Prime Minister Keir Starmer personally conducted explicit questioning regarding Jeffrey Epstein.This happened before appointing Peter Mandelson as US ambassador. Consequently, this revelation intensifies scrutiny on the prime minister’s judgement.
Specifically, Sir Keir asked three questions via his chief of staff. They focused on Lord Mandelson’s friendship with the disgraced financier. Firstly, he asked why contact continued after Epstein’s conviction. Secondly, he inquired about reports Mandelson stayed at Epstein’s home. Thirdly, he questioned any association with a Ghislaine Maxwell charity.
Initially, the Cabinet Office’s ethics team flagged the relationship. They prepared a file for the Prime Minister. After reviewing it, Sir Keir demanded further clarity. Therefore, this explicit questioning was a direct result of initial vetting concerns.
However, Mandelson’s answers seemingly satisfied No. 10 at the time. He denied staying at the Manhattan apartment. He also addressed the other points. Accordingly, officials proceeded with a second vetting process. This deeper “developed vetting” did not uncover the supportive emails.
Unfortunately, those emails later became public. They contained messages of support for Epstein. Mandelson urged him to “fight for early release.” These emails were unavailable during vetting. They were linked to a defunct email address.
Now, Downing Street sources suggest frustration. They believe Mandelson was “economical with the truth.” This contrasts with his earlier assurances. The emails emerged from Bloomberg’s reporting on Wednesday. Sir Keir read them that night and was reportedly “furious.”
Subsequently, Mandelson was asked to resign. He refused. Therefore, officials sacked him on Thursday morning. This entire episode creates significant political pressure. Some Labour MPs are questioning the Prime Minister’s judgement. They are also blaming senior aides for the failure.
Ultimately, the Prime Minister’s explicit questioning proved insufficient. The undisclosed emails changed everything. This situation highlights a critical vetting failure. The government’s handling of the appointment is now under a microscope. The explicit questioning did not prevent a major political crisis and a diplomatic embarrassment.
For more political updates, visit London Pulse News.
