This Radical Dispatch Newszine - below - is provided free for all subscribers.
At the top of this post, Resistance Radio presents our WARRIOR CREED video/audio podcast from , with a transcript provided - BREAKING: Trump & Ex-FCO Head Blame Starmer for Appointing Epstein’s Mandelson.
This podcast can be set to either audiovisual, or just audio, and is for premium members of Radical Media only. To listen, basic members should upgrade to the premium service here:
Read on now for our free Radical Dispatch.
BREAKING: Trump & Ex-Foreign Office Head Blame PM Starmer for Appointing Epstein-Suspect Lord Mandelson
- A Radical Dispatch
1) PM Starmer Lied
PM Keir Starmer’s attempt to scapegoat the head of the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO), Sir Olly Robbins, for allegedly not telling him that Lord Mandelson had failed his Security Services vetting before appointing him as British ambassador to Washington DC has spectacularly backfired.
Yesterday, Sir Olly took his revenge by telling all during a parliamentary hearing.
The Times reports April 17th 2026:
“The bombshells kept coming.
No 10 applied ‘constant pressure’ on the Foreign Office to appoint Lord Mandelson and showed no interest in his vetting.
The Cabinet Office questioned whether there should be any vetting at all.
Mandelson was given access to highly classified material before he was granted security vetting.
The prime minister tried to appoint his director of communications — who it later emerged had supported a sex offender — as an ambassador.
The litany of revelations during Sir Olly Robbins’s appearance before the foreign affairs select committee is hugely damaging for Sir Keir Starmer because it goes back to what his critics describe as his ‘original sin’ — his catastrophic decision to appoint Mandelson in the first place and questions over his judgment.”
Our regulars will know that we have long held Starmer complicit in this affair.
Our immediate reaction to Starmer scapegoating the head of this Foreign Office was uncompromising.
We reminded the public that the idea that Starmer did not know was fantastical. This is especially so since we have been commenting on the openly available information since as far back as 2024.
Likewise, the issue was raised openly in parliament itself by MPs.
Click to play:
Rachel Gilmore MP in the House of Commons: “As if not already bad enough, this murky affair has been thickened by the fact that a source from MI6 has reportedly claimed that they failed to clear Mandelson and warned that his links to the man I still refuse to name would ‘compromise him’. Downing Street pressed ahead with the appointment anyway.”
In fact, our very first Radical Dispatch in February 2025 was openly naming Mandelson as an Epstein-suspect.
Given this context it is incredible for the Prime Minister to claim that he did not know.
2) Trump Blames Starmer
President Trump has seen the writing on the wall, publicly blaming PM Starmer for his “wrong judgement”.
And international media, such as Pakistan’s premium English language daily Dawn, has now picked up the story.
It is no surprise that the story has spread. Considering the allegation made by PM Starmer - that he wasn’t told - it would enter the realm of high treason, if true.
Click to play:
Maajid Nawaz for WARRIOR CREED: “Of course, we've mentioned that President Trump has blamed Keir Starmer for appointing Epstein friend Lord Peter Mandelson as the British ambassador to Washington, DC. But in particular, what we have in terms of developments today that are groundbreaking is that the head of the Foreign Office, Sir Olly Robbins, who Keir Starmer sacked and blamed for the mishap of appointing Epstein friend Lord Mandelson as our ambassador to Washington DC by claiming, amazingly claiming, that he had not been told that Mandelson failed his security vetting and that as prime minister, it was somehow permitted in this great country, Great Britain, for him to be able to appoint a man to the most sensitive diplomatic position on this planet while it being concealed from him that said man had failed his security vetting and that somehow this isn't a bigger scandal than the original scandal because of course that verges on perhaps a criminal offence. And so for Keir Starmer to blame Sir Early Robbins for this was an incredibly serious matter. To withhold national security sensitive information to the prime minister in a manner that jeopardises the national security of the country and places the country at genuine risk to its national security would be a criminal offence because it would be treason.”
3) Starmer Scapegoating of Head of UK Foreign Office Backfires
Of course, the more likely situation is that Sir Olly Robbins did his job, and that PM Starmer has merely scapegoated him. This view is supported by the repeated bombshells revealed by Sir Olly in his parliamentary testimony yesterday.
The Times reports 21st April 2026:
The first major bombshell was Sir Olly’s revelation that Downing Street was pressuring him to quickly approve Mandelson regardless.
The Times reports 21st April 2026:
Video testimony of Sir Olly ar Parliament makes this point well enough.
Click to play:
Sir Olly Robbins: “I’m afraid I don’t think at the point of his appointment and for days thereafter it was actually a given that he would be vetted. Again, if you look at the documents submitted under the Humble Address, there is no stipulation from Number 10 that he should be vetted. The welcome that was sent to him immediately afterwards doesn’t say, ‘welcome to the Foreign Office, subject to vetting’. The announcement put out on the 20th of December says that he will be out early in the new year. It does not say, ‘subject to vetting’.”
Committee Chair: “The contract does, though. The contract of employment.”
Sir Olly Robbins: “The contract is given to him after he was vetted. It says that he must maintain his clearance. So did mine.”
Sir Olly’s case rested on the notion that Downing Street under Starmer took a dismissive approach to Mandelson’s vetting.
The Times reports 21st April 2026:
And that he was already being given higher classification briefings than he deserved, as if his approval was a given.
The Times reports 21st April 2026:
Sir Olly went so far as to say that Downing Street had a dismissive attitude towards the entire process.
Click to play:
Sir Olly Robbins: “I’m afraid I walked into a situation in which there was already a very, very strong expectation. And you would have seen the papers released already under the Humble Address that coming from Number 10, that he needed to be in post and in America as quickly as humanly possible. The very first formal communication of this to my predecessor from Number 10 private office being that they wanted all this done at pace and Mandelson in post before inauguration. So that’s the situation I faced.”
Committee Chair: “I’m sorry, so there is paperwork about that and that can, presumably, will be disclosed to Parliament?”
Sir Olly Robbins: “It already has been, Chair. That letter from Number 10, Private Office, is already in disclosures made. There’s nothing improper about it, but that’s the context I walked into. So I’m afraid what that translated into for my team in the Foreign Office and certainly the handover briefing I was getting as I arrived at post was what I felt was a generally dismissive attitude to his vetting clearance. The focus was on getting Mandelson out to Washington quickly. Despite this atmosphere, an atmosphere of pressure, the department completed developed vetting to the normal high standard. Because the vetting process is not there to determine fitness for office or reputational risk. It’s there to protect national security. And the Prime Minister has already made those decisions.”
Sir Olly also revealed that Downing Street were pressuring him to look into a similarly expedited approval for Starmer’s then Head of Communications, Matthew Doyle.
The Times reports 21st April 2026:
The problem was, of course, that Matthew Doyle had his own problems with sex offenders.
The i Paper reports 21st April 2026:
“Sir Keir Starmer was facing a fresh Labour backlash after a senior ex-official said No 10 pushed the Foreign Office for his former media chief, who campaigned for a paedophile, to be given a top diplomatic posting abroad.”
Considering all this, is it any surprise that Sir Olly confesses to not fully understanding why he was sacked.
Click to play:
Sir Olly Robbins: “Again, Mr. Carden, thank you for the generous way you asked the question, but I should be careful here. The very short answer is I don’t fully understand the reasons that I’m in the position I am in, but that is for a separate process for me to try to get to the bottom of. As a human being, I’m desperately, desperately sad about it, Mr. Carden. I love that job. I love that institution. I was proud to serve this government and any government that might follow it. I hope I was doing it to the best of my ability. I was certainly doing it as hard as I possibly could. I had wonderful colleagues who I miss deeply. And the issues we were dealing with and my colleagues are still dealing with are of profound importance to the success of this government and the success of the country. It’s been the proudest part of my career to lead that institution, because of their work not because of mine, and you say kind things about my distinguished career, I just feel intensely proud of the people I’ve led and I wish them every success and wish I could still be with them.”
Of course, the answer is that he was scapegoated. All while maintaining the utmost seriousness and professionalism in his job, even now.
Click to play:
Committee Chair: “Was there anything in the DV (developed vetting) that was not already in the public realm? Was there anything that had been identified that we didn’t already know, all of us?”
Sir Olly Robbins: “So I wrote to you this morning, Chair, and I’m sorry if this begins to come back to your opening remarks, but I may no longer be an official, but I don’t think I can open that box. This system absolutely depends on candidates for vetting knowing that the government will completely respect the confidences that they share.”
Committee Chair: “Yeah, no, no. So don’t tell me. OK, so if there was anything that wasn’t already in the public realm, just tell me that there was something that wasn’t already in the public realm. Don’t tell me what it was. Just tell me, oh, yeah, there was something else. But sorry, can’t tell you.”
Sir Olly Robbins: “I’m afraid I’m not prepared to do that, Chair. What that leads to is, of course, then an absolute storm of questions as to what that issue was.”
Committee Chair: “I’m not going to ask you a storm of questions. That’s going to be my last question. I’m going to move on to my last question after this.”
Sir Olly Robbins: “I’m sorry, Chair. I trust you. I’m not sure that the whole of the rest of the world will hold off from wanting to know.”
Committee Chair: “OK, all right.”
4) Globalists in the Shadows: Message Finally Breaks Through
Radical Media has long alleged that Globalists have ben installing blackmailed puppets into power using Kompromat as leverage in order to do their bidding.
Radical Media reports 22nd October 2025:
Our message seems to finally be breaking through, as a broadcaster on a mainstream national British show, Good Morning Britain, has now spelled this out exactly as we have.
Click to play:…
Become a premium member to see the Good Morning Britain segment, to gain access to the full WARRIOR CREED podcast, and to complete this Radical Dispatch.
