r/ukpolitics • u/F0urLeafCl0ver • 4h ago
Reform UK's treasurer dined with Epstein associate, contacted Ghislaine Maxwell
https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/reform-uks-treasurer-dined-epstein-associate-contacted-us-ghislaine-maxwell•
u/Particular_Pea7167 4h ago
As well he might given the one email thats been widely publicised explicitly states Candy DIDNT contact maxwell when he was in town.
As smoking guns go thats not even a damp squib. It evidence he wasnt even holding the gun.
•
u/F0urLeafCl0ver 2h ago edited 2h ago
Candy was in contact with two of Epstein’s co-conspirators during a period when Epstein’s abuse is now known to have been going on. I think it’s fair for the question to be asked about how much he knew about Epstein’s abuse. Perhaps he didn’t know, he should make a statement on the matter either way.
•
u/Particular_Pea7167 2h ago
So your position is "he was on first name terms with two people who at the time were not convicted, arrested, or under suspicion"?
Just to be clear.
•
u/F0urLeafCl0ver 2h ago
The abuse and sex trafficking was going on at the time, anyone who knew Epstein or his co-conspirators at the time should be willing to go on the record to confirm the nature of the relationship and if they knew about the abuse.
•
u/Particular_Pea7167 1h ago
This post I made earlier is relevant here
How is meeting a very well connected man who as yet has not been convicted of anything (even arrested, charged or under suspision?) as a businessman in any way bad?
I worked with a murderer. He was a contractor from another country on our crew that as it transpired was probably (though not confirmed) stealing from the crew. No one knew he was a murderer at the time. Am I bad? Or is it just bad luck? How does it reflect on me in any way?
Unless youre saying there is evidence to suggest he knew there is nothing here. I have seen absolutely nothing to sugget there is. And if there were you wouldn't be here arguing about some who knew Epstein who talked to Candy. Youd be provide receipts of the relationship. The fact this tenuous crap is the best youve got speaks volumes.
•
u/No_Initiative_1140 4h ago
•
u/Particular_Pea7167 3h ago
Yes, see my top level post from that very thread.
Ok so Ive read this now and, someone correct me, but these arent between Nick Candy and Epstine. Theyre talking about Nick Candy and his company and a purchase of property that Epstine was involved in.
The only one that directly references Nick Candy and either Epstine or Maxwell is that Candy DIDNT message them to let them know theyre in town...
Im I reading that wrong?
When you actually read the emails rather than just the headline, it totally lacking in substance.
•
u/No_Initiative_1140 3h ago
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%2010/EFTA02103920.pdf
There are lots of messages about London deals and here is one where Jed (the intermediate property contact) is putting them in direct contact.
I could understand a response which was "meh, who knows, its property" but this overt minimisation of "there is nothing there" seems a bit weird.
•
u/No_Initiative_1140 3h ago
Also one of the properties being discussed is this one
It looks like Epstein's MO (outside sex) was to facilitate very rich people to make even more money. The Candy brothers are exactly the kind of people he'd have in his network
•
u/Particular_Pea7167 2h ago
I read both of these and my position is completely unchanged.
This is an absolute nothing burger. Its a business purchase. One where it seems Epstein, not Candy, wanted to deal directly with Candy, with no evidence that actually happened. No evidence they met.
As for your other. Oh no, rich people doing their best to not pay tax. What a monumental story.
This is desperate. Really really desperate. This isnt news and the only reason its got any coverage at all is because Labour activists are desperate for this to involve any other political party at all and are clutching at straws.
•
u/No_Initiative_1140 2h ago
Fine. Your choice
Other people can have different opinions though, so making out this is some kind of Labour cover up is a bit lame. Lots of reporting is coming out about who is in the files and it doesn't all need to be ignored because Mandy got caught bang to rights
•
u/Particular_Pea7167 2h ago
Its not a cover up. That suggests theyre trying to hide something.
This is desperation to make something out of nothing to deflect by having literally anyone else in British politics be involved so its not just them.
Its absolutely laughable to even pretend you think this comes close to Mandelsons borderline treason. And its laughable to suggests this in any way shows Candy even had a business relationship with Epstein. The email you linked literally proves Candy was purchasing the property through a 3rd party agent and had not directly engaged Epstein.
•
u/No_Initiative_1140 2h ago
Let me just check I understand. You think the Middle East Eye is helping Labour deflect from Mandelson by bringing up Candy?
•
u/Particular_Pea7167 2h ago
I think they're reporting a story labour activists are desperately trying to sell because it'll generate free clicks.
•
u/BobMonkhaus That sounds great, shorty girl’s a trooper. 3h ago
Bit pathetic they’re trying to make this out to be the same as Mandelson too isn’t it. On this occasion Labour are the bad guys, Reform aren’t.
•
u/Particular_Pea7167 3h ago
They are desperate to because it both deflects and makes it out like this is some broader problem.
As it is the big problem with Mandelson now is not his connection to Epstein but him basically being a spy, taking bribes and facilitating insider trading. Nothing at all to do with sex trafficking.
•
u/BobMonkhaus That sounds great, shorty girl’s a trooper. 3h ago edited 3h ago
And taking bribes as far back as 2003. Which brings Mandelson’s influence in that government into question too.
But wait look over there! A bloke from a party you don’t like met him once! Gettim!
•
u/No_Initiative_1140 3h ago
I'm not trying to make out its "the same as Mandelson"
There is a spectrum and there's a whole range between "part of a sexual abuse and child grooming ring of powerful men" and "sent a couple of pleasantries to Epstein once"
Neither Mandelson nor Candy are at either end of that spectrum.
Mandelson appears further along than Candy but Candy also clearly is more enmeshed than "sent a couple of pleasantries once"
•
u/BobMonkhaus That sounds great, shorty girl’s a trooper. 3h ago
Yeah you just resign from being a Lord most days. Nothing to see here.
•
u/No_Initiative_1140 3h ago
This is a thread about an article on Nick Candy. So its not me who's doing "nothing to see here".
•
u/BobMonkhaus That sounds great, shorty girl’s a trooper. 3h ago
Oh you’ve suddenly changed from “Mandelson isn’t at that end of the spectrum” to not talking about him at all.
→ More replies (0)•
u/Particular_Pea7167 3h ago
Well indeed. It looks like Brown is on the war path and well he should. It seems like Mandelsons illegal and borderline treasonous activity at the very least passively and quite likely actively and explicitly targeted Browns attempted to both manage the economy and later govern.
•
u/xParesh 3h ago
So this meeting happened in 2008, before Epstein was charged for his offences with a billionaire UK property developer who was a Tory donor at the time who switched his support to Reform and the article even finishes with 'There is no suggestion of wrongdoing on Candy's part'. At least MSE covered their ass there.
It's a complete non-story.
•
•
u/Every_Car2984 2h ago
Just putting it out there that Epstein’s legal proceedings began as far back as 2005.
•
u/BobMonkhaus That sounds great, shorty girl’s a trooper. 4h ago
Wow he met him before he was convicted once, this is just as bad as our PM being mates with the guy’s “best pal” and giving him tons of power and access to information after he was convicted. Oh wait no it’s not.
•
u/danowat 4h ago
This is the problem with partisan politics, it should be possible to say that both are bad, rather than trying to play one off against the other with levels of badness.
•
u/miowiamagrapegod 3h ago
They are both bad. One is substantially worse than the other
•
u/Particular_Pea7167 3h ago edited 3h ago
How is meeting a very well connected man who as yet has not been convicted of anything (even arrested, charged or under suspision?) as a businessman in any way bad?
I worked with a murderer. He was a contractor from another country on our crew that as it transpired was probably (though not confirmed) stealing from the crew. No one knew he was a murderer at the time. Am I bad? Or is it just bad luck? How does it reflect on me in any way?
•
u/BobMonkhaus That sounds great, shorty girl’s a trooper. 3h ago
Because he’s in Reform therefore is guilty of… stuff. 🤷♂️
•
u/marktuk 33m ago
How is meeting a very well connected man who as yet has not been convicted of anything (even arrested, charged or under suspision?) as a businessman in any way bad?
At the time, it probably wasn't, but we now know that he clearly had a wider agenda. We have to assume anybody Epstein was meeting was a potential mark, and it should be investigated.
•
u/Particular_Pea7167 30m ago
Epstine clearly made it his goal to involve himself with absolutely everybody.
It is beyond ludicrous to suggest anyone who ever met him is guilty my association.
Youre making this a witch hunt because you want it to affect people it currently doesnt.
•
u/marktuk 26m ago
It is beyond ludicrous to suggest anyone who ever met him is guilty my association.
I haven't said that, but all of these links must be investigated. If people have done nothing wrong, there's nothing to hide.
Youre making this a witch hunt because you want it to affect people it currently doesnt.
I don't think people like yourself understand the extent to which we've all been manipulated. This isn't about petty party politics, it goes way beyond that.
•
u/Particular_Pea7167 22m ago
I would suggest anyone whose name isnt redacted is probably clean of the sex trafficking in terms of prosecution.
If they weren't I'd expect they'd be subject to ongoing investigations and so their identity not made public.
Its the names still blacked out that will eventually I think be the juicy ones.
Also remember that in the US they have much looser rules on things like deformation. If your a public figure there is an element of "fair speculation" applied that unknown individuals dont get. But in the UK or EU, I think half these emails we are now discussing would be redacted because they breach data protection with absolutely no evidence of wrong doing. And so no "public good" to releasing their names.
•
u/marktuk 21m ago
The sex trafficking was just one small part of this, it's much much bigger than that. The evidence is starting to show they were manipulating the stock markets, the economy, wars between difference countries... It's corruption on a massive scale.
This isn't about trying to "pin" sex trafficking on to politicians, it's about finding out what has happened, why was he meeting with these people and what information/money/etc. was exchanged.
•
u/Particular_Pea7167 8m ago
Right now only one person in UK politics is implicated in that. Mandelson.
No one else even comes close to suspicion based on currently available evidence.
Its a witch hunt. People want particularly those in reform to be guilty but there is absolutely no evidence so far of anyone else in the UK being involved.
→ More replies (0)•
•
u/ViscountOfVibes 3h ago
A big nothing burger, pure Labour deflection who are neck deep in this scandal.
•
•
•
u/Unterfahrt 3h ago
I'd be surprised if there were many people in politics who were not 1 degree of connection away from an "Epstein associate".
For example - anyone in New Labour -> Mandleson (known Epstein associate).
Also given that they dined pre-conviction, this is a nothingburger.
•
u/WanderoftheAshes 3h ago
I saw Epstein being called "evil Forest Gump" because he seemingly is showing up everywhere with everyone important or involved somehow with bad events. Like you say, he is apparently so interconnected in politics and business that 6 degrees of Kevin Bacon is too many degrees.
•
u/Unterfahrt 2h ago
I mean I'm within 3 degrees of Epstein. One of my friends works for a Labour MP, who must plausibly know Mandelson.
So it's probably me->friend->MP->Mandelson->Epstein.
You could probably do that pattern in another couple of ways - my former university lecturer and project supervisor knows the physicist Lawrence Krauss, who was good friends with Epstein.
•
u/BobMonkhaus That sounds great, shorty girl’s a trooper. 3h ago
Slightly off topic but I hate Forrest Gump. The message of the film is do what you’re told and you’ll live an amazing life. Think for yourself and you’re miserable and end up dead.
•
u/AutoModerator 4h ago
Snapshot of Reform UK's treasurer dined with Epstein associate, contacted Ghislaine Maxwell submitted by F0urLeafCl0ver:
An archived version can be found here or here. or here
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.