Podcast appearances and mentions of Peter Mandelson

A 1999 child-protection campaign linked to the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children brought Prince Andrew and Peter Mandelson together at a high-profile event focused on safeguarding vulnerable children. Both men were publicly positioned as advocates against abuse, aligning themselves with efforts to protect minors. Within a short period after that introduction, however, both were photographed socializing with Jeffrey Epstein, creating a stark contrast between their public roles and their private associations.That overlap has since drawn criticism, with individuals connected to the campaign expressing regret about facilitating the connection and acknowledging how it intersected with Epstein's wider network. The situation highlights how Epstein was able to operate within elite circles that included political figures and royalty, even as those same figures were publicly tied to causes meant to combat the kind of abuse he was accused of. Both Andrew and Mandelson have denied wrongdoing, but the timing and proximity of these relationships continue to raise questions about judgment and why those associations were not immediately severed.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:New picture shows disgraced Andrew with Mandelson at kids charity event weeks after 'meeting for first time'Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

A former senior Foreign Office official told lawmakers that he was instructed to move ahead with appointing Peter Mandelson despite raising concerns during the vetting process, including issues connected to Mandelson's associations and the potential political fallout. According to his testimony, he was effectively told to “get on with it,” signaling that the decision had already been made at higher levels and that standard caution around security clearance and reputational risk was being overridden.The disclosure has fueled criticism that the appointment process was rushed and that proper scrutiny was sidelined in favor of political priorities. Officials acknowledged that red flags existed but indicated there was little willingness to delay or reconsider the decision, even with Epstein-related concerns lingering in the background. The episode has since raised broader questions about how seriously vetting procedures are taken when they conflict with political objectives, and whether accountability mechanisms within the government were bypassed.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Former foreign office chief was told to ‘get on' with appointing Mandelson despite his worries over links with Epstein | LBC

The US tech giant Palantir ‘holds public contracts worth hundreds of millions of pounds in everything from financial regulation to local government', Peter Geoghegan and Lucas Amin wrote recently in the LRB. The newsletter where they work, Democracy for Sale, ‘has been looking into Palantir's business in the UK, and particularly its contracts with the NHS'. On this episode, Peter joins Thomas Jones to discuss the company's origins, rapid rise and expansion – with the help of Peter Mandelson – into the British state. They talk about the risks of handing our most personal data over to a company whose billionaire founders have poured millions into right-wing political campaigns in the US, and ask whether the software's actually any good at doing what it promises. Read Peter Geoghegan and Lucas Amin on Palantir: https://lrb.me/palantirpod From the LRB Subscribe to the LRB: ⁠⁠https://lrb.me/subslrbpod Close Readings podcast: ⁠https://lrb.me/crlrbpod⁠ LRB Audiobooks: ⁠https://lrb.me/audiobookslrbpod⁠ Bags, binders and more at the LRB Store: ⁠https://lrb.me/storelrbpod⁠ Get in touch: podcasts@lrb.co.uk Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Tháng 5/2025, một số nhân vật trong Đảng Lao động cầm quyền ở Anh công khai thách thức thủ tướng Kier Starmer. Ra tranh chức lãnh đạo đảng, cả cựu Bộ trưởng Y tế Wes Streeting và thị trưởng Manchester Andy Burnham đều công khai ủng hộ xu thế quay lại Liên Âu (EU). Mười năm sau Brexit, một xu thế mới đang trỗi dậy trong xã hội Anh, đó là tìm cách quay trở lại mái nhà chung châu Âu, hoặc ít nhất là xích lại gần thị trường Liên Âu để giảm bớt thiệt hại kinh tế. Nhưng điều này khả thi tới đâu và Anh Quốc đang đối mặt với thực tế như thế nào để tái thiết quan hệ với EU? Từ Luân Đôn, thông tín viên Nguyễn Giang giải đáp một số câu hỏi. RFI : Câu hỏi đầu tiên, Nguyễn Giang có thể cho biết vì sao chủ đề 'quay trở lại Liên Hiệp Châu Âu' lại nổi lên ngay lúc này trong nội bộ Đảng Lao động Anh? Nguyễn Giang : "Vâng, đúng ra thì câu chuyện này không xuất hiện đột ngột. Nó tích tụ dần từ áp lực kinh tế nhiều năm qua. Kể từ sau khi hiệp định Brexit có hiệu lực năm 2020, tăng trưởng GDP của Anh tụt hẳn và dai dẳng ở mức thấp. GDP của Anh chỉ tăng 1,1% năm 2024 và 1,3% năm 2025, thấp hơn mức dự báo chính thức là 1,5%. Trong khi đó, các ngành xuất khẩu, nông nghiệp, dược phẩm và công nghệ đều cảm nhận rõ sức nặng của rào cản thương mại mới với châu Âu, khối kinh tế lớn hàng đầu thế giới ngay bên cạnh Anh. Đây chính là mảnh đất màu mỡ cho luận điểm "Brexit là sai lầm" bắt rễ trở lại. Khi ông Kier Starmer bị mất uy tín vì vụ Peter Mandelson, các nhân vật muốn thay ông trong đảng Lao động đều đã nêu ra khẩu hiệu quay lại EU, vì họ đánh vào tâm lý cử tri thấy Brexit gây hại cho kinh tế nhiều. Họ đề xuất một “liệu pháp” là quay lại, hoặc kết nối lại với EU được chừng nào hay chừng đó". RFI: Như vậy, có phải chỉ có các nhân vật quan trọng trong Đảng Lao động tranh cãi nhau về Brexit và muốn đảo ngược vụ ly hôn với Liên Hiệp Châu Âu vì lý do kinh tế? Nguyễn Giang : "Thực ra không hẳn. Nếu xét riêng tỷ lệ ủng hộ gia nhập lại EU một cách toàn diện, cử tri của đảng Dân chủ Tự do (Lib Dem) và đảng Xanh còn có con số cao hơn so với cử tri Lao Động. Điều này phản ánh một thực tế phức tạp hơn: liên minh cử tri của Lao Động vừa gồm những người trẻ thành thị ủng hộ châu Âu, vừa gồm những cử tri ở khu vực có tên là 'Bức Tường Đỏ' (Red Wall), tức là các địa hạt nghèo, đa số thiên tả trong cộng đồng đông người Anh bản địa (da trắng), ở phía Tây Bắc xứ Anh, từng bỏ phiếu Brexit vì thất vọng về kinh tế. Gần đây chính họ lại quay lại ủng hộ xu thế đảo ngược Brexit.  Các hạn chế đi lại, cấm định cư ở châu Âu cũng khiến hàng triệu người dân Anh thấy khổ sở. Bản thân chúng tôi mỗi khi lái xe sang Pháp là phải chờ kiểm tra giấy tờ lâu hơn. Đi nghỉ hè đôi khi trở nên cực nhọc. Đây là những điều khi Anh còn ở trong EU là chuyện không phải nghĩ tới. Nhưng điều đáng chú ý là trong nội bộ đảng cầm quyền ở Anh hiện nay— tức những người thực sự nắm thẻ đảng — sự ủng hộ gia nhập lại EU lại rất mạnh. Một cuộc thăm dò do Survation thực hiện cho trang LabourList tiết lộ rằng tới 65% đảng viên Lao Động muốn đảng này nêu ra cam kết gia nhập lại EU trong cuộc bầu cử tiếp theo, trong khi chỉ 24% phản đối". RFI: Xin anh nhắc lại một chút về quan điểm các chính trị gia hàng đầu trong đảng Lao động, gồm cả các ứng viên hàng đầu muốn thay thế thủ tướng Starmer về Brexit và Liên Âu. Nguyễn Giang : "Đây là điểm nóng nhất của cuộc tranh luận hiện tại. Ba gương mặt nổi bật nhất đang có ba lập trường khác nhau tuy cùng hướng về Liên Âu. Ông Sadiq Khan, thị trưởng Luân Đôn, là người lên tiếng sớm và thẳng thắn nhất. Ông kêu gọi Anh tái gia nhập cả Liên minh thuế quan lẫn Thị trường chung trước cuộc bầu cử 2029, và sau đó đưa cam kết gia nhập lại EU đầy đủ vào cương lĩnh tranh cử. Ông Khan tuyên bố việc gia nhập lại là "không thể tránh khỏi" và cho rằng Luân Đôn đã chịu thiệt hại "về kinh tế, xã hội và văn hoá" vì Brexit. Xin nhắc ông Khan không ra tranh chức thủ tướng Anh mà chỉ muốn tái tranh cử chức đô trưởng Luân Đôn, một vị trí đầy quyền lực. Ông Wes Streeting, cựu bộ trưởng Y tế, tuyên bố rằng "rời EU là một sai lầm thảm khốc" khiến nước Anh "giảm sự giàu có hơn trước, kém ảnh hưởng hơn và kém tự chủ hơn so với bất kỳ thời điểm nào trước Cách mạng Công nghiệp." Ông khẳng định Anh "không thể tiếp tục im lặng" và cần "một mối quan hệ đặc biệt mới với EU, vì tương lai của Anh gắn liền với châu Âu và một ngày nào đó sẽ quay trở lại EU." Xin  nhắc là Streeting chỉ mới 43 tuổi, nên có vẻ như quan điểm của ông phản ánh suy nghĩ của thế hệ chính trị gia trẻ, sẽ quyết định tương lai Anh Quốc.  Còn ông Andy Burnham, thị trưởng Manchester và ứng viên được kỳ vọng nhiều để lên làm thủ tướng Anh thay ông Keir Starmer, thì có lập trường thận trọng hơn. Dù ông thừa nhận Brexit "đã gây thiệt hại", nhưng ông tôn trọng quyết định "đã được đưa ra trong cuộc trưng cầu dân ý Brexit năm 2016" RFI: Trong tình hình này, chính phủ của thủ tướng Keir Starmer hiện đang theo đuổi đường lối gì thưa anh? Nguyễn Giang : "Chính phủ của ông Starmer một mặt thừa nhận “sự tổn hại cho kinh tế Anh do Brexit gây ra”, mặt khác vẫn giữ một ranh giới cứng. Tức là Anh sẽ không gia nhập lại Thị trường chung, không vào Liên minh thuế quan EU, không khôi phục tự do đi lại. Thay vào đó, họ theo đuổi chiến lược "reset" (tái thiết lập quan hệ), tức là đàm phán từng thoả thuận theo từng lĩnh vực cụ thể, đủ gần để xóa bớt rào cản thương mại, nhưng không đủ xa để bị quy là "tái Brexit." Tại hội nghị thượng đỉnh Anh–EU tháng 5/2025, hai bên đã ký kết một Hiệp ước An ninh và Quốc phòng, đồng thời mở đàm phán về 5 lĩnh vực. Tài liệu của Nghị viện Anh tháng 5 cho biết cụ thể đây là các mảng hai bên đã và đang đàm phán: Nông nghiệp và thực phẩm: Thoả thuận SPS, thống nhất tiêu chuẩn kiểm dịch động thực vật để nông sản và thực phẩm xuất khẩu sang EU, sẽ làm giảm đáng kể chi phí kiểm tra biên giới. Hàng EU nhập vào Anh cũng có thể rẻ đi cho người tiêu dùng. Năng lượng: Liên kết thị trường điện năng EU–Anh có thể giúp ổn định giá điện và tăng hiệu quả giao dịch năng lượng xuyên biên giới, một lợi ích thiết thực cho cả doanh nghiệp lẫn người tiêu dùng. Quốc phòng: Thoả thuận về quỹ SAFE của EU mở cơ hội cho doanh nghiệp quốc phòng Anh tham gia các dự án mua sắm chung của châu Âu, qua đó tăng năng lực sản xuất và lấp đầy khoảng trống năng lực quân sự. Khoa học và giáo dục: Việc tái gia nhập Erasmus+ và duy trì tham gia chương trình nghiên cứu Horizon củng cố vị thế của Anh trong hệ sinh thái nghiên cứu châu Âu. Công nghệ và đổi mới: Năm 2026, Anh và EU đã bắt đầu đàm phán về khả năng Anh tham gia Quỹ Hội đồng Đổi mới Sáng tạo châu Âu — bao gồm cả Quỹ Scale-up Europe — hướng tới hỗ trợ các doanh nghiệp công nghệ tăng trưởng nhanh." RFI: Các thỏa thuận từng lĩnh vực này đem lại lợi ích kinh tế cụ thể gì cho Anh? Nguyễn Giang : "Các ước tính khả quan nhất cho rằng chương trình tương thích các lĩnh vực kinh tế Anh với EU đến năm 2030, nếu làm tốt, có thể đem lại cho kinh tế Anh mỗi năm thêm 26 tỷ tới 50 tỷ bảng, tương đương 1,7% đến 2,2% tăng trưởng GDP. Nếu được như thế thì cũng rất tốt vì kinh tế Anh nay chỉ tăng trưởng ở mức trên dưới 1%. Cộng vào thêm 2% nữa thì ta có một bức tranh kinh tế không hề tệ cho Anh quốc". RFI: Nhưng vì sao hai bên không thể đẩy nhanh hơn đàm phán để Anh đạt tiến triển nhanh chóng trong quan hệ kinh tế kiểu mới với Liên Âu? Nguyễn Giang : "Người Anh đã hiểu là Liên minh châu Âu trước hết là một khối thương mại lớn, có sức mạnh vì tầm vóc thị trường của họ, nên họ chơi cứng với Anh và chơi rất thực dụng. Mỗi mỗi bước xích lại thị trường EU bằng một chính sách “tương thích” đều kèm theo một hoá đơn tiền tỷ mà Anh  phải trả. Nói ngắn gọi thì Anh phải “mua lối vào EU” từng ngành một. Đây là điều mà phía Anh nhận ra ngày càng rõ hơn sau mỗi vòng đàm phán. Tôi xin nêu ra một số ví dụ mà tôi có quan sát khá kỹ. Ví dụ, để tái gia nhập Erasmus+, chương trình giao lưu sinh viên với EU, Luân Đôn phải trả 570 triệu bảng ngay trong năm đầu tiên. Để duy trì tham gia Horizon, chương trình nghiên cứu khoa học lớn nhất của EU, thì tấm vé là 2,2 tỷ bảng mỗi năm. Việc tham gia thị trường điện năng hay thoả thuận SPS cũng có thể yêu cầu Anh đóng góp tài chính đáng kể vào ngân sách EU, ngoài chi phí hành chính. Thậm chí tấm vé vào chương trình tín dụng quốc phòng SAFE của EU có giá khoảng 2 tỷ euro (tương đương 1,7 tỷ bảng), hay chỉ 3% ngân sách quốc phòng 62 tỷ bảng của Anh trong năm 2025/26. Đây là lý do bộ trưởng chuyên trách về EU, ông Nick Thomas-Symonds,từ chối ký để Anh tham gia sản xuất vũ khí cùng EU. Hiện Anh đang đàm phán để gia nhập thị trường năng lượng EU, nhưng nhiều khả năng là EU sẽ đòi trả phí. Logic lo ngại của chính phủ Anh là cứ mỗi lần Luân Đôn muốn xích lại, EU lại đưa ra một yêu cầu mới. Ranh giới giữa "xích lại theo từng lĩnh vực" và "gia nhập lại Thị trường chung" sẽ ngày càng mờ nhạt nếu quá trình "tương thích hoá tự động" (dynamic alignment) được mở rộng không kiểm soát. Đó là lý do tại sao bộ trưởng Thomas-Symonds nhấn mạnh Anh phải tự đặt ra ưu tiên của mình, không thể để Bruxelles dẫn dắt". RFI: Cuối cùng, nhìn một cách thực tế thì liệu Anh có thể gia nhập lại Liên Hiệp Châu Âu trong nhiệm kỳ Quốc Hội này không, hay trong 5-10 năm tới ? . Nguyễn Giang : "Về mặt thực tế chính trị thì không. Ngay cả ông Wes Streeting cũng thừa nhận việc tổ chức thảo luận trong đảng để đảo ngược Brexit là "không giúp gì cho lợi ích của đảng Lao động hay của quốc gia." Ông Andy Burnham thì nói thẳng rằng khơi lại cuộc tranh luận Brexit lúc này sẽ làm suy yếu uy tín dân chủ của đảng Lao động. Ai cũng rõ là EU không dễ chấp nhận cho Anh quay trở lại. Thực tế là quan hệ hai bên đã sứt mẻ nhiều từ 2016 đến nay. Điều khả thi hơn trong nhiệm kỳ hiện tại là hoàn tất các thoả thuận từng ngành như tôi nói ở trên để tạo ra lợi ích kinh tế thực chất mà không vượt các ranh giới đỏ chính trị. Tuy thế, câu hỏi lớn hơn - gia nhập lại EU đầy đủ - có thể được đặt ra nghiêm túc trong cuộc bầu cử tổng tuyển cử tiếp theo, dự kiến vào năm 2029, nếu như phong trào ủng hộ trong đảng tiếp tục lớn mạnh và nếu bức tranh kinh tế không cải thiện. Cựu thủ tướng Tony Blair mới cuối tháng 5 năm nay nói ông luôn phản đối Brexit, nhưng cho rằng vào thời điểm này Anh không nên đàm phán ở thế yếu với EU để quay lại làm thành viên. Tôi có xem cuộc phỏng vấn truyền hình của ông Tony Blair với nhà báo Nick Robinson, và thấy ông Blair hiến kế cho chính quyền Anh rằng cần cải tổ đất nước để kinh tế mạnh lên. Chỉ khi đó Anh mới có vị thế tốt để đàm phán tái gia nhập EU. Nhưng Khi nào thì không ai rõ." RFI : Cảm ơn Nguyễn Giang. 

A former senior Foreign Office official told lawmakers that he was instructed to move ahead with appointing Peter Mandelson despite raising concerns during the vetting process, including issues connected to Mandelson's associations and the potential political fallout. According to his testimony, he was effectively told to “get on with it,” signaling that the decision had already been made at higher levels and that standard caution around security clearance and reputational risk was being overridden.The disclosure has fueled criticism that the appointment process was rushed and that proper scrutiny was sidelined in favor of political priorities. Officials acknowledged that red flags existed but indicated there was little willingness to delay or reconsider the decision, even with Epstein-related concerns lingering in the background. The episode has since raised broader questions about how seriously vetting procedures are taken when they conflict with political objectives, and whether accountability mechanisms within the government were bypassed.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Former foreign office chief was told to ‘get on' with appointing Mandelson despite his worries over links with Epstein | LBCBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Senator Elizabeth Warren is demanding answers from JPMorgan chief executive Jamie Dimon about whether he acted on advice connected to Jeffrey Epstein while lobbying against a proposed British tax on bankers' bonuses. Warren's questions follow the release of a 2009 email exchange in which Epstein asked then-Labour minister Peter Mandelson whether Dimon should pressure UK chancellor Alistair Darling over the tax. Mandelson reportedly replied that Dimon should “mildly threaten” Darling, and Dimon later warned that JPMorgan could reconsider investments in Britain, including plans for a new London headquarters. Warren said the communications raise serious questions about the extent of JPMorgan's relationship with Epstein and what DimonDimon testified in 2023 that he had never met Epstein and had not heard his name until Epstein's 2019 arrest. JPMorgan continues to insist that Dimon never communicated with Epstein, never sought his advice and was not involved in decisions involving Epstein's accounts. The bank has also rejected former executive Jes Staley's claim that he discussed Epstein with Dimon, describing Staley's testimony as unreliable. JPMorgan acknowledged that maintaining Epstein as a client was a mistake but said the bank ended the relationship in 2013 and would have acted sooner had it known he was continuing to commit crimes. Warren is now seeking a fuller accounting of whether Dimon's lobbying efforts were influenced, directly or indirectly, by Epstein and his political connections.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:JP Morgan boss pressed by US senator about contact with Jeffrey Epstein | JP Morgan | The Guardian

Keir Starmer is facing intensifying calls to resign as a political scandal deepens around his decision to appoint Peter Mandelson as the UK's ambassador to the United States, despite serious concerns raised during the security vetting process. The controversy centers on revelations that Mandelson failed key vetting checks tied in part to his past association with Jeffrey Epstein, raising questions about judgment, oversight, and whether warnings were ignored or overridden. Starmer has acknowledged the appointment was a mistake but maintains he was not informed of the failed vetting at the time, a claim that critics—both political opponents and figures within his own party—have openly challenged.The growing pressure is not just about the appointment itself, but about credibility and accountability. Critics argue that either Starmer knew about the risks and proceeded anyway, or he failed to maintain control over a critical national security decision—both scenarios fueling demands for his resignation. The issue has been compounded by internal turmoil, including firings, conflicting testimony from officials, and broader political setbacks facing his government. With elections looming and party support showing signs of strain, the scandal has evolved into a direct threat to his leadership, with opponents framing it as a defining test of trust and competence at the highest level of government.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Why U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer Is Facing Growing Calls to ResignBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

It's been branded “the scariest company on the planet” and it is busy weaving itself into the fabric of Britain's NHS, defence establishment and beyond. Peter Thiel's Palantir has a terrible reputation – but do its products even work as billed? As MPs call for Palantir's £330m NHS contract to be scrapped and fears grow over Big Brother-style data sharing, we talk to Democracy for Sale founder Peter Geoghegan whose investigation into Palantir reveals a company that's a lot better at schmoozing than delivery – and how Peter Mandelson's lobbying firm helped land the NHS deal.How did a controversial US tech firm – whose AI powers military strikes in Gaza and Iran and ICE's immigration raids, and whose founder Peter Thiel thinks the NHS makes people sick – wheedle its way into Westminster? And what can we do about it? • Read about Peter and Lucas Amin's investigation on Democracy for Sale • Read the full 7,000 word investigation on the London Review of Books• Back us on Patreon – www.patreon.com/bunkercastWritten and presented by Group Editor Andrew Harrison. Producer: James Liddell. Audio production: Robin Leeburn. Managing Editor: Jacob Jarvis. Music: Kenny Dickinson. THE BUNKER is a Podmasters Production.www.podmasters.co.uk Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Senator Elizabeth Warren is demanding answers from JPMorgan chief executive Jamie Dimon about whether he acted on advice connected to Jeffrey Epstein while lobbying against a proposed British tax on bankers' bonuses. Warren's questions follow the release of a 2009 email exchange in which Epstein asked then-Labour minister Peter Mandelson whether Dimon should pressure UK chancellor Alistair Darling over the tax. Mandelson reportedly replied that Dimon should “mildly threaten” Darling, and Dimon later warned that JPMorgan could reconsider investments in Britain, including plans for a new London headquarters. Warren said the communications raise serious questions about the extent of JPMorgan's relationship with Epstein and what DimonDimon testified in 2023 that he had never met Epstein and had not heard his name until Epstein's 2019 arrest. JPMorgan continues to insist that Dimon never communicated with Epstein, never sought his advice and was not involved in decisions involving Epstein's accounts. The bank has also rejected former executive Jes Staley's claim that he discussed Epstein with Dimon, describing Staley's testimony as unreliable. JPMorgan acknowledged that maintaining Epstein as a client was a mistake but said the bank ended the relationship in 2013 and would have acted sooner had it known he was continuing to commit crimes. Warren is now seeking a fuller accounting of whether Dimon's lobbying efforts were influenced, directly or indirectly, by Epstein and his political connections.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:JP Morgan boss pressed by US senator about contact with Jeffrey Epstein | JP Morgan | The GuardianBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

Senator Elizabeth Warren is demanding answers from JPMorgan chief executive Jamie Dimon about whether he acted on advice connected to Jeffrey Epstein while lobbying against a proposed British tax on bankers' bonuses. Warren's questions follow the release of a 2009 email exchange in which Epstein asked then-Labour minister Peter Mandelson whether Dimon should pressure UK chancellor Alistair Darling over the tax. Mandelson reportedly replied that Dimon should “mildly threaten” Darling, and Dimon later warned that JPMorgan could reconsider investments in Britain, including plans for a new London headquarters. Warren said the communications raise serious questions about the extent of JPMorgan's relationship with Epstein and what DimonDimon testified in 2023 that he had never met Epstein and had not heard his name until Epstein's 2019 arrest. JPMorgan continues to insist that Dimon never communicated with Epstein, never sought his advice and was not involved in decisions involving Epstein's accounts. The bank has also rejected former executive Jes Staley's claim that he discussed Epstein with Dimon, describing Staley's testimony as unreliable. JPMorgan acknowledged that maintaining Epstein as a client was a mistake but said the bank ended the relationship in 2013 and would have acted sooner had it known he was continuing to commit crimes. Warren is now seeking a fuller accounting of whether Dimon's lobbying efforts were influenced, directly or indirectly, by Epstein and his political connections.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:JP Morgan boss pressed by US senator about contact with Jeffrey Epstein | JP Morgan | The GuardianBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Is Britain really as free of corruption as we think? This year the UK posted its lowest-ever score in a global corruption index. High-level scandals like Peter Mandelson's Epstein ties and Peter Murrell embezzling from the SNP – and less conspicuous instances of fraud and backhanders – are eating into our self-image as rule-followers. And the man who might be Prime Minister keeps changing his explanation for a £5m gift from a crypto baron. Are these isolated political crises, or does the rot in our system run deeper? Professor of anti-corruption practice at the University of Sussex Robert Barrington joins Zing Tsjeng to unpick how corruption manifests in Britain. • Buy Robert's book Corrupted Kingdom: Britain's Disappearing Integrity – And How We Can Get It Back from our affiliate bookshop and you'll help fund the podcast by earning us a small commission for every sale. Bookshop.org's fees help support independent bookshops too.• Special offer! Get 20% off any vehicle history check at carVertical.com/TheBunker.• Back us on Patreon – www.patreon.com/bunkercastWritten and presented by Zing Tsjeng. Producer: James Liddell. Audio production: Jade Bailey. Managing Editor: Jacob Jarvis. Group Editor: Andrew Harrison. Music by Kenny Dickinson. THE BUNKER is a Podmasters Production.www.podmasters.co.uk Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Most interviews sound the same.Safe questions. Predictable answers. Polite agreement.But every now and then, something different happens.A moment of silence.An unexpected question.A shift in energy that makes everyone lean in.In this episode, I sit down with Alfie Joey – former BBC presenter – to explore what actually makes an interview memorable.Alfie has interviewed prime ministers, celebrities and business leaders. We talk about why over-preparation can make you more natural, how one repeated question can break through any defence, and why the best interviewers never make it about themselves.Alfie shares stories from the field – from interviewing Peter Mandelson in a completely unexpected way, to creating a room-wide “chocolate moment,” to asking one simple question that left an entire audience in silence.If you host a podcast or want to have better conversations, this episode will change how you think about asking questions.What You'll Learn:- How to create (or spot) powerful interview moments- The danger of putting yourself in the story- How to challenge guests without confrontation- Why most questions lead nowhere – and how to fix that- The simple LinkedIn trick to make interviews freshIn This Episode:04:08 – The Power of Over-Preparation08:00 – Interviewing Peter Mandelson 12:27 – The LinkedIn Trick for Better Questions16:54 – Why Listening Is the #1 Skill18:30 – Never Put Yourself in the Story23:30 – The Chocolate Interview Moment29:35 – Following the Audience, Not the Plan50:47 – Why You Must Watch Your RecordingsIf you want to run better interviews – and better conversations – this episode is for you.We hope you enjoy it.———————Connect with Alfie: LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/alfie-speakeasyguy-joey/ Website: https://alfiejoey.com/

Britain is changing prime ministers again: Keir Starmer is out after two years, with Greater Manchester mayor Andy Burnham the favourite to replace him — inheriting an underfunded defence plan and the wreckage of Peter Mandelson's Epstein-tainted appointment, all of it driven by the fear of Reform. Chris and Matt then ask what happens when the mole is a machine, using Anthropic's Claude blackmail experiment and Melissa Graves's Lawfare essay to reframe AI in intelligence work as a counterintelligence problem. Finally, Ken Harbaugh's Atlantic report on Ukraine's "warrior-witches" — women running honeypots and directing drone strikes from occupied ground, where the oldest tradecraft still wins. Trigger Warning: In the last story after the second AD Break there is mention of violence against women in the Russian War on Ukraine Subscribe and share to stay ahead in the world of intelligence, global issues, and current affairs. Take our audience survey: https://forms.gle/eFx59XntNtiKzNQa8 Support Secrets and Spies Become a “Friend of the Podcast” on Patreon for £3/$4: https://www.patreon.com/SecretsAndSpies Buy merchandise from our Redbubble shop: https://www.redbubble.com/shop/ap/60934996 Buy us a coffee: https://buymeacoffee.com/secretsandspies Subscribe to our YouTube page: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCDVB23lrHr3KFeXq4VU36dg For more information about the podcast, check out our website: https://secretsandspiespodcast.com Articles discussed in today's episode "Keir Starmer to step down as prime minister two years after historic election victory" by Pippa Crerar | The Guardian: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2026/jun/22/keir-starmer-resigns-as-prime-minister "How UK's Keir Starmer went from election landslide to downfall" by Jill Lawless & Pan Pylas | Associated Press: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/how-uks-keir-starmer-went-from-election-landslide-to-downfall "Andy Burnham soft-launches his premiership" by Dan Bloom | Politico Europe: https://www.politico.eu/article/andy-burnham-uk-soft-launches-his-premiership/ "Starmer backs 5 billion drone overhaul for UK forces in DIP" by George Allison | UK Defence Journal: https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/starmer-backs-5-billion-drone-overhaul-for-uk-forces-in-dip/ "The Next Counterintelligence Problem Is Artificial" by Melissa Graves | Lawfare: https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/the-next-counterintelligence-problem-is-artificial "The Warrior-Witches of Ukraine's Resistance" by Ken Harbaugh | The Atlantic: https://www.theatlantic.com/international/2026/06/underground-intelligence-network-russia-ukraine/687578/ Connect with us on social media Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/secretsandspies.bsky.social Instagram: https://instagram.com/secretsandspies Facebook: https://facebook.com/secretsandspies Spoutible: https://spoutible.com/SecretsAndSpies Twitter/X: https://x.com/SecretsAndSpies Follow Chris and Matt on Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/chriscarrfilm.bsky.social https://bsky.app/profile/mattfulton.net Secrets and Spies is produced by Films & Podcasts LTD: https://filmsandpodcasts.co.uk/ Music by Andrew R. Bird Photos by Alamy, UK Government Secrets and Spies sits at the intersection of intelligence, covert action, real-world espionage, and broader geopolitics in a way that is digestible but serious. Hosted by filmmaker Chris Carr and writer Matt Fulton, each episode examines the very topics that real intelligence officers and analysts consider on a daily basis through the lens of global events and geopolitics, featuring expert insights from former spies, authors, and journalists. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

A leaked dossier known as Project Fish reportedly claims that Lord Peter Mandelson was viewed by Russian intelligence as a “privileged contact” for more than three decades, beginning around the time he served as Labour's director of communications in the late 1980s and early 1990s. The dossier, reportedly compiled by a former British intelligence officer with knowledge of Russian operations, alleges that Mandelson was considered one of Russia's most significant influence opportunities inside British politics. The claims are explosive, but the reporting also makes clear that there is no concrete public evidence proving Mandelson acted as a Russian agent or betrayed Britain on Moscow's behalf. People close to Mandelson have dismissed the allegations as “nonsense” and deny that he ever acted improperly for Russia.The dossier also ties the Russia allegation to Mandelson's relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, suggesting that Epstein's connection to Mandelson may have created leverage or intelligence value for Russian services. That is where the story becomes especially sensitive: Mandelson has already faced scrutiny over his Epstein ties, including separate reporting that he allegedly forwarded confidential UK government information to Epstein during the financial crisis, prompting calls for investigations and questions about his judgment. But the Russia dossier itself appears contested, and critics have raised doubts about its credibility, with one Russia-focused commentator describing the allegations as implausible and resembling “news-cycle adjacent fantasies.” So the heart of the story is not that Mandelson has been proven to be a Russian asset, but that a leaked intelligence-style dossier is now adding another layer of suspicion to an already toxic record of access, judgment, Epstein proximity, and elite political vulnerability.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Lord Peter Mandelson is Russia's 'Privilege Contact,' According to Leaked Dossier | IBTimes UK

A leaked dossier known as Project Fish reportedly claims that Lord Peter Mandelson was viewed by Russian intelligence as a “privileged contact” for more than three decades, beginning around the time he served as Labour's director of communications in the late 1980s and early 1990s. The dossier, reportedly compiled by a former British intelligence officer with knowledge of Russian operations, alleges that Mandelson was considered one of Russia's most significant influence opportunities inside British politics. The claims are explosive, but the reporting also makes clear that there is no concrete public evidence proving Mandelson acted as a Russian agent or betrayed Britain on Moscow's behalf. People close to Mandelson have dismissed the allegations as “nonsense” and deny that he ever acted improperly for Russia.The dossier also ties the Russia allegation to Mandelson's relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, suggesting that Epstein's connection to Mandelson may have created leverage or intelligence value for Russian services. That is where the story becomes especially sensitive: Mandelson has already faced scrutiny over his Epstein ties, including separate reporting that he allegedly forwarded confidential UK government information to Epstein during the financial crisis, prompting calls for investigations and questions about his judgment. But the Russia dossier itself appears contested, and critics have raised doubts about its credibility, with one Russia-focused commentator describing the allegations as implausible and resembling “news-cycle adjacent fantasies.” So the heart of the story is not that Mandelson has been proven to be a Russian asset, but that a leaked intelligence-style dossier is now adding another layer of suspicion to an already toxic record of access, judgment, Epstein proximity, and elite political vulnerability.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Lord Peter Mandelson is Russia's 'Privilege Contact,' According to Leaked Dossier | IBTimes UKBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

A leaked dossier known as Project Fish reportedly claims that Lord Peter Mandelson was viewed by Russian intelligence as a “privileged contact” for more than three decades, beginning around the time he served as Labour's director of communications in the late 1980s and early 1990s. The dossier, reportedly compiled by a former British intelligence officer with knowledge of Russian operations, alleges that Mandelson was considered one of Russia's most significant influence opportunities inside British politics. The claims are explosive, but the reporting also makes clear that there is no concrete public evidence proving Mandelson acted as a Russian agent or betrayed Britain on Moscow's behalf. People close to Mandelson have dismissed the allegations as “nonsense” and deny that he ever acted improperly for Russia.The dossier also ties the Russia allegation to Mandelson's relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, suggesting that Epstein's connection to Mandelson may have created leverage or intelligence value for Russian services. That is where the story becomes especially sensitive: Mandelson has already faced scrutiny over his Epstein ties, including separate reporting that he allegedly forwarded confidential UK government information to Epstein during the financial crisis, prompting calls for investigations and questions about his judgment. But the Russia dossier itself appears contested, and critics have raised doubts about its credibility, with one Russia-focused commentator describing the allegations as implausible and resembling “news-cycle adjacent fantasies.” So the heart of the story is not that Mandelson has been proven to be a Russian asset, but that a leaked intelligence-style dossier is now adding another layer of suspicion to an already toxic record of access, judgment, Epstein proximity, and elite political vulnerability.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Lord Peter Mandelson is Russia's 'Privilege Contact,' According to Leaked Dossier | IBTimes UKBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Keir Starmer's Britain is facing yet another law-and-order meltdown — and Julia Hartley-Brewer is not letting ministers off the hook.Rochdale grooming gang ringleader Shabbir Ahmed, known sickeningly as “Daddy”, is due to be released from prison despite being convicted of 30 rape and sexual offences against girls, including a child as young as 12. Stripped of British citizenship but unable to be deported to Pakistan thanks to an immigration loophole, his victims say they were promised justice — and betrayed again.Former military intelligence officer Philip Ingram joins Julia to ask why Parliament can pass emergency laws for British Steel, but not to protect British girls.Also: a BBC investigation tracks down convicted people smuggler Twanna Jamal, once branded the “godfather” of the French migrant camps, allegedly living under a false name in Leicester, driving a BMW and running businesses — while immigration authorities appear powerless or unwilling to act.Julia and Philip also take aim at Shabana Mahmood's immigration crackdown, warning that its “disproportionate impact” loophole could leave foreign offenders free to remain in Britain.There's also fury over a growing £5 billion defence black hole, with questions over whether Starmer's promised military uplift exists at all — while Russian drones, spy ships and sanctioned tankers probe Britain's nuclear sites and NATO defences.Plus: claims from a former MI6 officer that Peter Mandelson was viewed by Russian intelligence as a “privileged contact”, and what that really means in the world of espionage.Then Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg joins Julia from College Green to argue that Britain must change primary legislation, override human rights obstacles and leave the ECHR if it wants to deport foreign criminals and protect the public.And finally: Starmer issues a formal apology to victims of forced adoption — but Rees-Mogg questions whether today's maternity scandals should be the Government's real priority.Julia Hartley-Brewer broadcasts on Talk from Monday to Thursday, 10AM to 1PM.Available on YouTube and streaming platforms, along with DAB+ radio and your smart speaker. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer has come under mounting political pressure as renewed scrutiny surrounding the Jeffrey Epstein files has reignited questions about the role of prominent political figures connected to the scandal. The controversy intensified following developments involving Peter Mandelson, whose past association with Epstein has resurfaced in newly discussed records and testimony circulating in the United States. Critics across the political spectrum have argued that the situation places Starmer in an uncomfortable position because Mandelson remains a powerful and influential figure within Labour circles despite the long-running controversy surrounding his links to Epstein. Opposition politicians and some voices within Starmer's own party have demanded greater clarity about Mandelson's relationship with Epstein and whether any additional information contained in the emerging files could further implicate figures tied to the British political establishment.The pressure on Starmer stems not only from Mandelson's history with Epstein but also from the broader political optics of appearing reluctant to distance the government from individuals connected to the disgraced financier. As new material from the Epstein files continues to circulate and international investigations expand, critics argue that Starmer must confront questions about Mandelson's role directly rather than allowing the issue to linger in the background. The controversy has created an awkward political dilemma for the prime minister: Mandelson is widely seen as a veteran strategist and influential voice within Labour's political orbit, yet his association with Epstein has repeatedly sparked public backlash. With the Epstein files continuing to generate headlines in both the United States and the United Kingdom, Starmer now faces intensifying calls from opponents and transparency advocates to address the issue head-on and clarify his government's stance on figures linked to the scandal.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

In France, prosecutors in Paris have opened multiple new investigations into suspected crimes connected to late U.S. financier Jeffrey Epstein following the public release of millions of pages of previously sealed documents by U.S. authorities. Authorities announced two preliminary probes — one focused on alleged sex abuse and human trafficking offenses and the other on potential financial and economic wrongdoing, including money laundering, corruption, and tax fraud — with the goal of examining whether any French nationals or activities in France played a role in Epstein's network. Prosecutors are also encouraging potential victims in France to come forward and are revisiting earlier inquiries, including the case of French modeling agent Jean-Luc Brunel, an Epstein associate who was charged with sex crimes but died in custody before trial. The investigations extend to high-profile figures, with probes under way into former culture minister Jack Lang and his daughter for suspected tax fraud linked to Epstein-related financial arrangements, as well as scrutiny of a French diplomat accused of improper conduct based on emails in the released files.In the United Kingdom, police have stepped up inquiries into potential ties between Epstein and activities on British soil as documents released by U.S. authorities shed light on previously unseen details. U.K. law enforcement agencies are examining whether Epstein may have used private flights in and out of UK airports, notably Stansted and Luton, to traffic women — claims prompted by flight logs and passenger lists found in the newly disclosed files. Multiple police forces, including Essex, Thames Valley, Surrey, and the Metropolitan Police, are coordinating through a national group to assess emerging allegations linked to trafficking, immigration irregularities, and connections to British-linked associates, with inquiries involving figures such as Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor (both of whom have denied wrongdoing). The coordinated effort is part of a broader response to the global revelations from the Epstein files and reflects growing political and legal pressure in Britain to investigate any potential abuses or misconduct tied to Epstein's network.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Paris prosecutors open two new Epstein probes and call on victims to come forwardPolice probe claims Epstein trafficked British victims through Stansted | The IndependentBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The developments center on renewed police scrutiny of sexual misconduct allegations connected to Prince Andrew and Jeffrey Epstein, with authorities reviewing both historical claims and newly surfaced material. Investigators are reassessing evidence linked to Epstein's trafficking network, including accounts from multiple women who allege inappropriate conduct during encounters tied to Epstein's properties and social circle. These claims are being examined alongside previously known accusations, such as those brought by Virginia Giuffre, which were settled civilly without any admission of guilt.At the same time, the investigation appears to be widening in scope, with police not only revisiting sexual allegations but also examining broader questions about Andrew's conduct and associations during his relationship with Epstein. This includes whether individuals in his orbit, including security personnel or others connected to his movements, may have witnessed or overlooked potential wrongdoing. While no new charges have been confirmed and Andrew continues to deny all allegations, the ongoing inquiry reflects increasing pressure on authorities to fully explore both past accusations and any new evidence emerging from recently released Epstein-related files.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Met Police is probing 'whole range of sexual allegations' against Andrew, chief confirms - and says Peter Mandelson is being investigated over €500billion bailout email he sent Jeffrey Epstein | Daily Mail Online

Keir Starmer has resigned amidst enormous pressure from within the Labour Party. The question is, what does this change actually mean for a Great Britain that seems on the cusp of social upheaval...I'm doing this episode from the ARC conference in London.SPONSOR: American FinancingMany homeowners have more equity than they realize but are turning to credit cards instead of putting that equity to work. American Financing's salary-based mortgage consultants can help wipe out high-interest debt, with mortgage rates currently in the 5s and customers saving an average of $800 a month. There are no upfront fees, and starting now could even delay two mortgage payments.NMLS 182334, nmlsconsumeraccess.org. APR for rates in the 5s start at 6.327% for well qualified borrowers. Call 866-886-2026 for details about credit costs and terms. Average savings based on borrowers who save over $199.99.Call 866-886-2026 or visit https://www.AmericanFinancing.net/MTA-----GET YOUR MERCH HERE: https://shop.nickjfreitas.com/BECOME A MEMBER OF THE IC: https://NickJFreitas.comInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/nickjfreitas/Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/NickFreitasVATwitter: https://twitter.com/NickJFreitasYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@NickjfreitasTikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@nickjfreitas3.000:00:00 – Starmer steps down: seven prime ministers in ten years 00:01:00 – How Labour won: the 2024 landslide that wasn't 00:02:52 – The scandals: Angela Rayner and Peter Mandelson 00:05:00 – Labour wiped out: local elections, Reform and the Greens 00:09:52 – Why Starmer had to go: Burnham and the Manchester by-election 00:11:22 – Andy Burnham's agenda: tax, housing and welfare 00:14:23 – Socialism or fascism? Public-private control of industry 00:19:23 – Will Labour ever tackle immigration? 00:21:29 – The Denmark model: open borders vs. the welfare state 00:23:04 – Is Britain becoming ungovernable?

In September 2025, Peter Mandelson — then the United Kingdom's Ambassador to the United States — was dismissed (effectively recalled and fired) by Prime Minister Keir Starmer after revelations about his longstanding social relationship with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein surfaced. Emails published earlier that year showed Mandelson had maintained contact with Epstein after Epstein's 2008 conviction and had expressed supportive sentiments toward him, which diplomats said was far deeper than what had been known at the time of his appointment. Those communications raised questions about his judgment and suitability for the high-profile diplomatic post, prompting Starmer to remove him from the position immediately.In February 2026, the scandal escalated when authorities arrested Mandelson on 23 February on suspicion of misconduct in public office. This followed the release of internal documents and emails from the U.S. Department of Justice's Epstein files suggesting he may have shared sensitive government information with Epstein during his time in government in 2009–10. As part of the fallout, Mandelson resigned from the House of Lords and the Labour Party, and British police executed search warrants at his residences as part of a criminal investigation. His arrest reflects widening legal and political consequences from the Epstein file revelations that have also embroiled other high-profile figures.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Queen Elizabeth II is accused by unnamed royal sources of repeatedly shielding Prince Andrew and ignoring warnings about his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein. The claims center partly on documents indicating that the Queen supported Andrew's appointment as Britain's special trade representative in 2000, a position that gave him extensive international access and placed him in contact with wealthy business figures. Critics now argue that the role may have provided Andrew with opportunities to pursue questionable dealings connected to Epstein, including unproven allegations that he benefited financially from business introductions. One unidentified insider goes much further, claiming that the Queen knew about Epstein, the girls and the trafficking but protected Andrew because he was her favorite son. Those allegations remain unverified, and Andrew has consistently denied criminal wrongdoing.The broader suggestion is that the Queen's loyalty to Andrew may have overridden concerns within the royal family and government about his judgment and conduct. King Charles, then Prince of Wales, was reportedly skeptical of Andrew's suitability for the trade role, but the appointment moved forward with support from figures including Peter Mandelson. The claims have resurfaced as authorities examine whether Andrew improperly shared confidential trade information with Epstein, placing renewed pressure on the royal family to explain what palace officials knew and when they knew it. However, much of the account relies on anonymous sources, recycled tabloid allegations and unrelated conspiracy theories, meaning the central accusation—that Elizabeth knowingly covered up Andrew's Epstein connections—has not been established by official findings or tested in court.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Queen Elizabeth Blindly Covered Up Ex-Prince Andrew's Epstein Ties, Royal Insider Claims | IBTimes UK

Queen Elizabeth II is accused by unnamed royal sources of repeatedly shielding Prince Andrew and ignoring warnings about his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein. The claims center partly on documents indicating that the Queen supported Andrew's appointment as Britain's special trade representative in 2000, a position that gave him extensive international access and placed him in contact with wealthy business figures. Critics now argue that the role may have provided Andrew with opportunities to pursue questionable dealings connected to Epstein, including unproven allegations that he benefited financially from business introductions. One unidentified insider goes much further, claiming that the Queen knew about Epstein, the girls and the trafficking but protected Andrew because he was her favorite son. Those allegations remain unverified, and Andrew has consistently denied criminal wrongdoing.The broader suggestion is that the Queen's loyalty to Andrew may have overridden concerns within the royal family and government about his judgment and conduct. King Charles, then Prince of Wales, was reportedly skeptical of Andrew's suitability for the trade role, but the appointment moved forward with support from figures including Peter Mandelson. The claims have resurfaced as authorities examine whether Andrew improperly shared confidential trade information with Epstein, placing renewed pressure on the royal family to explain what palace officials knew and when they knew it. However, much of the account relies on anonymous sources, recycled tabloid allegations and unrelated conspiracy theories, meaning the central accusation—that Elizabeth knowingly covered up Andrew's Epstein connections—has not been established by official findings or tested in court.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Queen Elizabeth Blindly Covered Up Ex-Prince Andrew's Epstein Ties, Royal Insider Claims | IBTimes UKBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

The developments center on renewed police scrutiny of sexual misconduct allegations connected to Prince Andrew and Jeffrey Epstein, with authorities reviewing both historical claims and newly surfaced material. Investigators are reassessing evidence linked to Epstein's trafficking network, including accounts from multiple women who allege inappropriate conduct during encounters tied to Epstein's properties and social circle. These claims are being examined alongside previously known accusations, such as those brought by Virginia Giuffre, which were settled civilly without any admission of guilt.At the same time, the investigation appears to be widening in scope, with police not only revisiting sexual allegations but also examining broader questions about Andrew's conduct and associations during his relationship with Epstein. This includes whether individuals in his orbit, including security personnel or others connected to his movements, may have witnessed or overlooked potential wrongdoing. While no new charges have been confirmed and Andrew continues to deny all allegations, the ongoing inquiry reflects increasing pressure on authorities to fully explore both past accusations and any new evidence emerging from recently released Epstein-related files.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Met Police is probing 'whole range of sexual allegations' against Andrew, chief confirms - and says Peter Mandelson is being investigated over €500billion bailout email he sent Jeffrey Epstein | Daily Mail OnlineBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

Queen Elizabeth II is accused by unnamed royal sources of repeatedly shielding Prince Andrew and ignoring warnings about his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein. The claims center partly on documents indicating that the Queen supported Andrew's appointment as Britain's special trade representative in 2000, a position that gave him extensive international access and placed him in contact with wealthy business figures. Critics now argue that the role may have provided Andrew with opportunities to pursue questionable dealings connected to Epstein, including unproven allegations that he benefited financially from business introductions. One unidentified insider goes much further, claiming that the Queen knew about Epstein, the girls and the trafficking but protected Andrew because he was her favorite son. Those allegations remain unverified, and Andrew has consistently denied criminal wrongdoing.The broader suggestion is that the Queen's loyalty to Andrew may have overridden concerns within the royal family and government about his judgment and conduct. King Charles, then Prince of Wales, was reportedly skeptical of Andrew's suitability for the trade role, but the appointment moved forward with support from figures including Peter Mandelson. The claims have resurfaced as authorities examine whether Andrew improperly shared confidential trade information with Epstein, placing renewed pressure on the royal family to explain what palace officials knew and when they knew it. However, much of the account relies on anonymous sources, recycled tabloid allegations and unrelated conspiracy theories, meaning the central accusation—that Elizabeth knowingly covered up Andrew's Epstein connections—has not been established by official findings or tested in court.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Queen Elizabeth Blindly Covered Up Ex-Prince Andrew's Epstein Ties, Royal Insider Claims | IBTimes UKBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

How effective will new UK laws be at protecting children online? Ed Balls and George Osborne hear a question from Natalie Fleet, the Minister for Safeguarding and Violence Against Women and Girls. They discuss the technology that can help, the importance of legislation keeping pace with risks, and the legal decision that made social media platforms more likely to host misleading content.Plus, why is the government now prioritising inflation over low unemployment? Is it possible to tackle them both at the same time? And what could a future Prime Minister do towards this? Ed and George assess the history and economics behind it.They also discuss the importance of historical education as a politician and an economist. Ed talks about the importance of learning from mistakes of the past, and George recalls how two paintings in No 11 Downing Street paid tribute to an influential 1925 dinner between then-Chancellor Winston Churchill and economist John Maynard Keynes.And finally, how do Ed and George feel about comedians rarely impersonating them? The pair show off their own impressions of William Hague, Gordon Brown, and Peter Mandelson.We love hearing from you, so please don't forget to send all your EMQs to questions@politicalcurrency and make sure to include a voice note of your question or send a question to our social media handles:

For the final episode of this series, we look at some of the stories that we're leaving unresolved in our ‘News Quiz 2026 Summer Break Cliffhanger Special'. This includes the latest on the Peter Mandelson scandal and the back and forth between Trump, Israel and Iran. We also discuss the British animals which might make it onto our banknotes, and Andy challenges the panel on their best ways to improve football ahead of this year's Men's World Cup.This week's panel is Pierre Novellie, Alasdair Beckett-King, Coco Khan and Desiree Burch.Written by Andy Zaltzman.With additional material by: Lotte Allan, Angela Channell, Eve Delaney and Katie Storey Producer: Georgia Keating Executive Producer: Pete Strauss Production Coordinator: Asha Osborne-Grinter Sound Editor: Marc Willcox Recorded by David ThomasA BBC Studios Production for Radio 4.

A newly surfaced photograph from Department of Justice files shows former Prince Andrew—now Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor—sitting barefoot in a bathrobe alongside Jeffrey Epstein and British politician Peter Mandelson at a wooden table, believed to be on Martha's Vineyard around 1999 or 2000. The image is one of the first known photos placing all three men together in a casual setting, adding to the growing body of visual and documentary evidence linking Andrew to Epstein's social circle during that period.The photo's release has intensified scrutiny on Andrew's longstanding relationship with Epstein, particularly as it coincides with ongoing investigations and previously disclosed communications suggesting continued contact even after Epstein's criminal history was widely known. Authorities in the U.K. are examining allegations that Andrew shared confidential information with Epstein during his time as a trade envoy, while the broader document releases continue to raise questions about how deeply embedded Epstein was within elite political and social networks.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Former Prince Andrew pictured barefoot in bathrobe with Peter Mandelson, Epstein | Fox News

The Epstein files are being framed as more than another royal scandal in Britain; they are being presented as a full institutional crisis hitting the monarchy, Parliament, and the Metropolitan Police all at once. The reporting argues that the newly released U.S. Justice Department documents have accelerated a collapse in public trust, with polling showing support for the monarchy falling below majority levels and approval ratings for senior royals dropping sharply. The deepest royal damage centers on Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, who was reportedly arrested in February 2026 on suspicion of misconduct in public office over questions about whether he forwarded classified government reports to Epstein while serving as a trade envoy. No charges have been brought, but the arrest and open investigation have turned Epstein from a reputational stain on the royal family into a live legal and constitutional problem.The political and policing fallout is described as just as severe. Keir Starmer's government is portrayed as being badly damaged by the Peter Mandelson connection, after Mandelson's Epstein relationship and later document releases reportedly helped fuel a Labour revolt, cabinet resignation pressure, and growing questions about Starmer's judgment. At the same time, the Metropolitan Police is under scrutiny over allegations that officers had proximity to Epstein-linked social circles, that Epstein-connected flights entered and left Britain without meaningful scrutiny, and that a London property tied to Epstein was not pursued more aggressively despite concerns about young women being housed there under coercive conditions. The broader point is that Britain is not dealing with one isolated Epstein-related embarrassment, but a convergence of failures across the Crown, the government, and law enforcement — the very institutions that were supposed to prevent this kind of power-protected abuse from festering in the first place.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Epstein Files Are Tearing Britain's Institutions ApartBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

If you are worried about China taking over due to having better robots than the yanks, I got mixed messages for ya here. This was created using DeepSeek v4 Pro. Remember when DeepSeek could do the same thing as chatGPT but on shitty processors and not much RAM? All those stocks shit themselves? Oh what memories. Would have been a great time to buy NVIDIA stocks. I didn't, if you're asking....It's pretty good but it really didn't follow the instruction in the prompt that Joel Hill is Jack the Insider on the transcript. So that's a minus point. But also, this took fucking ages to generate. It's better than lots of the yankee slop but damn son this took MINUTES. So they might take over if we are patient or whatever. Enjoy the episode. ----------------------------------------------Joel Hill (Jack the Insider) and Hong Kong Jack return for a sprawling episode that tackles two of the biggest stories shaping politics in 2026. The pair open with the jaw-dropping Redbridge poll putting One Nation at 31% of the primary vote — a number that would all but wipe the National Party off the federal map and potentially deliver Anthony Albanese a strengthened majority government by splintering the right. Joel and Jack clash over whether culture-war grievances or material concerns are driving the surge, while drawing historical parallels to Joh for Canberra and the DLP split of the 1950s.The conversation then crosses hemispheres for a tour through UK chaos: Peter Mandelson's leaked dossier exposing a rudderless No. 10 under Keir Starmer, Nicola Sturgeon's estranged husband pleading guilty to embezzling SNP donations on a surreal shopping spree of Lalique salt shakers, seven Dysons, and a motorhome with four miles on the clock, and a deeply troubling police body-cam incident that has reignited the two-tier policing debate ahead of three critical by-elections.The centrepiece of the episode is a sober, hour-long deep dive into the COVID-19 pandemic and what Australia has refused to learn. The Two Jacks lay out the true death toll (perhaps 22 to 69 million globally), the devastating scale of long COVID, the vaccine rollout failures, the absurdities of hotel quarantine with rubbish bags over heads, and why governments and public health officials are desperate to avoid a Royal Commission. They close by asking whether the next pandemic will meet a population that has permanently lost trust in its leaders — and whether we'll simply repeat the mistakes of both COVID and the Spanish flu.Sport provides a lighter coda: the Carlton revival under an interim coach, James Hird's awkward candidacy at Essendon, the expanded 48-team World Cup that nobody seems excited about, and a formidable New Zealand Test side taking on England at Lord's.00:00:25 — Introduction Joel welcomes listeners to Episode 159, recorded 4 June. Today: Australian political news, a check-in on the UK, and a deep dive into the COVID-19 pandemic.00:01:21 — The Redbridge Poll: One Nation at 31% The AFR's Redbridge poll: One Nation 31%, Labor 28%, LNP 20%, Greens 12%. The two-party preferred is now being calculated as One Nation versus Labor — a seismic shift in how Australian politics is measured.00:03:12 — Not Just a Protest Vote Jack argues this is real, not a re-run of Hanson's 1990s flash-in-the-pan. The South Australian state election and the Farrah by-election suggest One Nation support is durable. Joel counters that protest votes can be expressed at the ballot box and that Australians are tiring of pluralism.00:04:09 — If One Nation Succeeds, Labor Wins The cruel irony: One Nation's rise probably delivers Labor government. The National Party could simply disappear. The DLP kept the Coalition in power for decades as an anti-Labor party; One Nation may do the reverse.00:05:46 — Scrutiny and Splintering Joel notes One Nation's policies are "two-sentence fragments" and motherhood statements. When proper scrutiny arrives, the contradictions will surface. Hanson's parliamentary attendance is as poor as imaginable.00:08:22 — The Third Rail Jack argues populists succeed because they discuss what polite society won't: immigration, culture wars, welcome to country rituals. The major parties must engage these topics or cede the ground entirely.00:11:34 — Feeling Unheard The core driver, Jack contends: voters feel sneered at and silenced by mainstream politics. It's not about flag counts, it's about being listened to.00:13:50 — What Actually Drives Votes Joel pushes back: voting determinants are the household economy, migration, climate change — not culture war trivia. Culture wars "don't amount to a hill of beans" at the ballot box.00:14:51 — The DLP Parallel Both agree the One Nation phenomenon most closely resembles the DLP split of the 1950s and 60s — a right-wing fracture that delivered Labor government after Labor government.00:17:18 — The Republic Referendum Lesson Jack recalls the 1999 republic referendum: pro-republicans split between models rather than uniting, scuppering the whole project. Voters will vote their preference even knowing it helps their enemy.00:19:32 — UK Parallels: Accommodate or Fight? Significant figures in the UK Tory party are debating whether to fight Reform or reach an accommodation. Tony Abbott recently said the Liberal Party won't criticise Pauline Hanson.00:21:48 — Joh for Canberra Redux Imre Salusinszky's comparison: this is "Joh for Canberra" all over again. But Joel notes Joh's moment lasted months; One Nation's has already lasted years.00:24:08 — State Election Previews Joel predicts the Victorian state election will be chaotic and peculiar — a government that's been in power too long, an opposition that may not be up to the task, and One Nation peeling votes from safe Labor seats. NSW will give a clearer reading.00:25:44 — Hanson "Ready to Govern" — from the Senate? Pauline Hanson announced she's ready to govern. Joel asks: shouldn't she contest a lower-house seat first? Jack recalls the only precedent: John Gorton became PM while still a senator, but had to be eased into Kooyong.00:28:20 — The Mandelson Dossier: Starmer's Empty Suit Jack's read of the leaked Mandelson documents: ministers don't know what the PM wants, there's zero respect or fear of his authority. Starmer comes across as an empty chair. One minister's text: "Every meeting with Labour MPs — it's all about who can we tax to pay benefits to other people."00:30:50 — Mandelson's Legal Peril Mandelson is under police investigation for misconduct in public office. Could face charges — the seriousness depends on whether it's mere misconduct or genuine bribery for foreign interests.00:31:49 — The Nicola Sturgeon Saga Her estranged husband has pleaded guilty to embezzling roughly £400,000 in SNP donations. The shopping list: six high-end coffee machines, seven Dyson vacuums, Lalique salt and pepper shakers, Montblanc pens, Swiss watches, an iJag, part of a Volkswagen, and a motorhome with four miles on the clock parked at his 92-year-old mother's house. Nicola claims she "didn't go in the kitchen much."00:34:20 — The BBC Interview Laura Kuenssberg's forensic interview with Sturgeon — "not quite Prince Andrew, but not much better." Sturgeon has been cleared by Police Scotland, but her reputation, already damaged by the Alex Salmond trial, is now in tatters.00:35:05 — Will He Go to Prison? £400,000 is a substantial sum. With another £600,000 unaccounted for, a custodial sentence seems likely. The money was ring-fenced for a second independence referendum push.00:36:50 — Money Laundering or Conspicuous Consumption? Joel wonders if the bizarre purchases — multiple watches on the same day — were an amateur money-laundering attempt: buy goods with SNP funds, sell them quietly for cash.00:38:23 — UK By-elections: Makerfield Looms Three by-elections on 18 June, including the critical Makerfield contest. Andy Burnham, Greater Manchester's high-profile mayor, is the tepid favourite. Low turnout could help him return to Westminster.00:39:30 — The Body-Cam Incident A white teenager accused of racially vilifying a Sikh man was stabbed — and police arrested the bleeding victim, not the attacker. Body-cam footage shows the victim saying "I can't breathe, I've been stabbed" while officers dismiss him. Joel calls the footage "just awful."00:41:22 — Two-Tier Policing Jack traces UK policing's overcorrection: after the Macpherson/Lawrence report, guidelines were rewritten so aggressively that they've produced a pattern of questionable enforcement that devastates community trust — and plays directly into Tommy Robinson's hands.00:42:08 — NSW Police on Four Corners Joel recommends the harrowing Four Corners investigation: bashings in custody, false arrests, an officer who threw body-cam footage into Sydney Harbour, and two undercover officers jailed for a savage assault. The problem today is general duties policing, not the specialist squads of the 1980s. Some command areas are far worse than others — a leadership failure.00:44:55 — Victoria Police: Under-Resourced, Not Corrupt Joel shares an anecdote: two divisional vans for 80,000 people in outer-east Melbourne. Tough work being a police officer; even tougher being a good one.The COVID-19 Reckoning00:45:09 — Why This Matters Joel sets the frame: we parked COVID in 2023 with a hangover but never understood what we'd been through. Today's episode aims to crack that problem.00:45:51 — The True Death Toll Officially: 7 million dead. But most countries stopped testing and stopped reporting cause-of-death data to the WHO. Using excess mortality, the real toll is between 22 and 69 million — at the high end, exceeding the Spanish flu.00:47:02 — Long COVID's Shadow Roughly 400 million people globally (6% of the population) have experienced long COVID. In Australia alone, between 200,000 and 500,000 people are living with or have lived with the condition. Second infections can be worse. Emerging links to cardiovascular disease, type 2 diabetes, and accelerated dementia.00:49:43 — The Collective Amnesia Governments worldwide have "a collective embarrassment" about how they handled the pandemic, Jack says. They want it in the history books and forgotten. Joel says this is a grave mistake for public trust — and for public health, given COVID is now a permanent fixture alongside flu season.00:50:50 — Why Excess Deaths Are the Only Honest Metric All other figures are "kind of made up" because attribution methods vary wildly between countries. Excess deaths remain elevated in Australia and most nations.00:51:25 — Children and COVID Bobby Kennedy Jr. removed under-18s from government-supported vaccines in the US. Joel argues this is a disastrous move given mounting evidence that childhood COVID infection leads to higher rates of long-term chronic illness.00:52:47 — Why No Royal Commission? Not just politicians protecting themselves — public health officials and much of the media wanted to avoid scrutiny of their judgments and actions during the pandemic.00:53:32 — The Media's Abdication Jack watched "a lot" of Daniel Andrews's daily press conferences. Only two journalists ever asked pertinent questions: Rachel Baxendale and Leigh Sales. Nobody asked why curfews, why beach arrests, why the disparate impact on tradies and cafe owners while the "laptop class" actually made money working from home.00:56:14 — Andrews's Immense Popularity Joel adds context: Andrews was wildly popular at the time, which partly explains the media's deference — though Jack insists that shouldn't have mattered.00:57:34 — The Curfew Nonsense Curfews were about giving law enforcement the easiest possible environment, Joel says — and should have been acknowledged as such and wound back sooner. Meanwhile, Bondi's wealthy swam en masse while Western Sydney's working-class communities were treated harshly.00:57:59 — The Vaccine Rollout Failure The Morrison government bet everything on AstraZeneca — the non-mRNA, first-available vaccine. Then rare blood-clotting issues emerged (seven deaths, mainly men aged 40–49). Meanwhile, Australia was left waiting for Pfizer and other mRNA vaccines because no other supply deals had been secured.00:59:37 — Omicron Breaks the Pandemic's Back The Omicron variant emerged from South Africa: more infectious but far less lethal. Combined with 95%+ vaccination rates among Australians over 18, it effectively ended the acute phase — though at the cost of entrenched mistrust.01:00:38 — Government Overreach and Broken Trust Jack's core criticism: governments outsourced decision-making to public health officials rather than making political judgments that balanced competing interests. Joel counters that it would have been a "bold move" for politicians with no scientific background to contradict public health advice.01:02:19 — "Just Let It Rip" Was Never an Option The three countries with the highest COVID mortality — Brazil (highest), United States (second), India (third) — were all led by populist governments that largely refused mandates. Letting it rip was devastating.01:03:27 — The ADF Quarantine Scandal Scott Morrison refused to allow ADF quarantine facilities to be used for returning travellers. Instead, people were crammed into hotels with gaps under the doors. Joel recalls the "rubbish bags over heads" episode in Victoria — dark green plastic bags as infection control.01:05:00 — The Inquiry's Recommendations Create a proper Australian CDC. Release expert advice publicly. Better national planning with clear political accountability. And critically: politicians must own the big decisions on freedoms and spending instead of hiding behind experts.01:06:01 — The Next Pandemic There will be another one. If it's a respiratory, airborne pathogen like COVID, similar circumstances will return. Are we ready? Probably not. Will we close the country again? The economic damage — unemployment hitting 7.5% in 2020 — was enormous, even if it recovered to 3.5% by pandemic's end.01:08:06 — Who Was Left Behind? The arts community was inexplicably excluded from JobSeeker and JobKeeper. Meanwhile, the "laptop class" working from home effectively got a 15% pay rise by eliminating commuting costs. Bunnings did very well; so did companies that kept JobKeeper without passing it to employees.01:11:14 — The Human Cost of Lockdowns Public housing towers in Flemington were locked down. Joel recalls one family: an African-Australian single mother with nine children in a two-bedroom commission flat, trapped. Jack calls what happened with schools "disgraceful." But Joel notes the evidence now shows childhood COVID infection has serious long-term health consequences, complicating the retrospective judgment.01:13:59 — Will We Learn Anything? Jack's bleak prediction: the next pandemic is probably far enough away that we'll take no notice of COVID's lessons and make the same mistakes. Joel agrees — we didn't learn from the Spanish flu a century ago either.01:15:51 — Malcolm Roberts and Vaccine Misinformation The One Nation senator claims 70,000 Australians died from COVID vaccines — a figure with no evidentiary support, built by misattributing excess deaths. In reality, mRNA technology is now being deployed as a cancer treatment, showing promise against bowel and pancreatic cancers.01:17:36 — Trust Destroyed If the next pandemic arrives within this generation, governments will face a population that has lost faith. If it takes 50 years, the damage may have faded. Western Australia, meanwhile, locked itself down with negligible deaths and actually loved the isolation — provided the iron ore and LNG ships kept moving.01:20:37 — The Spanish Flu Echo Joel's closing historical note: Australia's response to the Spanish flu in 1919–1921 was nearly identical to COVID — lockdown disputes, police arresting people for not wearing masks, states fighting the newly created federal Department of Health. The whole thing collapsed into acrimony the moment state rivalries flared. A century later, nothing had changed.01:21:48 — Federation as Fatal Flaw Jack adds: the three high-mortality COVID countries (US, Brazil, India) share a feature beyond populist leaders — they're all federations where central government power is limited. When "the emperor is far away and the mountains are high," coordinated pandemic response is nearly impossible.01:23:40 — No Appetite for Truth Jack's final word: nobody wants a proper inquiry. Not politicians, not public health officials, not much of the media. Joel disagrees on the importance — the pandemic's legacy still shapes how Australians think, vote, and trust.Sport01:27:40 — AFL Coaching Carousel Essendon and Carlton both need permanent coaches. Joel asks: is James Hird the right man for Essendon? Jack: 17 other clubs wouldn't give him an interview, but the Bombers may have backed themselves into a corner where appointing him is the only way out.01:28:53 — Merit vs Member Sentiment Rowan Connolly's question: would you take James Hird or John Longmire (five grand finals, one premiership, 60%+ win rate)? The answer is obvious on merit — but members and fans want the fairy tale.01:29:47 — Carlton's Astonishing Revival Three straight wins. Ranked 16th in forward-50 entries a month ago; now second. The game style is unrecognisable — no more bombing the ball to non-existent power forwards. Mitch McGovern's low, flat kick to Patrick Cripps for the match-winner against Geelong was emblematic of the transformation. Seven players aged 21 or younger are now getting games and bringing energy.01:33:18 — FIFA World Cup 2026: Nobody's Excited Expanded to 48 teams, Scotland are going — and a Scot in his 30s told Jack that neither he nor any of his mates (all doing well financially, normally first on the plane) have any interest. Ticket prices are "extraordinary." The final is at MetLife Stadium in New Jersey — which Jack describes as "Waverley on steroids, but even more bleak."01:36:08 — Australia's Draw Socceroos face Turkey first up, then the United States. Jack suggests marketing it as "Gallipoli Round Two." Spain are favourites; England, Brazil, and Germany are in the chasing pack.01:37:06 — Cricket: England v New Zealand, First Test at Lord's Joel runs through New Zealand's likely top seven — Latham, Conway, Williamson, Ravindra, Mitchell, Blundell — noting the first four have all made Test double-centuries. "Just about the best first six in Test cricket." With O'Rourke's express pace and Henry's quality, this is a formidable Black Caps side.01:38:40 — Stump Speech & Next Week Listener mail (including an "exposé of who Jack is") held over for next episode. For the record: Hong Kong Jack's CV includes HSC at Assumption College Kilmore, a stint as a carpenter, a law degree from Melbourne University, stints at Holding Redlich and Slater & Gordon, work as a litigation and immigration lawyer, and an appointment to the Refugee Review Tribunal as a federal cabinet appointee.01:40:39 — Outro Joel thanks listeners for hanging in for an extra ten minutes. Back next week.The Two Jacks is recorded weekly. Send your questions and feedback to the show.

UK police have begun reviewing material tied to Jeffrey Epstein that references Prince Andrew and Peter Mandelson, with investigators examining whether any criminal conduct linked to those associations occurred within the United Kingdom. The effort involves multiple law enforcement bodies working in coordination, supported by prosecutors who are providing early legal guidance as authorities sift through newly surfaced documents originating from U.S. disclosures. The focus is not just on past associations, but on whether those relationships crossed into territory that could justify formal charges under UK law.The scrutiny has intensified pressure on both men, with allegations centering on whether either of them improperly shared sensitive or privileged information with Epstein while holding influential public roles. Investigators are assessing whether those interactions amounted to misconduct or breaches of official duty, while both figures have denied any wrongdoing. The situation has triggered significant political and reputational fallout, with ongoing inquiries determining whether the material uncovered rises to the level of prosecutable offenses.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Anti-corruption cop in UK Epstein files probe vows 'relentless pursuit for justice' - The MirrorBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Andy is with Mark Steel and Ria Lina to ask the big questions...Are we still paying attention to the Iran war?Would Andrew Mountbatten Windsor make a good mechanic?Has anyone read the latest Peter Mandelson files? And the World Cup - a political own goal?

This week, Nish and Coco dig into the latest release of files around Peter Mandelson's appointment as UK ambassador to the US, and what the hundreds of emails and WhatsApps reveal about Labour's internal panic, Keir Starmer's leadership, and a government that seems increasingly unsure of itself.They also unpack Alan Milburn's major review into youth unemployment. Is Britain dealing with a generation that doesn't want to work, or a broken system that has stripped away routes into jobs, training and support?Plus: Nish and Coco are joined by Sabah Choudrey, speaker, consultant and founder of Trans Pride Brighton, to discuss the EHRC's new guidance on single-sex spaces, the worsening climate for trans people in the UK, and how a small network of gender-critical organisations has helped push trans rights into the centre of the culture war.GUESTS Zoë CrowtherSabah ChoudreyUSEFUL LINKSUpdated EHRC Code of Practice: GI's response | Gendered IntelligenceJoin the trans lobby on the 25th June: Mass Lobby for Trans Equality CHECK OUT THESE DEALS FROM OUR SPONSORS SHOPIFY: https://shopify.co.uk/podsavetheukVANTA: https://www.vanta.com/PSTUK AURA FRAMES: https://www.auraframes.com Code: PSTUK BT: Search ‘Why BT' to find out more.Pod Save the UK is an Intelligence Squared production for Crooked Media.Get in touch - contact us via email: podsavetheuk@crooked.comLike and follow us on Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/@PodSavetheUKInstagram: https://instagram.com/podsavetheukTikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@podsavetheukBlueSky: https://bsky.app/profile/podsavetheuk.crooked.comFacebook: https://facebook.com/podsavetheukX: https://x.com/podsavetheuk

The second tranche of messages related to the vetting of Peter Mandelson to be UK ambassador to the US were released on Monday – the gift that keeps on giving. Tim Shipman joins Patrick Gibbons to discuss his political column, which reveals some of the messages from Darren Jones MP which should have been included... yet they weren't – why? Tim talks to Patrick about how embarrassing the latest messages are for Labour, what they reveal about Keir Starmer's government and what he thinks more broadly about 'government by WhatsApp'.Produced by Patrick Gibbons. Become a Spectator subscriber today to access this podcast without adverts. Go to spectator.co.uk/adfree to find out more.For more Spectator podcasts, go to spectator.co.uk/podcasts.Contact us: podcast@spectator.co.uk Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

More than 1,500 pages of documents tied to Peter Mandelson's controversial appointment as Britain's ambassador to the United States were released, but the release immediately triggered more questions than answers. The files reportedly showed Mandelson aggressively lobbying for the Washington post, promising ministers they would “never regret” appointing him, while also revealing internal Labour messages that painted a bleak picture of Keir Starmer's leadership and the mood inside government. But huge sections of the document dump were redacted on national security and diplomatic grounds, and at least one key vetting summary was withheld because of an ongoing police investigation into Mandelson. Opposition MPs seized on the apparent absence of Starmer's direct paper trail, questioning how such a major appointment could happen with so little visible documentation from the Prime Minister himself.The most damaging unanswered questions revolve around what was missing: redacted pages, absent WhatsApp messages, disappearing-message settings, and undisclosed vetting material. No. 10 acknowledged that Starmer uses disappearing messages on WhatsApp, saying this can be consistent with government guidance, but critics argue it raises obvious questions about whether key communications about Mandelson's appointment are now gone. The release also intensified scrutiny of Mandelson's Epstein-related baggage, his reported security-vetting problems, and why the government pushed ahead with the appointment despite reputational and political warnings. In plain terms, the document dump was supposed to close the book, but instead it opened a new chapter: who backed Mandelson, what did Starmer know, what did the vetting process flag, and how much of the record has been hidden, deleted, or redacted?to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Five questions STILL unanswered after 1,000s of bombshell Mandelson docs - redacted files, missing texts and PM loathed

For years, Lord Peter Mandelson tried to minimize the depth and seriousness of his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, presenting it as a regrettable association from the past rather than an intimate, ongoing connection with a convicted sex offender. That version became harder to sustain as more material emerged showing that Mandelson's relationship with Epstein was not casual, distant, or easily dismissed. A handwritten note in Epstein's alleged birthday book reportedly referred to Epstein as Mandelson's “best pal,” while later disclosures showed communications and financial links involving Mandelson's husband after Epstein's 2008 conviction and 2009 release from custody. The central problem for Mandelson was not simply that he had known Epstein, but that the public record kept suggesting a relationship far closer, warmer, and more durable than the carefully managed explanations he had offered.The released emails blew those denials apart because they appeared to show Mandelson engaging with Epstein as a trusted confidant and useful contact, even after Epstein was already publicly known as a convicted sex offender. What had been framed as an embarrassing old connection suddenly looked like a continuing relationship that raised questions about judgment, access, influence, and whether political elites were still willing to treat Epstein as useful despite knowing exactly who he was. The fallout was severe: Mandelson's appointment as UK ambassador to Washington came under intense scrutiny, the vetting process became a political scandal, and the documents forced a broader reckoning over how much the government knew before putting him in such a sensitive diplomatic post. In the end, Mandelson's problem was that the paper trail did what years of polished denials could not withstand: it made the relationship look less like a mistake from the past and more like a liability that powerful people had tried to explain away until the emails made that impossible.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

A newly surfaced photograph from Department of Justice files shows former Prince Andrew—now Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor—sitting barefoot in a bathrobe alongside Jeffrey Epstein and British politician Peter Mandelson at a wooden table, believed to be on Martha's Vineyard around 1999 or 2000. The image is one of the first known photos placing all three men together in a casual setting, adding to the growing body of visual and documentary evidence linking Andrew to Epstein's social circle during that period.The photo's release has intensified scrutiny on Andrew's longstanding relationship with Epstein, particularly as it coincides with ongoing investigations and previously disclosed communications suggesting continued contact even after Epstein's criminal history was widely known. Authorities in the U.K. are examining allegations that Andrew shared confidential information with Epstein during his time as a trade envoy, while the broader document releases continue to raise questions about how deeply embedded Epstein was within elite political and social networks.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Former Prince Andrew pictured barefoot in bathrobe with Peter Mandelson, Epstein | Fox NewsBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

More than 1,500 pages of documents tied to Peter Mandelson's controversial appointment as Britain's ambassador to the United States were released, but the release immediately triggered more questions than answers. The files reportedly showed Mandelson aggressively lobbying for the Washington post, promising ministers they would “never regret” appointing him, while also revealing internal Labour messages that painted a bleak picture of Keir Starmer's leadership and the mood inside government. But huge sections of the document dump were redacted on national security and diplomatic grounds, and at least one key vetting summary was withheld because of an ongoing police investigation into Mandelson. Opposition MPs seized on the apparent absence of Starmer's direct paper trail, questioning how such a major appointment could happen with so little visible documentation from the Prime Minister himself.The most damaging unanswered questions revolve around what was missing: redacted pages, absent WhatsApp messages, disappearing-message settings, and undisclosed vetting material. No. 10 acknowledged that Starmer uses disappearing messages on WhatsApp, saying this can be consistent with government guidance, but critics argue it raises obvious questions about whether key communications about Mandelson's appointment are now gone. The release also intensified scrutiny of Mandelson's Epstein-related baggage, his reported security-vetting problems, and why the government pushed ahead with the appointment despite reputational and political warnings. In plain terms, the document dump was supposed to close the book, but instead it opened a new chapter: who backed Mandelson, what did Starmer know, what did the vetting process flag, and how much of the record has been hidden, deleted, or redacted?to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Five questions STILL unanswered after 1,000s of bombshell Mandelson docs - redacted files, missing texts and PM loathedBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Good morning. One of the clichés of the media industry is that the public have a ‘right to know' especially when things go wrong. It's often true. Think of the post office scandal or the recent investigations into some of our privatised water companies. It's important for the public to know when rules are being broken and when there's manifest injustice. But the right to know must be balanced by prudence. On issues of security or defence, or when vital decisions are waiting, secrecy can be important. The whole point of a democratic system is that it's for us to choose who we trust, who we allow to keep secrets on our behalf. And all this is fine of course, until it goes wrong. In recent days many files relating to Peter Mandelson have been made public. We've learnt of indiscreet remarks between him and the then Work and Pensions Secretary, Pat McFadden. There are scathing comments about the Prime Minister and other leading politicians which were never meant to see the light of day, and come across now as disloyal. Reading them I can't help but suspect part of this was simply letting off steam. Politicians have a right, as we all do, to trust that casual remarks sometimes made in frustration won't go any further. But of course they sometimes do and in the days of smart phones this trust is coming to seem naïve. Perhaps these days we could reflect that Jesus' prophecy: ‘What you have said in the dark will be heard in the light, and what you have whispered in an inner chamber will be proclaimed on the housetops'. This is very challenging. Who hasn't said something disparaging behind someone's back and then interacted with them as if they'd never spoken? Hypocrisy is part of the human condition. And Jesus himself warns against it. ‘Let your yea be yea and your no be no'. That leaves it up to us to make judgments about who we trust and why, who we can safely let off steam to and who it is better to avoid. The public's right to know has to be balanced by common sense, because in the case of secrecy, context is all: another journalistic cliché of course. But it's true. And perhaps we should extend our sympathy to those who carry the burden of secrecy on our behalf. Not everything is a plot. Not everything said in private actually matters that much, though its exposure can be deeply embarrassing. Jesus told his disciples to be innocent as doves but I don't think he was telling them to take everything at face value. In the same sentence he had advised them to be as wise as serpents.

The second tranche of documents related to the appointment of Peter Mandelson as US ambassador have been released. The documents, running at more than 1,000 pages, were supposed to reveal what ministers knew about Mandelson's links to Epstein and the security process to approve his appointment, but instead have revealed government infighting and early doubts about Keir Starmer's premiership. Lucy Hough speaks to the Guardian's head of national news, Archie Bland – watch on YouTube. Help support our independent journalism at theguardian.com/infocus

We look at some correspondence from the Prince of Darkness and a company offering a great way to make your garden shed worth $160k. Then, Riley speaks with Gareth Fearn about the ongoing unfolding energy crisis, and how the British state has spent the last twenty years solving the problem they wish they had. Get more TF episodes each week by subscribing to our Patreon here! RILEY ALERT Check out No Gods, No Mayors here! HUSSEIN ALERT Check out 10k Posts here! MILO ALERT Check out Milo's tour dates here: https://www.miloedwards.co.uk/liveshows NATE ALERT Nate's band Second Homes has just released their debut album, which includes the song used in this episode's outro, and you can stream it for free here! Trashfuture are: Riley (@raaleh), Milo (@Milo_Edwards), Hussein (@HKesvani), Nate (@inthesedeserts), and November (@postoctobrist)

The second batch of documents tied to Lord Peter Mandelson's appointment as the UK ambassador to the United States is set to be published, with officials describing it as one of the largest document releases ever laid before Parliament. The files relate to the controversy over Mandelson's appointment, his vetting process, and the fallout from revelations about the extent of his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, which ultimately led to his removal from the ambassadorial post. The release is expected to include a large volume of communications and government material, though some sensitive vetting documents may be withheld or redacted because of an ongoing Metropolitan Police investigation into alleged misconduct in public office. The broader issue is politically damaging for Keir Starmer's government because it raises questions about what officials knew, when they knew it, how Mandelson was cleared for such a high-profile diplomatic role, and whether the government was fully transparent about the risks surrounding his Epstein ties.Newly released Epstein-related files reportedly show another strange layer of his obsession with genetics, DNA, reproduction, and personal legacy, including references to sperm banking, genetic testing, and alleged efforts to preserve or extend his biological footprint even after death. The material fits into a broader pattern already associated with Epstein: his documented fascination with eugenics, transhumanism, elite scientific circles, and the idea of using wealth and access to embed himself inside worlds of medicine, genetics, academia, and power. The new information is unsettling not only because of what it suggests about Epstein's private ambitions, but because it raises more questions about who knew about these interests, who helped facilitate them, whether any institutions enabled him after his conviction, and why so many pieces of his operation remain hidden, redacted, or only partially understood years after his death.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Second batch of Mandelson files to be published on MondayEpstein's dark dream of spreading his DNA may outlive him: new files - Raw Story

GB News Political Editor Christopher Hope reports as GB News sources claim messages between Peter Mandelson and Keir Starmer were omitted from the new release of Mandelson files. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Today, more than 1000 pages of documents about Peter Mandelson's appointment as UK ambassador to the US have been published by the government.Adam, Chris and Joe get together to discuss what the files tell us about Peter Mandelson's vetting process, his relationship with some of the government's most senior figures and his thoughts on the Prime Minister's leadership. Some of the files have been redacted or held back as part of the ongoing criminal investigation into allegations of misconduct in public office by Peter Mandelson. He has repeatedly let it be known that he believes he has not acted criminally, did not act for personal gain and is co-operating with policeYou can now listen to Newscast on a smart speaker. If you want to listen, just say "Ask BBC Sounds to play Newscast”. It works on most smart speakers. You can join our Newscast online community here: https://bbc.in/newscastdiscordGet in touch with Newscast by emailing newscast@bbc.co.uk or send us a WhatsApp on +44 0330 123 9480.New episodes released every day. If you're in the UK, for more News and Current Affairs podcasts from the BBC, listen on BBC Sounds: https://bbc.in/4guXgXd Newscast brings you daily analysis of the latest political news stories from the BBC. The presenter was Adam Fleming. It was made by Jack Maclaren with Anna Harris. The social producer was Jem Westgate. The technical producer was Dafydd Evans. The assistant editor is Chris Gray. The senior news editor is Sam Bonham.

As Parliament returns from recess, the latest files related to Peter Mandelson's appointment as UK ambassador to the US are due to be released today. How bad could they be for Labour? Tim Shipman joins James Heale to discuss – has the self-styled 'Prince of Darkness' proven to be more a ghost of Christmas past for the government?Plus: Mandelson isn't the only ghost haunting British politics today. Tim and James discuss the ghost of Christmas present, the scandal facing the SNP. Former party treasurer – and husband to Nicola Sturgeon – Peter Murrell pled guilty to charges of embezzlement, prompting the former First Minister to deliver a teary interview to the BBC at the weekend. How believable did they find Sturgeon? And, with two by-elections on the horizon, what consequences could there be for the SNP?Finally: the boys discuss the latest poll showing Trade Union support ebbing away from Labour towards Reform. So – continuing the Dickensian metaphor (sorry) – could this be Labour's very own ghost of Christmas future?Produced by Megan McElroy and Patrick Gibbons.Become a Spectator subscriber today to access this podcast without adverts. Go to spectator.co.uk/adfree to find out more.For more Spectator podcasts, go to spectator.co.uk/podcasts.Contact us: podcast@spectator.co.uk Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Richie Allen - AKA The BBG - with a round-up of the day's top news stories including: Former Scottish First Minister unrepentant over husband's embezzling. 1,500 new Peter Mandelson files released. Do they reveal anything? Pfizer contraceptive drug causes brain tumours in women. Class action looms. BBC investigation exposes shocking maternity failings in Nottingham hospitals. What does it mean, if anything, for Lucy Letby? Plus much more. 

The second batch of documents tied to Lord Peter Mandelson's appointment as the UK ambassador to the United States is set to be published, with officials describing it as one of the largest document releases ever laid before Parliament. The files relate to the controversy over Mandelson's appointment, his vetting process, and the fallout from revelations about the extent of his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, which ultimately led to his removal from the ambassadorial post. The release is expected to include a large volume of communications and government material, though some sensitive vetting documents may be withheld or redacted because of an ongoing Metropolitan Police investigation into alleged misconduct in public office. The broader issue is politically damaging for Keir Starmer's government because it raises questions about what officials knew, when they knew it, how Mandelson was cleared for such a high-profile diplomatic role, and whether the government was fully transparent about the risks surrounding his Epstein ties.Newly released Epstein-related files reportedly show another strange layer of his obsession with genetics, DNA, reproduction, and personal legacy, including references to sperm banking, genetic testing, and alleged efforts to preserve or extend his biological footprint even after death. The material fits into a broader pattern already associated with Epstein: his documented fascination with eugenics, transhumanism, elite scientific circles, and the idea of using wealth and access to embed himself inside worlds of medicine, genetics, academia, and power. The new information is unsettling not only because of what it suggests about Epstein's private ambitions, but because it raises more questions about who knew about these interests, who helped facilitate them, whether any institutions enabled him after his conviction, and why so many pieces of his operation remain hidden, redacted, or only partially understood years after his death.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Second batch of Mandelson files to be published on MondayEpstein's dark dream of spreading his DNA may outlive him: new files - Raw StoryBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

More than 1,000 pages of emails and WhatsApp messages have been released relating to Peter Mandelson's appointment as the UK's ambassador to the US. The documents show Mandelson's criticism of Keir Starmer, and his desperation to become the Oxford University chancellor – but the controversial vetting file from when he was appointed ambassador is missing. Pippa Crerar and Kiran Stacey explain what these files show us. Help support our independent journalism at theguardian.com/politicspod

Peter Mandelson's links with senior figures in China, Russia and Israel were among the concerns raised by the UK's vetting agency when it concluded he should be denied clearance, multiple sources have told the Guardian. It comes after a powerful parliamentary committee said the government was failing to fully comply with a parliamentary motion ordering the release of all papers relating to Mandelson's appointment. A spokesperson for Hayman said he “has no personal connection or familiarity whatsoever” with Mandelson, and his contact with him was limited to work the British politician did for his thinktank. A Cabinet Office spokesperson said it was “committed to complying with the Humble Address in full”. Lucy Hough speaks to the head of investigations Paul Lewis – watch on YouTube. Help support our independent journalism at theguardian.com/infocus