Lord Mandelson has been sacked as His Britannic Majesty’s Ambassador to the United States.
The sacking follows the emergence of details about his relationship with convicted paedophile and sex trafficker, Jeffrey Epstein.
On Tuesday we learned of a letter allegedly written to Epstein by Lord Mandelson, referring to him as his ‘best pal’ and describing him as an "intelligent, sharp-witted man" who "parachuted" into his life.
Lord Mandelson said he regretted ever meeting Epstein.
The Prime Minister is in a lose-lose situation, Jacob Rees-Mogg has said
|GB NEWS
But the next day it was revealed he told him his friends would stick by him, and advised him to fight for early release.
Despite these reports, the Reverend Starmer backed his Ambassador to the helm.
The questions now are, what did the Prime Minister know?
Was Lord Mandelson vetted?
Lord Mandelson expressed his regret over his association with Jeffrey Epstein | THE SUNAnd if so, were things swept under the rug?
This is a lose-lose situation for the Prime Minister.
One possibility is that Lord Mandelson was, as number 10 insists, vetted thoroughly and extensively. In which case, these problems would have been found - therefore indicating the Prime Minister was aware of them and either ignored them or thought they did not matter.
The other possibility is that Lord Mandelson was not vetted properly, in which case, the Prime Minister and his team are guilty of an egregious dereliction of duty.
When these associations were made public, the Prime Minister should have taken action and sacked Lord Mandelson immediately. That is what a leader should do.
But Keir Starmer did not do that - he kept Lord Mandelson in post for 48 hours after everyone else in the nation realised he could not continue as the Ambassador.
This not only weakens his authority as a leader, but it also makes Britain look weak. Former Home Secretary Suella Braverman told GB News this earlier today:
One week from President Trump’s State Visit, we are without an Ambassador to the United States, and in the aftermath of the previous incumbent’s scandal.
It’s been reported today, to appoint Mandelson, that Keir Starmer ignored two previous resignations by Lord Mandelson for financial impropriety, a well-publicised friendship with the world’s most notorious paedophile, and allegedly warnings from his own security services.
The Prime Minister is facing serious questions. What did he know? When did he know? And why, when the scandal was made public, did he hesitate to take action?
Is he still fit for office? Does he have no moral compass?