Will Epstein bring down Starmer? Markets

You can lay him at 1.49 to leave this year
Or back at 1.48 if you think he's replaced this year.

Party conference could be dangerous.

The people manipulating the markets could do better.

Party conference could be dangerous.

I think now is the defining moment for him, The language being used in parliament is up there with incident
when boris lied to parliament.

If he survives this I think the chances he survives the imminent local elections, no matter how bad, increase

or, This could be the moment he is mortally wounded and the local election losses are tied to him and he is thrown overboard with them in the summer.

But realistically it's not the same as Boris, unless
somebody has some evidence he lied.

We all knew Johnson was lying because the story was out

So he deliberately lied to Parliament. Starmer set him
up at PMQs and he had to go.

Starmer has misled parliament because he failed to
find out the truth, but it was hidden from him. So its
unintentional and he has to correct parliamentary record,
which he has done, (but should have done last wednesday
as that was his earliest opportunity.) (probably frantically
checking correspondence in case he had missed something!!!)

He now faces the locals, and the papers portraying him
in bad light will undoubtedly cost even more seats
than might have been lost given his approval of handling
of Iran and trump

Conference will be good time for an election or coronation
of a new leader

Conference is 27-30 of September which is a bugga
for month betting above

I bet Starmer wishes he could threaten his backbenchers with a general election as a penalty for disloyalty, but if memory serves a prime minister now needs parliamentary approval after a rule change a few years ago?

Starmer has misled parliament because he failed to
find out the truth, but it was hidden from him. So its
unintentional and he has to correct parliamentary record,
which he has done, (but should have done last wednesday
as that was his earliest opportunity.) (probably frantically
checking correspondence in case he had missed something!!!)

He now faces the locals, and the papers portraying him
in bad light will undoubtedly cost even more seats
than might have been lost given his approval of handling
of Iran and trump

My understand of it... different.. maybe wrong.

A) Starmer Told parliament the he only found out mandy failed his vetting a few days ago.
B) A seemingly respected journalist has published a screen shot of him raising mandy's failure
with Starmers director of communications on whatsapp 25th Sept last year.

Starmer is selling the line that he didn't know and we have to believe is top spin doctor didn't tell him.... and that he didn't ask if mandy passed his vetting until last week despite the scandal breaking months ago.

It's a hard line to buy into.


Emily Thornbury MP, said "She had been lied too by ommission" by the FO in their responses to her inquiries.
Long story, but yeah, she asked and they told her he had been vetted and appointed but ommitted to tell
her he had failed vetting... Three times she asked.


So defo FO obfuscation, and the top FO guy is giving his version to parliament tommorow.


Which bits, if any, have I got wrong?

A) Starmer Told parliament the he only found out mandy failed his vetting a few days ago.


Yeah apparently starmer was told mandelson failed vetting last Tuesday.

B) A seemingly respected journalist has published a screen shot of him raising mandy's failure
with Starmers director of communications on whatsapp 25th Sept last year.

Yeah again this is happening.




Starmer sacked Mandelson as UK ambassador to the US hours after the Independent asked No 10 whether Mandelson was actually cleared by vetting. A spokesperson replied: “Vetting done by FCDO in normal way.”

Starmer is selling the line that he didn't know and we have to believe is top spin doctor didn't tell him.... and that he didn't ask if mandy passed his vetting until last week despite the scandal breaking months ago.

It's a hard line to buy into.


Exactly this, but no paper trail, or electronic that anybody
actually told starmer.

Doubtless there will be more questions asked by
committees in parliament, who will call in those involved
to answer under oath, as Johnson was.

Starmer apologised to victims of epstein for appointment
of mandelson.... But... Mandelson was not sacked for that..
he was sacked for passing privileged info to epstein in the past.

Vetting mandelson failed was apparently for owning shares
in Chinese company... (this is not 100% confirmed
only reason, and further questions should find truth of
exactly why he failed and all of concerns raised)

If this was only reason he could have been told to sell
them or place them in blind trust for duration of his
time as ambassador.

Indeed seemingly he was not asked to do so even after
gaining vetting clearance.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2026/apr/20/peter-mandelson-a-timeline-of-his-appointment-as-uk-ambassadorto-the-us

Guardian timeline as to what happened when, as reported

Lots of stuff on twitter too.

.@johnmcdonnellMP: "Isn't the reality this, that when he sought to realise his ambition to become leader of the Labour party with very little base in the party, he became dependent on McSweeney and Mandelson and Labour Together to organise, fund his election.."


^^^ indeed, probably?

Will Starmer lead Labour into the next GE? It seems absurd to even ask the Q, but KS isn't naturally of the Labour right & doesn't have a political base in Labour - instead he's been used by the right of the party (and willingly so), and when they decide he needs to go, hes gone.

Saul Staniforth, April 2024

@SaulStaniforth twitter, a decent commentary on all of this
if you are on twitter.

Robbins is a very clever diplomat,but I THINK he is trying to bring down Starmer without it being really obvious.

New Market a couple of days old, not much action yet.

UK - Party Leaders -- Will Starmer be PM at the next general election?

2 Runners            £942 Matched

			102.1%		97.6%
Yes	6	6.2	6.6		7.8	8.2	1000	£121
	£6	£11	£530		£21	£2	£1
No.	1.13	1.14	1.15		1.18	1.19	1.2	£821
	£15	£137	£5		£2,964	£20	£66

Robbins is very good.

He hasn't answered everything, but has been clear
about what he says, and about what he hasn't.

Starmer has got rid of a good man.

He's coming across as having integrity, giving considered replies whilst maintaining an air of candidness.

One of the key questions which needs to be asked and hasn't AFAIK is

"Why and Who is responsible for omitting to tell Thornbury that Mandy failed his vetting in written replies from the FO?"

This action is/was part of the ongoing cover up and will lead to the real movers and shakers.

'Was there anything in Peter Mandelson's developed vetting that wasn't already in the public realm?' - Dame Emily Thornberry

'I may no longer be an official, but I can't open that box' - Sir Olly Robbins

PMQ's in an hour is going to grab the evening headlines after yesterdays testimony by Robbins.

Unlikely to be a fawning "Let's praise Starmer" fest.

He has to do really well or it's curtains within two months at the most.

Will Starmer answer any questions today?

I reckon he will keep banging on about 'due process', apologise to the Epstein victims, and accuse Kemi of wanting to go to war 'without thinking through the consequences'

Davey nailed him on yet another lie.

Quite a polished performance from Starmer, matter of fact and plausible. Badenoch is way out of her depth.

Looks like Starmer is holding on.

There's a distinct lack of someone like ian blackford at PMQ's, no one is able to directly hit the nail on the head with brevity and clarity.

Nice one lala

Apr 22, 2026 -- 12:23PM, lapsy pa wrote:

Quite a polished performance from Starmer, matter of fact and plausible. Badenoch is way out of her depth.

Normal stuff then.

Starmer doesn't answer questions in PMQs, as everyone obviously knows. So to give him his due, his is capable of reading out sentences prepared by somebody else. Even if they aren't correlated to the questions.

You were one of Boris's biggest acolytes Cider,you are losing the run of yourself lately.

My thoughts on Boris years ago are not relevant to your analysis of Starmer now. I wouldn't say polished, but the only time he is coherent is when he is reading out sentences that have been written by someone else, and had plenty of time to prepare. The majority of the public could manage that.

Okay,i don't blame you for putting a bit of distance there as many others have as well.

Badenoch came out like a screeching banshee with a big 'gotcha' head on her, 3 times she was sent back to her box with her tail between her legs.
As polished as it gets.

I'm not interested in debating Boris, it is completely irrelevant.

Badenoch a 'screeching banshee'? Er, no. She is obviously trying to get him to lie again.

It turned out that Davey nailed him on another lie, as per my first post on the thread. Starmer told the house that he didn't try to make any other crony appointments. He obviously did, as was revealed yesterday. And coincidentally it was another pal of a convicted paedophile.

Badenoch has been doing better recently ( not hard ) but was back to awful today.
Starmer safe until the elections next month unless something else comes out.

There must be loads of other stuff that could come out. It remains hidden until the newspapers find out, then we get the worthless apologies and the taking of culpability, as if it is the 'honourable' thing to be seen doing. No mate, you are only apologising because you have been caught out and it's all over the front pages.

Look at Rayner and her tax dodging, much has been of the fact that she 'referred herself' to the ethics advisor. Every time her name was brought up, Starmer would say that she made an honest mistake, he has full confidence in her, and that she referred herself. as if referring herself is some get out of jail free card.

She only referred herself (she would have been investigated anyway, so the same thing) because the Telegraph had made her tax dodging public knowledge

...and Tice obviously

We have the Arson Trial to come yet , George Galloway wants to know why there has been a practical Media blackout regarding that , what does George and others Know ?

RENT BOYZ

Surely if any against STARMER he would go now , while he can

Badenoch had open goal and didn't even need to go there.

Don't give him a chance to make tiktoks of his
answers in parliament.

Get him on summit else on top of mandleson

“Whatever noise they make nothing is going to distract me from delivering for our country”

More than 3 words.

Badenoch simply isn't in the same class as Starmer. She is being constantly humiliated and it's astonishing that her party haven't removed her already.

They are banging different drums.

Each playing to their own perceived audience

Each audience already deaf to the other drummer.

Starmers audience want more jam, Badenochs would
probably deport her.

Probably on a similar level as somebody aftertiming the backing of Labour to win the local elections.

yhtl 14:11

Following Sir Olly's evidence, the Foreign Affairs Committee has today requested that Cat Little, Ian Collard, Sir Philip Barton and Morgan McSweeney attend and give evidence.

Cat Little will give evidence tomorrow at 9am.

Morgan McSweeney will attend Tuesday.





By order of

Emily Thornberry

Apr 22, 2026 -- 12:57PM, Cider wrote:

I'm not interested in debating Boris, it is completely irrelevant. Badenoch a 'screeching banshee'? Er, no. She is obviously trying to get him to lie again.It turned out that Davey nailed him on another lie, as per my first post on the thread. Starmer told the house that he didn't try to make any other crony appointments. He obviously did, as was revealed yesterday. And coincidentally it was another pal of a convicted paedophile.

And it worked, she got Starmer to lie.

He went off script apparently, lying about something that only happened yesterday, that a huge amount of people watched. This bloke is a disaster zone.

Cabinet ministers have lost confidence in the Prime Minister’s leadership, as they admitted the mood is "bleak".

However, a minister said it was up to the Cabinet as a whole to move to depose him, reports The i Paper.

A spokesman for the Prime Minister said he is proud of the work being done by his Cabinet and that "nothing will distract the PM from delivering for our country".

Sir Keir Starmer has been labelled a "coward" after it was revealed MPs will take a break from Westminster on Tuesday next week.

Starmers sychophants appear to be going in on him one last time before they make their decision on whether or not to flip to Davey ten names.

I’m told that Cat Little, the top cabinet office official who first informed Starmer about the vetting failure, appeared before the ISC today, along with foreign office officials, to update them. 

The committee is understood to be furious at lack of key documents relating to Olly Robbins’ decision to overturn a recommendation to deny Peter Mandelson security clearance, and his failure to record notes of crucial meetings over the appointment.

The ISC is expected to finish going through vetting documents within 48 hours, and the cabinet office will then sift through them, making redactions, meaning they won’t be released before parliament rises next week ahead.

All this means the Mandelson scandal will return to haunt the PM once again at some point after the May elections.

Pippa c

Rent boy trials next week....... oh, bugger.

Does anyone know which door Kier had arsoned?

Not the front. He's wanting to cancel PMQs next week, allegedly.

“I can categorically say I wasn’t not sure whether the Ukrainian was inside me”

I gather Starmer has been offered a job in Chamonix.
They heard he can turn an avalanche around.

The Answer to OP question is looking very much like NO.

Another top FO civil servant and starmers ex top spin doctor appeared before thornbury's inquiry today, and
a HoC motion to put starmer in front of the HoC standards committee for lying to parliament failed to pass this evening.

Unless Thorbury changes tack and gets to the name of the FO civil servant who is responsible for *"Lying to her by ommission", Starmer has won and successfully sold his line that he only found out a week ago.




*as she put it (regarding the FO ommitting to tell her that mandlson had failed vetting... 3 times in written responses to her inquiry questions)

UK - Party Leaders -- Month Keir Starmer replaced as Labour Leader

4 Runners            £77,343 Matched

			106.1%		93.4%
April-June 2026	6.4	7	7.2		8.8	9	14.5	£25,424
	£210	£40	£18		£1	£35	£1
July-September 2026	2.26	2.32	2.34		2.64	2.66	2.7	£12,091
	£350	£100	£39		£21	£100	£219
October-December  2026	5.4	5.5	5.8		7.2	7.4	7.6	£2,729
	£37	£4	£9		£3	£2	£6
2027 or later	3	3.05	3.1		3.3	3.35	3.6	£37,099
	£103	£27	£5		£8	£15	£21

Markets now give Starmer an 80% chance of being booted out this year.

7 Months of headlines and scandals over giving jobs to epstns mates, immediately followed by a drubbing
in the local elections.

UK - Party Leaders -- Year Keir Starmer replaced as Labour Leader

4 Runners            £1,478,562 Matched

			100.9%		97.8%
2026	1.22	1.23	1.24		1.25	1.26	1.27	£1,383,054
	£560	£27	£249		£50	£31	£10
2027	6.8	7.4	7.6		8.2	8.8	9.2	£32,946
	£9	£3	£2		£38	£4	£13
2028	44	55	60		80	85	90	£15,363
	£20	£1	£8		£2	£1	£2
2029 or later	12	17	18.5		23	24	25	£47,199
	£5	£26	£50		£3	£20	£10

The markets now say Starmer has a 92.6% chance of going this year.


Whilst his suitability for the PM job has always been in doubt, his downfall has been bought about because of Epstein.


Epstein has bought down a Prince, An Ambassador, and now a PM.

This is proof, Britain has a much higher moral standard than America.

UK - Party Leaders -- Year Keir Starmer replaced as Labour Leader

4 Runners            £1,682,412 Matched

			103.1%		98.6%
2026	1.06	1.07	1.08		1.09	1.1	1.11	£1,582,525
	£548	£84	£1,000		£1,795	£1,455	£1
2027	12	13.5	14		17.5	18	34	£35,745
	£5	£100	£30		£3	£30	£4
2028	80	100	110		750	770	890	£15,773
	£2	£10	£3		£5	£3	£1
2029 or later	30	38	40		100	130	140	£48,368
	£5	£11	£10		£6	£2	£2

Q:   Will Epstein bring down Starmer?
A:  YES


His resignation today is climax of 6 months of Epstein related headlines leading to an MP stepping
down to facilitate a challenger.



Epstein has brought down a British Prime Minister, A British Prince, and a British Ambassador.

UK - Party Leaders -- Month Keir Starmer replaced as Labour Leader

4 Runners            £366,828 Matched

			1.3%		99.5%
April-June 2026	200	210	260		470	480	500	£65,564
	£144	£44	£8		£22	£10	£5
July-September 2026	-	-	-		1.01	1.03	1.07	£182,508
					£25,530	£1,000	£1
October-December  2026	44	100	120		400	490	990	£20,592
	£2	£20	£12		£12	£2	£66
2027 or later	250	450	1000		-	-	-	£98,164
	£3	£2	£28

Running away not taking any responsibility just like King James at the battle of the Boyne.

It was a hatchet job and seemed to be led by Streeting who is supposedly Mandl;esons 'acolyte'.
Is there a 'bigger movement' behind the scenes?
It won't matter who he is replaced by,no magic wand and nothing in the pot.The only answer is more in the pot and who puts that in?