Politics
Wasn't sure of Morgan Mcw.eeney was the banned word or pa.nts on fire was.
But surely the coppers have taken Mandelson's phone in their investigation, and so will have all the messages with McSweeney anyway. Only delaying the inevitable.
Whats on Mandelsons phone seized as part of a criminal process will only become public if he is prosecuted for a crime.
What was on Mcweeneys phone relates to Starmers terrible decision to appoint Starmer.
Two very seperate things.
No doubt he will be on here defending the boobie whisperer by then anyway.
these fools expect the plebs to believe Mcswindle had his 'phone' stolen, with all of the government secrets and contacts on it, and it was treated the same as the rest us and just given a crime reference number for the insurance.
and as is evident to absolutely anyone, messages haven't been saved to the sim for about 15 years. any new device will have the whatsapp history etc. he hasn't lost all of his contacts
all in it together
But, not a word.
Any odds on their new project?
I mean, what will we know that we don't already?
I keep saying Starmer should have been up front from the start and said something like "we know about Peter's good and bad sides, but we know he has links to those in Washington and can use those links to benefit us." Acting all coy and and undermined was ridiculous.
be watching the news like we watched Dr Who as kids, from behind a cushion.
Because that doesn't stop you from saying a war has been started because of similar rumours.
Whether Starmer appointed a paedo becus da politics?
It's blatantly obvious that mandy got the job precisely because he was part of the Trump/Epstein pedo ring.
What is sad is so many on here only want to 'Hold to account' a subset of the criminals based on their own political bias, They run a mile from "Holding to account" any maga figure.
How did they get so mentally disfigured to be completely blind to child S.A. so obviously committed by their hero?
According to you the war in Iran is is to keep sexual Epstein allegations off the news for Trump.
According to you any suggestion of sexual Epstein allegations relating to Mandelson and him being appontied by Starmer will require an investigation or conviction before we can 'spin' it.
Is that correct?
No wonder he has subsequently given up the pretence of trying to answer any questions. Global statesman, nee superstar forensic lawyer :)
Yes, one of the reasons - imo - was to distract from the increasing clamour to release the files, and the fact that mainstream channels were now starting to report on the statement that Trump himself abused a kid.
Has there been any significant leak of Mandelson being involved in the abuse? I'm all for arresting him and throwing away tghe key if so. But I was always under the impression, Mandelson was more in the "good connection who provides valuable info" side of things.
You can spin away all you like though. Free country. But try not to be so offended if someone comes on and wants to talk about the facts as they are though.
Yes, one of the reasons - imo - was to distract from the increasing clamour to release the files, and the fact that mainstream channels were now starting to report on the statement that Trump himself abused a kid.
So the investigations and convictions only matter, when........ enlighten us, I'm struggling here?
It's not like they would carve up his speeches to deliberately mislead people on critical matters, or anything like that!
So the investigations and convictions only matter, when........ enlighten us, I'm struggling here?
when they are NOT investigating Trump and his cohorts.
You should know this as you run a mile from posting any sort of condemnation for ALL the pedos.
You're only concerned about the non maga pedos.
People wonder why Glitter and saville got away with it for so long, look inside yourselves for the answer, why do you look the other way?
Mar 27, 2026 -- 1:47PM, Shrewd_dude wrote:
ah okYes, one of the reasons - imo - was to distract from the increasing clamour to release the files, and the fact that mainstream channels were now starting to report on the statement that Trump himself abused a kid.So the investigations and convictions only matter, when........ enlighten us, I'm struggling here?
When the guy being accused is the same guy covering up maybe?
But you still support him as PM, I believe?
Mar 27, 2026 -- 1:52PM, Cider wrote:
Everything the mainstream claim about Trump must be assumed to be true though. Obviously :)It's not like they would carve up his speeches to deliberately mislead people on critical matters, or anything like that!
It's not the mainstream media though. There are police reports, there are politicians of both sides who say he's covering up. Some real Maga-types who would have gone to the wall for him. Are they mainstream media or is that a bit inconvenient for you?
Mar 27, 2026 -- 2:01PM, Cider wrote:
You also think Starmer is lying then, PP?But you still support him as PM, I believe?
In that he knew Mandelson knew Epstein?
Yeah, almost certainly. But again, I think he reasoned that when you look at all these other people in Washington who also knew Epstein, then their paths will have crossed and he might have some dirt on them which could be useful for us. Therefore...
Support him as PM?
Not particularly. But I don't see any realistic alternatives. Would have loved Burnham to have got a seat. But Rayner's flawed and Cameron mk2 is a ridiculous shout. I've stated before, I'd be laying 2026 for him to leave. Not cos I want him to stay, but cos I think the odds aren't great, and, if he was going, it'd have happened a few weeks ago when this first broke. If they do find evidence that Mandy was a fiddler and Starmer knew and covered it up then certainly he'd be gone, but there are some gargantuan ifs in there.
Why were the mainstream, and liberalists on here, so desperate to protect him?
Can you point to a single post on here where anyone is defending him?
Thankyou in Advance.
P.S.
I could find 10,000 posts on here with people desperate to defend Trump and deflect from the abundance of evidence that
shows he was a major player in this pedo ring.
P.P.S. prosecute all the pedos... anyone being selective about which pedos to prosecute is a wrong un.
Mar 27, 2026 -- 2:03PM, Cider wrote:
I'm not fussed about Trump. I have no idea what is true and what's not, same as you. Palpably you want it both ways, for the people you support, only the supposed facts count. For the people you don't, anything goes.
that's not what I've said though. The police have Mandelson in their sights now and will investigate. However, the only real allegations so far are about him passing on valuable info that was used to make a profit. None of the other stuff. If it comes to light then great. Hang him. But the overreaction of some on here is just classic SDS imo.
Mar 27, 2026 -- 2:03PM, Cider wrote:
I'm not fussed about Trump. I have no idea what is true and what's not, same as you. Palpably you want it both ways, for the people you support, only the supposed facts count. For the people you don't, anything goes.
People I support
But why are those who defended spaffer and Co losing
their phones in covid etc now suddenly up in arms.
Almost as if their yootube handlers have got them
ranting yet again.
Anyone for Farage and Trump? Odds on bets only please.
You are doing that in your first post porky.
When you clearly imply it doesn't matter the police will have it.
The issue at hand is it can't be handed over for parliamentary and political reasons. Even someone as intellectually limited as you must recognise a difference?
There's no pedestal you can stand on and look down upon anyone with that.
Looking on the bright side, we're pleased that you don't support all child abusers, we thought your avid support of
a few of them indicated you were going to be on the side of all of them going forward.
G'luck
Mar 27, 2026 -- 6:40PM, Shrewd_dude wrote:
can you please tell me how I'm doing that? You are doing that in your first post porky. When you clearly imply it doesn't matter the police will have it. The issue at hand is it can't be handed over for parliamentary and political reasons. Even someone as intellectually limited as you must recognise a difference?
Ok, but what are the political reasons apart from SDS?
If McSweeney's phone is so important and he's not accused of any crime, who else's should be handed over for close inspection? Only those on the left I assume.
If you seem to think that's okay because it might come out in a criminal investigation just say so.
Other people just want to know what was said on the phone as per Starmer said.
The "robbery" is clearly fiction. Slightly tricky to prove it now obviously and accusations of a cover up must be better than what kind of a palaver McSweeney's got on his phone.
unless it was a 2010 nokia lol
