And just like that, it completely VANISHED from the media. But a sitting congressman, Ted Lieu, said on the record The Epstein files are being blocked because they show Trump raped and threatened to kill children. Don't trust me... listen to him 👇

He eliminated USAID, and defunded pediatric cancer research for this. He cut every worthy program so he could paint super algae-producing reflecting pools & post his name to already-named buildings- If you think this UFC spectacle didn't cost any tax payer money, you deserve to be publicly tarred & feathered.

What I find most extraordinary is that some of those now clamouring for yet another change of leadership were either silent, or wholly content, when Labour suffered its worst General Election defeat since 1935 under Jeremy Corbyn. The electorate delivered its verdict with unmistakable clarity. The party was left diminished, divided and facing a prolonged period in opposition. Sir Keir Starmer inherited that shattered inheritance and, through discipline, patience and determination, led Labour back into government with a commanding parliamentary majority. That is not a matter of interpretation. It is an historical fact. One may disagree with particular decisions, pieces of legislation or matters of policy. Such disagreements are entirely legitimate in a democratic party. What is far less convincing is the proposition that replacing the leader would somehow resolve every difficulty confronting the government. Leadership contests do not generate economic growth. They do not strengthen public finances. They do not fund the armed forces. Nor do they address the profound domestic and international challenges facing any modern administration. More often, they serve only to deepen divisions and distract from the serious business of governing. There is also a wider truth that many appear reluctant to acknowledge. The most strident calls for Sir Keir Starmer's removal are not emanating from the broad mass of Labour supporters. They come from political opponents, sections of the media that have spent months predicting his downfall, Reform supporters, and those on the fringes of politics who have opposed him from the outset. Alongside them are elements within Labour who have never reconciled themselves to the fact that the party moved on from the Corbyn era and rejected the politics that led it to catastrophe. The British people did not elect a Labour government to indulge in perpetual introspection or endless leadership manoeuvres. They elected a government to restore stability, confront difficult realities and govern in the national interest. That task was never going to be without controversy, nor was it ever likely to satisfy every faction within the party. Before advocating another change of leader, it would be prudent for those making such demands to explain precisely what would be achieved by it. Which policies would change? Where would the money come from? How would the nation's challenges be addressed differently? To date, there has been an abundance of criticism and a striking absence of credible answers. Labour's opponents would take immense pleasure in watching the party descend once more into factional conflict. Those who genuinely care about Labour's future should be wise enough not to assist them. History has already demonstrated the consequences of disunity. It would be an act of profound political folly to repeat those mistakes so soon after the party fought its way back into government.

I’m confused. The Tories and Reform UK tell us Labour isn’t taking the Russian threat seriously. Boris Johnson holidayed with senior FSB agents in Tuscany for decades, and the Welsh leader of Reform is in prison for collaborating with Russia. Where were these critics then?

🚨🗣️New: Thierry Henry reacts to the USA vs Paraguay stoppage for TV commercials: “I’ve spent my entire life in this beautiful game — as a player at the highest level, as a fan, and now as someone who analyses it every week — and what unfolded during that USA versus Paraguay match left me deeply frustrated. The fourth official standing there on the touchline, arm raised high, instructing the referee to hold the restart… not for any injury, not for tactical reasons, and not even primarily for player hydration in that scorching heat. No. It was because the broadcast team hadn’t finished airing all their commercials. That’s not football. That’s a television show pretending to be a World Cup match. The beautiful game is being strangled by greed. Players are out there in the heat, ready to restart, momentum building like a storm about to break — and we pause everything so the sponsors can cash in. It’s like stopping a symphony mid-crescendo because the advertisers want their jingle heard. Football didn’t conquer the world by turning into American sports with endless timeouts and ad breaks. We had rhythm, flow, emotion that flowed like a river. Now? It’s dammed up for dollars. This isn’t about hydration or player welfare anymore — it’s a slippery slope where the soul of the game is sold piece by piece. Fans deserve better. Players deserve better. The referee on that pitch looked like a puppet on strings controlled from some broadcast truck. Enough is enough. We need to protect what made this sport the greatest on Earth before it disappears completely.” The World Cup should be football’s cathedral. Instead, we’re turning it into a shopping mall with a pitch in the middle. And here’s the question nobody wants to answer: if the fourth official is waiting for commercials, then who is really running the game? FIFA? The referee? Or the broadcasters? Because the moment football starts asking advertisers for permission before asking the players, you’ve crossed a line. The World Cup is supposed to be the showcase of football. Not the showcase of who paid the most for airtime.”

Last week he said he’d be happy to cut welfare to fund defence. Now he’s keeping the pensioners happy. Only one thing that means … as Al Carns said this morning, going after disability and in-work benefits. 🤬

I agree 💯

When caught in a blatant lie about US missile stockpiles, Pete Hegseth snaps at the reporter, saying "you don't have to read back to me what I testified." He knows he lied under oath about our military readiness, and he hates being held accountable. Pathetic Pentagon clown show.

As I said to Jeremy Hunt on BBC Politics Live on Thursday, he was Chancellor, and he bears some of blame for his party’s cuts to defence spending 👇 Labour has reversed their cuts, delivered the biggest boost to defence spend since the Cold War, and is investing on top of that.

Kenyon is going to be remembered as one of the worst candidates in by-election history. Not quite Frederick Haslam in 1940, but in the same league.

Suella Braverman and Robert Jenrick let him in. Fast tracked his asylum claim, now blames the ECHR. You couldn't make it up. I guarantee it isn't the ECHR preventing the vast majority of returns. She's talking out of her backside. Most nervous I've ever seen her

Carns is asked where the extra £ for defence should come from. ".. I think there are places, such as moving welfare from hand outs to hand ups" Describing welfare as hand outs tells us all about Carns politics & who he wants to target - the sick, disabled, low paid, pensioners

The mainstream media constantly distorts what I say. You can no longer rely on them to report the truth. That’s why I’ve decided to speak to you directly and launch my essays to Britain. ✍️ Read my first post out tomorrow at 8am. Click below or in my bio to subscribe.