Table of Contents
The big challenge from the latest shimmy in the Dance of a Thousand Files that’s the new Epstein Files release is separating fact from fiction. And digging behind a wall of black bars. The new document dump throws in sworn statements with scurrilous rumours. Big names are redacted, while victims sue over invasion of privacy.
So far, the Epstein scandal has claimed only the lowest-hanging fruit. Prince Andrew, who’s been completely irrelevant for the last 43 years, was an easy scapegoat. Much like Operation Yewtree in the UK, which nabbed a few uncool has-beens, like Rolf Harris, while the big-name rockstars who openly banged (and in at least one infamous incident, brazenly abducated a 14-year-old) underaged groupies like there was no tomorrow, waltzed off scot-free.
But are the files about to claim their first really big scalp?
While not directly implicated in Epstein’s mind-bogglingly depraved network of elite predators, UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer may well be damned by proxy. At heart is his old, loyal sidekick and advisor, Peter Mandelson. Mandelson is directly, damningly, implicated in the files.
What may bring down Starmer, finally, is not the crime, but the cover-up. Starmer appointed Mandelson as UK ambassador to Washington in December 2024. When news of Mandelson’s ties to Epstein’s child-rape elite club, Starmer denied knowing anything about it. More and more evidence is showing that Starmer lied, and continues to lie, about what he knew, and when.
Starmer now admits that when he appointed Mandelson as ambassador to Washington, he was aware of Mandelson’s friendship with the late Epstein, including the fact that the peer stayed at the financier’s Manhattan apartment while he was in jail for child prostitution offences.
This contrasts with Starmer’s vague “I don’t know any more than you” response when he was asked about this same issue in January 2024.
But the Labour leader still insists that he had no idea of the extent of the relationship between the two, which has now been exposed in lurid detail including Mandelson sharing confidential government information with Epstein, numerous email exchanges between the two and pictures of Mandelson in his underwear with an unknown woman.
Starmer is insisting that Mandelson lied to his team about the extent of his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein. But, on his own admission, Starmer knew much more than he initially admitted. At best, Starmer and his team seem to have been singularly incurious about Mandelson’s past when he was given the plum diplomatic posting.
Wouldn’t they begin an in-depth investigation into the nature of that relationship before entrusting Britain’s highest diplomatic post to a man with such a high risk personal link to Epstein?
Apparently not. Instead it seems that Starmer’s chief of staff, Morgan McSweeney, a close backer of Mandelson for the job, only asked cursory questions of Mandelson about his friendship with Epstein, including why he had continued his friendship after Epstein was convicted and why he stayed in Epstein’s New York home while Epstein was in jail.
Mandelson is said to have lied in his responses, claiming that he did not stay in his apartment – a fact that was proven to be a lie by the recent release of emails between Mandelson and Epstein.
And that, it appears, was the extent of the vetting of Mandelson for the job. It is extraordinary that neither McSweeney nor Starmer saw the need to dig deeper into what was potentially a politically explosive relationship which – as the facts have since proven – had the potential to blow up in the government’s face.
No doubt McSweeney is frantically updating his LinkedIn profile and hunting around for a potential new job. Who wants to bet that Starmer’s next move will be to try and throw his chief of staff under the bus to save his own career?
Ultimately responsibility for this debacle rests with Starmer.
There is every chance that this scandal will get worse as the criminal investigation into Mandelson proceeds. Starmer’s promise to release all government correspondence in relation to Mandelson’s appointment may only serve to highlight the incompetence of the process.
It’s a long three years-plus until voters get to have a decisive say on Starmer’s prime ministership. But, with local government elections due in a few months, a terrified Labor party will likely want to do some under-the-bus throwing of their own.
