Donald Trump says he has ordered two nuclear submarines to be positioned in the “appropriate regions” in a row with former Russian president Dmitry Medvedev.

It comes after Mr Medvedev, who is now deputy chair of Russia‘s Security Council, told the US president on Thursday to remember Moscow had Soviet-era nuclear strike capabilities of last resort.

On Friday, Mr Trump wrote on social media: “Based on the highly provocative statements of the Former President of Russia, Dmitry Medvedev, who is now the Deputy Chairman of the Security Council of the Russian Federation, I have ordered two Nuclear Submarines to be positioned in the appropriate regions, just in case these foolish and inflammatory statements are more than just that.

“Words are very important, and can often lead to unintended consequences, I hope this will not be one of those instances. Thank you for your attention to this matter!”

Trump-Russia live: Follow Ukraine war latest

Speaking outside the White House later in the day, Mr Trump was asked about why he had moved the submarines and replied: “We had to do that. We just have to be careful.

“A threat was made and we didn’t think it was appropriate, so I have to be very careful. So I do that on the basis of safety for our people. A threat was made by a former president of Russia and we’re going to protect our people.”

The spat between Mr Trump and Mr Medvedev came after the US president warned Russia on Tuesday it had “10 days from today” to agree to a ceasefire in Ukraine or face tariffs, along with its oil buyers.

Moscow has shown no sign that it will agree to Mr Trump’s demands.

Read more:
Who are the winners (if any) and losers of Trump’s tariffs?

On Thursday, Mr Medvedev reminded Mr Trump that Russia possessed a Soviet-era automated nuclear retaliatory system – or “dead hand”.

Mr Medvedev, a close ally of Russian President Vladimir Putin, was referring to a secretive semi-automated Soviet command system designed to launch Russia’s missiles if its leadership was taken out in a decapitating strike.

He made the remarks after Mr Trump told him to “watch his words” after Mr Medvedev said the US president’s threat of hitting Russia and its oil buyers with punitive tariffs was “a game of ultimatums” and added that “each new ultimatum is a threat and a step towards war” between Russia and the US.

Mr Medvedev served as Russia’s president from 2008 and 2012, when Mr Putin was barred from seeking a third consecutive term, but then stepped aside to let him run again.

As deputy chair of Russia’s Security Council, he has become known for his provocative and inflammatory statements since Moscow invaded Ukraine in 2022.

Donald Trump has said “nobody has asked” him to pardon Ghislaine Maxwell, but insisted he has “the right to do it” as US president.

Jeffrey Epstein’s former girlfriend is currently serving a 20-year sentence after being convicted of helping the paedophile financier traffic and sexually abuse underage girls in 2021.

Prosecutors have said Epstein’s sex crimes could not have been done without Maxwell, but her lawyers have maintained that she was wrongly prosecuted and denied a fair trial, and have floated the idea of a pardon from Mr Trump.

Last week, they asked the US Supreme Court to take up her case.

When pressed on the possibility of pardoning Maxwell, Mr Trump told reporters: “I’m allowed to do it, but nobody’s asked me to do it.”

He continued: “I know nothing about it. I don’t know anything about the case, but I know I have the right to do it. I have the right to give pardons, I’ve given pardons to people before, but nobody’s even asked me to do it.”

Mr Trump also said he would not pardon Sean “Diddy” Combs, who was convicted in July on two charges of transportation to engage in prostitution.

His comments came shortly after the federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) said Maxwell has been moved to a minimum-security prison camp in Texas.

She was being held at a low-security prison in Tallahassee, Florida, that housed men and women, but has now been transferred to a prison camp in Bryan, Texas.

When asked why Maxwell was transferred, BOP spokesperson Donald Murphy said he could not comment on the specifics, but that the BOP determines where inmates are sent based on such factors as “the level of security and supervision the inmate requires”.

Maxwell’s lawyer confirmed the move but also declined to discuss the specific reasons for it.

The Texas camp houses solely female prisoners, the majority of whom are serving time for nonviolent offences and white-collar crimes, Sky’s US partner NBC News reports.

Minimum-security federal prison camps house inmates considered to be the lowest security risk and some facilities do not even have fences.

A senior administration official told NBC: “Any false assertion this individual was given preferential treatment is absurd.

“Prisoners are routinely moved in some instances due to significant safety and danger concerns.”

Read more:
All we know about Trump and Epstein’s ‘friendship’
Analysis: Trump hopes to escape Epstein controversy

Maxwell has received renewed attention in recent weeks, after the US Justice Department said it would not be releasing the so-called ‘Epstein files’.

The department 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.

Officials from the Trump administration have since tried to cast themselves as promoting transparency in the case.

Last month, they lodged a request to unseal grand jury transcripts – which was denied – and Maxwell was last week interviewed by Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche.

Epstein survivor’s family criticises move

Maxwell’s move to a lower security facility has been criticised by the family of Epstein abuse survivor Virginia Giuffre, who died in April, and accusers Annie and Maria Farmer.

They said in a statement: “It is with horror and outrage that we object to the preferential treatment convicted sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell has received.

“Ghislaine Maxwell is a sexual predator who physically assaulted minor children on multiple occasions, and she should never be shown any leniency.

“Yet, without any notification to the Maxwell victims, the government overnight has moved Maxwell to a minimum security luxury prison in Texas.”

The statement concluded: “This move smacks of a cover up. The victims deserve better.”

A jury has ruled that Tesla is partly to blame for the death of a young woman who was hit by an electric car on Autopilot.

Naibel Benavides was stargazing at the time of the collision, which sent her flying 22m (75ft) through the air in Florida.

Her boyfriend was seriously injured in the 2019 incident, while her body was discovered in a wooded area.

The company has now been ordered to pay $243m (£183m) in damages to Ms Benavides’ family, and to her partner Dillon Angulo.

Jurors concluded that not all of the blame could be put on a reckless driver who admitted he was distracted by his phone before he hit the young couple.

The motorist, George McGee, reached a separate settlement with the victims’ families in an earlier case.

Brett Schreiber, who represented the victims, said: “Tesla designed Autopilot only for controlled-access highways yet deliberately chose not to restrict drivers from using it elsewhere, alongside Elon Musk telling the world Autopilot drove better than humans.

“Today’s verdict represents justice for Naibel’s tragic death and Dillon’s lifelong injuries.”

Tesla – and Elon Musk – have said it will appeal the verdict, labelling it “wrong” and a setback for automotive safety.

The verdict would also work to “jeopardise Tesla’s and the entire industry’s efforts to develop and implement life-saving technology”, the company warmed.

Tesla had claimed Mr McGee was solely to blame for the fatal crash because he had reached down to pick up a dropped mobile phone as his Model S sped through an intersection in Key Largo, Florida, at about 62mph.

Mr McGee allegedly did not receive alerts as he ran a stop sign and a red light – and the plaintiffs’ lawyer argued that the driver’s assistance should have warned the driver and braked before the collision.

The collision sent Ms Benavides Leon flying 22m (75ft) through the air, with her body later being discovered in a wooded area, while Mr Angulo suffered serious injuries.

“To be clear, no car in 2019, and none today, would have prevented this crash,” Tesla said. “This was never about Autopilot; it was a fiction concocted by plaintiffs’ lawyers blaming the car when the driver – from day one – admitted and accepted responsibility.”

Read more from Sky News:
Trump hits out again at ‘stubborn moron’
World’s oldest baby born in the US

Lawyers for the plaintiffs also alleged that Tesla either hid or lost key evidence, including data and video recorded seconds before the collision.

They showed the court that the company had the evidence all along, despite repeated denials, after hiring a forensic data expert who dug it up.

After being shown the evidence, Tesla said it made a mistake and honestly hadn’t thought it was there.

Past cases against Tesla were dismissed or settled, so the verdict in this case could encourage more legal action.

Miguel Custodio, a car crash lawyer not involved in this trial, added: “This will open the floodgates. It will embolden a lot of people to come to court.”

The verdict comes as Mr Musk plans to roll out a driverless taxi service, hoping to convince people his vehicles are safe enough to drive on their own.

Improvements to the company’s driver assistance and partial self-driving features have been made in recent years – but in 2023, 2.3 million Tesla vehicles were recalled amid fears Autopilot was failing to sufficiently alert drivers not paying attention to the road.