PETER Mandelson’s husband Reinaldo Avila da Silva has been photographed popping out for an XXXL mega pack of washing powder.
He’s going to need more than that to wash out the nasty stain left by the Prince of Darkness’s latest self-inflicted scandal.
Mandelson says he believes allegations that disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein made financial payments to him 20 years ago are false but “need investigating by me”.
Hilarious. If the average Joe was asked whether $75k had mysteriously arrived unsolicited in their bank account, they’d be able to answer with a categoric yes or no.
But “I’m Mandy, fly me” had a fondness for the high life that his relatively low political salary couldn’t fund.
So he’s always had a penchant for a deal or a freebie, even if it came from someone with questionable business practices or morals.
Indeed, in 2010, he allegedly emailed Epstein to say: “I don’t want to live by salary alone.”
As to the emails that suggest Reinaldo was chasing Epstein for the money to fund an osteopathy course, words fail me. What’s that all about?
Mandelson has now resigned from the House of Lords after quitting the Labour Party to spare it “further embarrassment” (as if it isn’t doing a good job of that all on its own) but if he thought that would save him from further scrutiny, he’s sorely mistaken.
As the world and his wife sifted through the latest, vast cache of emails and photos released by the US authorities, it emerged that Mandy may well have been exploiting his position at the heart of government to feed sensitive government information to the financier in exchange for the occasional bung.
As a public servant, it seems his ethos was not so much “what can I do for my country” but “what can my country do for mine and Reinaldo’s bank balance”.
And so, rightly in my view, Scotland Yard is now investigating allegations that he committed a criminal offence by leaking the information, and there’s a strong chance he’ll be stripped of his peerage for such a breach of public trust.
“I was too trusting,” (stop laughing at the back) he mitigated in an exclusive interview with The Times yesterday. That won’t wash either.
Other useful idiots sucking at the teat of Epstein’s financial largesse were the then-Prince Andrew and his supposedly estranged wife Sarah Ferguson who face fresh disclosures showing their reckless judgment (him) and toe-curling obsequiousness (her) around a man they barely knew for fear of losing his continued patronage of the high life that, like Mandy, they were fond of but couldn’t afford.
Despite his wide-eyed Newsnight protestations, it’s now patently clear that Andrew’s ties to Epstein were a lot closer than he’s let on.
And now that another alleged Epstein victim has come forward to say she was dispatched to the UK to have sex with the Queen’s son, it surely warrants further investigation.
Indeed, the Prime Minister has finally climbed off the fence and urged Andrew to testify before a US congressional committee about what he knows.
You might argue that, as he’s now a social pariah, what’s he got to lose?
Although, given that a top justice official in the US says the latest drop does not “allow us to necessarily prosecute someone”, then perhaps lawyers are advising him to keep his head down and say nothing.
Whatever. It remains that none of the men who either allegedly participated in the exploitation of procured young women, or enjoyed a freebie in the lavish surroundings it helped finance while seemingly turning a blind eye to what was going on, have had their grubby collars felt.
And the only person currently residing in prison (deservedly so) for their part in the unedifying scandal is a woman — Ghislaine Maxwell.
Perhaps, with every “not me, guv” protestation from all these powerful men, she is coming one step closer to taking them all down with a tell-all on what really went on behind Epstein’s closed doors.
Now that’s some dirty laundry we’d all like to see.
LIL BIT ANGRY
LILY ALLEN says that “rage is powerful and necessary” and “not necessarily a bad thing to express”.
She’s right.
Violent physical rage remains unacceptable unless it’s taken out on old appliances in one of those increasingly popular “rage rooms”.
But expressing controlled anger verbally or, in Lily’s case, via album lyrics can only be a good thing.
As women, expressing perfectly understandable frustration or anger is frequently frowned upon as “not nice” or “not warm enough” while, generally speaking, men doing the same are admired for “not taking any s**t”.
So let it all out ladies – you know you want to.
Brooklyn is in a spot of brother over his privacy
LA is crawling with paparazzi so any celebrity who lives there knows it’s a given that they’ll be photographed the second they’re out in public.
So when Brooklyn Peltz-Beckham and wife Nicola went on yet another shopping trip (do they do anything else?) to help spend her alleged $1million a month pocket money from her billionaire dad, what did the, ahem, aspiring chef choose to wear?
A T-shirt with a Ford logo that read: “Good Brothers Service.”
Which, of course, was widely interpreted as a blatant dig at his younger brothers, who have taken their parents’ side in the ongoing family feud.
Brooklyn, lad, by all means carry on with these cheap shots. But please don’t continue to insult our intelligence with your lame claim that you want privacy.
Every move you and your wife make is designed to get attention.
FINE WORK, TONY
THREE cheers to litter sleuth Tony Slater, who helped track down the person who discarded a McDonald’s bag on a Cotswold country lane.
There was a timed receipt in the bag and, after reporting it to an environmental health officer who enlisted the help of the fast food chain to identify the make and model of the car, “official channels” were used to track down the litterer and issue a £500 fine.
Turns out it was one of Tony’s near neighbours, so quite why they’d want to litter their own village rather than take rubbish home is anyone’s guess.
But next, can we please get a system in place to DNA those dog poos that lazy owners leave in the middle of pavements for others to tread in?
A hefty fine and a return of their pet’s offerings to their own front doorstep would do nicely, thank you.
OH PIPE DOWN
RUMOUR has it that Tom Cruise has vacated his luxury flat in London’s swanky One Hyde Park development because he feels the city is no longer safe.
But could there be a more pedestrian reason for his exit?
It was revealed yesterday that the block has defective pipework which caused water leaks and, following a court case, residents face the upheaval of a ten-year refurbishment to fix the “highly complex” issue.
And, as the ongoing privacy trial involving Prince Harry, Liz Hurley et al proves, A-listers have a strong aversion to leaks.
THE National Education Union wants teachers to be given “greater flexibility” to take breaks during term time so they can attend events like Glastonbury.
Sorry? Don’t they already get around 13 weeks off a year?
Also, if a teen pupil bunked off lessons to attend the music festival or go on holiday, their parents would likely be fined.
It doesn’t take a genius to see the double standards.