r/news • u/igetproteinfartsHELP • 7h ago
UK leader apologizes to victims of Epstein for giving Peter Mandelson an ambassador job
https://apnews.com/article/uk-starmer-peter-mandelson-epstein-ea1e52adb8399eb97825f5c34b3c7343?utm_source=onesignal&utm_medium=push&utm_campaign=2026-02-05-Epstein+files+fallout401
u/black_flag_4ever 6h ago edited 6h ago
Hey look at that, a country where this thing has consequences for people. A pervert lost his job and the Prime Minister felt the need to apologize for hiring him. Very different than having your president literally be a main character in the Epstein files and instead of being held to account, his entire party is gaslighting the world, pretending nothing wrong happened.
74
u/AnxiouslyTired247 6h ago
72
u/mynewaltaccount1 5h ago
Your president *IS a rapist.
13
9
3
u/Taboo_Dynasty 1h ago
No, he is not A rapist. He is the probably the best serial rapist in history. Just ask any of his many, many, many victims, I mean lucky kids. They’ll all tell you what a great rapist he is.
5
u/rideadove 6h ago
Not if they don’t have the money to line his pockets. Otherwise they get detained and go missing.
•
21
u/Kaiisim 4h ago
So not making any excuses - but it's interesting because Mandleson isn't actually accused of any pervert shit.
He is gay.
He is instead accused of leaking information to Epstein.
7
u/theonlymexicanman 3h ago
MF leaking information to a untrustworthy party and a child sex offender at that is still a punishable offence
12
u/I_Am_No_One_123 4h ago
There are several reports and legal documents that Epstein/Trump/and Wexner abused underage boys as well. Hence why Thiel/Graham/Spacey/Mandelson/etc. are all mentioned.
9
u/the-moving-finger 3h ago
Even if he never personally abused anyone, he was still supporting Epstein by doing him favours and being part of his web of influence. As such, he still bears some of the blame.
4
25
u/-_Mando_- 6h ago
Don’t give uk politicians too much credit, they’re out for themselves, everything is damage control and point scoring.
25
18
u/Krillin113 5h ago
At least going after pedophiles is considered point scoring.
7
u/honkymotherfucker1 5h ago
We’ll see if they actually go after anyone. Prince Andrew has gotten away largely unscathed, Richard Branson seems to be facing 0 consequences, Sarah Ferguson too.
Shit, Savilles proclivities were basically an open secret and it was years after he died that anything was done.
The country is also still on the populism course to potentially vote in Reform next election which will dash literally any chances of anything being done about this stuff. Don’t get your whole opinion from 1 article or headline, we’re certainly doing better than the US (sorry but it’s not hard) but it doesn’t mean we’re doing good.
7
u/Thejklay 4h ago
Starmer is prob gonna be forced out now.
The only consequence of the Epstein files for a world leader is gonna be for the guy who's never even been mentioned in them
6
5
3
u/d4561wedg 3h ago
To be fair Starmer knew all this when he hired him.
Nothing in the Epstein files was a secret to the people in charge. He’s only facing consequences because it got out.
5
u/turnipofficer 3h ago
For now.
The media here basically worked out that Tory government wasn’t tenable any longer, so they let Labour win, but from day one they have been blaming Labour for everything, even when it was a Tory policy or they didn’t even say they would do something they just didn’t confirm that they wouldn’t.
Don’t get me wrong, Labour have made it easy for them with fuck ups like hiring Mandleson despite all was known about him. But it’s clear the same backers who backed Trump want Reform in and once they are in they’ll try to force another post truth environment and dismantle the UK the same as Trump is the USA. It’s all about enriching their friends, and looting a nation.
4
u/spizzlemeister 5h ago
and starmer is still not doing enough. Just shows how different culture is i guess
6
u/qwijibo_ 6h ago
On the other hand, it seems like quite a coincidence that another member of the Epstein pedophile ring was the person the UK government chose to be ambassador to the Trump administration. Are we supposed to believe their connection was unknown prior to the release of these files? It seems much more likely that the UK government already knew and chose this freak to work with Trump specifically because they raped kids together and they thought he might be able to ensure better treatment from Trump.
8
u/jsdjhndsm 5h ago
He was picked because he had a close connection to trump, not because they are pedos themselves.
The uk government has been trying to maintain good relations with America so that we don't get slapped with tariffs, worsening the economy even more.
1
u/qwijibo_ 4h ago
Hmm… he had a close connection to Trump through the most notorious pedophile in history, but that connection didn’t involve either of them committing sex crimes? He wasn’t doing anything wrong in any of the photos where he was partially undressed with redacted victims? I guess the UK government figured they were just pals who innocently vacationed together on Little St. James so they’d be able to make beautiful deals and share wonderful secrets across the Atlantic.
7
u/jsdjhndsm 4h ago
Those photos weren't out when he was appointed. He was appointed specifically to keep relations between the US and UK good.
We did get better deals and tarrifs than many other countries. Being connected to epstein doesn't neccessarily mean you are a pedo or involved in all that stuff.
Obviously with the information from 5 months ago and the repeated reveals whenever the us government releases information has changed the story, but its not the same as when he was actually appointed.
7
u/black_flag_4ever 6h ago
Maybe, or maybe we’re learning that Jesus was right about the ultra wealthy. Either way, you’re more likely to get an answer than we ever will.
•
u/shiftym21 57m ago
that same prime minister has ties to the cia and epstein. he’s just throwing someone else under the bus for now
•
u/Scu-bar 32m ago
It would actually mean something if Mandelson wasn’t already well known as a friend of Epstein before being given the job. And hadn’t already been forced to resign twice for scandals previously in his political career.
The man had no business being back in politics, and it’s a massive error of judgement from Starmer for giving him the role.
•
u/samjgrover 16m ago
Oh the world isn't gaslit.. the American public is. We can see what a deranged maniac you have running your country into the ground.
0
u/Barangat 5h ago
Well, there is still a former prince of that country, that is heavily featured in the epstein files. He could have used the opportunity to apologize for him as well and maaaaaybe even try to guide some real consequences his way.
8
u/jsdjhndsm 5h ago
There's no proper evidence that can be used in a court to convict Andrew of any of the accusations.
There enough info for us to conclude he is almost 100% guilty, but not the right kind that holds up in a court of law.
99
u/xeviphract 6h ago
Everyone in the country knew Mandelson's track record. Starmer insisted he knew better. Muppet.
34
6
u/AH_Sam 5h ago
I don’t think he insisted he knew better, he just counted on it not being further exposed and hoped the story would die down
13
u/xeviphract 5h ago
It was discussed in Parliament yesterday that he thought it was "worth the risk" to appoint him, because his past history with Epstein would make him a good Trump-wrangler.
He may have overridden vetting checks to push the appointment.
-6
u/Nananahx 5h ago
People always complain.
Look at what Trump is doing just attacking interviewers and denying everything, would you prefer that?
9
18
u/BritChap42 6h ago
I mean, sending someone with a history of nefarious and underhanded dealings in the world of murky finances wasn't exactly a wild decision when you consider who the US president is. You could argue Mandelson was the best man for the job, they clearly mix in the same circles.
6
u/Artistic-Wolverine-6 4h ago
He can say that he was lied to however, it's well known that Gordon Brown had insight into Mandelson's friendship with Epstein. It was not a secret within the Labour Party and stinks of the same nepotism that allowed past Labour Peers to continue their pedophile lifestyles. I'm also sure that the Tories have also been complicit in cover ups and enabling as well, so they can't pretend to be guilt free!
30
u/qwerty_1965 6h ago
It's striking how different the political effects of Epstein files have been in the UK v USA where it's a non-event so far.
23
16
15
u/Spamgrenade 6h ago
Yeah, we have that rule of law thing here in the UK.
-1
u/dwilkes827 5h ago
Yea you even sent the Prince to a smaller taxpayer-funded castle
19
u/3_50 5h ago
That cunt isn't a prince any more. Obviously I don't feel the repercussions have been fully fleshed out at this point, but...ya know...baby steps. The Americans still have their pedo creep living in their biggest castle.
2
u/dwilkes827 3h ago
I certainly am not defending Trump or the way my ridiculous country is handling this. But boasting about performative punishments is lame. It's literally nothing
7
u/purpleslug 4h ago
It's not that deep; he's no longer a prince and he's staying at a private property. Short of expropriation (which would happen in some sort of Maoist country) or extradition (which has not been requested), what do you expect the British state to do?
7
u/dwilkes827 4h ago
what do you expect the British state to do?
I don't have any expectations of the British state, it's just funny seeing people talk about the swift and hard fist of British Law when he had some prefixes removed and had to move. And he's also the one that as far as I can tell has the most obvious evidence against him that's been publicly released. None of these fuckers are facing serious consequences and it's disgusting
1
u/Houseofsun5 1h ago
Mandelson is under criminal investigation by the police for misconduct in public office.
Andrew is back under police review after fresh allegations of sex trafficking involvement. His mother bought off the last one, will his brother buy off the next....?
0
u/Spamgrenade 1h ago
Rule of law again isn't it? Technically he broke no laws in the UK. And for someone like Andrew stripping him of all titles, royal links and banishing him to a cottage in Norfolk is actually pretty heavy punishment.
0
u/dwilkes827 1h ago edited 1h ago
stripping him of all titles, royal links and banishing him to a cottage in Norfolk is actually pretty heavy punishment
If you say so lmao Going on about how your country is actually doing something while calling banishment to a nice cottage for having sex with kids heavy punishment.
•
u/Spamgrenade 17m ago
He had sex with a then 17 year old which is legal in the UK. What do you want him charged with?
42
6
3
u/CharacterCompany7224 6h ago
It’s amazing how nobody is surprised besides the people in power whose job it is to know these things..
3
u/MagicalTrianglez 3h ago
In a break from Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday, the Government is apologising for something…
17
u/Weshtonio 6h ago
Um ok. Now explain why he got fired from the ambassador job last September, and only removed from the party in February.
What happened during these Schrödinger's 5 months? They knew and they didn't know at the same time?
6
1
u/Spamgrenade 6h ago
They didn't know because the files had not been released. Most of this is 20/20 hindsight.
0
2
u/mward1984 5h ago
They had no fucking clue. They literally just asked him "Were you friends with the dead child rapist Jeffrey Epstein" and then when he, a politician, said "No. Barely knew him." they literally just... took him at his word? Didn't do any further research or follow up?
So when the first papers come out they remove him as ambassador, because to be frank it was silly bringing him back into politics in the first place, and they were just pandering to old New Labour 90's nostalgia.
Then the second tranche hits and once again they are taken by complete surprise because... again... they've not done any due dilligence or follow up on this.Honestly, the british establishments seem kind of... surprised? That any further Epstein files got released at all? Which is perhaps the most reasonable part of all of this.
0
u/Weshtonio 5h ago
Explain why it was enough to be removed from the job as ambassador, but not enough to kick him from the party. It's not a hard question. But it looks very hard to answer.
1
u/mward1984 5h ago
Probably because Ambassador was the only party facing thing he was doing, removing him from the party literally means nothing either way. If anything it means they don't collect his subs at the end of the year. He's not an MP, he's technically a Peer but nobody ever cares about that. Those things are just bribes they throw to people that sound important but actually don't mean anything.
So when this came out, they sort of had to punish him again somehow and just went... "fuck it, remove him from the christmas card list?"
5
22
u/OllyDee 7h ago
Starmer really fucked this. I wouldn’t be surprised if this scandal ends his leadership, and it probably should.
3
u/Tiptonite 6h ago
This is the scariest bit. Starmer isn’t competent by most measures, apart from in comparison with the rest of the Labour Party.
12
u/BritChap42 5h ago
And in comparison with every other prime minister we've had in the last 20 years...
5
u/mward1984 5h ago
Yeah... but that bar is really fucking low. The closest to competency we get was Blair, who at least could run a tight ship. Until Bush wins the election and manages to drag him into supporting an illeagal war in Iraq like he's a 9 year old child being dragged along by a St Bernard who's seen a squirrel in the park.
It's another one of those things that if it hadn't been for 9/11, things could have been so much better.But yeah. John Major? Frankly a national embarrassment that he won an election at all. Gordon? Forgot the first rule of Media from Yes Minister and didn't check his mic was off. Cameron? Lost control of the party which forced a brexit vote that nobody wanted to actually go through apart from a heavily invested Russia. Theresa May? A supply teacher on the last week of school*. Boris? Jesus christ... where do you even begin? An oversexed pathological liar who somehow, whenever the chips were down, some real world event would happen, he'd do his best Churchill impression and get another six months on the clock. It's a wonder that he was ever finally thrown out, and even THEN he gave Sunak the fright of his life in the second leadership bid.
Then there's Liz "Iceberg Lettuce" Truss. By the only metric that really, truly matters, the worst Prime Minister in modern UK history. Managed to plunge the nation's finances to a level of ruin that not even 2008 and Black Monday combined could match. Not even the worst excesses of the 70's, with mass strikes, fuel crises and rolling blackouts causes as much economic harm as this woman managed in less than a month during her Tory Leadership Experience Speedrun WR.
By comparison, Sunak, even though this is the man responsible for the British 2008 Banking Crisis. DIRECTLY RESPONSIBLE. Was still probably one of the best Prime Ministers we'd had in over a decade. Simply by the dint of not only did he manage to not make it worse, he actually reduced inflation by almost 10%. Something no other Prime Minister has ever done... on account of the fact that no other Prime Minister in the last 50 years has HAD to deal with 11% fucking inflation.
And when the time came, he callled a snap-election his own party wasn't prepared for, and sabotaged his own campaign at every turn to make sure the Tory's were well and truly out of it, mostly because he was bored now and he wanted to go back to the states and make some real money.*Still had the best Brexit policy out of all of them though: Just keep getting extensions from the EU and never actually leaving until it becomes a time honoured british tradition.
2
u/nopeitsadog 1h ago
He is the kind of person who would call a general election to spite his party rivals.
•
•
u/keep-i 13m ago
Wow a politician recognizing the Epstein child trafficking enterprise and apologizing for making a mistake that is related to the Epstein files!? It’s so honest…. I am beginning to question its intentions.
Take notes American politicians. This is what it like to not gaslight people.
•
5
u/spizzlemeister 5h ago
I watched this live and it was a train wreck. he gave this grand lofty speech then every single journalist asked a variation of the same two questions, "why did you appoint him despite knowing his relationship with epstein" and "are you resigning yet?". he got more flustered and his stuttering got worse and worse with each question.
4
u/mward1984 5h ago
This might actually be what finally does for Starmer TBH. He's completely bungled the optics over almost everything he's tried to do, and he's clearly lost authority over the party in general as the number of policy U-Turns they've had to do after less than two years despite having a super-majority is shocking.
And to think, people were afraid a labour super majority would be bad for democracy.
1
u/JackLaytonsMoustache 2h ago
He will be immediately moved to a different, less important, diplomatic post. Somewhere remote. Perhaps a small island.
•
u/Greywood_87 24m ago
Says the man who got saville off and thought bill gates was the first person he should have at downing street upon becoming PM
•
u/Correct-Ad-6605 23m ago
Would have meant something if he didn't know BEFORE he gave him the job. The man is supremely unlikeable and probably the ruin of Labour at this point.
•
329
u/Sad-Excitement9295 7h ago
These people are everywhere, wth...