September 17, 2025 • 47 mins
This week, President Trump returns to the UK for an unprecedented second state visit. He’ll meet with King Charles and Prime Minister Keir Starmer, but what’s behind this unusually grand reception? And what could it mean for US–UK relations in the days ahead?
In this week’s episode of TrumpWorld, Anushka and Matt are joined by Chuck Todd - renowned American journalist and former host of NBC’s Meet the Press. He unpacks why the President is being treated with such extraordinary pomp, and what this could mean for the UK and the rest of the world.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
(00:00):
He's enamored with the idea of being a monarch himself.
You must entertain for the king,and you must make the king feel
good. He just loves winners.
The minute you have the stench of a loser, whether you're a
political ally or not, he will quickly throw you away.
Including in your own house. Not in the moment, but he'll do
it pretty quickly. Hello and welcome to Trump World
(00:24):
with me, Anushka Astana. And me, Matt Frey.
Now, Anushka, you're joining us on this side of the pond this
week because our Trump world's collide thanks to the state
visit. He's in the UK and so, so am I.
I'm right now sitting in the hotel where the US press corps
are gathering, ready to cover the next few days.
(00:45):
The quick The key question for me on this visit is, is it worth
sucking up to Donald Trump? Does it even work?
Well, that is a question that I think has exercised the mind of
every leader around the world for the last eight months since
he's taken over office. And I guess it depends on your
personal circumstances. How desperate are you because of
(01:06):
tariffs? Are you desperate to win an
election, in which case it mightbe good to stand up to Trump
like Makani or President Lula ofBrazil?
If you're desperate just to, youknow, govern well, then maybe
that's where you are with Keir Starmer.
Yeah, I mean, Keir Starmer really has gone all in.
I mean, this is the full shebang.
The royal visit, gold plated, the best room in Windsor Castle
(01:29):
all lined up for him. Do you think it's worth doing
that? The sad reality is that the best
card that we have to play as a nation with Donald Trump and
perhaps with anyone, frankly, who cares about things like
monarchy is, are the trappings of monarchy.
It's the, you know, it is the sleepover at Windsor Castle.
It is the royal banquet. It's the golden carriage, all
(01:51):
the fanfare. We do that stuff really well.
And it's the best example of British soft power.
But the the problem is that it only gets you so far.
And what I worry about is whether Keir Starmer having
played that card when he first visited Trump in February with
the, you know, the very demonstrative envelope
theatrically pulled out of his pocket to hand over to the
(02:12):
president, The 1st president have two state visits, not just
one. Even Ronald Reagan only had one
state visit that, you know, there's a sort of myopia there
that this doesn't go much further because once Trump has
gone and once he's forgotten about, you know, the, the, the
soft pillows in Windsor Castle, what is there left?
Because there are so many areas of disagreement on Gaza, you
(02:36):
know, obviously on tariffs, you know, on free speech, where this
relationship could sour. Yeah, which could be quite
difficult. I've been talking to people,
diplomats and officials about, you know, why did he really need
to have this historic invitation, the 1st president
ever to be invited twice to a state visit?
And that there's kind of the pragmatic answer that the answer
(02:59):
that they're putting out there, which is, look, a state visit is
an unbelievable opportunity to get access to the White House.
We know this week they've been in there even with Peter
Mandelson, the US ambassador, having been sacked by Keir
Starmer because of his associations with Jeffrey
Epstein. We know that the team have been
in there with the White House. And at the state banquet
tonight, there will be all British ministers alongside, as
(03:22):
someone put it to me, anyone who's anyone inside the White
House. But, but the other reason for
this is actually Britain's economic interests and the
government's political interests, which is Keir
Starmer's in trouble. And what he needs more than
anything, if he's got any chanceof turning this round, is for
the economy to improve. And they're nervous about what
Donald Trump could do because ofhis nature.
(03:43):
He could do something suddenly that massively impacts on our
economy. And so they've decided to go all
in with the kind of sycophancy, if you like, to try and appeal
to him. But you know, I think there are
also risks that go with that relationship, particularly when
you consider how close he is to Nigel Farage and how much he
(04:04):
likes other strong men leaders around the world.
And there's also this curious historical aspect to the
so-called special relationship. And I really hate using that
term because let's be honest, it's not all that special.
And it's, you know, the relationship has been through
various mutations and, and the challenge, I think, for a
British Prime Minister in a relationship that is really not
(04:26):
equal, although some of the characters have been equal in
the past. I mean, Churchill and Roosevelt
were equal characters. They were equal world leaders.
But it was Churchill who begged the Americans under Roosevelt to
basically save him from Nazi Germany.
Tony Blair thought he was equal to an American president when he
stood out to Bill Clinton in theOval Office, a moment described
(04:49):
very proudly to me by a former British ambassador, and
basically told him to put boots on the ground or the threat of
it over the Kosovo crisis, and came to listen to Blair and did
just that. And then Blair thought, oh, I
can take this to the next guy. And he thought he could do the
same thing with George W Bush after 911.
And I remember all these diplomats in Washington saying
(05:09):
we are the Athens to their Rome.Like the Americans are powerful,
but a bit thick and we can basically steer them in the
right direction as the philosopher island.
Well, how did that turn out? Because, you know, we keep, we
keep coming up with movie titles.
It was love, actually. And then it turned into Fatal
Attraction for Tony Blair. And I think Starmer's in a
similar position. He has to judge it really
(05:31):
carefully because he's caught between his own party and his
own electorate who are very, very wary of Trump possibly, you
know, positively dislike him. I think 75% of the British
probably really don't like him and the requirements of
governance and trade and all these other things where he has
to come to some sort of deal. So I think he's got to, yes,
hold out the hand of friendship,give him, you know, all the
(05:53):
royal paraphernalia you can, youknow, you can take home the
golden cutlery if he wants, but you've got to have a little bit
of pushback. And I wonder if that'll come
over issue, especially like Gaza.
It's funny you mention Love Actually, because I always think
of that scene in the film where the UK Prime Minister in the
film turns to the US president and actually stands up to him
and it it's a scene in a film because it has literally never
(06:17):
happened and what people always say.
But we're always looking for it,don't we?
But when but when you go into Downing St. you're basically, I
always get this impression you're taken into a dark room.
They basically open up the booksand you realise how important
that relationship is in ways that, you know, we never get to
see close up. And therefore you can never do
the. That means you've got to stand
up to him. That said, I do think there are
(06:38):
examples recently where it doesn't necessarily work to be
this sycophantic towards Donald Trump.
He doesn't. He sees it as an opportunity to
sort of show strength over you. And at the moment, yeah, OK, it
may have worked so far, but there are a couple of like, you
know, quite big tension points Ican see coming down the track to
do with, you know, you know, thetaxes that we put on major tech
(07:01):
companies that are based on the US.
Or the other big thing is the relationship that's been growing
between India's Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Putin and Xi
Jinping. Some people think Trump is
pushing Modi in that direction with huge tariffs on India.
We the, you know, UK, but also the whole of the European
(07:21):
countries are now under massive pressure to go with America and
actually put pressure on India and China as well.
I think that could become really, really difficult.
I spoke to a couple of Labour MPs over the weekend and they
said to me, if only our Prime Minister, the leader of our
party, Keir Starmer, Sir Keir Starmer and Trump does love a
(07:42):
title. If he could just stand up to
Trump in front of that fireplace.
Because we don't. We want Love Actually, not
actually love. And the dangers we're going to
get the latter, not the former. But imagine for Keir Starmer,
this could be one of those defining moments that might only
last a week or so. And there might be hell to pay
at the end of it. But I just think that especially
(08:02):
now with all the mood music and all the kind of political
temperature being set by Nigel Farage and to some extent, the
kind of, you know, the hard leftthat has got disgruntled with
Keir Starmer over Gaza, this would be his opportunity.
But my God, you know, he would have to pay a price for it.
(08:22):
Trump would not forgive him lightly.
And it is quite a chilling moment as well as we speak as
well as this sort of economic side of it, which I totally buy.
Like America can do one tiny thing and completely impact all
of our economies instantly in a way that would be politically,
you know, apocalyptic for the Labour Party if if they're not
(08:42):
already in that state right now,You know, So what does Keir
Starmer do in that situation? We can understand why he's doing
it. But we have another chilling
thing happening right now. And, you know, I've just been to
Utah to report on the Charlie Kirk killing.
And, you know, things are getting increasingly heated.
The Americans are increasingly attacking Europe for what it
(09:05):
sees as an attack on free speech.
And I think things in, you know,could go in quite a scary
direction when it comes to that in terms of the divisions we're
seeing here. But actually, I, I, I, you know,
I always knew America was divided, but until I started
living there, I don't think I felt the level of it.
It's like nothing I've ever experienced before.
It's this collective idea that collectively 1/2 of America
(09:30):
killed wanted to kill Charlie Kirk, who is, you know, now a
political St. for the right and the other half have to somehow
exact their revenge. When you combine that with the
very open vengefulness of the Trump presidency, when you
combine that with the powers vested in ICE lifting people off
the streets wearing masks, when you combine that with this kind
(09:52):
of more theatrical element of the National Guard being
deployed. I mean, I, you know, my American
friends, even those were the thickest of hides who've seen,
you know, political violence come and go.
And this is can be a politicallyvery violent country.
After all, even in the 90s therewas political violence.
Waco, Oklahoma, Columbine, the first school shooting that even
(10:12):
those friends have told me in recent days, we're really
scared. Not Civil War scared, but a kind
of complete fraying of the texture of the fibre that at the
end of the day binds the countrytogether.
And whenever I felt really depressed about America, which
was quite a lot when I was thereduring the first to 911 years, I
(10:33):
would go to a naturalization ceremony where you have new
immigrants swearing allegiance, not to a president, not to a
country, but to a piece of paper, to the Constitution that
defends their rights to be different, but to be American at
the same time. And I think that that contract
with citizens, with, with America has gone.
(10:53):
When we were trying to look at political violence in recent
years in America, which has certainly been there, it has so
clearly been there in both directions.
I mean, we've seen, you know, Democratic politician and her
husband murdered in Minnesota. We've seen an arson attack at
the home of the Democratic governor of Pennsylvania.
(11:15):
We, of course, saw the terrible attack against Nancy Pelosi's
husband and and before that there were Republicans who were
shot as well. These these attacks have been
happening in both directions. And I think the challenge for a
lot of people right now is, you know, how do we move away from
this to more unity? But Anuska, we've never before
had an administration by decree saying that if you somehow made
(11:37):
light of Charlie Kirk's death, or if you somehow celebrated
Charlie Kirk's death, you know, woe to those who did.
But if you did that and if it can be proven you will lose your
job, we will make sure that you're fired, that your
livelihood is gone. I mean, how does that how does
that jail with their idea of pure free speech?
(11:58):
It doesn't, frankly. And I think again, that's there
is violence on both sides against both sides.
But to have the administration from the get go, the minute that
that poor man was killed, say, Iblame the left, I blame the
Democrats. And for Trump to not put a lid
on that, I think that is where we're in different territory
(12:19):
now. And all of that is obviously
going to hangover this state visit, not just, you know, the
debate that's being happened happening in the US over Charlie
Kirk, but also the debate that'sbeen happening here where we saw
that huge far right March over the weekend.
I think it's going to amplify the political differences
between Keir Starmer and Donald Trump.
(12:40):
You know, and we know, for example, that Keir Starmer and
many of his aides are about to attend a big progressive
conference here in the UK. It'll be interesting to see how
the president responds to that. It will be interesting to see
how the president responds to Keir Starmer's difficult
political moment right now. It may make everything we're
about to talk about whether you should be sycophantic or whether
(13:03):
you should stand up to Donald Trump even harder to negotiate
for the UK. Indeed.
Well, let's introduce our guest.So now to explore the key
question whether to stand up to Trump or to stand by him.
Let's speak to Chuck. Todd, Amanda.
Decades of experience covering US politics.
He was the chief political analyst at NBC and the host of
(13:27):
Meet the Press, and GQ once called him the most powerful
journalist in Washington, DC Welcome to you, Chuck.
It's nice to see you, Matt. So the subject at hand is
whether to stand by or to stand up to Donald Trump.
If you were a world leader, surely you'd be standing by
more. Let's put it this way.
You'd be sucking up to him. You know, it really everything
(13:49):
depends on your own situation, right?
You know, look, I, I look at it this from, there's a, there's a
children's book called If you Give a Mouse a Cookie.
And some people may be familiar with it, some may not, but the
idea is if you give a mouse a cookie, they're going to keep
coming back for more, right? That's essentially the moral of
the story. And it's a children's book and
(14:09):
there is a, there is a lot to beseen, you know, and I think that
that's, that's what you have to weigh, right?
You have to weigh how long do you think you're dealing with
him? And I think world leaders look
at this and, and maybe appeasement or sucking up to him
makes more sense than if you do it domestically, right?
(14:30):
Because domestically what we've seen is every time he has come
for a pound of flesh, he and he's gotten it, he comes back
for more, right? Whether it's with the media
companies, with the tech companies, even in some of these
trade deals. So I, you know, I don't think
you can sit here and say that, that anybody has figured this
(14:50):
out. But it really ultimately, I
think you cannot look at it in terms of your.
I think you have to look at it in terms of your own needs in
the moment. So Lula's running for a re
election, you know it pays for him to stand up to Trump.
It's good politics for him domestically.
And Starmer hasn't got an election for another four years
(15:12):
or so. And it pays for him, arguably,
to be nice to Trump. Oh, I think so.
Especially in the situation he'sin right now, which is he's kind
of politically weak. He's got, you know, we've got
the embarrassment of the ambassador having to be fired
and recalled essentially. So he's in a different
situation. And he's also got his European
(15:32):
allies to worry about. And you've got the US presence
with NATO and you've got, you know, a European conflict,
right? So, you know, it is, it is, to
me, understandable why many of the European allies are doing
what they're doing this time because the end of the day, they
know he could really mess up NATO.
(15:53):
And that's the last thing they want.
Yeah. But on your argument on what
you're saying, to some extent, isn't it quite risky what
they're doing? Because, you know, the mouse
does keep coming back for the cooking.
And there is this kind of idea that Donald Trump loves the idea
of a strong man, and if someone's sucking up to him, he
knows he can kick them around. That's been my experience and my
(16:16):
observation. I mean, I look at, you know, and
that's why what you the perfect way to deal with him is to find
a few places where you do stand up and you find a few places
where you go ahead and give him something where you at least let
him know that, hey, I'm not going to be an easy mark.
I think the world leader that has managed him better than
(16:39):
anybody else so far is Claudia Sheinbaum out of Mexico.
And I, I never would have expected that, to be honest, but
she is. She stands up to him every once
in a while. She drive, you know, but at the
same time, she'll give him a little something for cooperation
with the border. Maybe she'll ramp up tougher and
(17:01):
AMLO did the same thing, her predecessor down there.
So it is he's transactional. So if you come to him with
something you need or you want, or you stand up for him and you
give him something over here youcan create a give and take.
I think the mistake that's made is when it's all appeasement.
And, and arguably, it looks publicly like it's all
(17:23):
appeasement, if that's the word you would use with Keir Starmer.
I mean, some people cringed whenhe handed over that letter from
the king, you know, to Donald Trump.
But arguably, we have had some trade advantages.
I was just talking to someone about the 10s of thousands of
jobs in the car industry here that rely on us having reduced
tariffs in cars. They also, they were talking
(17:46):
about this balance you were talking about.
They insist that behind closed doors, Keir Starmer can be
tough. I mean, it really is all the
pageantry he could hope for. It's the Royals.
It's, you know, gold edged. What is it that makes him love
that kind of scene in particular?
Oh, I think he's just enamored with it.
You know, he's enamored with theidea of being a monarch himself.
(18:07):
You know, I think there are people that think that this is
his drive is for authoritarianism.
But what he really, I mean, if you think about it, he is sort
of the stereotype of what we, what we think of, of this sort
of narcissistic monarch that we many of both of our television
series will mock at different times, right?
Which is you must, you must entertain for the king and you
(18:28):
must make the king feel good. And you know, it's good to be
the king, right? All of those things.
In some ways, that's, that does make him I, I, I just think it
makes him feel better for whatever reason or another.
And that's, that is, you know, his drive for authority is more
for the pageantry than it is from some sort of ideological
(18:49):
movement. It's why I've always said it's
just, it's, it isn't like the 1930s in that respect, because
it's not like he's got some grand idea or grand plan.
He just wants to be liked. And we can all decide whether
what happened to him as a child or a teenager or whatever that
that created this necessity. But, you know, it's a strange
(19:12):
fact. You know, he doesn't have a lot
of personal friends. Like there aren't people that
you can identify. Oh, that's a childhood friend.
Oh, that's somebody he's known for 40 years.
He doesn't have people in his life like that.
There are people he's known for a long time, but there's nobody.
You say, oh, he's the close friend.
In many ways, the friends he hastoday are kind of new.
(19:33):
They're people he wasn't friendswith 10 years ago.
He didn't know them. So he, I think that also tells
you a little something about him.
But look, he's, you know, he's the president.
Let me throw an idea at it, you guys.
And I'm curious the idea of now that there is an opening at the
embassy in the United States, the UK embassy in the United
States. And Starmer has a political foe
(19:56):
And, and, and Nigel Farage, the most Clintonian thing to do
would be you take somebody essentially, you know, who has
good relations with the administration.
How would that play? How would that work?
Fuck, it's a, it's a great idea,except that Nigel Farage has his
eyes on a bigger job. And that's the job of the man
(20:17):
sitting in #10 at the moment. So I think Once Upon a time, you
know, in the first Trump administration, he would have
probably said, yes, thank you very much, and bitten off the
hand that offered that job. I think at the moment he's got
his sights set on #10 he's parked his tanks on Keir
Starmer's lawn. He's rolled all over the Tory
lawns. I mean, you know, he at the
moment at least, yeah, he's the man.
(20:38):
He is the man of that moment. He wouldn't say yes to it right
now, but at the time they were originally considering it, when
Peter Mandelson was put in, Nigel was very, very clear that
he wanted them to offer him thatjob.
And I actually spoke to people inside Downing St. and I said,
isn't there something to that? Like you, you know, you, you
achieve a couple of things. Yes, there's the good
relationship with the administration, but also you
(20:59):
move Nigel Farage slightly away.I mean in some ways I'll tell
you what, Nigel Farage in there in the in the 1st place might
have been better for them than Peter Mandelson.
So I just, I'm just curious about the point you made about
Claudia Shaman, the president ofMexico.
I mean, she clearly has given some, you know, into some of
Trump's demands, especially on the border.
(21:20):
But she's also been very firm inher language.
The other person that we admiredwith firmness of language is
Mark Carney, who kind of pivotedfrom using tough language about
Trump to get elected as the Prime Minister of Canada,
something that no one thought was possible, you know, a few
weeks before he started his campaign.
And then once he was in that joband he went to see Trump in the
(21:40):
Oval Office, he continued with atough language, but it was much
more emollient and more charming.
Did did his pivot work out or isCanada suffering?
Well, Canada is suffering economically still, right from
the tariffs. I mean, everybody is suffering
right now. And I'm, I'm look, I'm, I am
extraordinarily pessimistic about world relations, right?
When, when, when the biggest economy in the world erects
(22:02):
nationalist walls like we've done the art, the most logical
response is everybody else to start to look out for themselves
first, right? So it is, it becomes a contagion
of nationalism. And that is now that said, it
was nationalism that essentiallyCarney tapped into in Canada,
right? And that it goes back to
(22:24):
weirdly, Trump respects that. And if he knows that, look,
you're standing up because this is what you believes in the best
interest of your country. And and then that's how you can
create a give and take. What Trump just does not accept
is the premise of a multipolar world, right?
He doesn't accept the premise ofmultilateralism.
He doesn't. And I don't, you know, and he's
(22:46):
never accepted the idea of multilateralism, right, Which is
why he criticizes NATO in particular.
But he's, but it's a lot of these multilateral organizations
that he's skeptical of. And it goes back to, hey, we're
the United States, we're the biggest power.
Why should we share that, right?And that's because that's his
mindset, right? It's a 0 sum game.
(23:08):
We're, we're the, we're the, which is also why he ends up
appeasing XI, right? He does.
He is not nearly as tough on XI as he is on Venezuela, for
instance, right? But in arguably they're both
adversaries in a way. But he sees she as a as an
equal, he sees Putin as an equal.
(23:29):
He does not see Zelensky as an equal, and he doesn't see
Starmer as an equal. Can I just quickly ask you on
this on, on the particular question of equality, because
the special relationship which we go on about much more than
you guys do. And I think the last time Trump
was here in 2018, you know, he took the Mickey out of of
Theresa May, who was then the Prime Minister when he was a
(23:50):
Chequers. And he said this is the most
special kind of special, specialrelationship ever.
I mean, he was just telling us what we really wanted to hear
because that relationship is thecrack cocaine of British
diplomacy. We need it in order to feel
relevant. And it's been through various
different permutations. Where does America and
especially this administration see Britain now?
(24:11):
Are we your Sancho Panzer that goes along with Don Quixote into
the sunset or are we, you know, the, the last, the, the, the
left tooth of the donkey that hesaid.
So I mean, what's, what do we bring to the relationship for
you? I do believe that we see you as
our real European ally versus everybody else.
(24:31):
Like Europe. You know, it's sort of like the
UK is family and Europe is a friend.
I'm not sure if that's a compliment or, you know, or a
cause. Especially so for the American
right, that relationship. It has been and there's always
think about, think about our twopolitical parties in this
country and how obsessed they are with always helping their
(24:52):
counterparts in the UK, right? It, it is the only other country
that comes close in that kind ofwhere, by the way, where the,
where the country itself needs to hear how much we care is
Israel, right? It's, it's the UK and it's
Israel and they're on and, and, and in some ways it's the same
thing. And and because of that kind of
(25:12):
closeness. So we are special.
We do right. We also want to want to get
involved more in your politics than we do, for instance, any
other countries politics. But on that point, I mean, you
know, in the past, every one of these visits, whether it's to
Washington or to London, would have been, you know, lubricated
by language about common values and, you know, a little nod to
to Winston Churchill and to Ronald Reagan and Margaret
(25:34):
Thatcher riding their horses together.
But, you know, we had Elon Musk,who I know he's fallen out with
Donald Trump, but it's still, you know, politically,
spiritually quite close to him. You know, on a massive screen in
London, the biggest March we've ever seen by the far right in
this city, basically saying violence is coming to you,
Britain, whether you like it or not.
Charlie Kirk, the late Charlie Kirk, you know, the closest
(25:57):
thing that you have to a political St. in American
politics right now, certainly onthe right called Britain a
totalitarian third world hellhole.
You know, this whole debate about free speech or the lack of
it in this country, those sharedvalues certainly between the
party of the of, of, you know, the administration and this
country, they don't exist anymore.
(26:18):
I agree with that in that there is not that same, you know,
every other president. It wouldn't have mattered what
the ideology was of the Prime Minister, right?
There was a tightness. And you know, I'm not going to
sit here and say that that that,you know, look, Clinton and
Blair certainly had a better relationship maybe than than
than the relationship that he was that he inherited with John
(26:40):
Major and things like that. So I, I don't want to but and,
and there and I do think becausethey were ideological soul
mates, Blair and Clinton, that was close.
But look how quickly Bush and Blair became close, right?
And, and now internationally, Bush and Clinton actually share
an ideology. And I think that's the issue,
right, which is ultimately Trump's the first American
(27:00):
president since World War Two who didn't have the same
ideology about the world, right?And on, on, on sort of the
relationship that the United States and Europe are supposed
to have with each other in the UK.
He's the first one that didn't accept the premise, right, of
this relationship. And I think that's, you know,
(27:21):
we're now seeing the fallout from that.
And, and let me just ask you about that, because obviously
Keir Starmer and Donald Trump are ideologically very
different. We actually had quite a lot of
controversy during the election campaign when Labour Party
figures went and, you know, campaigned with the Democrats.
I don't know if that will becomea bit of a thing here because
there's a big progressive conference about to happen in
(27:41):
London, which I'm sure Donald Trump knows about.
But but when people relay to us the first call between Prime
Minister Starmer and then DonaldTrump as a candidate, it was
like a day or two after the assassination attempt.
And somebody who has very familiar with that call said to
me, Kit Starmer was like, you know, I'm so sorry about what
happened to you. I hope you're OK.
(28:03):
And apparently Trump was like, yeah, yeah, forget that.
You're a winner. You're like a massive winner.
Like your election result is completely incredible.
And the person was saying to me,he just loves winners.
And so given that, I'm interested in, you know, if
that's right, if you think that about Donald Trump, But also
Keir Starmer now is in so much political trouble.
I mean, people are talking aboutwhether he can survive till the
(28:24):
next election after Peter Mandelson had to be sacked as
U.S. ambassador. How much will that change how
Donald Trump feels about Keir Starmer?
Well, Trump doesn't in the way that you just described.
He loves being seen with winners.
The minute you have the stench of a loser, whether you're a
political ally or not, he will quickly throw you away.
(28:46):
He will quickly distance. And so this is a very dangerous.
Including in your own house. Including when is when is your
guest. Oh, he would do.
He would, you know, not in the moment, but he'll do it pretty
quickly. You know, he'll he gets a sense
of that and and this is what, but he's done it to his own
political allies in the past domestically where the minute
you know, he'll throw, you know,it is all about in service to
(29:09):
him. And the minute you know, he
doesn't want to be seen as a loser or weak and he he thinks
you're dragging him down in someform or another or he has an
opportunity to strengthen himself.
And I promise you if he thinks he's got an opportunity to get
Farage as Prime Minister, it's he is going to rhetorically and
(29:34):
in the entire mega movement is going to rhetorically make
Starmer's life miserable in the UK.
And and that's what I would be nervous about if I were Starmer.
And, and when he was here in 20/16/2018 with Theresa May, he
did exactly that to her. He undermined her because he
talked up Boris Johnson, who hadjust resigned as foreign
(29:54):
secretary over the Brexit agreement that was too soft for
his liking. And Trump gave an interview, I
think it was to The Times on theeve of the visit, and he
completely undermined it. I remember the time officials at
#10 were tearing their hair out.They were distraught by the fact
that this guy, who was already aliability to invite into your
house, was in beginning to burn the sofa.
It is funny when you talk to officials here who basically try
(30:16):
and like arrange it all so it goes perfectly.
And they were so happy about after that White House visit
because in their eyes it went perfectly.
But they always say, I think right up to Starmer himself, you
just have no clue what is going to happen when Donald Trump's
around. You don't know.
And so they're really nervous. I mean, the one complicating
factor here, and maybe it's not for him, but I think it is, you
(30:36):
know, an issue, which is Peter Mandelson's demise was all
around his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein and in many ways
vindicates that the the birthdaybook is real because Peter
Mandelson isn't denying, but those pages were really from
him. How does Trump handle all of
that? The one thing I've thought about
in the sacking of Mandelson overthe Epstein issue is whether
(30:58):
that Trump will resent that and be angry that start by doing it.
You're acknowledging that it's abad thing and you're
acknowledging the existence of the very thing that Trump is
trying to deny. So I think that's a wild card
and it and it and it, and, you know, it could very well now
that said, because of the current situation that we have
(31:20):
with the with the assassination of Kirk, Trump may be feeling
untouchable politically right now, right?
And he may be feeling he can, you know, and he's not, maybe he
doesn't want to worry him. And he may think, well,
Epstein's gone, you know, nobody's going to be talking
about this anymore. So I don't have to worry about
it. But I have thought that it's
(31:40):
possible the way Starmer's handled this, that it will
irritate Trump. I mean, the other thing that
will come up, especially in a press conference, which they're
due to have a check as the primeminister's country residence on
Thursday, will be Gaza, weren't it?
I mean, just today, the UN Commission of Inquiry report
says that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza, 4 out of the
(32:04):
five categories for defining genocide.
Those boxes are ticked by Israel.
This is in the run up to the UK recognizing an independent
Palestinian state as they said they wouldn't.
I can't imagine them not doing that to the UN next week.
And Trump has already been on the record for saying that is a
really bad idea. And I'm sure he's going to
disagree violently with this UN Commission report and we'll side
(32:26):
with this on that. I mean, that could be a really
abrasive issue, don't you think?It's possible and it's also
possible that Trump uses the moment to send a message to
Netanyahu, who he is upset with at messing up the ceasefire
negotiations, right with Hamas, with the attack on Qatar.
And that has become a huge, you know, look, there's a lot of
(32:46):
financial relationship. You know, it's interesting.
I, I, I was with somebody who's very much in the Israeli
opposition to Netanyahu, who is very skeptical of the Qataris
and, and whether they can be trusted in any form one way or
the other. So it's a, you know, that is a,
that is a very complicating factor in this, in this
(33:07):
relationship. So, you know, yes, it's it's is
the United States going to standby Israel against that UN
report? That is true.
But I I don't think the chances are zero that he doesn't stand
next to Starmer and tell Netanyahu he's got a he's, you
know, he's, you know that he's got to end this war soon.
(33:27):
The Qataris lavished a jumbo jeton Trump.
They spent 60 billion U.S. dollars on on American arms.
I mean, when it comes to suckingup to Trump, they're probably
in, you know, in the in pole position.
They get the gold medal for sucking up to Trump.
And yet, you know, we don't knowhow much he knew about the
airstrike, but he allowed that to go ahead.
And they were furious about it. It shows you the limitations of
(33:51):
flattery, doesn't it? I think it does, and it's a
reminder that you know, he doesn't.
He expects the the tributes, buthe does not believe he owes
anything in return per SE. But I think we're not, you know,
I, I don't think we have the full story on on how quickly he
was informed of this. It's also possible Trump didn't
hear what Netanyahu claims he sold him to, right.
(34:14):
So I, I, you know, this is one of those, it doesn't make a lot
of sense that the United States would look the other way on an
attack on Qatar with so much of our American forces on that in
that country's. It just that, that that's why I,
I don't buy the Israeli push back on this.
(34:36):
And I don't think BB has a lot of credibility.
I think the other thing I didn'tunderstand when the strike
happened was, I mean, it's very clear that the warning was, you
know, not specific at all in terms of who they were going to
strike and where they were goingto strike.
And speaking to people in the military, it is absolutely, you
know, unbelievable almost that Israel wouldn't have given that
(34:59):
sort of details to the US. Why?
Why was he not more openly angryabout that?
Well, I think it goes back to it's that's a question where
he's balancing constituencies. You know, this is one of those
few issues where there's political he you know, he the
one reason he sticks so closely with Bibi right now in this is
(35:21):
that it divides the American left, right.
I mean, it is so it is served him well politically.
But he is starting to see members of his own base not
necessarily in the same place onthis.
And you see more and more high profile members of of the MAGA
movement questioning the conductof this war stand, you know,
(35:43):
what's going on in Gaza, not comfortable with everything
that's happening. So I do think he's a bit torn on
this and he's finding out what every American president has
found out since the mid 90s. Bibi Netanyahu forgets who's who
is, who is the little country inthis relationship and who's the
big country in this relationship.
(36:04):
And he continues to do that. And he I think he believes he's
politically immune from Trump. And there's going to be a moment
where Trump, you know, decides to remind Bibi who's the
secondary member of this relationship.
Yeah, although interesting he didn't at that moment because it
felt like the moment. I hear you.
But I think it could be coming is what I would say is that
(36:25):
look, he's not going to I I justthink it this is and look what
he what he's doing now during a ground war in Gaza.
I mean, this is only prolonging the war.
And just on, on, because there'sNetanyahu and there's Putin, who
were both seen as the strongman who Trump gets on with.
Well, and then we have the sort of spectacle, I would say, of
all the European leaders coming with Zelensky to the White
(36:47):
House. And I mean, sycophancy central
in terms of going around the table telling Trump how
wonderful he was. And just bringing it back to our
first question, it kind of, you know, it might be in Keir
Starmer's interest to, you know,hand out an invitation from the
king in order to try and protectour economy.
Because if our economy gets in aworse situation, Starmer's
(37:08):
really political, his political fortunes are really through the
floor. He needs to turn that around.
But that sycophancy, yes, the relationship with Zelensky is
much better than it was saying in February.
But I mean, we might notice thatthere isn't peace between Russia
and Ukraine. If anything, we've moved further
away from peace between Russia and Ukraine since that.
(37:28):
I mean, aren't these kind of strong men leaders taking him
for a ride to some extent? And in this situation, the
sycophancy didn't work. I look, I agree, and I look at
the first term, right? You know, in Trump 1.0, most
people's instincts was to stand up to Trump, right?
Internationally and domestically, even in his own
(37:50):
party. All right.
And Trump 2 point O everybody's decided they're exhausted from
that fight and they've concludedthat what they did in the first
term didn't work. Let me try this.
And I, you know what, what my analysis would be is no, that it
did work in the first term. What didn't work is that Biden
(38:11):
had a failed presidency, right? Biden, you know, didn't
understand why he won in 2020 and he didn't lead the country
to a point where they were readyto turn the page on Trump.
So, you know, we're we're here and in some ways not standing up
to him only I think ends up encouraging him.
(38:31):
And to I mean, again, I go back to if you if you give a mouse a
cookie and and that's where where we're situated.
But look, you know, how long is Starmer going to be there,
right? The, the, the problem with
Democratic elected leaders is that they're, they're only there
until their next election. And if, you know, you got to
deal with the American presidentthat you have not necessarily
(38:52):
the one that you want, right? I remember, I remember Obama's
folks complaining to me back in the early teens that they
thought the collection of European leaders was just weak
and that it was too bad he didn't have better counterparts
to deal with. And it's just like, OK.
And he didn't have to, you know,that Merkel was really the only
(39:12):
world leader. He he, he truly thought was, was
up to the to the, to the task. So, you know, I think, I think
there's always a little bit of that.
But you've, this is a realpolitik, right?
I think isn't that what Kissinger called it?
Also remember that Starmer. Starmer will go have his
election after Trump leaves office.
(39:33):
Unless, of course, he can somehow concoct a third term.
Unless unless he doesn't survive.
I was just going to say that's the problem with Starmer.
There's with your system. There's always a piano hanging
over the head of the PM right atany moment in time the rope can
get cut. Yeah, right.
And if you if you give too much to Trump, that becomes your
election campaign right there, which you might lose to a guy
(39:54):
called Nigel Farage, who'll say,well, I'm, you know, we all want
to be nice to Trump, but I'm theonly one he actually listens to.
Just I just want to ask you a question, Chuck.
When it comes to what we have tooffer as a country, we in
Britain is our the best card that we can really play
sleepovers at Buckingham Palace or Windsor Castle.
(40:14):
Is that as good as it gets? Let's be honest, we can take the
brutal. Truth.
I think for Trump, that's all hecares about.
So we shouldn't confuse that with a with AI.
Don't think our system for our democracy.
I don't, I'd like to, I'd like to think not.
I mean, I think the, you know, we still count on the UK as sort
of being, I think our most important proxy in the European
(40:36):
relationship, right. And, and if the, you know, and
again, I do think we all see it as, you know, the UK is a
sibling, the rest of Europe are friends and in some ways the UK
is our and vice versa, right? When the rest of the Europe gets
frustrated, who do they turn to to get the Americans attention?
You go to the UK. Can I ask you just one other
(40:57):
thing, and this is unrelated butsort of not the first thing that
Trump will do after the state visit is go to Charlie Kirk's
memorial. I think that's his big event of
the weekend. There's the death of Charlie
Kirk and the language that it has unleashed.
Is that a turning point for you in American politics?
Well, I will tell you this that I've been, I've been, you know,
(41:20):
as somebody who's supposed to also write for a living, trying
to. I'm always looking for hope in
our current political situation.And it looks like Trump and his
allies see a political opportunity to exploit rather
than, you know, as I as I've he wants to bring everybody to
(41:42):
heal. He is not interested in helping
the country heal, if that makes sense.
And I think he sees a political opportunity.
And, and so it is going to get worse because we have seen when
you radicalize, you radicalize your opponents.
And right now, you know, 1 extremist movement is only
successful if they have another one out there as their
(42:04):
counterpoint. And we and, and I, I really fear
that the, what they're threatening right now, which is
essentially to, they're threatening to the left what
they claimed the left was doing to the right, which is
criminalizing speech right and cancel culture.
And you know, this will, I don'tknow if the, I don't know if the
(42:28):
Democratic Party can speak with one voice to push back on this.
I think the Republican critics of Trump all feel like they
can't speak up. They've been silenced.
So no, I think this could be a very dark turning point for a
short term. I still have long term optimism.
For a short term. But I do think that this could I
think the voters aren't going totolerate this.
(42:50):
But if he but but him going thisdirection of essentially going
after folks and you know, basically ignoring the
extremists on his side and saying it's only a problem on
the left. I do think event that will wear
thin with voters but but it may be ugly for the next year or
two. I was in Utah at Utah Valley
(43:12):
University after the killing of Charlie Kirk, and there was a
person standing there with a kind of Democrats killed Charlie
Kirk sign. And we were listening to what
Donald Trump said. Actually, Spencer Cox, the
Republican governor, was saying stuff that I found really quite
inspiring on how we try and bridge the divide right now.
But there was a certain irony and it's quite scary to
(43:35):
everything Donald Trump was saying, which was he was
basically he he he was, he was basically doing exactly what he
was accusing others of which was, you know, saying that the
left was responsible for this death.
And we have a free speech issue that they are going to really
try and exploit in the UK as well.
Despite the fact that you had, you know, so many people
(43:58):
marching in that far right Marchthat Matt mentioned.
I see what you're saying about it getting ugly over the next
year. Where does your hope come from?
What brings it back? Look, I think we've got 2 huge
problems, 1 is the tech companies, right?
And and the fact that we are notturning our attention to them,
right? They have exploited this, they
(44:19):
have created this information ecosystem that is designed to
agitate, that is designed to create instability.
I mean, it's not lot shouldn't be lost on any of us that before
social media, the world was, youknow, it's not like we didn't
have our share of mentally of mentally fragile people.
(44:40):
But now we we've we've got this social media ecosystem that we
can prey upon them. That's one.
But you know, it is I don't knowif the Democratic Party is the
ability to sort of, hey, we've got to we've got to take a step
back here. Spencer Cox gives me a little
bit of hope, but I don't know ifeither party has the credibility
(45:01):
to heal. And so, you know, if we don't
have, if the, if the president won't do it, there's nobody else
that has the credibility to do it.
It may take an outsider, it may take an independent candidacy,
it may take a third party. But I think right now our two
parties are broken. Our leadership structure is
broken, our incentive structuresare broken.
(45:23):
And This is why we're in the situation we're in.
I've got to say it, Chuck. I mean, you were optimistic
about four minutes ago. I know.
I. Know it's hard.
You've killed. You've killed your own optimism.
It is, you know, all I can say is eventually the voters get it
right. And we've gone through bouts of
of violence in this country in the past.
You guys have had your share of violence.
(45:43):
You know, it. It is, it is.
Democracy can be messy. Chuck, it's been great talking
to you. I promise you that when you come
over to this side of the ocean, you won't get a royal visit.
I don't have a royal carriage. I'm not going to put you up in
winds you. Know how exciting this is?
Really good. I've waited my whole life.
Up in Windsor and I can give youa Scotch egg and a warm.
(46:03):
Beer. Well, I would like that, but
I've waited my whole life, you know, being a Charles, you know,
I always, you know, I had this. I was always sort of like, I
hope he gets there. And I was for a long time
thought, oh, there's never goingto be a King Charles.
I'm never going to be able to asa Charles.
King Chuck, You know, I wish he went by Chuck.
Does he have a nickname? Does he go by King Chuck
(46:26):
privately? I really hope it is.
I hope it's not King Charles or King Charlie.
I really hope it's. King.
I'm sure he's got lots of nicknames, but I don't think
Chuck is one of them. I hate to say it.
Next week, the Trump World Caravan moves across the ocean
again to New York for the UnitedNations General Assembly.
It's the 80th session of that organization at a time when
(46:47):
certainly the administration in Washington doesn't believe
perhaps that it should even exist.
Huge challenges, the recognitionPalestine by the UK, by France
and the general discussion aboutthe state of the world disorder.
Anushka will be there, and so will I, and hopefully so will
you. And we do want to hear from you.
(47:08):
So if you've got any burning questions, wherever you are,
across the Atlantic Ocean or anywhere in the world, do get in
touch with us. You can e-mail us at
trumpworld@channel4.com or you can leave messages on YouTube or
Spotify and we will try to get back to you.
Thanks for joining.
He's enamored with the idea of being a monarch himself.
You must entertain for the king,and you must make the king feel
good. He just loves winners.
The minute you have the stench of a loser, whether you're a
political ally or not, he will quickly throw you away.
Including in your own house. Not in the moment, but he'll do
it pretty quickly. Hello and welcome to Trump World
(00:24):
with me, Anushka Astana. And me, Matt Frey.
Now, Anushka, you're joining us on this side of the pond this
week because our Trump world's collide thanks to the state
visit. He's in the UK and so, so am I.
I'm right now sitting in the hotel where the US press corps
are gathering, ready to cover the next few days.
(00:45):
The quick The key question for me on this visit is, is it worth
sucking up to Donald Trump? Does it even work?
Well, that is a question that I think has exercised the mind of
every leader around the world for the last eight months since
he's taken over office. And I guess it depends on your
personal circumstances. How desperate are you because of
(01:06):
tariffs? Are you desperate to win an
election, in which case it mightbe good to stand up to Trump
like Makani or President Lula ofBrazil?
If you're desperate just to, youknow, govern well, then maybe
that's where you are with Keir Starmer.
Yeah, I mean, Keir Starmer really has gone all in.
I mean, this is the full shebang.
The royal visit, gold plated, the best room in Windsor Castle
(01:29):
all lined up for him. Do you think it's worth doing
that? The sad reality is that the best
card that we have to play as a nation with Donald Trump and
perhaps with anyone, frankly, who cares about things like
monarchy is, are the trappings of monarchy.
It's the, you know, it is the sleepover at Windsor Castle.
It is the royal banquet. It's the golden carriage, all
(01:51):
the fanfare. We do that stuff really well.
And it's the best example of British soft power.
But the the problem is that it only gets you so far.
And what I worry about is whether Keir Starmer having
played that card when he first visited Trump in February with
the, you know, the very demonstrative envelope
theatrically pulled out of his pocket to hand over to the
(02:12):
president, The 1st president have two state visits, not just
one. Even Ronald Reagan only had one
state visit that, you know, there's a sort of myopia there
that this doesn't go much further because once Trump has
gone and once he's forgotten about, you know, the, the, the
soft pillows in Windsor Castle, what is there left?
Because there are so many areas of disagreement on Gaza, you
(02:36):
know, obviously on tariffs, you know, on free speech, where this
relationship could sour. Yeah, which could be quite
difficult. I've been talking to people,
diplomats and officials about, you know, why did he really need
to have this historic invitation, the 1st president
ever to be invited twice to a state visit?
And that there's kind of the pragmatic answer that the answer
(02:59):
that they're putting out there, which is, look, a state visit is
an unbelievable opportunity to get access to the White House.
We know this week they've been in there even with Peter
Mandelson, the US ambassador, having been sacked by Keir
Starmer because of his associations with Jeffrey
Epstein. We know that the team have been
in there with the White House. And at the state banquet
tonight, there will be all British ministers alongside, as
(03:22):
someone put it to me, anyone who's anyone inside the White
House. But, but the other reason for
this is actually Britain's economic interests and the
government's political interests, which is Keir
Starmer's in trouble. And what he needs more than
anything, if he's got any chanceof turning this round, is for
the economy to improve. And they're nervous about what
Donald Trump could do because ofhis nature.
(03:43):
He could do something suddenly that massively impacts on our
economy. And so they've decided to go all
in with the kind of sycophancy, if you like, to try and appeal
to him. But you know, I think there are
also risks that go with that relationship, particularly when
you consider how close he is to Nigel Farage and how much he
(04:04):
likes other strong men leaders around the world.
And there's also this curious historical aspect to the
so-called special relationship. And I really hate using that
term because let's be honest, it's not all that special.
And it's, you know, the relationship has been through
various mutations and, and the challenge, I think, for a
British Prime Minister in a relationship that is really not
(04:26):
equal, although some of the characters have been equal in
the past. I mean, Churchill and Roosevelt
were equal characters. They were equal world leaders.
But it was Churchill who begged the Americans under Roosevelt to
basically save him from Nazi Germany.
Tony Blair thought he was equal to an American president when he
stood out to Bill Clinton in theOval Office, a moment described
(04:49):
very proudly to me by a former British ambassador, and
basically told him to put boots on the ground or the threat of
it over the Kosovo crisis, and came to listen to Blair and did
just that. And then Blair thought, oh, I
can take this to the next guy. And he thought he could do the
same thing with George W Bush after 911.
And I remember all these diplomats in Washington saying
(05:09):
we are the Athens to their Rome.Like the Americans are powerful,
but a bit thick and we can basically steer them in the
right direction as the philosopher island.
Well, how did that turn out? Because, you know, we keep, we
keep coming up with movie titles.
It was love, actually. And then it turned into Fatal
Attraction for Tony Blair. And I think Starmer's in a
similar position. He has to judge it really
(05:31):
carefully because he's caught between his own party and his
own electorate who are very, very wary of Trump possibly, you
know, positively dislike him. I think 75% of the British
probably really don't like him and the requirements of
governance and trade and all these other things where he has
to come to some sort of deal. So I think he's got to, yes,
hold out the hand of friendship,give him, you know, all the
(05:53):
royal paraphernalia you can, youknow, you can take home the
golden cutlery if he wants, but you've got to have a little bit
of pushback. And I wonder if that'll come
over issue, especially like Gaza.
It's funny you mention Love Actually, because I always think
of that scene in the film where the UK Prime Minister in the
film turns to the US president and actually stands up to him
and it it's a scene in a film because it has literally never
(06:17):
happened and what people always say.
But we're always looking for it,don't we?
But when but when you go into Downing St. you're basically, I
always get this impression you're taken into a dark room.
They basically open up the booksand you realise how important
that relationship is in ways that, you know, we never get to
see close up. And therefore you can never do
the. That means you've got to stand
up to him. That said, I do think there are
(06:38):
examples recently where it doesn't necessarily work to be
this sycophantic towards Donald Trump.
He doesn't. He sees it as an opportunity to
sort of show strength over you. And at the moment, yeah, OK, it
may have worked so far, but there are a couple of like, you
know, quite big tension points Ican see coming down the track to
do with, you know, you know, thetaxes that we put on major tech
(07:01):
companies that are based on the US.
Or the other big thing is the relationship that's been growing
between India's Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Putin and Xi
Jinping. Some people think Trump is
pushing Modi in that direction with huge tariffs on India.
We the, you know, UK, but also the whole of the European
(07:21):
countries are now under massive pressure to go with America and
actually put pressure on India and China as well.
I think that could become really, really difficult.
I spoke to a couple of Labour MPs over the weekend and they
said to me, if only our Prime Minister, the leader of our
party, Keir Starmer, Sir Keir Starmer and Trump does love a
(07:42):
title. If he could just stand up to
Trump in front of that fireplace.
Because we don't. We want Love Actually, not
actually love. And the dangers we're going to
get the latter, not the former. But imagine for Keir Starmer,
this could be one of those defining moments that might only
last a week or so. And there might be hell to pay
at the end of it. But I just think that especially
(08:02):
now with all the mood music and all the kind of political
temperature being set by Nigel Farage and to some extent, the
kind of, you know, the hard leftthat has got disgruntled with
Keir Starmer over Gaza, this would be his opportunity.
But my God, you know, he would have to pay a price for it.
(08:22):
Trump would not forgive him lightly.
And it is quite a chilling moment as well as we speak as
well as this sort of economic side of it, which I totally buy.
Like America can do one tiny thing and completely impact all
of our economies instantly in a way that would be politically,
you know, apocalyptic for the Labour Party if if they're not
(08:42):
already in that state right now,You know, So what does Keir
Starmer do in that situation? We can understand why he's doing
it. But we have another chilling
thing happening right now. And, you know, I've just been to
Utah to report on the Charlie Kirk killing.
And, you know, things are getting increasingly heated.
The Americans are increasingly attacking Europe for what it
(09:05):
sees as an attack on free speech.
And I think things in, you know,could go in quite a scary
direction when it comes to that in terms of the divisions we're
seeing here. But actually, I, I, I, you know,
I always knew America was divided, but until I started
living there, I don't think I felt the level of it.
It's like nothing I've ever experienced before.
It's this collective idea that collectively 1/2 of America
(09:30):
killed wanted to kill Charlie Kirk, who is, you know, now a
political St. for the right and the other half have to somehow
exact their revenge. When you combine that with the
very open vengefulness of the Trump presidency, when you
combine that with the powers vested in ICE lifting people off
the streets wearing masks, when you combine that with this kind
(09:52):
of more theatrical element of the National Guard being
deployed. I mean, I, you know, my American
friends, even those were the thickest of hides who've seen,
you know, political violence come and go.
And this is can be a politicallyvery violent country.
After all, even in the 90s therewas political violence.
Waco, Oklahoma, Columbine, the first school shooting that even
(10:12):
those friends have told me in recent days, we're really
scared. Not Civil War scared, but a kind
of complete fraying of the texture of the fibre that at the
end of the day binds the countrytogether.
And whenever I felt really depressed about America, which
was quite a lot when I was thereduring the first to 911 years, I
(10:33):
would go to a naturalization ceremony where you have new
immigrants swearing allegiance, not to a president, not to a
country, but to a piece of paper, to the Constitution that
defends their rights to be different, but to be American at
the same time. And I think that that contract
with citizens, with, with America has gone.
(10:53):
When we were trying to look at political violence in recent
years in America, which has certainly been there, it has so
clearly been there in both directions.
I mean, we've seen, you know, Democratic politician and her
husband murdered in Minnesota. We've seen an arson attack at
the home of the Democratic governor of Pennsylvania.
(11:15):
We, of course, saw the terrible attack against Nancy Pelosi's
husband and and before that there were Republicans who were
shot as well. These these attacks have been
happening in both directions. And I think the challenge for a
lot of people right now is, you know, how do we move away from
this to more unity? But Anuska, we've never before
had an administration by decree saying that if you somehow made
(11:37):
light of Charlie Kirk's death, or if you somehow celebrated
Charlie Kirk's death, you know, woe to those who did.
But if you did that and if it can be proven you will lose your
job, we will make sure that you're fired, that your
livelihood is gone. I mean, how does that how does
that jail with their idea of pure free speech?
(11:58):
It doesn't, frankly. And I think again, that's there
is violence on both sides against both sides.
But to have the administration from the get go, the minute that
that poor man was killed, say, Iblame the left, I blame the
Democrats. And for Trump to not put a lid
on that, I think that is where we're in different territory
(12:19):
now. And all of that is obviously
going to hangover this state visit, not just, you know, the
debate that's being happened happening in the US over Charlie
Kirk, but also the debate that'sbeen happening here where we saw
that huge far right March over the weekend.
I think it's going to amplify the political differences
between Keir Starmer and Donald Trump.
(12:40):
You know, and we know, for example, that Keir Starmer and
many of his aides are about to attend a big progressive
conference here in the UK. It'll be interesting to see how
the president responds to that. It will be interesting to see
how the president responds to Keir Starmer's difficult
political moment right now. It may make everything we're
about to talk about whether you should be sycophantic or whether
(13:03):
you should stand up to Donald Trump even harder to negotiate
for the UK. Indeed.
Well, let's introduce our guest.So now to explore the key
question whether to stand up to Trump or to stand by him.
Let's speak to Chuck. Todd, Amanda.
Decades of experience covering US politics.
He was the chief political analyst at NBC and the host of
(13:27):
Meet the Press, and GQ once called him the most powerful
journalist in Washington, DC Welcome to you, Chuck.
It's nice to see you, Matt. So the subject at hand is
whether to stand by or to stand up to Donald Trump.
If you were a world leader, surely you'd be standing by
more. Let's put it this way.
You'd be sucking up to him. You know, it really everything
(13:49):
depends on your own situation, right?
You know, look, I, I look at it this from, there's a, there's a
children's book called If you Give a Mouse a Cookie.
And some people may be familiar with it, some may not, but the
idea is if you give a mouse a cookie, they're going to keep
coming back for more, right? That's essentially the moral of
the story. And it's a children's book and
(14:09):
there is a, there is a lot to beseen, you know, and I think that
that's, that's what you have to weigh, right?
You have to weigh how long do you think you're dealing with
him? And I think world leaders look
at this and, and maybe appeasement or sucking up to him
makes more sense than if you do it domestically, right?
(14:30):
Because domestically what we've seen is every time he has come
for a pound of flesh, he and he's gotten it, he comes back
for more, right? Whether it's with the media
companies, with the tech companies, even in some of these
trade deals. So I, you know, I don't think
you can sit here and say that, that anybody has figured this
(14:50):
out. But it really ultimately, I
think you cannot look at it in terms of your.
I think you have to look at it in terms of your own needs in
the moment. So Lula's running for a re
election, you know it pays for him to stand up to Trump.
It's good politics for him domestically.
And Starmer hasn't got an election for another four years
(15:12):
or so. And it pays for him, arguably,
to be nice to Trump. Oh, I think so.
Especially in the situation he'sin right now, which is he's kind
of politically weak. He's got, you know, we've got
the embarrassment of the ambassador having to be fired
and recalled essentially. So he's in a different
situation. And he's also got his European
(15:32):
allies to worry about. And you've got the US presence
with NATO and you've got, you know, a European conflict,
right? So, you know, it is, it is, to
me, understandable why many of the European allies are doing
what they're doing this time because the end of the day, they
know he could really mess up NATO.
(15:53):
And that's the last thing they want.
Yeah. But on your argument on what
you're saying, to some extent, isn't it quite risky what
they're doing? Because, you know, the mouse
does keep coming back for the cooking.
And there is this kind of idea that Donald Trump loves the idea
of a strong man, and if someone's sucking up to him, he
knows he can kick them around. That's been my experience and my
(16:16):
observation. I mean, I look at, you know, and
that's why what you the perfect way to deal with him is to find
a few places where you do stand up and you find a few places
where you go ahead and give him something where you at least let
him know that, hey, I'm not going to be an easy mark.
I think the world leader that has managed him better than
(16:39):
anybody else so far is Claudia Sheinbaum out of Mexico.
And I, I never would have expected that, to be honest, but
she is. She stands up to him every once
in a while. She drive, you know, but at the
same time, she'll give him a little something for cooperation
with the border. Maybe she'll ramp up tougher and
(17:01):
AMLO did the same thing, her predecessor down there.
So it is he's transactional. So if you come to him with
something you need or you want, or you stand up for him and you
give him something over here youcan create a give and take.
I think the mistake that's made is when it's all appeasement.
And, and arguably, it looks publicly like it's all
(17:23):
appeasement, if that's the word you would use with Keir Starmer.
I mean, some people cringed whenhe handed over that letter from
the king, you know, to Donald Trump.
But arguably, we have had some trade advantages.
I was just talking to someone about the 10s of thousands of
jobs in the car industry here that rely on us having reduced
tariffs in cars. They also, they were talking
(17:46):
about this balance you were talking about.
They insist that behind closed doors, Keir Starmer can be
tough. I mean, it really is all the
pageantry he could hope for. It's the Royals.
It's, you know, gold edged. What is it that makes him love
that kind of scene in particular?
Oh, I think he's just enamored with it.
You know, he's enamored with theidea of being a monarch himself.
(18:07):
You know, I think there are people that think that this is
his drive is for authoritarianism.
But what he really, I mean, if you think about it, he is sort
of the stereotype of what we, what we think of, of this sort
of narcissistic monarch that we many of both of our television
series will mock at different times, right?
Which is you must, you must entertain for the king and you
(18:28):
must make the king feel good. And you know, it's good to be
the king, right? All of those things.
In some ways, that's, that does make him I, I, I just think it
makes him feel better for whatever reason or another.
And that's, that is, you know, his drive for authority is more
for the pageantry than it is from some sort of ideological
(18:49):
movement. It's why I've always said it's
just, it's, it isn't like the 1930s in that respect, because
it's not like he's got some grand idea or grand plan.
He just wants to be liked. And we can all decide whether
what happened to him as a child or a teenager or whatever that
that created this necessity. But, you know, it's a strange
(19:12):
fact. You know, he doesn't have a lot
of personal friends. Like there aren't people that
you can identify. Oh, that's a childhood friend.
Oh, that's somebody he's known for 40 years.
He doesn't have people in his life like that.
There are people he's known for a long time, but there's nobody.
You say, oh, he's the close friend.
In many ways, the friends he hastoday are kind of new.
(19:33):
They're people he wasn't friendswith 10 years ago.
He didn't know them. So he, I think that also tells
you a little something about him.
But look, he's, you know, he's the president.
Let me throw an idea at it, you guys.
And I'm curious the idea of now that there is an opening at the
embassy in the United States, the UK embassy in the United
States. And Starmer has a political foe
(19:56):
And, and, and Nigel Farage, the most Clintonian thing to do
would be you take somebody essentially, you know, who has
good relations with the administration.
How would that play? How would that work?
Fuck, it's a, it's a great idea,except that Nigel Farage has his
eyes on a bigger job. And that's the job of the man
(20:17):
sitting in #10 at the moment. So I think Once Upon a time, you
know, in the first Trump administration, he would have
probably said, yes, thank you very much, and bitten off the
hand that offered that job. I think at the moment he's got
his sights set on #10 he's parked his tanks on Keir
Starmer's lawn. He's rolled all over the Tory
lawns. I mean, you know, he at the
moment at least, yeah, he's the man.
(20:38):
He is the man of that moment. He wouldn't say yes to it right
now, but at the time they were originally considering it, when
Peter Mandelson was put in, Nigel was very, very clear that
he wanted them to offer him thatjob.
And I actually spoke to people inside Downing St. and I said,
isn't there something to that? Like you, you know, you, you
achieve a couple of things. Yes, there's the good
relationship with the administration, but also you
(20:59):
move Nigel Farage slightly away.I mean in some ways I'll tell
you what, Nigel Farage in there in the in the 1st place might
have been better for them than Peter Mandelson.
So I just, I'm just curious about the point you made about
Claudia Shaman, the president ofMexico.
I mean, she clearly has given some, you know, into some of
Trump's demands, especially on the border.
(21:20):
But she's also been very firm inher language.
The other person that we admiredwith firmness of language is
Mark Carney, who kind of pivotedfrom using tough language about
Trump to get elected as the Prime Minister of Canada,
something that no one thought was possible, you know, a few
weeks before he started his campaign.
And then once he was in that joband he went to see Trump in the
(21:40):
Oval Office, he continued with atough language, but it was much
more emollient and more charming.
Did did his pivot work out or isCanada suffering?
Well, Canada is suffering economically still, right from
the tariffs. I mean, everybody is suffering
right now. And I'm, I'm look, I'm, I am
extraordinarily pessimistic about world relations, right?
When, when, when the biggest economy in the world erects
(22:02):
nationalist walls like we've done the art, the most logical
response is everybody else to start to look out for themselves
first, right? So it is, it becomes a contagion
of nationalism. And that is now that said, it
was nationalism that essentiallyCarney tapped into in Canada,
right? And that it goes back to
(22:24):
weirdly, Trump respects that. And if he knows that, look,
you're standing up because this is what you believes in the best
interest of your country. And and then that's how you can
create a give and take. What Trump just does not accept
is the premise of a multipolar world, right?
He doesn't accept the premise ofmultilateralism.
He doesn't. And I don't, you know, and he's
(22:46):
never accepted the idea of multilateralism, right, Which is
why he criticizes NATO in particular.
But he's, but it's a lot of these multilateral organizations
that he's skeptical of. And it goes back to, hey, we're
the United States, we're the biggest power.
Why should we share that, right?And that's because that's his
mindset, right? It's a 0 sum game.
(23:08):
We're, we're the, we're the, which is also why he ends up
appeasing XI, right? He does.
He is not nearly as tough on XI as he is on Venezuela, for
instance, right? But in arguably they're both
adversaries in a way. But he sees she as a as an
equal, he sees Putin as an equal.
(23:29):
He does not see Zelensky as an equal, and he doesn't see
Starmer as an equal. Can I just quickly ask you on
this on, on the particular question of equality, because
the special relationship which we go on about much more than
you guys do. And I think the last time Trump
was here in 2018, you know, he took the Mickey out of of
Theresa May, who was then the Prime Minister when he was a
(23:50):
Chequers. And he said this is the most
special kind of special, specialrelationship ever.
I mean, he was just telling us what we really wanted to hear
because that relationship is thecrack cocaine of British
diplomacy. We need it in order to feel
relevant. And it's been through various
different permutations. Where does America and
especially this administration see Britain now?
(24:11):
Are we your Sancho Panzer that goes along with Don Quixote into
the sunset or are we, you know, the, the last, the, the, the
left tooth of the donkey that hesaid.
So I mean, what's, what do we bring to the relationship for
you? I do believe that we see you as
our real European ally versus everybody else.
(24:31):
Like Europe. You know, it's sort of like the
UK is family and Europe is a friend.
I'm not sure if that's a compliment or, you know, or a
cause. Especially so for the American
right, that relationship. It has been and there's always
think about, think about our twopolitical parties in this
country and how obsessed they are with always helping their
(24:52):
counterparts in the UK, right? It, it is the only other country
that comes close in that kind ofwhere, by the way, where the,
where the country itself needs to hear how much we care is
Israel, right? It's, it's the UK and it's
Israel and they're on and, and, and in some ways it's the same
thing. And and because of that kind of
(25:12):
closeness. So we are special.
We do right. We also want to want to get
involved more in your politics than we do, for instance, any
other countries politics. But on that point, I mean, you
know, in the past, every one of these visits, whether it's to
Washington or to London, would have been, you know, lubricated
by language about common values and, you know, a little nod to
to Winston Churchill and to Ronald Reagan and Margaret
(25:34):
Thatcher riding their horses together.
But, you know, we had Elon Musk,who I know he's fallen out with
Donald Trump, but it's still, you know, politically,
spiritually quite close to him. You know, on a massive screen in
London, the biggest March we've ever seen by the far right in
this city, basically saying violence is coming to you,
Britain, whether you like it or not.
Charlie Kirk, the late Charlie Kirk, you know, the closest
(25:57):
thing that you have to a political St. in American
politics right now, certainly onthe right called Britain a
totalitarian third world hellhole.
You know, this whole debate about free speech or the lack of
it in this country, those sharedvalues certainly between the
party of the of, of, you know, the administration and this
country, they don't exist anymore.
(26:18):
I agree with that in that there is not that same, you know,
every other president. It wouldn't have mattered what
the ideology was of the Prime Minister, right?
There was a tightness. And you know, I'm not going to
sit here and say that that that,you know, look, Clinton and
Blair certainly had a better relationship maybe than than
than the relationship that he was that he inherited with John
(26:40):
Major and things like that. So I, I don't want to but and,
and there and I do think becausethey were ideological soul
mates, Blair and Clinton, that was close.
But look how quickly Bush and Blair became close, right?
And, and now internationally, Bush and Clinton actually share
an ideology. And I think that's the issue,
right, which is ultimately Trump's the first American
(27:00):
president since World War Two who didn't have the same
ideology about the world, right?And on, on, on sort of the
relationship that the United States and Europe are supposed
to have with each other in the UK.
He's the first one that didn't accept the premise, right, of
this relationship. And I think that's, you know,
(27:21):
we're now seeing the fallout from that.
And, and let me just ask you about that, because obviously
Keir Starmer and Donald Trump are ideologically very
different. We actually had quite a lot of
controversy during the election campaign when Labour Party
figures went and, you know, campaigned with the Democrats.
I don't know if that will becomea bit of a thing here because
there's a big progressive conference about to happen in
(27:41):
London, which I'm sure Donald Trump knows about.
But but when people relay to us the first call between Prime
Minister Starmer and then DonaldTrump as a candidate, it was
like a day or two after the assassination attempt.
And somebody who has very familiar with that call said to
me, Kit Starmer was like, you know, I'm so sorry about what
happened to you. I hope you're OK.
(28:03):
And apparently Trump was like, yeah, yeah, forget that.
You're a winner. You're like a massive winner.
Like your election result is completely incredible.
And the person was saying to me,he just loves winners.
And so given that, I'm interested in, you know, if
that's right, if you think that about Donald Trump, But also
Keir Starmer now is in so much political trouble.
I mean, people are talking aboutwhether he can survive till the
(28:24):
next election after Peter Mandelson had to be sacked as
U.S. ambassador. How much will that change how
Donald Trump feels about Keir Starmer?
Well, Trump doesn't in the way that you just described.
He loves being seen with winners.
The minute you have the stench of a loser, whether you're a
political ally or not, he will quickly throw you away.
(28:46):
He will quickly distance. And so this is a very dangerous.
Including in your own house. Including when is when is your
guest. Oh, he would do.
He would, you know, not in the moment, but he'll do it pretty
quickly. You know, he'll he gets a sense
of that and and this is what, but he's done it to his own
political allies in the past domestically where the minute
you know, he'll throw, you know,it is all about in service to
(29:09):
him. And the minute you know, he
doesn't want to be seen as a loser or weak and he he thinks
you're dragging him down in someform or another or he has an
opportunity to strengthen himself.
And I promise you if he thinks he's got an opportunity to get
Farage as Prime Minister, it's he is going to rhetorically and
(29:34):
in the entire mega movement is going to rhetorically make
Starmer's life miserable in the UK.
And and that's what I would be nervous about if I were Starmer.
And, and when he was here in 20/16/2018 with Theresa May, he
did exactly that to her. He undermined her because he
talked up Boris Johnson, who hadjust resigned as foreign
(29:54):
secretary over the Brexit agreement that was too soft for
his liking. And Trump gave an interview, I
think it was to The Times on theeve of the visit, and he
completely undermined it. I remember the time officials at
#10 were tearing their hair out.They were distraught by the fact
that this guy, who was already aliability to invite into your
house, was in beginning to burn the sofa.
It is funny when you talk to officials here who basically try
(30:16):
and like arrange it all so it goes perfectly.
And they were so happy about after that White House visit
because in their eyes it went perfectly.
But they always say, I think right up to Starmer himself, you
just have no clue what is going to happen when Donald Trump's
around. You don't know.
And so they're really nervous. I mean, the one complicating
factor here, and maybe it's not for him, but I think it is, you
(30:36):
know, an issue, which is Peter Mandelson's demise was all
around his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein and in many ways
vindicates that the the birthdaybook is real because Peter
Mandelson isn't denying, but those pages were really from
him. How does Trump handle all of
that? The one thing I've thought about
in the sacking of Mandelson overthe Epstein issue is whether
(30:58):
that Trump will resent that and be angry that start by doing it.
You're acknowledging that it's abad thing and you're
acknowledging the existence of the very thing that Trump is
trying to deny. So I think that's a wild card
and it and it and it, and, you know, it could very well now
that said, because of the current situation that we have
(31:20):
with the with the assassination of Kirk, Trump may be feeling
untouchable politically right now, right?
And he may be feeling he can, you know, and he's not, maybe he
doesn't want to worry him. And he may think, well,
Epstein's gone, you know, nobody's going to be talking
about this anymore. So I don't have to worry about
it. But I have thought that it's
(31:40):
possible the way Starmer's handled this, that it will
irritate Trump. I mean, the other thing that
will come up, especially in a press conference, which they're
due to have a check as the primeminister's country residence on
Thursday, will be Gaza, weren't it?
I mean, just today, the UN Commission of Inquiry report
says that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza, 4 out of the
(32:04):
five categories for defining genocide.
Those boxes are ticked by Israel.
This is in the run up to the UK recognizing an independent
Palestinian state as they said they wouldn't.
I can't imagine them not doing that to the UN next week.
And Trump has already been on the record for saying that is a
really bad idea. And I'm sure he's going to
disagree violently with this UN Commission report and we'll side
(32:26):
with this on that. I mean, that could be a really
abrasive issue, don't you think?It's possible and it's also
possible that Trump uses the moment to send a message to
Netanyahu, who he is upset with at messing up the ceasefire
negotiations, right with Hamas, with the attack on Qatar.
And that has become a huge, you know, look, there's a lot of
(32:46):
financial relationship. You know, it's interesting.
I, I, I was with somebody who's very much in the Israeli
opposition to Netanyahu, who is very skeptical of the Qataris
and, and whether they can be trusted in any form one way or
the other. So it's a, you know, that is a,
that is a very complicating factor in this, in this
(33:07):
relationship. So, you know, yes, it's it's is
the United States going to standby Israel against that UN
report? That is true.
But I I don't think the chances are zero that he doesn't stand
next to Starmer and tell Netanyahu he's got a he's, you
know, he's, you know that he's got to end this war soon.
(33:27):
The Qataris lavished a jumbo jeton Trump.
They spent 60 billion U.S. dollars on on American arms.
I mean, when it comes to suckingup to Trump, they're probably
in, you know, in the in pole position.
They get the gold medal for sucking up to Trump.
And yet, you know, we don't knowhow much he knew about the
airstrike, but he allowed that to go ahead.
And they were furious about it. It shows you the limitations of
(33:51):
flattery, doesn't it? I think it does, and it's a
reminder that you know, he doesn't.
He expects the the tributes, buthe does not believe he owes
anything in return per SE. But I think we're not, you know,
I, I don't think we have the full story on on how quickly he
was informed of this. It's also possible Trump didn't
hear what Netanyahu claims he sold him to, right.
(34:14):
So I, I, you know, this is one of those, it doesn't make a lot
of sense that the United States would look the other way on an
attack on Qatar with so much of our American forces on that in
that country's. It just that, that that's why I,
I don't buy the Israeli push back on this.
(34:36):
And I don't think BB has a lot of credibility.
I think the other thing I didn'tunderstand when the strike
happened was, I mean, it's very clear that the warning was, you
know, not specific at all in terms of who they were going to
strike and where they were goingto strike.
And speaking to people in the military, it is absolutely, you
know, unbelievable almost that Israel wouldn't have given that
(34:59):
sort of details to the US. Why?
Why was he not more openly angryabout that?
Well, I think it goes back to it's that's a question where
he's balancing constituencies. You know, this is one of those
few issues where there's political he you know, he the
one reason he sticks so closely with Bibi right now in this is
(35:21):
that it divides the American left, right.
I mean, it is so it is served him well politically.
But he is starting to see members of his own base not
necessarily in the same place onthis.
And you see more and more high profile members of of the MAGA
movement questioning the conductof this war stand, you know,
(35:43):
what's going on in Gaza, not comfortable with everything
that's happening. So I do think he's a bit torn on
this and he's finding out what every American president has
found out since the mid 90s. Bibi Netanyahu forgets who's who
is, who is the little country inthis relationship and who's the
big country in this relationship.
(36:04):
And he continues to do that. And he I think he believes he's
politically immune from Trump. And there's going to be a moment
where Trump, you know, decides to remind Bibi who's the
secondary member of this relationship.
Yeah, although interesting he didn't at that moment because it
felt like the moment. I hear you.
But I think it could be coming is what I would say is that
(36:25):
look, he's not going to I I justthink it this is and look what
he what he's doing now during a ground war in Gaza.
I mean, this is only prolonging the war.
And just on, on, because there'sNetanyahu and there's Putin, who
were both seen as the strongman who Trump gets on with.
Well, and then we have the sort of spectacle, I would say, of
all the European leaders coming with Zelensky to the White
(36:47):
House. And I mean, sycophancy central
in terms of going around the table telling Trump how
wonderful he was. And just bringing it back to our
first question, it kind of, you know, it might be in Keir
Starmer's interest to, you know,hand out an invitation from the
king in order to try and protectour economy.
Because if our economy gets in aworse situation, Starmer's
(37:08):
really political, his political fortunes are really through the
floor. He needs to turn that around.
But that sycophancy, yes, the relationship with Zelensky is
much better than it was saying in February.
But I mean, we might notice thatthere isn't peace between Russia
and Ukraine. If anything, we've moved further
away from peace between Russia and Ukraine since that.
(37:28):
I mean, aren't these kind of strong men leaders taking him
for a ride to some extent? And in this situation, the
sycophancy didn't work. I look, I agree, and I look at
the first term, right? You know, in Trump 1.0, most
people's instincts was to stand up to Trump, right?
Internationally and domestically, even in his own
(37:50):
party. All right.
And Trump 2 point O everybody's decided they're exhausted from
that fight and they've concludedthat what they did in the first
term didn't work. Let me try this.
And I, you know what, what my analysis would be is no, that it
did work in the first term. What didn't work is that Biden
(38:11):
had a failed presidency, right? Biden, you know, didn't
understand why he won in 2020 and he didn't lead the country
to a point where they were readyto turn the page on Trump.
So, you know, we're we're here and in some ways not standing up
to him only I think ends up encouraging him.
(38:31):
And to I mean, again, I go back to if you if you give a mouse a
cookie and and that's where where we're situated.
But look, you know, how long is Starmer going to be there,
right? The, the, the problem with
Democratic elected leaders is that they're, they're only there
until their next election. And if, you know, you got to
deal with the American presidentthat you have not necessarily
(38:52):
the one that you want, right? I remember, I remember Obama's
folks complaining to me back in the early teens that they
thought the collection of European leaders was just weak
and that it was too bad he didn't have better counterparts
to deal with. And it's just like, OK.
And he didn't have to, you know,that Merkel was really the only
(39:12):
world leader. He he, he truly thought was, was
up to the to the, to the task. So, you know, I think, I think
there's always a little bit of that.
But you've, this is a realpolitik, right?
I think isn't that what Kissinger called it?
Also remember that Starmer. Starmer will go have his
election after Trump leaves office.
(39:33):
Unless, of course, he can somehow concoct a third term.
Unless unless he doesn't survive.
I was just going to say that's the problem with Starmer.
There's with your system. There's always a piano hanging
over the head of the PM right atany moment in time the rope can
get cut. Yeah, right.
And if you if you give too much to Trump, that becomes your
election campaign right there, which you might lose to a guy
(39:54):
called Nigel Farage, who'll say,well, I'm, you know, we all want
to be nice to Trump, but I'm theonly one he actually listens to.
Just I just want to ask you a question, Chuck.
When it comes to what we have tooffer as a country, we in
Britain is our the best card that we can really play
sleepovers at Buckingham Palace or Windsor Castle.
(40:14):
Is that as good as it gets? Let's be honest, we can take the
brutal. Truth.
I think for Trump, that's all hecares about.
So we shouldn't confuse that with a with AI.
Don't think our system for our democracy.
I don't, I'd like to, I'd like to think not.
I mean, I think the, you know, we still count on the UK as sort
of being, I think our most important proxy in the European
(40:36):
relationship, right. And, and if the, you know, and
again, I do think we all see it as, you know, the UK is a
sibling, the rest of Europe are friends and in some ways the UK
is our and vice versa, right? When the rest of the Europe gets
frustrated, who do they turn to to get the Americans attention?
You go to the UK. Can I ask you just one other
(40:57):
thing, and this is unrelated butsort of not the first thing that
Trump will do after the state visit is go to Charlie Kirk's
memorial. I think that's his big event of
the weekend. There's the death of Charlie
Kirk and the language that it has unleashed.
Is that a turning point for you in American politics?
Well, I will tell you this that I've been, I've been, you know,
(41:20):
as somebody who's supposed to also write for a living, trying
to. I'm always looking for hope in
our current political situation.And it looks like Trump and his
allies see a political opportunity to exploit rather
than, you know, as I as I've he wants to bring everybody to
(41:42):
heal. He is not interested in helping
the country heal, if that makes sense.
And I think he sees a political opportunity.
And, and so it is going to get worse because we have seen when
you radicalize, you radicalize your opponents.
And right now, you know, 1 extremist movement is only
successful if they have another one out there as their
(42:04):
counterpoint. And we and, and I, I really fear
that the, what they're threatening right now, which is
essentially to, they're threatening to the left what
they claimed the left was doing to the right, which is
criminalizing speech right and cancel culture.
And you know, this will, I don'tknow if the, I don't know if the
(42:28):
Democratic Party can speak with one voice to push back on this.
I think the Republican critics of Trump all feel like they
can't speak up. They've been silenced.
So no, I think this could be a very dark turning point for a
short term. I still have long term optimism.
For a short term. But I do think that this could I
think the voters aren't going totolerate this.
(42:50):
But if he but but him going thisdirection of essentially going
after folks and you know, basically ignoring the
extremists on his side and saying it's only a problem on
the left. I do think event that will wear
thin with voters but but it may be ugly for the next year or
two. I was in Utah at Utah Valley
(43:12):
University after the killing of Charlie Kirk, and there was a
person standing there with a kind of Democrats killed Charlie
Kirk sign. And we were listening to what
Donald Trump said. Actually, Spencer Cox, the
Republican governor, was saying stuff that I found really quite
inspiring on how we try and bridge the divide right now.
But there was a certain irony and it's quite scary to
(43:35):
everything Donald Trump was saying, which was he was
basically he he he was, he was basically doing exactly what he
was accusing others of which was, you know, saying that the
left was responsible for this death.
And we have a free speech issue that they are going to really
try and exploit in the UK as well.
Despite the fact that you had, you know, so many people
(43:58):
marching in that far right Marchthat Matt mentioned.
I see what you're saying about it getting ugly over the next
year. Where does your hope come from?
What brings it back? Look, I think we've got 2 huge
problems, 1 is the tech companies, right?
And and the fact that we are notturning our attention to them,
right? They have exploited this, they
(44:19):
have created this information ecosystem that is designed to
agitate, that is designed to create instability.
I mean, it's not lot shouldn't be lost on any of us that before
social media, the world was, youknow, it's not like we didn't
have our share of mentally of mentally fragile people.
(44:40):
But now we we've we've got this social media ecosystem that we
can prey upon them. That's one.
But you know, it is I don't knowif the Democratic Party is the
ability to sort of, hey, we've got to we've got to take a step
back here. Spencer Cox gives me a little
bit of hope, but I don't know ifeither party has the credibility
(45:01):
to heal. And so, you know, if we don't
have, if the, if the president won't do it, there's nobody else
that has the credibility to do it.
It may take an outsider, it may take an independent candidacy,
it may take a third party. But I think right now our two
parties are broken. Our leadership structure is
broken, our incentive structuresare broken.
(45:23):
And This is why we're in the situation we're in.
I've got to say it, Chuck. I mean, you were optimistic
about four minutes ago. I know.
I. Know it's hard.
You've killed. You've killed your own optimism.
It is, you know, all I can say is eventually the voters get it
right. And we've gone through bouts of
of violence in this country in the past.
You guys have had your share of violence.
(45:43):
You know, it. It is, it is.
Democracy can be messy. Chuck, it's been great talking
to you. I promise you that when you come
over to this side of the ocean, you won't get a royal visit.
I don't have a royal carriage. I'm not going to put you up in
winds you. Know how exciting this is?
Really good. I've waited my whole life.
Up in Windsor and I can give youa Scotch egg and a warm.
(46:03):
Beer. Well, I would like that, but
I've waited my whole life, you know, being a Charles, you know,
I always, you know, I had this. I was always sort of like, I
hope he gets there. And I was for a long time
thought, oh, there's never goingto be a King Charles.
I'm never going to be able to asa Charles.
King Chuck, You know, I wish he went by Chuck.
Does he have a nickname? Does he go by King Chuck
(46:26):
privately? I really hope it is.
I hope it's not King Charles or King Charlie.
I really hope it's. King.
I'm sure he's got lots of nicknames, but I don't think
Chuck is one of them. I hate to say it.
Next week, the Trump World Caravan moves across the ocean
again to New York for the UnitedNations General Assembly.
It's the 80th session of that organization at a time when
(46:47):
certainly the administration in Washington doesn't believe
perhaps that it should even exist.
Huge challenges, the recognitionPalestine by the UK, by France
and the general discussion aboutthe state of the world disorder.
Anushka will be there, and so will I, and hopefully so will
you. And we do want to hear from you.
(47:08):
So if you've got any burning questions, wherever you are,
across the Atlantic Ocean or anywhere in the world, do get in
touch with us. You can e-mail us at
trumpworld@channel4.com or you can leave messages on YouTube or
Spotify and we will try to get back to you.
Thanks for joining.
Popular Podcasts
My Favorite Murder with Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark
My Favorite Murder is a true crime comedy podcast hosted by Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark. Each week, Karen and Georgia share compelling true crimes and hometown stories from friends and listeners. Since MFM launched in January of 2016, Karen and Georgia have shared their lifelong interest in true crime and have covered stories of infamous serial killers like the Night Stalker, mysterious cold cases, captivating cults, incredible survivor stories and important events from history like the Tulsa race massacre of 1921. My Favorite Murder is part of the Exactly Right podcast network that provides a platform for bold, creative voices to bring to life provocative, entertaining and relatable stories for audiences everywhere. The Exactly Right roster of podcasts covers a variety of topics including historic true crime, comedic interviews and news, science, pop culture and more. Podcasts on the network include Buried Bones with Kate Winkler Dawson and Paul Holes, That's Messed Up: An SVU Podcast, This Podcast Will Kill You, Bananas and more.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com