Zak Mir looks at the possible return of the IMF, the Sir Humphrey Appleby friendly technicality that led to the release of Lucy Connolly, which was not apparently flagged by anyone, and the swift release of the Ghislaine Maxwell transcripts.
The Great British IMF Bailout Of 2026
There were two predictions I made in the wake of the Labour victory in July last year. The first was that the government would fall in a year, and the second, that if it did not, we would see an IMF bailout by 2026. The evidence for the bailout was the analogy that 2024 was the new 1974, and that given socialist policies in both years the country would go bankrupt within 2 years. Therefore, it has been very gratifying this week to see the headlines warning of an IMF bailout. Of course, the source of the warning is economists, who obviously do not normally know what they are talking about. And the story is written by journalists, who are not really bothered if anyone knows what they are talking about. But having recently turned a £22bn non-existent black hole, into a real £50bn, Rachel Reeves is very much on track with the double barrelled disaster of taxing increasingly impoverished workers, and borrowing more and more to pay for non-workers. We all know, and she knows is not going to work. This is especially so as the UK economy is always walking a tightrope of the “kindness of strangers” a.k.a. the financial markets, as well as the gullibility of the middle classes. However, a year in, anyone with any sense, especially those who have lived through the 1970s, will know that under “Old” Labour you have limited choices: leave the country, or live off benefits. While we see doctors and rail workers go on strike, it is actually the private sector who should go on strike.
Of course, the negative headlines regarding the economy come with attendant insults as to the competence of the likes of Starmer and Reeves. But it should always be noted, and is not noted enough, that the show so far in 13 months is a 10 out of 10 example of socialist policies designed to make the country poorer so more people have to vote Labour. If we were all rich how many people outside Primrose Hill, or Islington would vote for a socialist agenda. As we saw with 14 years of Conservative rule delivering Lib Dem policies, politicians are happy to take flak in order to deliver their ideology, Labour is no different. Indeed, one assumes that the likes of Angel Rayner enjoy seeing collective pips being squeezed.
The Political Prisoner
Should anyone be sent to prison for word crime? No more than someone who has stolen a loaf of bread / shoplifting. Should a child minder with a young child be sent to prison, probably not unless for a capital offense. If we did not know this previously, well into the 21st century, in the aftermath of the Lucy Connolly case. Connolly was freed this week, being denied the opportunity of serving out the full 31 months sentence for tweeting and then deleting spur of the moment comments. This must have been a disappointment to the Court of Appeal, who as recently as May suggested that there was no arguable basis that the sentence was excessive. Presumably, if the Court of Appeal is merely an extension of current government will then this would be the case. It would also be the case if the Court of Appeal was a centre – left organisation, and not focused on applying either law, or operating with a sense of justice. Now with Connolly’s release we have another example of the Starmer U-turn, something which we saw with regard to winter fuel payments, and benefit cuts in June. This has all the pawprints of the Prime Minister’s flip-flop handling of policy.
That said, the elephant in the room regarding Lucy Connolly, is how and why she was released early. This smacks of another flip-flop. That said, the technical reason for release was that August 21st marked 40% of the sentence, and so mathematically Connolly could be released. This begs the question why this was not mentioned at the time the Court Of Appeal issued its Alice In Wonderland type pronouncement in May. What fits just as well as a reason for release was that the “political prisoner” was becoming too much of a political hot potato, especially given US interest in the case, heightened by both the President and Vice President visiting this country recently. The Americans have expressed concerns regarding free speech in this country. Alas, what they are perhaps not aware of is that the ship sailed a long time ago, never to return.
The Ghislaine Maxwell Transcripts
While we may never get to the bottom of the Kennedy assasination, or know why the CCTV was off that day in the Alma tunnel, we have evidence straight from the horse’s mouth regarding the Epstein scandal. No, of course, having committed “suicide”, Jeffrey is not available for comment. But we do have convicted sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell to dish the dirt. Or rather exhonorate President Donald Trump. This is of course a very satisfactory state of affairs for a sitting President, otherwise one risks having the shadow of doubt hanging over one for years. Luckily, the US Department of Justice, has released the transcript of the US Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche interviewing Maxwell. Who needs The Late Show with Stephen Colbert, when you can read this. Most of the interview lets most of the key personnel whether involved, or not involved off the hook, at least partly. But the real question here is the reliability of the source? If we could interview Genghis Khan on his human rights record, Joan Of Arc on whether she really was a heretic, or Lord Lucan on what happened on the way to the Newhaven ferry, would the source be any more reliable than what we already know. The real kicker here is that the DoJ in a break from the past, is acting so quickly in the “big reveal.” Normally, it would be decades, after all concerned had left this mortal coil.
