Starmer insists relationship with Trump has not been jeopardised by ‘blatant foreign interference’ complaint

Published

10 months ago

October 23, 2024

admin

Sir Keir Starmer has insisted his relationship with Donald Trump has not been jeopardised after the Republican candidate’s team accused Labour of “blatant foreign interference” in the US election.

The prime minister said on Tuesday he had “established a good relationship” with Mr Trump despite the Trump campaign filing a legal complaint against Labour officials travelling to the US to volunteer for Kamala Harris in the tightly fought presidential race.

The complaint, filed with the independent Federal Election Commission, alleged that the volunteering by Labour Party members, coupled with reports of contact between senior Labour operatives and the Harris campaign, amounted to “illegal foreign campaign contributions and interference” to help Mr Trump’s Democrat rival in the US presidential election.

Sir Keir sought to downplay the row and role Labour Party activists were playing in the US election as he travelled to Samoa for the annual Commonwealth heads of government summit.

Speaking to reporters on the 28-hour flight over, the PM stressed Labour Party members were going over as volunteers rather than on the Labour Party books.

“The Labour Party has volunteers, who have gone over pretty much every election,” he said.

“They’re doing it in their spare time, they’re doing it as volunteers, they’re staying, I think, with other volunteers over there. That’s what they’ve done in previous elections, that’s what they’re doing in this election and that’s really straightforward.”

The Labour Party has insisted it is not funding the travel or accommodation for activists. Federal election rules stipulate foreign volunteers can’t spend more than $1,000 (£770) helping candidates.

However, in filing the complaint, Mr Trump’s legal team cited media reports that Labour Party officials, including the prime minister’s chief of staff Morgan McSweeney and Matthew Doyle, Downing Street’s director of communications, had travelled to the US in recent months to advise the Harris campaign.

The Trump team also cited a now-deleted LinkedIn post by Sofia Patel, director of operations for Labour, that suggested the party could be paying accommodation costs for activists, with the post stating “we will sort out your housing”.

“Those searching for foreign interference in our elections need to look no further than [the] LinkedIn post,” said the letter from Trump campaign lawyer Gary Lawkowski. “The interference is occurring in plain sight.”

Mr Trump’s lawyers say such support breaches US campaign finance laws, as they count as contributions from foreign actors, and they demanded an “immediate investigation” into what they called “blatant foreign interference” in the election.

Starmer and Trump ‘established a good relationship’

The prime minister argued the row would not jeopardise his relationship with Mr Trump should the Republican candidate win the election, insisting the pair had “established a good relationship” when they dined at Trump Tower together last month.

Sir Keir said: “I spent time in New York with President Trump, had dinner with him, and my purpose in doing that was to make sure that between the two of us we established a good relationship, which we did, and we’re grateful for him for making the time for that dinner.

“We had a good, constructive discussion and of course, as prime minister of the United Kingdom I will work with whoever the American people return as their president in their elections, which are very close now.”

The tensions between the ruling Labour Party and possible next US president come as the prime minister travels to the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM) on the Pacific island of Samoa this week, where he hopes to discuss trade opportunities ahead of next week’s historic budget.

His team back in Downing Street and the Treasury are putting the finishing touches on, in the words of one insider, an “unprecedented” budget that looks to bridge a shortfall of £40bn.

To plug the gap, the prime minister and Chancellor Rachel Reeves, who insisted ahead of the election they had “no plans” to raise taxes beyond what was laid out in the manifesto, are now rolling the pitch for a mix of big tax increases and spending cuts.

With such big stakes back home, coupled with a difficult run for a prime minister beset by rows over freebies and dysfunction in Number 10, one former adviser wondered aloud to me this week whether Sir Keir was spending too much time overseas when he should be focused on the domestic agenda back home and resetting his missions more clearly with the public.

However, he and his team defended the prime minister’s decision to travel to CHOGM a week before the budget, arguing these summits help to reset Britain’s relations in the world and drive trade.

One of his staffers noted the 56 Commonwealth nations’ economies are set to be worth $19.5trn (£15trn) by 2027 and these are markets worth tapping into.

But it is true too the leaders of the biggest Commonwealth economies are not in attendance.

Fellow G7 leader Justin Trudeau of Canada is not making the long trip to Samoa, while India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi and South African President Cyril Ramaphosa are in Kazan as Russian President Vladimir Putin plays host to 36 world leaders at a BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) summit.

Pressure over question of reparations

Meanwhile, the prime minister is also under pressure from some Labour MPs and Caribbean governments over reparations for countries affected by slavery and colonialism.

While Sir Keir is clear he doesn’t plan to engage in this discussion at the summit, it is nevertheless rising up the agenda.

This week, the Commonwealth will select a new secretary general and all three candidates vying to replace Patricia Scotland, the former Labour cabinet minister who’s been in post since 2016, have called for reparations for countries affected by slavery and colonialism.

But as the first sitting British prime minister to visit a Pacific island in a formal capacity, the prime minister will want to make the case his is, to quote one staffer, a “once in a generation opportunity” to harness the Commonwealth.

With tensions back home over the budget and the man who could be the next president of the United States, unity this week with old allies is what he needs.

US

Ukrainians are appalled at Trump’s naive and cack-handed diplomacy

Published

17 hours ago

August 15, 2025

admin

Ukrainians are appalled at Trump's naive and cack-handed diplomacy

For Ukrainians, the spectacle of Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump meeting in Alaska will be repugnant.

The man behind an unprovoked invasion of their country is being honoured with a return to the world stage by the leader of a country that was meant to be their ally.

And they feel let down.

Follow latest updates from Ukraine war

President Trump had threatened severe sanctions on Russia within 50 days if Russia didn’t agree to a deal. He had seemed close to imposing them before letting Putin wriggle off the hook yet again.

But they are not surprised. At every stage, Trump has either sided with Russia or at least given them the benefit of the doubt.

It is clear that Putin has some kind of hold over this American president, in their minds and many others.

Ukraine wants three things out of these talks. A ceasefire, security guarantees and reparations. It is not clear at this stage that they will get any of them.

Ukrainians and their European allies are appalled at the naive and cack-handed diplomacy that has preceded this meeting.

Vladimir Putin is sending a team of foreign affairs heavyweights, adept at getting the better of opponents in negotiations.

There are, the Financial Times reported this week, no Russia specialists left at the Trump White House.

Instead, Trump is relying on Steve Witkoff, a real estate lawyer and foreign policy novice, who has demonstrated a haphazard mastery of his brief and breathtaking credulity with the Russians.

Former British spy chief Sir Alex Younger described him today as totally out of his depth. Trump, he says, is being played like a fiddle by Putin.

There is a fundamental misunderstanding of the conflict at the heart of the Trump administration’s handling of it. Witkoff and the president see it in terms of real estate. But it has never been about territory.

Vladimir Putin has made it abundantly clear that Ukraine’s existence as a sovereign democratic entity cannot be tolerated. He has made no pretence that his views on that have changed.

Ukrainians know that and fear any deal cooked up in Alaska will be used by Putin on the path towards that ultimate goal

US

Melania Trump threatens to sue Hunter Biden for $1bn over Epstein comments

Published

1 day ago

August 14, 2025

admin

Melania Trump threatens to sue Hunter Biden for bn over Epstein comments

Melania Trump has threatened to sue Hunter Biden for more than $1bn (£736.5m) in damages if he does not retract comments linking her to Jeffrey Epstein.

Mr Biden, who is the son of former US president Joe Biden, alleged in an interview this month that sex trafficker Epstein introduced the first lady to President Donald Trump.

“Epstein introduced Melania to Trump. The connections are, like, so wide and deep,” he claimed.

Ms Trump’s lawyer labelled the comments false, defamatory and “extremely salacious” in a letter to Mr Biden.

Her lawyer wrote that the first lady suffered “overwhelming financial and reputational harm” as the claims were widely discussed on social media and reported by media around the world.

The president and first lady previously said they were introduced by modelling agent Paolo Zampolli at a New York Fashion Week party in 1998.

Mr Biden attributed the claim that Epstein introduced the couple to author Michael Wolff, who was accused by Mr Trump of making up stories to sell books in June and was dubbed a “third-rate reporter” by the president.

The former president’s son doubled down on his remarks in a follow-up interview with the same YouTube outlet, Channel 5 with Andrew Callaghan, entitled “Hunter Biden Apology”.

Asked if he would apologise to the first lady, Mr Biden responded: “F*** that – that’s not going to happen.”

He added: “I don’t think these threats of lawsuits add up to anything other than designed distraction.”

Ms Trump’s threat to sue Mr Biden echoes a strategy employed by her husband, who has aggressively used legal action to go after critics.

Public figures like the Trumps must meet a high bar to succeed in a defamation suit like the one that could be brought by the first lady if she follows through with her threat.

In his initial interview, Mr Biden also hit out at “elites” and others in the Democratic Party, who he claims undermined his father before he dropped out of last year’s race for president.

The letter threatening legal action against Mr Biden is dated 6 August and was first reported by Fox News Digital.

It was addressed to Abbe Lowell, a lawyer who has represented Mr Biden in his criminal cases. Mr Lowell has not yet commented on the letter.

This comes as pressure on the White House to release the Epstein files has been mounting for weeks, after he made a complete U-turn on his administration’s promise to release more information publicly.

The US Justice Department, which confirmed in July that it would not be releasing the files, said a review of the Epstein case had found “no incriminating ‘client list'” and “no credible evidence” the jailed financier – who killed himself in prison in 2019 – had blackmailed famous men.

US

Trump’s pride vs Putin’s legacy: What to expect from pivotal Ukraine summit

Published

1 day ago

August 14, 2025

admin

Trump's pride vs Putin's legacy: What to expect from pivotal Ukraine summit

Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin will meet for the first time in six years on Friday, with a possible deal to end the Ukraine war on the agenda.

Mr Trump has threatened “very severe consequences” if his Russian counterpart doesn’t agree to a ceasefire at the summit, being hosted at a remote US army base in snowy Anchorage, Alaska.

Follow latest updates from Ukraine war

But there are fears they will discuss a deal robbing Ukraine of the land currently occupied by Russia – something Volodymyr Zelenskyy has said he won’t accept.

Here’s what three of our correspondents think ahead of the much-anticipated face-to-face.

Putin’s legacy is at stake – he’ll want territory and more
By Ivor Bennett, Moscow correspondent, in Alaska

Putin doesn’t just want victory. He needs it.

Three and a half years after he ordered the invasion of Ukraine, this war has to end in a visible win for the Russian president. It can’t have been for nothing. His legacy is at stake.

So the only deal I think he’ll be willing to accept at Friday’s summit is one that secures Moscow’s goals.

These include territory (full control of the four Ukrainian regions which Russia has already claimed), permanent neutrality for Kyiv and limits on its armed forces.

I expect he’ll be trying to convince Trump that such a deal is the quickest path to peace. The only alternative, in Russia’s eyes, is an outright triumph on the battlefield.

I think Putin‘s hope is that the American president agrees with this view and then gives Ukraine a choice: accept our terms or go it alone without US support.

A deal like that might not be possible this week, but it may be in the future if Putin can give Trump something in return.

That’s why there’s been lots of talk from Moscow this week about all the lucrative business deals that can come from better US-Russia relations.

The Kremlin will want to use this opportunity to remind the White House of what else it can offer, apart from an end to the fighting.

Ukraine would rather this summit not be happening
By Dominic Waghorn, international affairs editor, in Ukraine

Ukraine would far rather this meeting wasn’t happening.

Trump seemed to have lost patience with Putin and was about to hit Russia with more severe sanctions until he was distracted by the Russian leader’s suggestion that they meet.

Ukrainians say the Alaska summit rewards Putin by putting him back on the world stage.

But the meeting is happening, and they have to be realistic.

Most of all, they want a ceasefire before any negotiations can happen. Then they want the promise of security guarantees.

That is because they know that Putin may well come back for more even if peace does break out. They need to be able to defend themselves should that happen.

And they want the promise of reparations to rebuild their country, devastated by Putin’s wanton, unprovoked act of aggression.

There are billions of Russian roubles and assets frozen across the West. They want them released and sent their way.

What they fear is Trump being hoodwinked by Putin with the lure of profit from US-Russian relations being restored, regardless of Ukraine’s fate.

That would allow Russia to regain its strength, rearm and prepare for another round of fighting in a few years’ time.

Trump and his golf buddy-turned-negotiator Steve Witkoff appear to believe Putin might be satisfied with keeping some of the land he has taken by force.

Putin says he wants much more than that. He wants Ukraine to cease to exist as a country separate from Russia.

Any agreement short of that is only likely to be temporary.

Trump’s pride on the line – he has a reputation to restore
By Martha Kelner, US correspondent, in Alaska

As with anything Donald Trump does, he already has a picture in his mind.

The image of Trump shaking hands with the ultimate strongman leader, Vladimir Putin, on US soil calls to his vanity and love of an attention-grabbing moment.

There is also pride at stake.

Trump campaigned saying he would end the Russia-Ukraine war on his first day in office, so there is an element of him wanting to follow through on that promise to voters, even though it’s taken him 200-plus days in office and all he’s got so far is this meeting, without apparently any concessions on Putin’s end.

In Trump’s mind – and in the minds of many of his supporters – he is the master negotiator, the chief dealmaker, and he wants to bolster that reputation.

He is keen to further the notion that he negotiates in a different, more straightforward way than his predecessors and that it is paying dividends.