Mandy

[CXRAndy]

Plausible denial


View: https://x.com/i/status/2045129388992131234

 

[CXRAndy]

Of course they knew.

It doesn't matter now. We all know and soon will make this known to starmer


View: https://x.com/i/status/2045115063502049574

 

[TailWindHome]

Err

Mandleson had already failed vetting in early Sept 2024- Maddox (independent) told Downing Street head of communications at that point- prior to news article published 11 September 2024

Starmer says in parliament due process was followed in September 10 2024

starmer failed to correct any miscommunication at the earliest opportunity in parliament, following week/s. Ministerial code fail

Starmer announces around the 19/20 December 2024 appointing mandleson US ambassador

February 2025 Starmer says mandleson passed vetting in news interview

Mandleson takes up position 10 February 2025

starmer now says he wasnt told, nor any of his ministers when his head of communications was informed back in Sept 2024

So ministers were aware. There is no way director of communication did not tell anyone of the WhatsApp messages with Maddox

The Maddox call to No10 was Sept 2025 not 2024

Let's stick to facts, shall we?

 

[briantrumpet]

The Maddox call to No10 was Sept 2025 not 2024

Let's stick to facts, shall we?

Facts are woke.

 

[CXRAndy]

The Maddox call to No10 was Sept 2025 not 2024

Let's stick to facts, shall we?


View attachment 14600

My error

Still doesn't negate the timelines and starmer not being informed of the failed vetting, his inaction on informing parliament of the error

 

[TailWindHome]

My error

Still doesn't negate the timelines

No. Using the wrong year does negate the timeline.

 

[CXRAndy]

Yeah it does. September 2025 onwards Starmer could have made an announcement to rescind mandleson appointment to the job. No10 knew. Their director of communications was told, it was in numerous newspaper online news

 

[TailWindHome]

Yeah it does. September 2025 onwards Starmer could have made an announcement to rescind mandleson appointment to the job. No10 knew. Their director of communications was told, it was in numerous newspaper online news

Ok. If this is your position now, that number were informed in Sept 25, two things flow from that

You now must accept that your previous claim, which you were 100% certain of, that Starmer 'knew he failed, but appointed him anyway' must is incorrect

And that Robbins version of events, that he approval the vetting despite the contents of the security report must also be true

 

[First Aspect]

That text is dated Sept 25,.discussing something earlier. But it isn't actual evidence of anything.

 

[Psamathe]

Timing next week can work badly against Starmer.

Robbins apparently rather angry at the way he has been treated.

1. Starmer gets his say on Monday.
2. Robbins gets his say on Tuesday, after Starmer and in a position to refute, question, etc. what Starmer has claimed.

Can you imagine the grief if the Civil Service had blocked a political appointment by the PM himself? Unacceptable, job of Civil Service is to do what the politicians want, ... ie Civil Service accommodates and facilitates the wishes of politicians.

 

[CXRAndy]

Robbins wasnt in charge at the point all the news was emerging on mandleson. He's the scapegoat. Will he spill the beans next week

 

[CXRAndy]

 

[TailWindHome]

Robbins wasnt in charge at the point all the news was emerging on mandleson. He's the scapegoat. Will he spill the beans next week

Just going to keep 'saying stuff', then?

 

[TailWindHome]

That text is dated Sept 25,.discussing something earlier. But it isn't actual evidence of anything.

The only thing that whatsapp really is evidence of is that piece of communication

 

[CXRAndy]

The only thing that whatsapp really is evidence of is that piece of communication

You really believe, that the messages just stopped at director of communications for No10?

The matter would have been discussed with multiple people within no10 in the following hours.