An intervention.

I'm reading, in the London Times, "Why JD Vance is so critical of Keir Starmer’s Britain/Having intervened on the murder of Henry Nowak, the US vice-president was accused of trying to ‘stir up division’ by the put-out prime minister."

Vance "intervened"? Vance published a statement. He said something. (We talked about it here, yesterday.)

The London Times piece is by David Charter. Excerpt:

"The British government has blocked Ye from entry on the grounds that his presence would not be conducive to the public good...."

"Prime Minister Keir Starmer called it 'deeply concerning' that Ye was scheduled to perform 'despite his previous antisemitic remarks and celebration of Nazism.' 'Antisemitism in any form is abhorrent and must be confronted clearly and firmly wherever it appears... Everyone has a responsibility to ensure Britain is a place where Jewish people feel safe and secure.'"

I'm reading "London music festival canceled after Britain bans headliner Kanye West/The move comes after days of mounting controversy over past antisemitic statements made by the rapper, now known as Ye" (WaPo).

West has apologized and stated "I love Jewish people," but he did sell swastika T-shirts and release a song called "Heil Hitler." 

Trump starts tearing into Talarico, pivots to "Newscum," and ends with "Kamala is back!"

A new Truth Social post from Trump (boldface mine):

The Democrat running in Texas, James Talarico, turns out to be a FRAUD! It showed after the Election when he beat Low IQ Candidate Jasmine Crockett (No relation to Davy Crockett!). He’s got six Genders, insults to Jesus, only vegan food, was wearing a mask in 2023 and 2024, and is a weak, ineffective guy who we “allowed” to win prior to releasing the avalanche of information we had on him because, as bad as Crockett was as a Candidate, this guy is worse! I believe that any human being running against him, sick, incompetent, close to death or, even a child, would win. He may be the Worst Candidate I have ever seen, other than, of course, Gavin Newscum who admitted that he suffers from mental incapacity, is unable to read a speech, and is dumb but, in saying “the dumb comment,” referred to his audience, and therefore became, in the eyes of African Americans, A TOTAL RACIST — which is probably true! Gavin admits that he’s a Low IQ individual, which typically is not good for winning the Presidency. His interview may have been the worst ever given by a “professional” politician. I believe, it takes him OUT OF THE RACE. Kamala is back! President DONALD J. TRUMP

Also, Trump has a Truth post with a video from the new "Saturday Night Live UK," the same clip I discussed and passed along in my first post of the morning, here. So we're already discussing that clip in the comments over there, where Rabel wrote: "Unflattering representation of Starmer. Shows him living up to the 'coward' claim. Minimal bashing of Trump. It wasn't especially funny but I agree with the message in the attempted humour."

"We are ready to put UK boots on the ground in part to reassure Ukrainians but in part to secure safe skies, safe seas and regenerate Ukraine’s armed forces."

"It is obviously welcome that President Trump has paved the way for vital US security guarantees.... The quicker you can bring about an end to the conflict and translate that into a lasting peace the better. We applaud President Trump’s efforts to bring about an end to the killing. We want to see an end to the killing if you can bring about an end to the killing and a sustained peace in one go all the better."

Said UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer, quoted in "Ukraine-Russia latest: Putin ‘should not be rewarded’, Zelensky says/Ukrainian leader has denounced ‘cynical’ Russian attacks before his meeting with Trump in Washington, which have killed at least nine" (London Times).

Let that stand in for all the many headlines I'm seeing this morning about the White House meeting today. It's more optimistic than most. There are reasons to go negative before the meeting, but I think it's bad form. 

Did Trump drop those papers out on purpose to make Starmer bend over?

Headline at The Guardian: "Starmer says he picked up Trump’s dropped papers to avoid security scare/UK prime minister says it ‘would not have been good’ for anyone else such as member of media to try to help" ("I mean, look, there weren’t many choices with the documents and picking it up, because... as you probably know there were quite strict rules about who can get close to the president.I mean, seriously, I think if any of you [the media] had stepped forward other than me – I was just deeply conscious that in a situation like it would not have been good for anybody else to have stepped forward, not that any of you rushed to. There’s a very tightly guarded security zone around the president, as you would expect").

Trump is such a master of showmanship... no? Or do you think the paper-dropping was mere happenstance and Starmer was the only one in the Very Tightly Guarded Security Zone who could pick up the papers? The press could have photographed those papers. And no one could expect the President of the United States to pick up what he dropped. He was holding the Very Firmly Bound Leather Folder, and Starmer was the one with his hands free and ready to serve.

"Publicity seeking President Emmanuel Macron, of France, mistakenly said that I left the G7 Summit, in Canada, to go back to D.C. to work on a 'ease fire' between Israel and Iran. Wrong!"

"He has no idea why I am now on my way to Washington, but it certainly has nothing to do with a Cease Fire. Much bigger than that. Whether purposely or not, Emmanuel always gets it wrong. Stay Tuned!"

Wrote Trump on Truth Social.

AND: The London Times reports this from the U.K Prime Minister, Keir Starmer:

“There’s nothing the president said that suggests that he’s about to get involved in this conflict — on the contrary.... There’s nothing the president said that suggests that he’s about to get involved in this conflict — on the contrary.... Throughout the dinner yesterday I was sitting right next to President Trump, so I’ve no doubt in my mind, the level of agreement there was in relation to the words that were then issued immediately after."

"Prime Minister Keir Starmer of Britain said Sunday that he would work with the leaders of Ukraine and France on a cease-fire plan to end Russia’s war in Ukraine...."

"Mr. Starmer told the BBC on Sunday that he had spoken to President Trump by phone a day earlier. 'I’m clear in my mind he does want lasting peace, he does want an end to the fighting in Ukraine'.... The prime minister said that he, Mr. Zelensky and President Emmanuel Macron of France had agreed they 'would work on a plan for stopping the fighting and then discuss that plan with the U.S.' Any peace agreement 'is going to need a U.S. backstop,' Mr. Starmer added, saying that British and U.S. teams were discussing the idea.... Since Friday, European leaders have lined up behind Ukraine and lauded its embattled president. Mr. Zelensky is also set to meet King Charles III later on Sunday."

The NYT reports.

What will Zelensky wear for his audience with the King? He's met with the King twice before — February 8, 2023 and July 18, 2024 — and both times he wore those dark green "wartime" clothes and not a suit.  Zelensky has met with other European royalty —Carl XVI Gustaf and Queen Silvia (Sweden), King Harald V, Queen Sonja, Crown Prince Haakon, and Crown Princess Mette-Marit (Norway), King Philippe (Belgium) — and each time, he wore the "wartime" outfit that he was called out for wearing in the Oval Office.

Of course, royalty is a game played through outfits. But Trump has his outfits too. Indeed, questioned about his military getup, Zelensky said that after the war, he could wear a "costume," and by "costume," he meant a suit: "I will wear a costume after this war will finish. Maybe something like yours, maybe something better."

But enough about clothing, what do we think about Europe stepping up to make the peace deal? Who will give Trump credit for making that happen and for, more generally, requiring Europe to take charge of the defense of Europe? Whether the Europeans can close a peace deal is another matter, but they concede in advance that any peace agreement "is going to need a U.S. backstop." Could they, instead, just flow endless money into Ukraine? They've counted on our money for so long.