I just don't understand.
Allegedly, Isabel Oakeshott leaks the confidential Ambassador diptel papers to the press instead of telling the FCO what she had unearthed. There's an outrage and an investigation set up. Trump's character has been impugned, but almost the next thing he does is behave boorishly in line with Darroch's profiling.
Noticably, no-one reading Darroch's assessment disagrees, nor rushes to Trump's aid.
No questions are asked about Oakeshott's role in this, or where she obtained the papers, or why she showed them to Farage before leaking them. Curiously, they are a mix of a two-year-old set, plus some from 8-10 days ago. Someone sneaky has been hoarding and filing systematically. Could it be dark money running a politician, a conniver, or someone slighted?
There's also no questions about Official Secrets Act being raised and no men in raincoats turning up at the Mail on Sunday.
Oakeshott is an activist friend of Leave, Arron Banks and Lord Ashcroft, amply illustrated in this recent Times diagram (although it leaves off a few other folk like Boris Johnson and Steve Bannon) - Oakeshott has anyway denied that the leak comes from anyone on the chart.
The Leave brigade sees merit in Farage influence in the USA. Trump wants someone toadying that he can control. Farage is already eyeing up the expenses.
I expect the FCO will ignore the witterings of the so-called President, and keep Kim Darroch in role until the end of his term , which is December 2019.
That would be inconvenient for latent PM Boris, who wants to replace the US ambassador with someone more politically controllable and without the memory of Borisgaffes. Part II of the stealthy plan might be to force Darroch to resign.
We, and those investigating, must ask who has most to gain from such a strategically timed and anonymous leak? Constructive ambiguity meets plausible deniability.
Meanwhile, the untouchable Brexiteers continue a-singin' and a-dancin' to MC Hammer.
No comments:
Post a Comment