[0:00]Patty, here we are >> in a very fastmoving news cycle. >> Yes, my head is bent. Uh, I've been on the phone a lot and I've been trying to understand and get to the bottom of who
[0:10]knew what and when in the scandal around Peter Manderson >> and you've got in particular, you've got word of three questions that Downing Street sent to Peter Mandlesson, which
[0:20]is new because newscasters will have heard Adam do a summary of all of this on our Friday newscast, which is still explains how we got here. So, we have new information with for you this
[0:32]Saturday and we're going to be joined by Alex Campbell from Bloomberg who led the team that were investigating all of this who got their sticky paws on the now notorious emails between Lord Madison
[0:44]and Jeffrey Epstein. >> All on this Saturday newscast. >> Hi, it's Laura in the studio. >> It's Patty in the studio. And I'm pleased to say that we are joined by an
[0:55]very eminent leader of a very talented team of journalists at Bloomberg who are the ones who got their pause on the now notorious cache of emails. Alex Campbell, the Bloomberg editor who led
[1:05]that investigation that has had a huge impact on British politics and of course also things across the pond. So hello Alex. >> Delighted to be here. Thank you. And what we're really getting at, what law
[1:16]is getting at there is that you called Peter Mandlesson, the UK ambassador to the United States with a story and he
[1:26]did not reply to you, but he popped up on the Sun's TV channel several days later. So, can you tell us how you first approached Peter Mandlesson and with what?
[1:36]>> Of course. So, um I I was the editor on this story. Harry Wilson and and Jason Leupold uh and a bunch of other fabulous reporters were were leading the way. Um,
[1:46]and uh, we obtained this trove of 18,000 emails from from Jeffrey Epstein's personal uh, Yahoo account kind of
[1:56]during the the where most of the emails were were during the time when allegations first surfaced against him uh, in 2006 kind of through his now
[2:06]infamous plea deal in 2008. uh and it features a lot of personal conversations with a lot of people and uh we in in that trove we we found uh a hundred
[2:17]emails or more than 100 emails between EP Epstein and Mandlesson and on Monday
[2:24]afternoon UK time we uh Harry sent Mandlesson a uh 2000word uh right of reply as as we call it uh
[2:36]you know a letter kind of outlining uh a story we were looking to publish uh based on those emails uh you know seeking comment, clarification,
[2:46]context, that sort of thing. Um then on Wednesday morning uh he he came out with this interview uh with the son where he
[2:56]was sort of apologizing for his relationship and and saying that it continued on far longer than it should have >> and saying using the phrase we know embarrassing emails are going to come
[3:07]out. Yes. Yes. Exactly right. Exactly right. Um so at that point we were kind of wondering you know what kind of response we were getting. So we we we
[3:17]followed up of course and um you know we we were we were uh Harry was uh WhatsAppapping with him and and
[3:27]trying to you know see if he was going to respond. He he kind of questioned like where the where the emails came from and and said he's going to go talk
[3:37]to somebody about the legalities and revert. Um and you know our deadline at that point was uh Wednesday evening. Um
[3:47]and this was like uh maybe 3:45ish uh Wednesday afternoon when when he he said that. And then an hour later, uh,
[3:56]the Sun published, uh, a story based on, uh, one or two of those those emails. Um, and then a few, we we obviously
[4:06]rushed to, uh, publish the rest of our story. Nobody in our industry, and I know newscasters are interested in this and how the sausage is made, so I hope people won't think that we're being
[4:17]self-indulgent talking about all of this, but how this works is also part of how politics works and how the news works. Now, nobody would have disagreed
[4:27]with The Sun and their um man in America now, Harry Cole's decision to say yes to Lord Mandlesson coming along to do an interview with him. Nobody of course would say, "Oh, no, sorry. Other people might be working on a story about you."
[4:38]So, I'll say no to the interview. But I just wonder, Alex, for you, your team, you've been working on this for a long time. Suddenly, he pops up appearing to
[4:49]try to get ahead of the story that you'd put to him. How did it feel? >> It's a it's a good question. Uh, you know, obviously it was a surprise. Um,
[5:00]and the the main thing on our minds was just, you know, uh, can when can we publish? You know, obviously every journalist knows the feeling of like having a story that you really want to
[5:11]publish, but you have to do a lot of things to make sure it's safe and ready to go, especially regarding making sure that uh the main person in the story has had enough time
[5:23]to comment. So, Patty, some of the things that we know now that we didn't know yesterday when Adam did the episode with um where things had got to. So we know now that by Tuesday the foreign
[5:35]office and Downing Street were aware that there was something coming. We know that they were aware that there was a story with more about the relationship between the two men and that Tuesday is
[5:46]crucial because that is before Karma stood up at the dispatch box on Wednesday and said I have full confidence in him. So he said that publicly even though in government they knew there was something else coming and
[5:58]of course the Sun had their interview with him saying that there were embarrassing things to come. I've also been told in the last few uh hours that
[6:08]number 10 asked Mandlesson to resign on Wednesday and he refused. I've also really intriguingly been told that when they were mulling over the
[6:18]appointment before he was given the job last year at Mandlesson was vetted by the cabinet office the propriety and ethics team is their acronym because of course it's white hole so everything
[6:30]must have an acronym a file I'm told was presented to the prime minister and the prime minister reviewed the file and then had three specific questions that he wanted to put Peter put to Peter
[6:42]Mandlesson his chief of staff Morgan Mweeny emailed Peter Madison on the prime minister's behalf asking him why he'd continued the contact with Epstein
[6:51]after he was first convicted why it was reported that he'd stayed at his apartment in Manhattan even though Epstein was then in jail and also whether or not he had become what was
[7:02]called a founding citizen of a charity that had been was Gillen Maxwell and that Epstein had given some money towards. Madison replied to that email and at
[7:14]that stage number 10 thought that the asurances that he gave Kier Sarmmer on those three points were adequate. I've also been told by two different sources that Mandlesson told them he did not
[7:25]stay in the Manhattan apartment in the summer of 2009 which is a contradiction to what's been actually reported around this for a long time. And bear with me on the detail here because this is
[7:37]really important. It was court documents in 2023 that showed Epstein saying to his private banker Mandals is going to come and stay at the apartment at the
[7:47]weekend. Peter Mandlesson never explicitly confirmed or denied whether that had actually taken place. Um but to my mind, this is the first time and two sources have said this to me that number
[7:58]10 was told he hadn't stayed in that flat at that particular time in the summer of 2009 when Epstein was in jail. So that's if you've been if you're still with me, Paddyy. >> I No, I am because this
[8:10]>> I don't blame you for your eyes glazing over slightly, but >> Well, because to me, this comes down for the prime minister. >> Yeah. >> To the famous most famous question in
[8:19]journalism. What did you know? And when did you know it? Yes. And this is why the prime minister's judgment is being called into question by not just the leader of the opposition and his
[8:31]political rivals, but by one very vocal Labor MP and by other quiet Labor MPs who are saying they're furious with the way this was handled. >> Absolutely right. And number 10 sources
[8:43]are now completely clear that they are absolutely furious. The phrase that was given to me was that they believe that Mandlesson, who of course is an ally of theirs, who helped Karma get back into power, who helped them sort out the
[8:54]Labour Party, they believe now that he was economical with the truth. >> Really, that's what they're saying >> about his relationship. That's the phrase that has been used to me. Not that he told them a whole pack of lies,
[9:06]but that he was economical with the truth about the extent of the relationship. But we'll be reporting the story here at the BBC that Kier Starmer
[9:15]did ask for asurances about the relationship with Epstein got assur what he believed were assurances for Mandlesson but went ahead and gave him the job. So I think that
[9:26]sort of scotches any notion that had sort of been doing the rounds that oh maybe they hadn't really thought about his relationship with Epstein. Maybe they thought oh well it's all in the past it's not a big deal. We know now
[9:36]that K Star specifically wanted three questions to be cleared up by Peter Mandlesson and he was well aware therefore that there was a there was a possible red flag and there was
[9:46]something that might explode in time. But the issue of the flat is also a really interesting one. You know there's lots of evidence and we know and there are photographs of Peter Mandlesson being at various properties of Epstein's
[9:58]over the years and the notorious bathrobe picture. Of course, we have not been able to find right now any explicit denial or confirmation of that stay having taken place from Lord Mandlesson.
[10:10]So, I think it could be quite significant that number 10 was told by him uh that he didn't stay there. >> One of the things that you've got to ask on the public record is has Downing
[10:21]Street played fair by victims. What is the responsibility of the British Prime Minister to the historic victims? And is appointing Peter Mandlesson after the
[10:33]knowing of a relationship with Jeffrey Epstein in line with caring for victims if you have done all the due diligence that you possibly can. It's interesting
[10:43]to me to see this information being given publicly about the three questions emailed by the chief of staff Morgan Mcweeny that shows the workings of
[10:54]reacting to this uh explosive scandal. It's giving us an in. It's giving us insight into how concerned they are in Downing Street with the answer to the question I've just posed. >> I think that's exactly right because
[11:06]normally or often in this kind of thing actually government just says we're not going to get into it. We're not going to get into it. We're not going to get into it. Now, also to be clear with newscasters, these are what sources are
[11:16]telling people off the record. These are conversations that are happening in in private. This is not official statements from Downing Street now saying, "Oh, here is all our information." But what
[11:26]we've been doing is trying to get to the heart of this because it is so critical. >> It's the timeline that matters. Exactly. And the thing is I think if we could just turn to a newscaster correspondence
[11:36]because it's this there is out there a sense of fair play. Are you allowed to make a mistake 20 make mistakes 20 years ago. Yes. Apologize for them and return to public life. We've I' I've been
[11:48]reading correspondence from a newscaster who says actually this isn't this isn't the the big scandal that the media is making it out to be because this was a a
[11:58]previously known relationship for which he's apologized and just wondering why this has led to the resignation that's from uh out there Alex you can see that people would like to think something
[12:09]that happened 20 years ago can be dealt with by apology and by moving on. So is a is part of the story there that he could have stayed under different circumstances.
[12:20]>> I I think uh your listener poses a a fascinating uh question. I I think to us uh you know part of what made the the story newsworthy or the the emails
[12:32]newsworthy was was that it was not just uh you know friends corresponding although there was plenty there were plenty of emails that that that featured how friends talk. Um but
[12:44]it but but it was somebody really expressing their support uh at the very moment that uh you know he's uh about to
[12:54]go to jail for for these crimes and saying you know that he's he's furious that it happened and that also curiously he said that this couldn't happen in
[13:05]Britain. Um and you know that you're you know you've got to fight for your release and your friends love you. Uh and then also having these conversations
[13:14]with about you know uh contacts and and what those contacts might be able to accomplish uh about the case.
[13:22]>> Um so so that was what seemed new to us beyond them being friends. You know >> it looks from the reporting that you've been doing both of you that he obviously
[13:32]himself thought he could stay because you told me he refused to resign. There's definitely a sense not that he was brazen and completely misled them,
[13:43]but that he wasn't completely candid about the full extent of their relationship. And particularly for number 10, I think what was untenable was the evidence that Mandlesson
[13:53]basically was didn't believe the conviction. You know, there had been a serious crime. He had come to accepted a sentence. And I think that was the bit
[14:04]that was not tolerable is this sense that Peter Mandlesson was still sticking up for his wealthy friend trying to help him when he had been disgraced and convicted of a terrible crime. And I think that was the change. It is though
[14:15]worth saying as you said there is a question and how you get good people to go into politics if things that happened to you 20 years ago can blow up in your face and suddenly you lose your job and
[14:26]you're completely in this kind of level of incredibly forensic scrutiny all the time. And Peter Mandlesson has actually for many years said he regrets his
[14:37]friendship with Epstein when going going on so long >> and he's mentioned the victims >> and he's mentioned the victims. He's understood to believe that he was frank and truthful with Downing Street about
[14:47]the extent of his relationship. >> So the two accounts of this whole mess clash and that's what's also difficult for Labor when they're trying to move on
[14:57]from this mess. It is a mess. It's an absolute mess. and in advance of the state visit. >> In advance of the state visit of Donald
[15:05]Trump being about to land in the UK. I mean, it is an absolute mess. Although, I do think we also shouldn't overstate how much Americans will be upset about
[15:15]losing our ambassador. You know, we're always more interested in them than they are in us. You know, it is awkward and it's tricky and it's disruptive and it means, of course, there's going to have to be a new different person
[15:26]representing the UK in the Oval Office. It clearly is a hugely important job. So, I'm not diminishing it, but while it's been a massive political hurricane here in the UK, not least because Peter
[15:38]Manderson is one of those few politicians who's really famous, >> actually in the US, the who the British ambassador is, is not something that's going to, you know, be keeping people
[15:49]awake in Wyoming. We >> we we're in the UK, we're in the position where the king's brother, Prince Andrew, says he never met Virginia Gay and yet paid her millions
[15:59]of pounds. So the logic is Prince Andrew paid millions of pounds to a woman he's never met. And that's because of the stinging relationship with Jeffrey
[16:09]Epstein. Any public man linked to Jeffrey Epstein is going to face severe scrutiny. And Peter Peter Mandlesson was linked to Jeffrey Epstein before he was
[16:20]appointed. The prime minister of the UK appointed him. And the questions are coming. And I don't think they're going to stop for the prime minister at the moment. I don't think they'll stop for a moment partly because
[16:32]of the kind of nature of route that this is and who Jeffrey Epstein was and all of those things. Also, Patty, I don't think they're going to stop because we're in a political moment where
[16:43]many, many of Karma's MPs are incredibly worried about how this government is doing. A few of them are starting to pop
[16:52]up their heads and talk openly about his leadership. Now, right now, you can count the number of them doing that on one hand, but you'd need lots and lots and lots of all of our hands to count the number of people who are saying that
[17:03]kind of thing in private. The opposition party and Kier Starmer's critics have got a taste for the hunt. This time last week, they'd managed to dispatch Angela
[17:13]Rener. Now, this week, they've managed to dispatch Peter Mandel. Obviously, they're both, you know, they're they're they what's what's happened are products of their own mistakes by their own
[17:23]admissions. But the political climate is not just as a sort of vague dispondency. There's a sense around the air where people who are after Kier Starmer have
[17:34]got a taste for success and they're not going to stop. Now, inside government, when you talk to people who are calm, there's still some people on the inside
[17:45]who are calm. Even at the end of a very torid week for the new senior team in number 10, remember this should be like right the second week of a shiny new reset when everything's going well and swimmingly and the new cabinet's in
[17:56]place and they've got new people in charge of all sorts of things in Downing Street. If you speak though, if you catch them at a calm moment, there's senior senior people in government will say, "Look, there's nothing here that we
[18:06]can't fix. We have to get our head down. We have to get on with it. We hope the economy might start start to turn better when people start to feel better off. We're going to be tougher on small boats. we're going to get ourselves
[18:16]together. We've got years to the next general election. There's no reason to pull the rip cord, but in their own party, not everyone feels that way. >> And I was reading on the front page of
[18:27]the FT today that there are a string of deals due to be announced with the state visit. So, we we'll mark that as something we're probably going to have to return to tomorrow. >> Yes. And the new business secretary,
[18:38]Peter Carl, is on the show with us tomorrow morning. So, no doubt he will want to talk all about them. Uh, I suspect he probably won't want to talk very much about the other Peter. Uh, but of course we wouldn't be doing our job
[18:50]if we didn't talk rather a lot about the other Peter. >> I just wonder lastly, can you explain what is it like, you know, on a massive investigation like that because I think our listeners are often interested in
[19:00]these things. This is a huge undertaking. You know, you have lots and lots of people working on the same story, especially when something involves very, very powerful people.
[19:09]It's not a turn up with a notebook, scribble down a few lines, and then stick it out. >> It a lot of it involves, you know, just really trying, you know, you you get
[19:21]extra time uh on on investigations teams often. And what you get to do with the extra time is to really try very very hard to uh confirm things and and to to
[19:32]get something nailed down, right? So, you know, obviously in in this case, right, Peter Mandlesson's uh association with with Jeffrey Epstein was wellknown. >> Uh the fact that he was friends and
[19:44]there, you know, there are pictures from I think 2005 showing showing them together on >> in uh near near Epstein's private island,
[19:55]right? Uh but but what the reporters were able to uncover through through their their their fabulous reporting here is, you know, uh email emails showing the depth of the relationship
[20:06]and and and showing support for Epstein at this moment that he's pleading guilty to crimes. Um, and
[20:17]that's, you know, it it is it can be a long road and there's a lot of ups and downs, a lot of weeks where you feel like, wow, uh, what even happened this
[20:28]last week? I didn't move the ball and is somebody going to wake up uh, you know, are higherups going to wake up and realize that they're they're they're wasting their money on me and and all
[20:39]all those sorts of things. And then you have moments of like unbelievable breakthrough of like, oh my god, it's it's there. The real thing is there. And then, wow, we have to really bulletproof
[20:50]this story to make sure it's accurate and we've done everything we need to do because obviously when once you put it out, then it's then it's under a new level of scrutiny, you know. >> And of course, your reporting this week
[21:02]really did have a very significant impact in our political world. >> So, I feel inevitably that we are wrapping things up. Um, Alex, thank you very much for joining us and filling us
[21:12]in in on timeline questions. I feel we'll have to say to you, will you come back on newscast perhaps with Adam come soon as more develops. >> Thank you so much. It's been a pleasure
[21:22]to be here and of course happy to come back anytime. >> Great. Great to have you. Thank you so much for listening. We'll be back uh tomorrow. Patty, who have you got on the program? >> Well, we're going to speak to Emily Mateless who of course interviewed
[21:34]Prince Andrew. We're going to see what she thinks of the Mandlesson and Kier Starma connections now that we're all reporting. >> Jolly good. Um, we've got Peter Kyle tomorrow, Laura Trot, the shadow
[21:46]education secretary and Piers Morgan, Rosanna Alan Khan who didn't go for the Labour deputy leadership and Christian Amur on the panel. So all-star panel tomorrow morning on Sunday morning. So
[21:56]be our all-star audience. I'll see you then. And we will be reunited in the newscast studio at whenever we do it. Happy Sunday. Sunday. That's the That's what I was looking for Sunday. So, we'll chat to you then.
[22:07]>> Bye.