briantrumpet
Shaman
That'd be a win-win.
Starmer's vision quest
- Thread starter mjr
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
That'd be a win-win.
Psamathe
Guru
From Guardian House of Lords should strip Mandelson of peerage, says Starmer
Maybe he should also be launching an inquiry as to how he became Ambassador to the US despite his involvement with Epstein being common knowledge.
Maybe he should also be launching an inquiry as to how he became Ambassador to the US despite his involvement with Epstein being common knowledge.
PurplePenguin
Senior Member
I'd make them all reapply for their jobs, but that's another topic.
laurentian
Regular
The cynic in me thinks that the cynic in Starmer may have known about Mandleson and Epstein and also known that Trump and Epstein had history . . . this would perhaps give Mandleson some leverage over Trump . . .
secretsqirrel
Senior Member
It was undoubtedly a political appointment probably based on Mandelson knowing how to handle Trump with the Epstein connection a known. But the depth of the sleaze would not have been known at the time.
bobzmyunkle
Veteran
Is he trying to be Shakespearean? Needs a doth.
CXRAndy
Pharaoh
TailWindHome
Active Member
When you consider the McSweeney/Mandleson alliance and propensity for dirty tricks it may be worth reconsidering everything you read about Corbyn while the two plotted to excise him from the Labour Party
Psamathe
Guru
Maybe the first most urgent thing for a Mandleson inquiry to establish is to find the fool who appointed him to the US Ambassadorship. Clearly such an incompetent has no idea of the concept of "due diligence" even when it's common knowledge about alarm bells yet still he got the job. Maybe there are others appointed to senior positions trying to avoid scrutiny for "who knows what" (and the appointer almost certainly doesn't "know what")
icowden
Shaman
Why? It was an ideal appointment if you stop and think about it. You need an ambassador that has moved in the same circles, that can schmooze and stroke egos, that knows where the bodies are buried.
If Starmers had had any balls, he'd have ignored the naysayers and pointed out that Mandy was the perfect choice.
Ambassadors are not there to win purity prizes they are there to represent our interests and further our goals in whatever way that takes.
Psamathe
Guru
Because we clearly cannot trust him to act in tbe best interests of the UK. Whilst a in Government passing privileged information to 3rd parties whilst receiving money from those 3rd parties. That's acting for personal gain to the detriment of the UK.
