Dan Wootton Outspoken - DONALD TRUMP FACES DOWN SLIPPERY STARMER AT WHITE HOUSE AS NIGEL FARAGE RUSSIA SLURS GROW

Episode Date: February 27, 2025

Go to https://ground.news/outspoken to see through media bias and stay fully informed. Subscribe through my link for 40% off unlimited access this month. The wrong Prime Minister at the wrong time for the United Kingdom. Slippery Starmer arrives at the White House on totally different pages to Donald Trump no matter how hard he might try to prove otherwise. The US President is going to war with the EU just as Britain attempts to cosy up. And Starmer’s technocratic approach ain’t going to impress the free wheeling MAGA warrior. In my Digest next, I’ll reveal why Starmer is wrong to write a blank cheque for corrupt Ukraine PLUS: The world’s foremost expert in Russia international affairs is here for a very special Uncancelled Interview to provide the truth you will not find in the MSM. AND: We reveal today’s Greatest Briton and Union Jackass. THEN IN THE UNCANCELLED AFTERSHOW: It’s war between Meghan Markle and Catherine, the Princess of Wales, as the disastrous Duchess dances on Instagram. Lady Colin Campbell is unleashed in the Uncancelled Aftershow on Substack. Sign up to watch at www.outspoken.live. Dan Wootton Outspoken is fan funded through monthly and one-time donations: https://www.outspoken.live ---------- Join Dan's Substack community: https://www.danwoottonoutspoken.com ---------- Find the full audio show wherever you get your podcasts: Apple — https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/dan-wootton-outspoken/id1762436723 Spotify — https://open.spotify.com/show/19Ltoneek2MSPL10CpSA1J?si=8f6d84e2db56448c ---------- Follow Dan on TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@outspokendan?is_from_webapp=1&sender_device=pc Follow Dan on Twitter: https://x.com/danwootton Follow Dan on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/danwootton/ Follow Dan on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/danwootton/?hl=en #DanWootton #DanWoottonOutspoken #news #outspoken Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

At Starbucks, we serve cold coffee just the way you like it. That refreshing chill of ice. That rich, smooth taste you crave. That handcrafted care every time. Your summer ritual is ready at Starbucks. When does fast grocery delivery through Instacart matter most? When your famous grainy mustard potato salad isn't so famous without the grainy mustard. When the barbecue's lit, but there's nothing to grill. When the in-laws decide that, actually, they will stay for dinner.

Instacart has all your groceries covered this summer. So download the app and get delivery in as fast as 60 minutes. Plus, enjoy $0 delivery fees on your first three orders. Service fees, exclusions, and terms apply. Instacart. Groceries that over-deliver. No spit, no bias, no censorship. I'm Dan Wootten. This is Outspoken Live episode number 172. The wrong prime minister at the wrong time for the United Kingdom. Slippery Starmer arrives at the White House this hour to face down, well, to be faced down, I guess, by Donald Trump. I don't think he's going to be facing down Donald Trump. Because let's be honest, these two men are on

completely different pages, no matter how hard two-tier care might try to prove otherwise. I mean, the US president is going to war with the EU just as Britain attempts to cozy up. The European Union's been, it was formed in order to screw the United States. I mean, look, let's... And Starmer's technocratic approach ain't going to impress the freewheeling MAGA warrior. Let me close with one of the voices

I mentioned earlier. A patient called Petro from the Burns unit that I visited in Kiev. He said to me, if Ukraine fails, Europe will be next. And that is what is at stake here.

In my digest next, I'll reveal why Starmer is wrong to write a blank cheque for corrupt Ukraine while attacking Nigel Farage over Russia. Nigel Farage didn't even turn up to the debate in Parliament today. Nigel Farage is falling over Putin. That's not patriotism. That is not what working people need. What I've done is take the duty of prime minister seriously. Then the world's foremost expert in Russian international affairs is here for a very special interview to provide you the truth that you will not find in the MSM. Jonathan Haslam, fellow of the British Academy and emeritus professor in the history

of international relations at the University of Oxford, author of the brilliant new book Hubris, joins me live for that very special uncancelled interview. We'll also, of course, coming up on the show today, bring you Starmer at the White House, if it happens this hour. Plus, is Trump right to rule out Ukraine joining NATO and say it's the reason for the war in the first place? And of course, today's greatest Britain and Union jackass will be revealed too. Then, after all the politics and the uncancelled after show on Substack, it's war between Meghan Markle and Catherine, the Princess of Wales, as the disastrous Duchess dances on Instagram. Oh my goodness. I cannot wait to hear what Lady Colin Campbell has to say about this one. She is unleashed in the uncancelled

after show on Substack. Now, of course, as I mentioned, we will reveal the greatest Britain and Union jackass at the end of the show. It is you who chooses the worst Britain in the world today. And it is you who chooses the nominees too. So let's get straight to them. Nominated by Halloween Jack 55 on ex-judge Stephen Everett because he let off the Labour MP Mike Amesbury with no prison time. Nominee two, Sadiq Khan. This nomination from London Now 251. Their reason for not allowing the grooming inquiry and for not allowing the tribute to the Bebas family in London. Lots of people have said that's absolutely shameful given it was all around the world, but not in London. And the final nomination from have now launched a hit piece against Charlie Downs, who is a frequent commentator here on Outspoken, and Jake Scott, a think tank researcher,

simply because they were invited to the parliamentary estate. This is just completely bizarre. So get voting now. Let me know what you think. I will bring you some of the best comments at the end of the show. And stand by, of course, you don't want to watch the mainstream media. When it comes to Starmer at the White House, you can get everything you need on Outspoken. So let's go. So where I agree with the mainstream media today is that this is a consequential moment for Slippery Starmer. But that's where the agreement ends, I'm afraid, because their analysis is laughable. The idea that Donald Trump is going to change his strong negotiating position on Ukraine because of our robotic, technocratic leader who can't even deliver a speech of consequence

without gripping to his notes as if they are Lord Ali, well, it's laughable. Let me close with one of the voices I mentioned earlier, a patient called Petro from the Burns unit that I visited in Kiev. He said to me, if Ukraine fails, Europe will be next. And that is what is at stake here. Oh, is it, Starmer? You're not doing a very convincing job. I mean, come on. This is a president who has big plans. He knows that the world order needs to change. And a script-reading globalist like Slippery Starmer, who has admitted prioritising Davos over his own country, is an enemy to that type of revolution. The irony, of course, is that under a different leader, this would actually be a moment, a real moment for an independent UK outside of the clutches of the

European Union, thanks to Brexit, to make our mark in reshaping the world. Because overnight, Trump has gone to war with the EU. Watch. Mr President, have you just made a decision on what level you'll seek on tariffs in the European Union? We have made a decision. We'll be announcing it very soon, and it'll be 25%, generally speaking, and that'll be on cars and all other things. And the European Union is a different case than Canada, a different kind of case. They've really taken advantage of us in a different way.

They don't accept our cars. They don't accept, essentially, our farm products. They use all sorts of reasons why not. And we accept everything of them. And we have about a $300 billion deficit with the European Union. Now, I love the countries of Europe. I guess I'm from there at some point a long time ago, right? But indirectly, pretty directly too, I guess.

But I love the countries of Europe. I love all countries, too, I guess. But I love the countries of Europe. I love all countries, frankly, all different. But the European Union's been... It was formed in order to screw the United States. I mean, look, let's be honest. The European Union was formed in order to screw the United States. That's the purpose of it.

And they've done a good job of it, but now I'm president. What will happen if these countries or the EU retaliate? They can't. I mean, they can try, but they can't. China did. They imposed tariffs that went into effect. China's retaliation for tariffs on the 10th of February. Has there been any impact that you've been able to observe? That's right. No, they can do it and they can try, but the numbers can never equal what ours, because we can go off. We are the pot of gold. We're the one that everybody wants and they can retaliate, but it cannot be a successful retaliation because we just go cold turkey. We don't buy anymore. And if that happens, we win. But we have the wrong

prime minister at the wrong time who will not capitalise on that moment, because Starmer is going to pretend to the world in the next few minutes that we're on the same page, when that couldn't be further from the truth. I mean, listen to Trump completely rule out the prospect of Ukraine joining NATO, a statement that will horrify Starmer, even though I believe it's eminently sensible. Our equipment, that would have been over very quickly. What concessions would you like to see? Oh, I don't want to tell you right now, but I can tell you that NATO you can forget about.

That's been, I think that's probably the reason the whole thing started. And I think, J.D., we can say that. Do you have a statement on that? You've been very much involved. I gave him the beauty. Great. Maybe the we can say that. Do you have a statement on that? You've been very much involved. I gave him the beauty. Maybe the hardest question, sir. I mean, look, as the president said, we're not going to do the negotiation in public with the American media. He's going to do it in private with the president

of Russia, with the president of Ukraine and with other leaders. And I think that's how this has to go. I think that... Indeed, Starmer is on very shaky territory, given his strategy before flying out to Washington, D.C. last night was to lambast Nigel Farage, the leader of Reform UK and Trump's closest British political ally, for being too close to Russia and Putin. In July, Reform UK fought the election on a policy to increase defence spending to 2.5% GDP by 2027 and 3% GDP after 2030, funded by a £6 billion saving in the aid budget. You said you'd do the similar, you'll increase defence spending to 2.5% by 2027,

3% after 2030, funded by a £6 billion cut in the aid budget. Are you Nigel Farage in disguise? Nigel Farage didn't even turn up to the debate in Parliament today. Nigel Farage is falling over Putin. That's not patriotism. That is not what working people need. What I've done is take the duty of Prime Minister seriously. I mean, good luck trying to justify that sort of approach to Donald Trump in a few

minutes time. Because Starmer is speaking the language of the Russian hoax proponents who spent years wrongly trying to accuse Trump of being in cahoots with Putin after his first election. Now the left and the MSM clearly intend to use the same strategy here to stop Farage as reform storms to the top of the polls. Despite the MSM and political analysts who are always wrong, like Dan Hodges, pretending Trump's desire to end the war with Ukraine would have a negative knock-on effect on Farage in the polls, that is not proving to be the case. The new Find Out Now poll today actually shows reform extending its lead ahead of Labour. Look at that. Reform on 28%, Labour 23%, the Conservatives 21%. So Starmer hasn't realised it, and he never will.

And the mainstream media will continue to believe they still control the narrative. But the reality is that Trump will be lauded, I believe in the end, for ending an unnecessary and costly war for which he should win the Nobel Peace Prize if he achieves it. That was a suggestion Scott Jennings made to much uproar on the dying CNN. I'm willing to give the new administration some latitude to try to enact the political will of the people of the United States, and that is for this to come to an end. The political will to continue to funding an open-ended engagement is draining rapidly. I think you would acknowledge that.

And so Trump here is a new broker on the field and has a chance to do something amazing, and that is to get these two people to stop fighting, and in that case would bring some stability to the continent of Europe. And, you know, what he has to say publicly about Russia or Ukraine over the course of time, I guess I'm willing to give them some latitude if the ultimate result is this, what Pete Hegseth said initially, a sovereign and prosperous Ukraine, those were his words,

the United States strikes a rare earth mineral deal with Ukraine. I would love that. And the governments in Europe decide that they do need to take a little more responsibility for their own national security. If these are the outcomes and the killing stops, they ought to give Donald Trump the Nobel Peace Prize. Is it just that?

The narrative over Ukraine and Russia has been distorted by the mainstream media and the political elites for their own end for far too long, at far too great a cost. It's time to realise the problem is far more nuanced than they will ever present. And to make that point, I am delighted today to be joined by Jonathan Haslam for our uncancelled interview. And as we stand by for Keir Starmer's arrival at the White House this afternoon, let me bring in Jonathan Haslam, Fellow of the British Academy and Emeritus Professor in the History of International Relations at Oxford University or at the University of Cambridge sorry he is one of the world's

greatest experts on Russian foreign policy and espionage and his best-selling new book Hubris the Origins of Russia's War Against Ukraine examines one of the most intractable issues of our time. And it is a delight to welcome him to Outspoken at such a critical juncture of this war as we await Starmer arriving at the White House to make the case to President Trump. Jonathan, your contention in this book is that actually the origins of this war in Ukraine date right back to the early 90s, when we saw the US administration under Bill Clinton push and push and push for Ukraine to join NATO. So what do you make of Trump categorically ruling that out? I mean, you would have seen it there. It's not even a possibility during his time in the White House. Yes, it's a fascinating turnaround. And the key point is that when the Americans in secret provided for Ukraine to enter NATO. This was in October 1994,

if you can think back that far. They never asked the Ukrainians. They made these decisions, who was going to enter NATO. They just wanted to expand NATO, to expand American power in the world. And Ukraine was just a small part of it. And they had no idea what was going to happen. The Clinton administration had absolutely no foresight about this whatsoever. But of course, the Russia, this was before Putin came to power. Putin didn't come to power for another six years. So Putin picked up a problem that pre-existed his advent to power. Whatever you think of Putin, this was a problem for Russia. Well, indeed, indeed. And so when Starmer continues this narrative against Putin, right? You saw what he had to say about Nigel Farage, for example.

How does that go down in Russia? And is it a sensible approach or is the Trump strategy far more sensible in terms of actually achieving peace? Yeah, this is, as you said earlier, you said it very well. I mean, how does Keir Starmer imagine Britain's image is vis-a-vis the United States and vis-a-vis the US president? I mean, we're tiny. We don't figure in any large sense. There is no such thing as the special relationship. When I first went to America to work there in 1984, I asked someone about it. In fact, he was the man who advised Dean Acheson in the early 50s. I said, so what's this special relationship?

And he said, there isn't one. You know, so there's a sort of dream world the British Whitehall lives in about the special relationship. And it's even if we did have and we do have very close relations in secret intelligence, for example. But so do the Australians. You know, it's are we going to compare ourselves with them? I think not. Starmer is certainly not going to do so.

So there's a sort of lack of realism about British policy, which is truly worrying. And you can say what you like about Trump. You should never listen to what he says. You should just look at what he does. And what he does is usually pretty effective. And this is where Starmer has nothing to counterbalance him with, nothing at all. In fact, Macron, whom the Americans call Macron for some reason, Macron has more pull in Washington, as we saw, than Starmer, as we shall see. But of course, Trump is going to be very polite to him. He just won't give way. How frustrating has it been for you, as one of the world's experts on Russia, who knows all of the background about Ukraine, to see the way that the mainstream media has been so intransigent, really, when it comes to reporting the truth of this issue. I mean, some of the reviews for your book were just laughably horrible

because you don't parrot the narrative. Yes, well, you can blame Whitehall for that. And it's a vestige of the Wuhan virus, which, of course, was a Chinese virus. It's a vestige of Wuhan virus that we have in Whitehall. All sorts of bodies supposedly dealing with disinformation. Disinformation means information the government doesn't like and can't control. So exactly what Vice President Vance said about Europe is our problem in Britain. Not only do we lock people up or police approach people for saying nasty things on the media, but our media is subservient.

Our mainstream media is as subservient to Whitehall as Vance would have suggested. And so what have we missed as a result of the mainstream media coverage of the conflict between Russia and Ukraine? I mean, let me speak from my personal experience, Jonathan. As you know, I've done a lot of research on this recently. But at the beginning, I sort of very briefly brought into that narrative that Zelensky was some type of heroic figure. In fact, can you just talk a little bit about the corruption in Ukraine, some of the state-sanctioned killings in Ukraine, and the fact that actually it's far too simple to try and present Russia versus Ukraine as a straight good versus evil battle? Well, I think, Walter, how far we go back. Ukraine was the largest recipient of American foreign aid from 1994 all the way through to 2014. When you deluge a country, you deluge its elite, you deluge its government with vast amounts of money, no good can come of it and no good has come of it.

Having said that, Russia, of course, is under a frightening dictatorship. You wouldn't in no sense want to live there. Working there is impossible in any sort of freedom. And Putin did the worst thing imaginable by attacking Ukraine. And he handed Russia's enemies a gift, which was basically, oh, pull out the old saw about Russia wanting to take over the whole of Europe. That is completely laughable. The idea that after Ukraine, Mr. Putin is waiting breathlessly to enter another war to take over parts of Europe is an absurd fantasy.

It's absolutely ridiculous. The Russian economy, it's on its face. I mean, the Russian economy is in a terrible state, Russian businessmen, who is trying to pull them together in Saudi Arabia for talks with the Americans, along with the Saudis. It's the man in charge of Russia's sovereign wealth fund. Where was he educated? Stanford, Harvard. You can imagine people like that living and working in Russia do not want the current state of things to continue and are willing to make sacrifices to get this ended. And this is our hope, really, is that the forces within Russia that you won't see on screen, Putin ensures that you don't see them on screen

in Russia, these people are a power lobby, and they're pushing for a deal. And in my view, they will in the end get it. And what do you think that deal will look like? And actually, what does it need to look like to achieve a lasting peace? This is tough. It's easier to start negotiations than to draw them to an end. Well, there are several things. First of all, all of these sanctions against Russia,

which are really reducing its economy to a terribly primitive state. They're a big handle that Trump has in the negotiations. There's the fighting, and Ukraine and Russia, it seems to me, they're young. The youth of their country has been destroyed by this war. The grandmothers, the mothers, the relatives. You think of all the people who have stood on the sidelines watching the coffins return on both sides.

This is horrendous. So on both sides, public opinion wants an end to the war. So that works on both sides. On the issue of territory is critical, the issue of territory. You'll remember that when the Americans helped launch a coup d'etat, which overthrew the Ukrainian government in February 2014, and you need to read about that in my book. It's elsewhere, but you'll find it in my book. They launched a coup d'etat to remove a constitutionally set up government in Ukraine. It was a terrible government, but name me a good Ukrainian government.

They overthrew it and put in their people, the people they were allied with, and then the other people were thrown out. So as a result of that, Putin acted swiftly and seized the Crimea in the Black Sea, this peninsula out in the Black Sea where the Russian Black Sea fleet is located. He rushed out, seized it, and then waited. And President Obama did nothing. He did nothing. He was asked, he was pressed by some of his subordinates, not the ones who were working in the last regime, but more junior subordinates of the Pentagon. Can't we go in and do something? He said, no, we're not, we're not. We're not going to do it. So they offered no opposition. So Putin took Crimea. The Russians have always claimed Crimea since

the end of the Soviet Union. This is a sore point in Russia. Ukrainians never really colonized the Crimea. It was the Russians who colonized Crimea. So Russians regard it as theirs. So that part of Ukrainian territory, I think, is unlikely to go back to Ukraine. But there's the territory just opposite it, opposite on the other side of the Black Sea, eastern Ukraine, there is a very large population. Well, goodness only knows how large it is after the fighting. A large population of Russian speakers who are not necessarily Russians, but they identify with Russian culture. The question is, what happens to them?

They're part of this territory that Russia has annexed and passed all sorts of legislation to keep it part of Russia. There's no way we can have peace between Russia and Ukraine if that territory remains in Russian hands. The Russians have to discord that territory. I don't know how to do it but they have to think of ways of doing it for example at the end of the war uh trieste was a an area of dispute between yugoslavia and italy and in the end you had a form of international control over the territory for a period of time. And it seems to

me the only way of dealing with those Eastern Ukrainian territories is to have some form of joint international control over them, not NATO so-called peacekeepers. The idea of the British Army, I mean, goodness only knows the British Army, if you spread them out one by one, wouldn't cover a 50th of that territory. Totally. The German Army, whatever. No, I mean, it was a completely insane prospect, which obviously Starmer went for.

Now, just if you're joining us momentarily, you'll see the flags are now out at the White House. Keir Starmer arriving for his first meeting with Donald Trump since he became US president as the situation, the crunch talks over the future of Ukraine and Russia meet a critical juncture. Now, Jonathan Haslam, it feels like the biggest disagreement between Trump and Starmer is over the characterization of Vladimir Zelensky as a dictator because he has not held democratic elections since the start of the war. Where do you stand on that? Yes, I think this was a very unfortunate thing to say. We didn't have an election during World War II when we were on our backs. And even though there was severe

opposition to Churchill from the left of the Labour Party. So I just think that was unfair. It came out of anger because when he sent his treasury minister to Ukraine to try to do a deal on these rare earth materials kept in parts of Ukraine for the United States to have them in return for all the money it spent in Ukraine. He was treated, how shall I say, I mean, Zelensky was just totally rude to him, as though this were just some minion from Washington. That was a huge mistake. You know yourself from watching everything that Trump does. It's all about image. It's about prestige. And if some small country relative to the United States is going to scorn an envoy of his, they're in trouble. And I'm afraid this unfortunate word dictator was just a sort of verbal retaliation, which he won't withdraw. It's a deliberate insult. But then what about the fact, Jonathan, though,

that Zelensky punishes his political rivals, that some journalists have been silenced, that there is the suggestion of state-sanctioned killings in Ukraine. Now, that doesn't necessarily put him on a level as bad as Putin, but it just feels to me like the mainstream media ignore the corruption in Ukraine altogether. And certainly Starmer does when he writes the blank checks. Yes, I agree with you. I mean, Ukraine is not whiter than white. I have Ukrainian from various sides of the picture. It's no place to be if you oppose the Ukrainian president's point of view. It really isn't. You're best out of the country. But at a time when Trump refuses to call Putin a dictator and he calls Zelensky a dictator, this is the huge misstep in terms of world opinion and American opinion.

But I think those on the ground, those who deal with these things, won't take them too seriously. I mean, Zelensky knows perfectly well that he has avoided the electorate. And he also knows perfectly well that he has a major problem of corruption, his defense ministry got rid of people, As I say, he threw them out. There have been Russian spies, you must remember, within the Ukrainian regime. The Russians seeded Ukraine with foreign intelligence operatives, their neighbors, the places full of them. And I don't think Zelensky has found half of them yet. So he's not been in a great position. I don't agree with whitewashing him either. But I think in this big business,

it's a bit of a red herring. In the end, who's going to decide this? Who's going to decide this piece? Trump and Putin. No one else. I mean, Zelensky will be invited. Stand by, because I think we'll take this sound up now because Donald Trump, I believe we will see, has just arrived on the steps of the White House. Now, this is very significant, Jonathan Haslam, because you remember just two days ago, Trump did not turn up to welcome President Macron to the White House. So the red carpet is being rolled out for Keir Starmer, who is about to pull up at the White House for his first meeting with President Trump. Here's the car. And as I say, Macron was made to walk in on his own with no real welcome. Here's Starmer emerging. Let's see if we can listen in to what's said.

President Trump, can you get a peace deal done in Ukraine? Yes. How confident are you, sir? Yeah, I will. Thank you. Mr. Prime Minister, will you get it back, stop believing? Okay, so quite a big moment. Big moment. Trump did arrive on the steps of the White House to welcome Starmer,

something that was not done for President Macron. The question, very simple to Donald Trump, will you get a peace deal? He replies, yes, we will. When Starmer Jonathan Haslam is asked, will you get a backstop? He just turns around and walks inside because we're not going to get, Europe is not going to get a backstop from Trump. Yes. If I could fill in with a few words. Please. If we roll back to the invasion of Ukraine by Putin,

the Americans, American intelligence have predicted this for a number of months. And just before it happened, the former Israeli prime minister went to see Putin to dissuade him from invading. And Putin, he was very polite to him, but he said, no, no, no. And then the Russians went in, and they thought they'd take Ukraine in a matter of days. So in other words, Putin was completely thrown by this. This was a very good time to move in and get something done. And that's what the Israeli prime minister proceeded to do in March and April. And he got a deal ready with Zelensky before so many boys died. But I mean, and what happened? Boris Johnson arrives in Kiev and says, no, don't sign this. And he did so in the name of NATO, in the name of the United States,

because Mr. Biden didn't want to be seen operating in this fashion. And what was Boris Johnson's motivation? I mean, was it all this personal idea that I'm going to be Churchillian and I'm going to stop this war? Why did he do that? Because, look, I was a supporter of Boris in many ways, but it actually makes me so angry when I think of the damage that has been done to the international economy, to the lives that have been lost. There should have been a peace deal then. It's not like this new peace deal is going to be much different. No, I think you're right. This was Naftali Bennett. He was a very smart man. He talked to

everybody. He was willing to persuade Putin to get together with Zelensky. He was extremely smart in doing so. And the British undid it. You remember when the attack occurred, NATO reacted, well, most NATO countries, the leading countries of NATO, like a rabbit caught in the headlights in the middle of the road and just froze. And Washington, of course, had Biden in charge. And Biden, as you know, was not quite of a normal state mentally.

He was slow to everything. And so nothing was happening. And the British, at the British Ministry of Defence, they took the initiative and launched plans to react to the invasion, quite extensive plans. And in those plans, which I've seen a copy of, courtesy of the Russians, it was they published it on their news site, they managed to get a hold of a copy, was basically we're going to put Britain on the map. You know, in other words, the invasion was going to give Britain an opportunity to take the lead in NATO, which it did in training Ukrainian troops in covered operations and all the rest of it.

So for about nine months or so, Britain really took the lead till the United States caught up. But we're ahead of our European partners. So you can see that Whitehall, for a sort of fantasy six months, thought that somehow Britain was back and Britain would lead. And what you're seeing in Starmer's comments is a sort of reflection of this sort of lunatic imperial mentality. The Russians saw all these plans. That's why in the Russian media, instead of attacking the Americans over Ukraine, they spent most of their time attacking Britain. And it's very funny, in the Russian newspaper today,

they talked about Kit Starmer. They hadn't even bothered to look up his first name properly. So I'm afraid Britain is not what Whitehall would want it to be in this situation. We're going to be sidelined. And you can bet your bottom dollar that our new ambassador will do his best to make sure that we are 100% with Trump. 100%. So whatever Trump does, we will echo. And that is the tradition of our relationship with the Americans since the

Suez Crisis of 1956. We're the poodle, They hold the lead. And this will be reasserted at this meeting between Starmer and Trump. But given your book, Jonathan, makes the point that it was this push by the US for NATO entry from 1994 onwards that was the origin of the war that we still see raging today. Can you understand why it has become such a bottom line for people like Boris Johnson, for the mainstream media, even Nigel Farage? Even Nigel Farage is now,

and this surprised me, this really surprised me, is raising the possibility of Ukraine entering NATO. Why does our political class believe that is so essential? Well, you could say it's the sort of position fought before and after the war the point is that the great leaders of mainstream media have never bothered all the way through this since 1994 to ask some basic questions where did this come come from? Who started it? How long has it been going on for? Should we support it? They just don't ask questions. It's mind boggling. There are plenty of people like myself, but in the United States, who could have helped them answer

those questions. In other words, totally incurious. And they just want to hit the russians so somehow you know if you you've got to stand tall by saying ukraine must be in nato without understanding the or this this is all rooted in the united states determination to have ukraine in nato that's why only the united states can negotiate this away with Russia, with Putin. And the point is this opposition to Ukraine and NATO didn't originate with Putin. It originated in the 90s with Rutskoy and Boris Yeltsin and carried forward by Putin. In other words, it's an issue between states. It's not an issue just between statesmen. It's an issue in Russia of the national interest. So if you say,

well, we can do anything you like for an agreement, as long as Ukraine stays in NATO, even Mr. Zelensky has grandly offered to stand down if Ukraine goes in NATO. Well, what a bizarre, what an utterly bizarre proposal. It shows absolutely no understanding of international relations at all. You know, if Canada had joined the Warsaw Pact, do you think the United States would have just sort of gone along with it? I mean, when Cuba sidled up to the Soviet Union, President Kennedy tried to invade it with mercenaries and then tried to assassinate its leader. I mean, we may well find out shortly

how far the Cubans were involved in assassinating kennedy in retaliation what do you think what do you think i'm fascinated about the release of the jfk files well i i think you'll find some a pretty dirty mess and i think you'll find as we found a little with 9-11 and other things, you suddenly find that certain people you thought were on the other side were actually agents of our own. I always remember when there was a coup d'etat in Greece in the late 60s, and we never quite found out what was going on. And then in Washington, they were boasting it was the first time a CIA agent had actually taken power in another country. The deep state is very deep.

And Trump's people are going to try and clean it up. Well, good luck. It's been there too long. It's been there too long. So I think the Kennedy files will reveal some pretty unsalacious, some salacious things. It's not going to be good for America's image, but it's as far as the Republicans are concerned, it's the Democrats who are going to take the blame. Then there are the Epstein files, and goodness only knows how many members of Congress and elsewhere are in those Epstein papers. I know.

And look, this sense of transparency I think is incredibly important. But is your contention that actually the deep state is too powerful? Even Donald Trump, even Elon Musk don't have the power to really get to the truth. Well, they may get to some of the truth. But, you know, how deep do you have to dig? How many years do you have available? How many people will you have to sack? Where will you find these documents? In Britain,

you know, they're always saying, oh, we don't have any documents on that. And you end up finding out about torturing people in Kenya. And it ends up they sit in Milton Keynes of all places. You know, the deep state has ways and means of hiding things, because governments come in for such a short period, you know, they're thinking, okay, the clock is on, you know, let's time them out for four years. And then the other lot will come in and they'll leave us alone. So I'm not super optimistic. I'm hopeful we'll get some clarity. But, you know, a big, powerful country like the United States and under Donald Trump is not always going to play a clean game.

They will need the deep state, particularly, you know, when they come into conflict with other countries. And don't think the deep state isn't over here as well. It's also over here. Oh, big time. It's in Germany. You know, it's easier to talk about cleaning it up than actually cleaning it up.

And obviously, we need it for some things. You can't just turn around and say, oh, well, sorry, you know, sorry, we threw you out of your job. But would you mind helping us overthrow the government of this country? You know, you can imagine what the response will be. Kennedy originally wanted to clean up CIA. One of the arguments that CIA was somehow complicit in his assassination was that he swore after the Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba that the CIA got him into this mess and he was going to clean them up. And this constantly kept being raised. So one doesn't know if whether some people thought this president, you know, maybe his time is up.

And what do you think we don't know about 9-11? Well, apparently, we always wondered why it was that these characters came over from the Middle East and signed up for air pilot training and then just said, oh, we just need, no, we don't need to know how to land. We just need to know how to take off. I mean, you start thinking, oh, well, what sort of training is that for? And apparently some of the, you remember when 9-11 happened, all American airspace was closed. I got stuck there for two weeks trying to pay a hotel bill.

And what happened? The airspace was opened up to allow a large quantity of Saudi citizens to leave the country in a hurry. Yes. Yes. Yes. You know. Any possibility it was an inside job? No, but there were people who took astronomical risks with American security and the lives of American and other citizens,

they thought, I think the same thing happened with Kennedy. I think they played along. I think they thought, oh, well, we can control this. We'll just run it. And then at the right moment, we can move in and stop it. And he got out of their control. In other words, there was a sort of an incredible, once again, the word hubris in the deep state. It's notorious for that. And that's how you get these utter

screw-ups. And what they don't want is for this to be known to the public, because the public will not trust them. Well, after the way Trump was treated under Biden and then previously, an awful lot of Americans no longer trust all sorts of elements of the state, including the legal system, the FBI, CIA, and they think that these revelations will make things even worse. And one of the questions you have with the Epstein files is, was this really a private enterprise operation? Was no state, deep state enterprise, either American or foreign, at all involved with the possibility of bringing people in of wealth, great money, and blackmailing them for other purposes. Who knows? Who knows? Well, indeed. And, of course, as I often point out, Jonathan is someone who has had quite a lot of contact, for example, with people close to Prince

Andrew. Very interesting, isn't it, that it's only two Brits who ended up taking the fall for Epstein. Very easy for the American authorities, isn't it, to pin it on the favourite son of Queen Elizabeth II and Ghislaine Maxwell, both Brits. Yes, it's murky. Elaine's father was somewhat murky, and his so-called accidental death, he had done things for the Russians, he had done things for Mossad. Arguably, he was going to do something else for somebody and they thought better of it. I don't think there's much that's happened there that's accidental. I think picking on the Brits, yes, as you say, was easier. And Prince Andrew seems to have a large number of secrets to himself. At least if this stuff comes out, he's going to appear like a small speck on the horizon compared with the other bigwigs that are going to be exposed.

Indeed. Well, look, stand by, Jonathan Haslam, because much more from this incredible man, author of Hubris, the Origins of Russia's War Against Ukraine, and also, of course, a fellow at the British Academy, Emeritus Professor in the History of International Relations at University of Cambridge. In just one minute, a reminder to Donald Trump and Keir Starmer speaking right now at the White House. If there are cameras allowed in, we will bring you what is said. But first, the reason you're watching this show is that it's becoming increasingly difficult to trust mainstream media or the so-called fact checkers who claim to determine which facts are true. And there's good reason for that, given the debate over free speech,

the controversy surrounding Brexit, and how Trump and other politicians challenging the status quo are portrayed. But I have the solution. It's called Ground News. And it's the best way to stay informed and cut through media bias and narratives so you can get the facts for yourself. Go to ground.news forward slash outspoken to check it out. But I just want to show you this incredible app and website in action. So let's take the game changing speech by US Vice President J.D. Vance to the Munich Security Conference, where he tore into European governments, including ours here in the UK, for the despicable retraction of free speech. You can see clearly in one place that 361 sources are covering the story. Ground News instantly shows how the story

is being covered by the media, broken down by whether it leans to the left or the right, illustrated by its bias distribution service. If you scroll down, you can see every article about this topic broken down by the political position and ownership of the publication. So we can see for ourselves quite clearly that Newsmax and GB News gave fair and accurate coverage focusing on how Vance finally had the guts to point out uncomfortable truths to European leaders. By stark contrast, the left-wing HuffPost claimed the speech left all of Europe aghast, while the Independent missed the lead altogether to focus on Vance's joke about Elon Musk, which he claims bombed.

What's more, Ground News gets to know you personally, providing you with the news stories you're interested in while also analysing your own biases. My favourite feature is their Blind Spot feed, which surfaces upwards of 20 stories daily that you might not be hearing about because of the corruption of the mainstream media. Now, I know you love the news. That's why you're watching Outspoken. But like me, you don't trust the legacy media. So Ground News gives you the tools to understand the truth about what is going on in the world. It is the only way I read the news, allowing you to see through media bias and manipulative narratives, no more relying on MSN bias to define the truth for you so go to ground.news forward slash outspoken to check it out subscribe through my link for 40 off the vantage plan which is what i use for

unlimited access ground news is subscriber funded and supporting my sponsors also supports my work so for less than a netflix subscription you can get all of the world's news in one place and think for yourself thank you game ground news this has been a total game changer for me. So let me just repeat the address, ground.news forward slash outspoken. But now back to the show. Jonathan Haslam, should Donald Trump win the Nobel Peace Prize if he is able to bring together Ukraine and Russia in some type of new peace plan? Well, the Nobel Peace Prize is a product of Norwegian social democracy. Norwegian social democrats decide who gets it. Obama was given one before he'd done anything.

Henry Kissinger was given one after he bombed goodness knows how many people. I really, wasn't it with one of the Nobel Prize, that was the Swedish Nobel Nobel Prize went to, that was the Swedish Nobel Prize, went to Bob Dylan for poetry. So I think... Donald Trump is hanging around, getting sleepless nights, wondering whether he's going to win a prize. I think what

he wants to do is to put his stamp on the US presidency, you know, for the next decade. That's what he wants. He wants to go down in history as the great American president. So he has to be very careful. He really has to be very careful. If he seems to be giving in to Vladimir Putin, which is, you know, what he's already being accused of by the media, as you say, then this could be damaging. So he has to really walk a tightrope on this one. So can I just show you, Jonathan Hadlam, the argument being made in MAGA world? This is Scott Jennings. He's actually a brilliant pundit who has to go on CNN all the time, surrounded by lefty liberals who just hate everything he stands for. But have a look at how he made this argument, and I'll get you to respond off the back. I'm willing to give the new administration some latitude to try to enact the political will of the people of the United States, and that is for this to come to an end. The political will to continue to funding an open-ended engagement is draining rapidly. I think you would acknowledge that.

And so Trump here is a new broker on the field and has a chance to do something amazing. And that is to get these two people to stop fighting. And in that case would bring some stability to the continent of Europe. And, you know, what he has to say publicly about Russia or Ukraine over the course of time, I guess I'm willing to give them some latitude if the ultimate result is this, what Pete Hegseth said initially, a sovereign and prosperous Ukraine. Those were his words. The United States strikes a rare earth mineral deal with Ukraine. I would love that. And the governments in Europe decide that they do need to take a little more responsibility for their own national security. If these are the outcomes and the killing stops,

they ought to give Donald Trump the Nobel Peace Prize. I mean, you can see Jonathan Hadslam uproar, uproar on the set. They were absolutely horrified at the mere suggestion. But what do you make of his argument? Yeah, I mean, he's a senior political commentator at CNN. And they kept him on just to show that they could employ a Republican as long as he didn't say too much. And now he can say a lot, which they're beginning to regret.

No, I think, but, you know, when you think about those things he stated, like a sovereign, prosperous Ukraine, you know, repeating Trump, well, you know, how far are we from that? This is, who's going to pay for all this? That's the question. I mean, Trump. Well, indeed. So, well, well, at that point, let me ask about the mineral deal that Trump is trying to put together.

Is that fair? I think it's Trump's way of saying, look, we paid hundreds of billions of dollars to you for this war. We want our money back. We'll take it back out of your land, basically. And then that will give us a vested interest in the security of that. If you look at the map, most of that rare earth stuff is to the center to the east of the country. So in other words, if the Americans are digging stuff out of the ground out there, it's unlikely the Russians are going to come in again. So this has to be a settlement for very,

very long term. I think he did it partly as a kick in the face of the Chinese, because America doesn't want to be dependent on China for rare earth minerals, or the Canadians for that matter. So it's part of Trump's unilateralism, his economics of autarky, that proposition. What about Starmer continuing to effectively sign a blank check? This is the legacy from Whitehall from February 2023. I mean, it's bizarre. Why don't we dream about going back to Zimbabwe? It's absurd. I mean, okay, the Chagos Islands, we'll give those away and then pay for them to have them back,

which is part of the completed logic of this government's foreign policy. It's almost as illogical as their domestic policy. One can't see any sense in it. I'm afraid today, your point about access to information is critical. We cannot have a government that's making sensible decisions if the population of the country do not have access to plain fact. And the media has been ruining us for that point of view. It has to be, we have to go to social media for this. But an awful lot of the older generation have not yet done that. And the youngest generation are rejecting social media. So this is an issue. You cannot have a well-informed government without a well-informed electorate. And that's what we really have to aim at. And that's what you yourself are doing

on your own account. Yes. And I think the independent media is going to play a big role in this. I mean, we've already seen actually in the US quite what a massive role they can play because it was actually the independent media that really helped drive Trump back to the White House. But knowing everything you know, Jonathan, about the history of Russia, what plan do you think would bring the most sustainable peace? Well, I think if an agreement can be reached, which has to be a compromise on both sides, both sides in that battle are exhausted, right? But then what happens afterwards? Well, what appears to be happening to the world economy, and that takes us on another plane, is that sooner or later, probably within this year, the US stock market will tank. It'll tank, could go down by an extraordinary amount and bring with it a lot of other countries as well.

Remember, Norway and Switzerland's central bank bought up vast quantities of NVIDIA on the American Stock Exchange. Unbelievable. So what we have the potential for is economic industrial collapse in the next couple of years. How is anybody going to manage? But what's going to happen concurrently is a huge inflation of commodity prices in the world, from oil all the way through to sugar and everything else, which country produces the largest quantity of industrial raw materials, commodities? It doesn't produce chrome, but it produces almost everything else, Russia. In other words, Russia actually has great potential in the next decade to become a very rich power again. So this peace could be regarded as an interlude,

which will be needed, but Russia can take off on its own after that point, provided we get some sort of settlement. The boys have to come home one of the reasons russia has raging inflation is it has a shortage of manpower the manpower is being thrown into a sausage machine in ukraine that has to end it does it does. And it has to end for so many reasons. Because I think seeing the state of Ukraine in those before and after pictures is something Trump always talks about. But that really resonates with me.

It's like, what was the point of this? What did you achieve, Boris Johnson? And we really do have to think about that. And that's why I find it so frustrating, I guess, for starmer to just be so blinkered in terms of his position but jonathan haslam thank you so much you are the expert in this i really wanted to have you on to provide the context on this story that you just do not receive in the mainstream media. And I have to hugely recommend this book. It is absolutely brilliant. Hubris, The Origins of Russia's War Against Ukraine.

Must read. Very, very important book. And thank you so much to Jonathan Haslam, Fellow of the British Academy and Emeritus Professor in the History of International Relations at the University of Cambridge. An absolute pleasure to have you today. Now, Greatest Britain, Uni and Jackass time.

Your nominees for Uni and Jackass. Actually, I'll reveal them in just a moment. But first, actually, I want to get to some of your comments because there's been brilliant comments throughout the show today. Ms. Herbs wrote something I think we all feel. When Trump has finished cleaning up America, I hope he can come here and do the same for us. KTS wrote, Trump never forgets what Starmer, Lammy and Rainer has said about him and the Labour Party trying to support Harris. Oh, believe me, Trump will not forget that and Trump will enjoy watching them grovel. Sound Crow said Starmer looked scared. And of course he did. He looked pathetic. I mean, George said Starmer looked tiny

next to Trump, little little Stalin's in trouble. And yes, he totally is you just have to look at Starmer Trump he looks defeated was another comment there uh Stella Beetle though says I never think of the UK as the poodle to the US responding to Jonathan Haslam I consider you our best friend country we have to stick together we have to get rid of Starmer. And Colin wrote, are we checking the White House YouTube channel later for the press conference with Starmer, which will be in full and not have the MSM edit it down? Absolutely. That is going to be must watch. And by the way, we will bring you all of the highlights from what is going to be a really consequential press conference in Outspoken tomorrow. So make sure you are here

for that. Okay, Union Jack has time. Let me remind you of the nominees. Judge Stephen Everett, nominated by Halloween Jack 55 because he let the Labour MP Mike Amesbury off with no prison time. This story, we would have usually led with the story today, let's be honest. This story is utterly infuriating, completely disgusting. Let me just say, Mike Amesbury will be out of prison after about one or two days. Lucy Connolly is still behind bars for a post on X. Julie Sweeney is still behind bars for a post on Facebook. And Peter Lynch is dead. Okay?

And yet an MP in this country can punch the lights out of a constituent and be out of prison within a day. And yet we're told two-tier justice doesn't exist. Sorry, I just had to say that because usually, as I say, we would have been leaning on this story if it wasn't for the situation in Washington, D.C. Second nomination, Sadiq Khan. This is from London Snow 251 for not allowing grooming inquiry and for not allowing the tribute in London. Countries around the world pay respects to the Bibas family by illuminating buildings in orange. And of course, we didn't do it in London. And quite rightfully, Jewish leaders have blasted Sadiq Khan, said that he is shameful for failing to light up London's landmarks in honour of the Bebass family. And the final nomination, Hope Not Hate, Ted Hodgson nominated them. And it's because I've done another hit piece. I've done another

hit piece on good people. And this is what Hope Not Hate does. I cannot believe they are considered a charity. Okay, let me get to the results. With 9% of the vote, Hope Not Hate. With 38% of the vote, it is the Amesbury judge. And with 53% of the vote, today's union jackass, London's failed Mayor Sadiq Khan, and boy, that guy deserves it, virtually deserves it every day of the week. Let me tell you what we do for Friday. This is really exciting. We choose the worst Britain in the world all week. All you have to do, and I'm going to do this very soon after the show, is head to our community tab, our posts tab on YouTube, and I put up a mega poll. Honestly, we had over 30,000 of you vote last week, which is just incredible.

And then on tomorrow's show, it's not Uni and Jackass it is the worst britain in the world this week where sadiq khan is going to go head to head or let me just let me just remind you who he's going head to head with because uh we've had great nominations this week so from monday it was the greatest man greater manchester police for uh that despicable uh hunting down of a of a grandmother for posting something on x i I think, or Facebook. Tuesday, Ed Miliband. Wednesday, David Lammy. Thursday, Sadiq Khan.

Oh, goodness me. That is quite a choice, isn't it? I look forward to those results. And a sad one for today's Greatest Briton, Gene Hackman, nominated by Halloween Jack 55 after sadly passing away alongside his wife. This is a mysterious story, you know, very, very mysterious story. The latest I've heard is that they were dead for some time in that house. So much more is going to emerge on those circumstances of that, I have no doubt. Now, we're going to change the pace in the uncancelled after show on Substack because

I've got Lady Colin Campbell standing by as it is a war between Meghan Markle and Catherine, the Princess of Wales, as the disastrous Duchess dances on Instagram. But Catherine here has done something truly remarkable. Honestly, you're going to love this. You can sign up to watch the Uncancelled After Show every day. www.outspoken.live is the address. So at this stage, we come off YouTube youtube and rumble we move to substack to continue with the uncancelled after show but never fear we are back tomorrow 5 p.m uk time midday eastern 9 a.m pacific let me ask you to subscribe please if you're watching on youtube or rumble that means you'll get alerted to all of our new content and most importantly i promise to keep fighting for you but i hope to see you on the after show on Substack with Lady Colin Campbell in just one moment. We'll see you next time.