the UK
I said all this six years ago, bet that he wouldn't be PM at the next GE on the back of it... and lost.
He is a complete shyster, speaks fluent legalese, but that impresses fellow legal types; lying but being able to logically talk your way out of it is seen as an attribute today, unfortunately
He's far more capable of the job than than the last 4 incumbent and not as capable as Cameron or Blair
Thats the problem
Name better credible options?
Streeting, Rayner, Cooper, Farage, Badenoch, Hunt, Stride, Rupert Lowe, Emily Thornberry, Robert Jenrick, Jeremy Corbyn
No need to take the Michael. Honestly, someone asks a serious question and all they get is parody...
The war with Iran is far from over. I don’t understand why the market is pretending it is.
I think they are applying the same TACO factor to the IRGC and Netanyahu as they are to Trump.
One other factor is that - with US government bonds not seeming like so much of a safe haven with Trump as President - there's a shortage of places to put money if you decide to panic and sell equities.
This would encourage a person to leave their money in equities, because at least there's more of an upside potential as well as a downside risk.
The claim that nobody at the heart of government — ie close to Starmer — knew Mandelson had flunked his security vetting is unravelling at a rate of knots. Starmer’s head of comms was alerted by the media last September. Sources tell me multiple folks in the Cabinet Office (where the UK Security Vetting unit is based) had known for quite some time. Cat Little, Cabinet Office Permanent Secretary, even had a copy of the UK Sec Vet January 2025 document concluding Mandelson was unfit to be US ambassador. She informed the new cabinet secretary Antonia Romeo. Soon there were about a dozen lawyers and officials crawling all over it. Such matters don’t stay secret for long in the upper echelons of Whitehall. But it seems the PM was still in the dark … until last Tuesday. Mmmmmm
I thought this was supposed to be so top top top top secret, that literally nobody had access to it outside Robbins, and even then the way it has been reported they made it sound like you had to go into a deep air gapped bunker in order to read it.
This draws it closer to Starmer because, if dozens of lawyers are involved, then it is inconceivable the Attorney General was not involved
One Richard Hermer, Starmer's close ally
Get some fresh air. Take a walk on the pier. I can hardly face your disappointment when this whole edifice collapses. Listen to Any Questions and add a little of your own common sense and you'll find yourself much further on than AF Neil and his turgid tittle tattle
I know these are difficuit days for you but that is politics.
We are witnessing a Johnson style fall from grace for Starmer
Starmer is inept and rubbish ( except the international stuff) and Starmer has **** the bed over Mandelson but despite what you and the Tory media tell us Starmer has as far as I am aware:
a) Not lied to the Queen b) Not prorogued Parliament c) Not attended drinks and sh*gging parties whilst COVID lockdown was in full swing, including allowing civil service people to bring alcohol onto the premises by suitcase. d) Not put the son of a KGB agent into the HoL e) Or as Foreign Secretary not thrown off his minders to attend a weekend party with alcohol and alleged call girls hosted by the aforementioned KGB agent.
I could go on...
Putting a Chinese adjacent political appointee and friend of Epstein, with a track record of Johnsonian dodginess, on the other hand, into the post of US Ambassador deserves a resignation for being so crassly stupid.
The claim that nobody at the heart of government — ie close to Starmer — knew Mandelson had flunked his security vetting is unravelling at a rate of knots. Starmer’s head of comms was alerted by the media last September. Sources tell me multiple folks in the Cabinet Office (where the UK Security Vetting unit is based) had known for quite some time. Cat Little, Cabinet Office Permanent Secretary, even had a copy of the UK Sec Vet January 2025 document concluding Mandelson was unfit to be US ambassador. She informed the new cabinet secretary Antonia Romeo. Soon there were about a dozen lawyers and officials crawling all over it. Such matters don’t stay secret for long in the upper echelons of Whitehall. But it seems the PM was still in the dark … until last Tuesday. Mmmmmm
I thought this was supposed to be so top top top top secret, that literally nobody had access to it outside Robbins, and even then the way it has been reported they made it sound like you had to go into a deep air gapped bunker in order to read it.
This draws it closer to Starmer because, if dozens of lawyers are involved, then it is inconceivable the Attorney General was not involved
One Richard Hermer, Starmer's close ally
Get some fresh air. Take a walk on the pier. I can hardly face your disappointment when this whole edifice collapses. Listen to Any Questions and add a little of your own common sense and you'll find yourself much further on than AF Neil and his turgid tittle tattle
I know these are difficuit days for you but that is politics.
We are witnessing a Johnson style fall from grace for Starmer
Starmer is inept and rubbish ( except the international stuff) and Starmer has **** the bed over Mandelson but despite what you and the Tory media tell us Starmer has as far as I am aware:
a) Not lied to the Queen b) Not prorogued Parliament c) Not attended drinks and sh*gging parties whilst COVID lockdown was in full swing, including allowing civil service people to bring alcohol onto the premises by suitcase. d) Not put the son of a KGB agent into the HoL e) Or as Foreign Secretary not thrown off his minders to attend a weekend party with alcohol and alleged call girls hosted by the aforementioned KGB agent.
I could go on...
Putting a Chinese adjacent political appointee and friend of Epstein, with a track record of Johnsonian dodginess, on the other hand, into the post of US Ambassador deserves a resignation for being so crassly stupid.
One of your best whataboutery but it is irrelevant to the peril Starmer is in
The BBC quietly posts a correction of a Farage lie.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/helpandfeedback/corrections_clarifications In an episode with Reform UK leader Nigel Farage, he briefly referred to “net migration numbers” coming down because of an “exodus” of people leaving the UK (i.e. emigrating). To be clear, according to the Office for National Statistics (ONS), long-term international net migration was two thirds lower in the year up to June 2025. While the number of people leaving the UK did go up, 90 per cent of that overall fall was from a decrease in long term immigration (401,000).
The claim that nobody at the heart of government — ie close to Starmer — knew Mandelson had flunked his security vetting is unravelling at a rate of knots. Starmer’s head of comms was alerted by the media last September. Sources tell me multiple folks in the Cabinet Office (where the UK Security Vetting unit is based) had known for quite some time. Cat Little, Cabinet Office Permanent Secretary, even had a copy of the UK Sec Vet January 2025 document concluding Mandelson was unfit to be US ambassador. She informed the new cabinet secretary Antonia Romeo. Soon there were about a dozen lawyers and officials crawling all over it. Such matters don’t stay secret for long in the upper echelons of Whitehall. But it seems the PM was still in the dark … until last Tuesday. Mmmmmm
I thought this was supposed to be so top top top top secret, that literally nobody had access to it outside Robbins, and even then the way it has been reported they made it sound like you had to go into a deep air gapped bunker in order to read it.
This draws it closer to Starmer because, if dozens of lawyers are involved, then it is inconceivable the Attorney General was not involved
One Richard Hermer, Starmer's close ally
Get some fresh air. Take a walk on the pier. I can hardly face your disappointment when this whole edifice collapses. Listen to Any Questions and add a little of your own common sense and you'll find yourself much further on than AF Neil and his turgid tittle tattle
I know these are difficuit days for you but that is politics.
We are witnessing a Johnson style fall from grace for Starmer
Starmer is inept and rubbish ( except the international stuff) and Starmer has **** the bed over Mandelson but despite what you and the Tory media tell us Starmer has as far as I am aware:
a) Not lied to the Queen b) Not prorogued Parliament c) Not attended drinks and sh*gging parties whilst COVID lockdown was in full swing, including allowing civil service people to bring alcohol onto the premises by suitcase. d) Not put the son of a KGB agent into the HoL e) Or as Foreign Secretary not thrown off his minders to attend a weekend party with alcohol and alleged call girls hosted by the aforementioned KGB agent.
I could go on...
Putting a Chinese adjacent political appointee and friend of Epstein, with a track record of Johnsonian dodginess, on the other hand, into the post of US Ambassador deserves a resignation for being so crassly stupid.
One of your best whataboutery but it is irrelevant to the peril Starmer is in
Johnson paid the price as has his party
How is my post "whataboutery" when I have directly addressed your point that "we are witnessing a Johnson type fall from grace from Starmer". Whatever the fall it is not Johnsonian in its style or egregious nature.
The claim that nobody at the heart of government — ie close to Starmer — knew Mandelson had flunked his security vetting is unravelling at a rate of knots. Starmer’s head of comms was alerted by the media last September. Sources tell me multiple folks in the Cabinet Office (where the UK Security Vetting unit is based) had known for quite some time. Cat Little, Cabinet Office Permanent Secretary, even had a copy of the UK Sec Vet January 2025 document concluding Mandelson was unfit to be US ambassador. She informed the new cabinet secretary Antonia Romeo. Soon there were about a dozen lawyers and officials crawling all over it. Such matters don’t stay secret for long in the upper echelons of Whitehall. But it seems the PM was still in the dark … until last Tuesday. Mmmmmm
I thought this was supposed to be so top top top top secret, that literally nobody had access to it outside Robbins, and even then the way it has been reported they made it sound like you had to go into a deep air gapped bunker in order to read it.
This draws it closer to Starmer because, if dozens of lawyers are involved, then it is inconceivable the Attorney General was not involved
One Richard Hermer, Starmer's close ally
Get some fresh air. Take a walk on the pier. I can hardly face your disappointment when this whole edifice collapses. Listen to Any Questions and add a little of your own common sense and you'll find yourself much further on than AF Neil and his turgid tittle tattle
I know these are difficuit days for you but that is politics.
We are witnessing a Johnson style fall from grace for Starmer
Starmer is inept and rubbish ( except the international stuff) and Starmer has **** the bed over Mandelson but despite what you and the Tory media tell us Starmer has as far as I am aware:
a) Not lied to the Queen b) Not prorogued Parliament c) Not attended drinks and sh*gging parties whilst COVID lockdown was in full swing, including allowing civil service people to bring alcohol onto the premises by suitcase. d) Not put the son of a KGB agent into the HoL e) Or as Foreign Secretary not thrown off his minders to attend a weekend party with alcohol and alleged call girls hosted by the aforementioned KGB agent.
I could go on...
Putting a Chinese adjacent political appointee and friend of Epstein, with a track record of Johnsonian dodginess, on the other hand, into the post of US Ambassador deserves a resignation for being so crassly stupid.
One of your best whataboutery but it is irrelevant to the peril Starmer is in
Johnson paid the price as has his party
How is my post "whataboutery" when I have directly addressed your point that "we are witnessing a Johnson type fall from grace from Starmer".
You did invent a shagging party that Boris attended during Covid, and point out that Starmer hasn’t lied to a dead Queen
Plenty of people told Starmer not to appoint Mandelson, but he did. Now he has sacked Olly Robbins for not telling him (even though Robbins was not allowed to)
...The debate over Elagabalus's gender identity is long-standing and often splits academics. Dr Shushma Malik, a Cambridge university classics professor, told the BBC: "The historians we use to try and understand the life of Elagabalus are extremely hostile towards him, and therefore cannot be taken at face value. We don't have any direct evidence from Elagabalus himself of his own words...
Whether or not the emperor was transgender is a bit beside the point, which is surely that something akin to the condition has been around and acknowledged (positively or negatively) throughout history ?
Visiting the graves of Saints or even parts of Saints were tourist destinations of a sort in the Middle Ages. They were called pilgrimages but often were used to get bad 'uns out of the town before even more disruption ensued.
...The debate over Elagabalus's gender identity is long-standing and often splits academics. Dr Shushma Malik, a Cambridge university classics professor, told the BBC: "The historians we use to try and understand the life of Elagabalus are extremely hostile towards him, and therefore cannot be taken at face value. We don't have any direct evidence from Elagabalus himself of his own words...
Whether or not the emperor was transgender is a bit beside the point, which is surely that something akin to the condition has been around and acknowledged (positively or negatively) throughout history ?
Who cares ?
I said initially some see him/her as a transgender pioneer. They do.
I'm reading things elsewhere and someone has just referenced Gibbon's Decline and Fall (of the Roman Empire).
I'm now trying to work out which featured Roman Emperor is Trump closest to?
Elagabalus
Interesting background. Didn't realise the Roman Empire was pro-DEI.
Indeed. Elagabalus is now seen as an LGBTQI++ pioneer.
I would strongly recommend the book 'The Mad Emperor: Heliogabalus and the Decadence of Rome' by my good friend Harry Sidebottom. A cracking read.
I’ve always wondered about the effects of growing up with a funny surname like Sidebottom, Pratt, Lillicrap etc. clearly there will be teasing and I wonder if everyone just gets so used to it they don’t care or if it’s a burden for life.
...The debate over Elagabalus's gender identity is long-standing and often splits academics. Dr Shushma Malik, a Cambridge university classics professor, told the BBC: "The historians we use to try and understand the life of Elagabalus are extremely hostile towards him, and therefore cannot be taken at face value. We don't have any direct evidence from Elagabalus himself of his own words...
Whether or not the emperor was transgender is a bit beside the point, which is surely that something akin to the condition has been around and acknowledged (positively or negatively) throughout history ?
Who cares ?
I said initially some see him/her as a transgender pioneer. They do.
Sure, which is fine. It's just not particularly good history.
"David Lammy, the deputy prime minister, was on a military flight back from the Middle East when he was summoned to the cockpit by the captain who told him that No 10 needed to speak to him urgently over the radio."
Our piece on how the Mandelson vetting row unfolded this week
...The debate over Elagabalus's gender identity is long-standing and often splits academics. Dr Shushma Malik, a Cambridge university classics professor, told the BBC: "The historians we use to try and understand the life of Elagabalus are extremely hostile towards him, and therefore cannot be taken at face value. We don't have any direct evidence from Elagabalus himself of his own words...
Whether or not the emperor was transgender is a bit beside the point, which is surely that something akin to the condition has been around and acknowledged (positively or negatively) throughout history ?
That doesn't necessarily follow.
If someone uses as an insult the idea that someone wants to marry their horse, the absurdity is clearly part of the insult. It doesn't then prove to people centuries later that a condition of wanting to have a romantic relationship with an animal has existed throughout history.
So it makes a really big difference the context in which it is raised.
NEW: * Vetting led to Mandelson agreeing ‘mitigations’ to deal with security concerns * He was not allowed unsupervised access to former clients * All this was agreed and known about by Downing Street = no need for Robbins to block security clearance
...The debate over Elagabalus's gender identity is long-standing and often splits academics. Dr Shushma Malik, a Cambridge university classics professor, told the BBC: "The historians we use to try and understand the life of Elagabalus are extremely hostile towards him, and therefore cannot be taken at face value. We don't have any direct evidence from Elagabalus himself of his own words...
Whether or not the emperor was transgender is a bit beside the point, which is surely that something akin to the condition has been around and acknowledged (positively or negatively) throughout history ?
Who cares ?
I said initially some see him/her as a transgender pioneer. They do.
Sure, which is fine. It's just not particularly good history.
I’ll bear that in mind next time I see people making that point and refer them back to here 🙄
Farage repeats inexplicably that we should have got involved with the war and Trump is still his friend.
Perhaps he believes it, rather than just taking the position that he feels is electorally advantageous? I know that's hard to imagine.
His position though is literally insane.
Questionable perhaps. Richard Tice has gone further (apparently - I haven't seen it) and said we should basically do whatever the US and Israel want. No Richard - fuck off. If Reform is for anything, it is for standing up for British interests first.
Everyone thinks their party is standing up for British interests (except maybe PC and SNP). Given the rise of pro-EU sentiment and the damage Brexit caused, it could be argued that Reform are profoundly anti-British.
Abolishing the minimum wage should tell people all they need to know about Reform. Capitalism on steroids and more money for their rich mates .
The minimum wage being abolished would be a massive step forward for people actually being employed in the UK. I think it's inexpedient politically to abolish it, but I would make so many exemptions as to reduce the damage it causes.
The claim that nobody at the heart of government — ie close to Starmer — knew Mandelson had flunked his security vetting is unravelling at a rate of knots. Starmer’s head of comms was alerted by the media last September. Sources tell me multiple folks in the Cabinet Office (where the UK Security Vetting unit is based) had known for quite some time. Cat Little, Cabinet Office Permanent Secretary, even had a copy of the UK Sec Vet January 2025 document concluding Mandelson was unfit to be US ambassador. She informed the new cabinet secretary Antonia Romeo. Soon there were about a dozen lawyers and officials crawling all over it. Such matters don’t stay secret for long in the upper echelons of Whitehall. But it seems the PM was still in the dark … until last Tuesday. Mmmmmm
I thought this was supposed to be so top top top top secret, that literally nobody had access to it outside Robbins, and even then the way it has been reported they made it sound like you had to go into a deep air gapped bunker in order to read it.
This draws it closer to Starmer because, if dozens of lawyers are involved, then it is inconceivable the Attorney General was not involved
One Richard Hermer, Starmer's close ally
Get some fresh air. Take a walk on the pier. I can hardly face your disappointment when this whole edifice collapses. Listen to Any Questions and add a little of your own common sense and you'll find yourself much further on than AF Neil and his turgid tittle tattle
I know these are difficuit days for you but that is politics.
We are witnessing a Johnson style fall from grace for Starmer
Starmer is inept and rubbish ( except the international stuff) and Starmer has **** the bed over Mandelson but despite what you and the Tory media tell us Starmer has as far as I am aware:
a) Not lied to the Queen b) Not prorogued Parliament c) Not attended drinks and sh*gging parties whilst COVID lockdown was in full swing, including allowing civil service people to bring alcohol onto the premises by suitcase. d) Not put the son of a KGB agent into the HoL e) Or as Foreign Secretary not thrown off his minders to attend a weekend party with alcohol and alleged call girls hosted by the aforementioned KGB agent.
I could go on...
Putting a Chinese adjacent political appointee and friend of Epstein, with a track record of Johnsonian dodginess, on the other hand, into the post of US Ambassador deserves a resignation for being so crassly stupid.
One of your best whataboutery but it is irrelevant to the peril Starmer is in
Johnson paid the price as has his party
How is my post "whataboutery" when I have directly addressed your point that "we are witnessing a Johnson type fall from grace from Starmer".
You did invent a shagging party that Boris attended during Covid, and point out that Starmer hasn’t lied to a dead Queen
The sh*gging parties were well documented. Little Wilf's garden swing being a casualty as I recall. I am not for one moment suggesting Johnson was directly involved with the sh*gging element. I believe he had already left when such high jinks took place.
I'm reading things elsewhere and someone has just referenced Gibbon's Decline and Fall (of the Roman Empire).
I'm now trying to work out which featured Roman Emperor is Trump closest to?
Elagabalus?
Just kidding, Trump is far too old and his degenerate tastes may be in other directions.
Valerian?
Shapur, the Persian king, was said to have forced the emperor Valerian (199-c260), after being captured at the battle of Edessa, to swallow molten gold and then had Valerian skinned and his skin stuffed with straw and preserved as a trophy in the main Persian temple.
Ollie Robbins did not tell the PM anything about the vetting because this was in accordance with the rules.
He was then sacked by the PM because of this.
I know we have a problem with people being held accountable for misbehaviour but we now seem to have jumped that issue entirely by sacking people who do follow the rules. Why? Isn't that the question for the PM?
Ollie Robbins did not tell the PM anything about the vetting because this was in accordance with the rules.
He was then sacked by the PM because of this.
I know we have a problem with people being held accountable for misbehaviour but we now seem to have jumped that issue entirely by sacking people who do follow the rules. Why? Isn't that the question for the PM?
Or have I missed something?
About right but there are options, to repeat a bit from earlier:
Did Starmer:
Know something he should not have known and lied about it Not know something he should have known and lied about it Not know something he should not have known and lied about it and sacked the man who didn't and shouldn't have told him Know something he should have known and lied about it and sacked the man who did and should tell him.
I am sure other option are available, but the path by which Starmer has at no point done anything at all wrong is a so narrow that I can't see it without assistance.
I'm reading things elsewhere and someone has just referenced Gibbon's Decline and Fall (of the Roman Empire).
I'm now trying to work out which featured Roman Emperor is Trump closest to?
Elagabalus?
Just kidding, Trump is far too old and his degenerate tastes may be in other directions.
Valerian?
Shapur, the Persian king, was said to have forced the emperor Valerian (199-c260), after being captured at the battle of Edessa, to swallow molten gold and then had Valerian skinned and his skin stuffed with straw and preserved as a trophy in the main Persian temple.
Are we sure this hasn't already happened to Trump?
The debate over Elagabalus's gender identity is long-standing and often splits academics
He/She is one of the more interesting ones, but how long standing on that specific aspect I would wonder.
I'm just thinking about the "split academics". Vertically or horizontally? Cheesewire or chainsaw or laser beam? And what do you do with the bits? Bucket?
Ollie Robbins did not tell the PM anything about the vetting because this was in accordance with the rules.
He was then sacked by the PM because of this.
I know we have a problem with people being held accountable for misbehaviour but we now seem to have jumped that issue entirely by sacking people who do follow the rules. Why? Isn't that the question for the PM?
Or have I missed something?
Arguing with Starmer is like arguing with that Warlock or whatever it was that asks questions before either letting you cross the bridge in "Monty Python and the Holy Grail" or casting you into oblivion.
The winner will presumably be the one who knows the air speed velocity of swallows, european and asiatic, laden and unladen.
I have had a similar experience just now dealing with Norton taking money out of my bank account for no reason for the last twenty years. The key words are "small claims court summons", then you do get to speak to a human. It turns out the charge was set up fraudulently over 20 years ago and they have been sending the statutory email with offer to cancel to some email address which I have never had !
Comments
https://www.reuters.com/world/trump-announces-reforms-accelerate-access-psychedelic-drug-treatments-2026-04-18
Insert own gag here.....
We are witnessing a Johnson style fall from grace for Starmer
I would just add sadly I cannot walk the length of Llandudno pier anymore
Australia has the same problem post Howard, but Albanese should be the first to breach 4 years soon.
That’s the only way I can make the pieces in this jigsaw fit together, if Starmer genuinely didn’t know
For the Prime Minister to exonerate himself, he has to admit that he was gulled by them all, and that he effectively has zero authority
This would encourage a person to leave their money in equities, because at least there's more of an upside potential as well as a downside risk.
a) Not lied to the Queen
b) Not prorogued Parliament
c) Not attended drinks and sh*gging parties whilst COVID lockdown was in full swing, including allowing civil service people to bring alcohol onto the premises by suitcase.
d) Not put the son of a KGB agent into the HoL
e) Or as Foreign Secretary not thrown off his minders to attend a weekend party with alcohol and alleged call girls hosted by the aforementioned KGB agent.
I could go on...
Putting a Chinese adjacent political appointee and friend of Epstein, with a track record of Johnsonian dodginess, on the other hand, into the post of US Ambassador deserves a resignation for being so crassly stupid.
The older, senile Tiberius is a better fit, as is the delusional showman Nero.
Johnson paid the price as has his party
https://www.bbc.co.uk/helpandfeedback/corrections_clarifications
In an episode with Reform UK leader Nigel Farage, he briefly referred to “net migration numbers” coming down because of an “exodus” of people leaving the UK (i.e. emigrating). To be clear, according to the Office for National Statistics (ONS), long-term international net migration was two thirds lower in the year up to June 2025. While the number of people leaving the UK did go up, 90 per cent of that overall fall was from a decrease in long term immigration (401,000).
17/04/2026
I believe my argument is meticulously balanced.
"You know who else built a bunker under his ballroom, and planned a massive triumphal arch commemorating himself ?"
Judging by this poll, Tory voters are the least stupid - but are still mostly stupid - while Green voters are nearly all stupid.
https://nitter.poast.org/cjsnowdon/status/2045179474291925228#m
He/She is one of the more interesting ones, but how long standing on that specific aspect I would wonder.
Dr Shushma Malik, a Cambridge university classics professor, told the BBC: "The historians we use to try and understand the life of Elagabalus are extremely hostile towards him, and therefore cannot be taken at face value. We don't have any direct evidence from Elagabalus himself of his own words...
Whether or not the emperor was transgender is a bit beside the point, which is surely that something akin to the condition has been around and acknowledged (positively or negatively) throughout history ?
I said initially some see him/her as a transgender pioneer. They do.
It's just not particularly good history.
"David Lammy, the deputy prime minister, was on a military flight back from the Middle East when he was summoned to the cockpit by the captain who told him that No 10 needed to speak to him urgently over the radio."
Our piece on how the Mandelson vetting row unfolded this week
If someone uses as an insult the idea that someone wants to marry their horse, the absurdity is clearly part of the insult. It doesn't then prove to people centuries later that a condition of wanting to have a romantic relationship with an animal has existed throughout history.
So it makes a really big difference the context in which it is raised.
https://x.com/ShippersUnbound/status/2045504210049896559
NEW:
* Vetting led to Mandelson agreeing ‘mitigations’ to deal with security concerns
* He was not allowed unsupervised access to former clients
* All this was agreed and known about by Downing Street = no need for Robbins to block security clearance
NEW THREAD
Shapur, the Persian king, was said to have forced the emperor Valerian (199-c260), after being captured at the battle of Edessa, to swallow molten gold and then had Valerian skinned and his skin stuffed with straw and preserved as a trophy in the main Persian temple.
Ollie Robbins did not tell the PM anything about the vetting because this was in accordance with the rules.
He was then sacked by the PM because of this.
I know we have a problem with people being held accountable for misbehaviour but we now seem to have jumped that issue entirely by sacking people who do follow the rules. Why? Isn't that the question for the PM?
Or have I missed something?
Did Starmer:
Know something he should not have known and lied about it
Not know something he should have known and lied about it
Not know something he should not have known and lied about it and sacked the man who didn't and shouldn't have told him
Know something he should have known and lied about it and sacked the man who did and should tell him.
I am sure other option are available, but the path by which Starmer has at no point done anything at all wrong is a so narrow that I can't see it without assistance.
The winner will presumably be the one who knows the air speed velocity of swallows, european and asiatic, laden and unladen.
I have had a similar experience just now dealing with Norton taking money out of my bank account for no reason for the last twenty years. The key words are "small claims court summons", then you do get to speak to a human. It turns out the charge was set up fraudulently over 20 years ago and they have been sending the statutory email with offer to cancel to some email address which I have never had !