Nigel Farage has 41 mentions in the Epstein Files and counting

[SerendipityJane]

https://www.thecanary.co/trending/2025/12/30/nigel-farage-41-mentions-in-the-epstein-files/

Nothing major has come up that you seem to be aware of. If Farage had got half the level of scrutiny from the press that Rayner got over her house he’d be finished. We should be wondering why he doesn’t.

The school bullying thing does seem to have got some traction and hit home for some reason. I’m quite happy to believe the bit where Farage doesn’t deny doing it but I’m not so sure about the bit where he claimed hr didn’t mean anything by it. He does get very tetchy when it’s brought up which is his usual tell on the rare occasion a journalist holds him to account.

I suppose the issue is that its so unfair. Who else would get held responsible professionally for something they said while a child. And NF can't prove his innocence (just as the accusers can't prove guilt).

Its not a good precedent to set.

That’s my point. He isn’t trying to prove his innocence. He didn’t even go for ‘I was young and immature and wouldn’t do that now’ His defence is that it was a joke not that he didn’t say those things or make gas hissing noises at Jewish pupils.

Fair point. But it's hard for Farage to be impartial on this issue, given that he has an obvious bias himself.

It'd be like turkeys making decisions about Christmas.

.

He probably can't remember for sure. I'm years younger than NF and I can't remember half the stuff at school that we did or said. I appreciate the people who he allegedly said it to would remember though. But I think their motives in bringing it up are political so can't really be relied on 100%. I think that's a fair and reasonable approach.

If they can prove he did say those things then that's different as they are awful.

And if they are proven, then the issue of whether you should be held professionally responsible for something you said as a child needs to be considered and what precedent that sets. Bearing in mind it would apply to any politician of any stripe.

Worth the wait.

😂😂😂😂

Is that it?

As suspected.

OK that settles it- it's a plop and run thread.

Hilarious. The right wing media go after Labour every day. Every leader, every minister, MPs if they can be bothered. Probably the worse thing I ever saw was hacks turning up at the Miliband's uncles funeral and asking the mourners for dirt on them.
And yet Johnson wasn't allowed some Foreign Office briefings when he was Foreign S because he wasn't security cleared... His dubious Russian links, the young girl he put in the Lords. And they made him PM.
Farage's house in Clacton, his actual residence in Brussels, the fact he spends more time in the US than in Parliament.
Geoffrey Cox the Attorney General who lived in the Bahamas.
Priti Patel sacked twice and bullied staff
Dominic Raab bullied staff and handled the Afghanistan exodus appallingly, just didn't do his job.
I could go on but I can guarantee that if any of these examples were a Labour person we would never have heard the end of it.

Much of your list is not proven or not actually breaching any rules. Im not saying the Conservatives are squeaky clean. Far from it.. But a Conservative PM did actually resign for breaching the rules. Unlike some other PMs I could mention....

Ufortunately most of Labour Cabinet Ministers (or ex Cabinet Ministers) transgressions are actually proven and are actually a breach of the rules. And they are in power at the moment. So are the relevant ones for the press to be investigating.

You mean Johnson? Only because all of his Cabinet resigned first, So he couldn't carry on.

Boris Johnson was brought down by party gate. As investigated by the completely impartial Sue Gray.....

Boris Johnson survived party gate. He was brought down by one of the Tory sex scandals. Namely knowingly giving the chief whip position to a sex pest and then lying about it when he got caught out.

He did later quit as an MP over lying to the house but that was nothing to do with Sue Grey. That was a unanimous decision by a cross party parliamentary committee. Although I suspect it was more because he was bored by that point. He’d done the PM thing and wanted to be out making money from having been PM.

The main investigation was carried out by Sue Grey though. So the findings are obviously questionable.

Appointing someone dodgy hasn't brought Keir Starmer down though? Seems to be a different set of rules for Labour.

There have been many anti Brexit and Farage threads on MN over the years where the OP seldom posts, if at all, after their initial post. Guess if some don’t agree with their views, they lose interest immediately?

He has taken pay for work he hasn’t done. He was instrumental during Brexit, which was largely based on false promises. He has repeatedly deflected questions which might incriminate him, rather than give straight answers.

BohoGarden · 03/01/2026 13:38
Blair regretted the amount of time the debate took, not the actual banning of fox hunting.
Too busy, so annoying Tory voting country people was given priority over violence against children in Rochdale and other northern towns.