A prince, an ambassador, senior diplomats, top politicians. All brought down by the Jeffrey Epstein files. And all in Europe, rather than the United States.
The huge trove of Epstein documents released by the U.S. Department of Justice has sent shock waves through Europe’s political, economic and social elites — dominating headlines, ending careers and spurring political and criminal investigations.
Former U.K. Ambassador to Washington Peter Mandelson was fired and could go to prison. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer faces a leadership crisis over the Mandelson appointment. Senior figures have fallen in Norway, Sweden and Slovakia. And, even before the latest batch of files, Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, brother of King Charles III, lost his honors, princely title and taxpayer-funded mansion.
This is the theme of almost all of the “toppling”. Mostly they’ve just… resigned. They probably keep all the perks, and then take up a corporate advisor position once there’s less heat.
Headlines like this make it sound like there’s been real impact beyond generating articles about a few of the more public figures. But reading article, it’s really just a few politicians and bureaucrats resigning. Mandelson’s firing was already months ago. The investigation into a former Norwegian PM sounds like that’s as harsh as it’s got so far for politicians this time. And nothing except one law firm board member resigning for private companies?
They’re all getting away with it, and all the victims get is a hundred headlines about Musk being named in the files, and having their lives endangered from the terrible Don-centric redaction.
Resignation is often used in these kinds of cases, because there’s really no framework to fire them, since they didn’t actually violate any of the terms on which they’re hired. They should be tried for the crimes they’ve committed under the jurisdiction of the place where the crime was committed. Not in some random board meeting in a different country.
What happens is that the board says “even if you didn’t violate our terms or any local laws, we don’t see our organization being able to work with someone like you, so we urge you to do what is best for both parts, which is that you resign voluntarily.”
If they don’t, then the board can say “the existence of potential criminal cases against you can harm the reputation of our organization, so now you’re fired.” The outcome is almost the same, but this could create a lot more negative attention to what the company knew about.
Oh yes, I understand how they go about smoothing everything over.
But, given the details we know, don’t you think:
• one corporate resignation,
• one months-prior bureaucrat firing, and,
• one investigation into a former PM,
is pretty far removed from could be considered a proportional fallout?
Absolutely, but it isn’t up to their employers to punish them.