posted on 17/4/2026 13:37Starmer's lies about Mandelson - Gramsci.

 

So, when he told journalists that Peter Mandelson had successfully obtained security clearance for his appointment, he made a claim he knew to be false—albeit in a setting without consequence.

 

Yet,, when addressing the same issue in Parliament, Starmer knowingly avoided repeating that lie. Instead, he confined himself to saying that Mandelson had been “thoroughly vetted.” Ministers and officials did the same, knowingly steering clear of any explicit statement that Mandelson had been cleared by the security services prior to his appointment. 

They were all "on message".

 

They knew exactly what they were doing. Their statements were deliberately constructed to lead Parliament to believe clearance had been granted, while consciously stopping short of saying so.

 

This was not carelessness or ambiguity. It was a knowing use of language to mislead without triggering the consequences of a direct lie.