🚨KEIR STARMER CAUGHT LYING ABOUT MARRIAGE ON LIVE TV AS MORGAN MCSWEENEY FINISHES PM'S CAREER 🚨

No spin, no bias, no censorship.I'm Dan Wooten.This is Outspoken episode number 477 and breaking right now.Slippery Starmer caught out in a double lie as desperate Labour MPs plot to force the least popular Prime Minister in history into a departure after a disastrous day in Parliament for our corrupted leader as his own allies publicly turn.

But let me be clear what they are saying if they vote against this motion.Would they rather be on the side of Peter Mandelson, of convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein, of Morgan McSweeney?and Matthew Doyle.

The fact that MPs like me are being whipped into voting against this motion is, in my view, wrong, Mr Speaker.It has cleared into the terrible narrative that there is something to hide, and good, decent colleagues will be accused of being complicit in a cover -up.

But even that authoritarian three -line whip won't save Tootie Keir for more than a matter of weeks, as his so -called human shield, Morgan McSweeney, lied.changed his mind and threw his ex -boss under the bus.

Again, I don't think I can share the contents of the emails.

And the operator said, Stepney Green Park, OK?And you said, yeah, he turned left there.That wasn't anywhere near Stepney.

Unbelievably, the only allies for Slippery Starmer left are in the MSM, with the dire Cathy Newman launching her new career at Sly News by with a stroke.face, comparing a finished Starmer to Hugh Grant in Love Actually.

I took a very clear decision at the outbreak of the conflict in Iran that the UK would not be dragged into the conflict.

It was your Love Actually moment, wasn't it?

Well, I'm the British Prime Minister.I act in the British national interest.

And then she allowed Starmer to lie about his troubled marriage without even asking him once about the Ukrainian firebomber court case.

I always listen to Vic.And I think she was the one in the first place that basically said, why on earth would you want to go into politics?

Hopefully, we'll find out what is actually going on in this very peculiar case with Keir Starmer and three Ukrainian lads.

where three Ukrainian bum boys, red boys, are on trial for arson alleged against Keir Starmer's car, his previous home and his other properties.But no one's allowed to talk about it because there's a media ban.

The analysis you will not get from the MSM today with our husband and wife, superstar panel, former Tory minister and UKIP leader, Neil Hamilton, and author and media personality, Christine Hamilton.Also coming up on the show today, tit -whisperer Zak Polanski exposed for stitching up a dirty deal between the Green Party and a new Labour regime led by red Angela Rayner, the tax evader, and Donald Trump.reveals he wants to move to Buckingham Palace after it emerges.You're not going to believe this.He's actually a distant cousin of King Charles.So we're going to have all the latest from the royal state visit.

We will take you live to the White House if anything goes down.Right now I can tell you that King Charles and Donald Trumpare meeting privately.We'll also show you what Donald Trump had to say.at the White House.He made some gags.

It was brilliant.Then in the Royal Uncancelled After Show on Substack, Meghan Markle and Prince Harry managed to overshadow the King's first engagement in Washington, D .C.As a garden party, American Guest goes viral with a new photo of the couple's daughter.So what we're going to do is cross to the U .S.

for all the latest from Tom Sykes of the Royalist Substack.You can watch that at www .outspoken .live.Then we are back live with for a second special live episode of Outspoken today at 7 .30pm UK time.That is 2 .30pm Eastern time, 11 .30am Pacific time for the King's speech to Congress.

It's going to be blockbuster.But before today's show is out, we'll also reveal a brand new Greatest Britain and Union Jackass the Hamiltons and myself have nominated.Christine has gone for Ed Miliband for having no solar panels on his house.She describes him as a hypocrite.Lord Herma has been nominated by Neil Hamilton for insulting British war heroes.And I've gone for Morgan McSweeney for his very own unconvincing evidence today.

So get voting, keep your superchats coming in, keep your comments coming in, huge news day, let's go!Slippery Stammer has now been utterly destroyed by his closest ally, by the blob who once worked so hard to protect him, and by his own party who know the game is up.In less than two weeks, this corrupt Prime Minister will be left with a choice he never thought he would have to make.Announce he's going, or be forced out in total humiliation.And to be honest, that's already going to happen.And it is the least that we, the British public, deserve.

Before I get into today's shocking developments, let's play a quick game of how it started versus how it's going.Do you remember this holier -than -thou day one address from the Prime Minister who believes that he was so protected that he could ignore all the rules of morality that he demanded hard of others?

until you believe again.From now on, you have a government unburdened by doctrine, guided only by the determination to serve your interest, to defy, quietly, those who have written our country off.You have given us a clear mandate, and we will use it to deliver change, to restore service and respect to politics, end the era of noisy performance, tread more lightly on your lives, and unite our country.

Fast forward to today, when even liberal U .S.news network CNN is fully prepared to burst the bubble.Two -tier care is actually more unpopular than any U .S.serving president has ever been.

for Keir Starmer right now.Eighteen percent.You can't even drink or smoke anymore when you're 18 percent.You're below that line.That's not good.How about his own party, the voters who voted him in back in 2024?

Less than 50 percent of Labour Party voters back in 2024.actually are satisfied with the job that Keir Starmer is doing.When less than 50 % of your own party voters are satisfied with what is shaken, you know you're in bad, bad shape.Wildly unpopular right now.How does it compare to something in American history?Okay, so you see this 18 % right here, and I just went to myself, hmm, I'm not sure I've ever seen a U .

S.leader so unpopular.So I went back through the record books and I said, okay, popularity ratings, and I was like, who was the worst ever, the lowest ever?And that was George W. Bush back in 2008.He came in in one poll with a 20 % approval rating.Well, I got news for you, 20 % slow, But it's higher than 18%.

Keir Starmer is less popular right now than the least popular American president ever.He is somehow less popular.And Richard Nixon, of course, was coming in at about 24 % just before he resigned office.So Keir Starmer is less popular than Richard Nixon was when he was forced out by Watergate.Keir Starmer, a very unpopular man.A lot of people want to put a lot of things in their tea when they look at Keir Starmer.

This is unsurvivable.Everyone knows it.apart from Starmer, who today continued his authoritarian approach by forcing his deflated and revolting MPs into a three -line whip to vote against referring him to the Privileges Committee, even though he so obviously misled the House.Now, the vote is going to happen at some point this evening, and Kemi Badenoch made it clear just how morally reprehensible Starmer's decision is. I know it is very difficult for Labour MPs to walk through the lobby with other parties, but let me be clear what they are saying if they vote against this motion.

Would they rather be on the side of Peter Mandelson?of convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein, of Morgan McSweeney and Matthew Doyle, on the side of the man who sacked Sir Chris Wormald, sacked Sir Ollie Robbins, Sue Gray, is that what they came to Parliament for?

There was even rare agreement between the Leader of the Opposition and Liberal Democrat clown Ed Davey.

I'm grateful for the Right Honourable Lady giving way.She will know that I was never a fan of Boris Johnson.But when there was a similar motion before the House to refer Mr Johnson to the Privileged Committee, his side was not whipped.Can she confirm that?And can she question why the government is whipping its side on this matter?

That is an excellent question from the right honourable gentleman.I can confirm that this side was not whipped.I can also confirm that the head of the Privileges Committee was a former acting leader of the Labour Party.We trusted this House to do the right thing.Why can they not do the same?

Why?

Mr Speaker, the Privileges Committee is made up mostly of Labour MPs.Are they saying that they do not believe that their own colleagues would give the Prime Minister a fair hearing?Are they saying that?If this was just a bad decision that he's apologised for, then surely the Privileges Committee will find him not guilty.

So any Labour MP who does not vote to refer Starmer to the Privileges Committee this evening is finished.finished morally, there's no coming back from it.And in fairness, not all Labour MPs could defend the indefensible.MLOL, the Labour MP for South Shields, since 2013.was utterly damning.

I feel the way that today's vote has been handled by the government smacks once again of being out of touch and disconnected from the public mood.The fact that MPs like me are being whipped into voting against this motion is in my view wrong, Mr Speaker.It has played into the terrible narrative that there is something to hide and good, decent colleagues will be accused of being complicit in a cover -up.

Complicit in a cover -up?That's from your own side!And there is a cover -up going on, we know it.Because at the same time, at a select committee, Starmer's so -called human shield, although he didn't do a good job of that today, Morgan McSweeney, was failing to protect his old boss in a performance that I believe was as convincing as his claim that his phone containing crucial Mandelson text messages was stolen by a thief.He revealed that he had made it clear to Starmer that there were cons and there were risks of appointing Mandelson.

You really wanted Peter Mandelson to be the ambassador, didn't you?

Britain was exposed, the UK was exposed after Brexit.We left the European Union without any U .S.trade deal.And for me, honestly, this was the top priority of the Prime Minister, was to get a U .S.

trade deal with the Americans.And I thought that based on Mandelson's experience as an EU trade commissioner, that made him the strongest candidate.But like everybody else, I made clear to the Prime Minister there was pros and cons and there was risks.I don't think the Prime Minister would have chosen Mandelson if Kamala Harris had been elected president.I think he considered about who would be the right fit for the White House.

It's actually hilarious that Starmer was relying on that little dweeb to save the country, and that little dweeb then lied about how much he knew.about his close buddy Mandelson's relationship with Jeffrey Epstein.As Nicholas Giewatt put it, preposterous for McSweeney to claim that in December 2024 he believed Mandelson had only a passing acquaintance with Epstein, when the Financial Times had done its damning reporting on their close friendship in June 2023.He's either lying or he's spectacularly bad at his job.Well, I'd argue both.Watch.

was way, way, way worse than I had expected at the time.And it was when I saw the pictures, when I saw the Bloomberg questions in September 2025, I have to say it was like a knife through my soul.I did not expect that level of connection that he was talking about there.

Well, you hadn't read the newspapers then, you stupid dweeb.Then we come to the end game for Stammer himself.As Dan Bloom reported, Morgan McSweeney says he didn't feel he got the full truth back from Mandelson on his Epstein links, but Keir Starmer appointed him anyway, conditional on developed vetting.Dan Hodges added, this is the bombshell exchange.McSweeney explicitly said he had doubts about Mandelson's responses.He implies he reported that to Starmer, but Starmer appointed Mandelson anyway.

Watch.

I think it's appropriate when doing due diligence for you as a friend of Peter Mandelson to speak to the Prime Minister and for that and for his responsibility.be measured by another friend of Peter Mandelson, Matthew Doyle, and for that information to be put before the Prime Minister as a basis upon which they can make a decision?

I agree and I think that when I look back on it, I certainly think it would have been much, much better if I'd asked Pet to ask those follow -up questions.I guess my thinking at the time was I'd put follow -up questions to him in writing and that if a senior member of staff did that, that he would feel more obligated to give the truth and the full truth.I didn't feel that I got that back from him.But it wasn't my decision.It was the prime minister's decision.And he saw the DV as part of that decision.

But he then realised that he had thrown Stammer under the bus, so contradicted what he said.As Labour columnist for the Daily Mail Hodges explained, McSweeney has just completely changed his story.He's now saying, when Mandelson replied to him, he thought he was telling the truth.It's staggering.Given the importance of the session and the time he's had to get his lines straight, that Morgan McSweeney seems so unprepared for this session.Watch.

So does that mean that you advised the Prime Minister that you didn't think that Mandelson had told you the full truth about Epstein?

No, I didn't say that.

What did you say?Well, you say that the Prime Minister thought, well, if it's a serious problem, the DV will pick it up.

No, I didn't say it was a serious problem, the DV will pick it up.

No, but I mean, either, sorry, either you thought that Bannilson was lying to you about Epstein, and presumably you told the Prime Minister that, or you thought, well, you know, or the Prime Minister thought, well, OK,he's lied, but let's make sure, but the DB will pick it up, so that'll cover us at that point.

No, I thought he had told the truth.I thought if he'd written to me and set it up the way he did, that he'd have told the truth.That was a mistake.

Right, so he'd lied before and then he told the truth when he wrote it.

I thought he, no, no, no, I didn't, I didn't think he had lied.I thought he told the truth and I thought, And that was the basis of which I thought we were going ahead.But I also thought if I was wrong, if he had been lying, I thought he told the truth, and that's why I thought we should proceed.But I thought if he was wrong, if I was wrong, and he had been lying, that might be picked up at DV.

And whatever he wrote, he essentially assured you that it was, that any allegations about him staying at Epstein's house once Epstein was in jail was all fine?

Again, I don't think I can share the contents of the emails and the questions and his answers.But when he wrote back to me, I assumed wrongly that he was telling me the truth.

In a damning summing up, Dan Hodges added Morgan McSweeney, former Chief of Staff to the Prime Minister, has just testified to the Foreign Affairs Select Committee he believed the man on the left when he told him he was not friends with the man on the right.The passing of the word pressure is getting ridiculous now.It doesn't matter what sort of pressure was applied.Keir Starmer told the House of Commons no pressure was brought to bear whatsoever.So Starmer lied and McSweeney lied.And to show just how unconvincing McSweeney was today, I've got to show you his cock and ball story about his fake phone theft.

You know, I've been calling out the fake phone theft since it first emerged, given that this device, let's never forget, includeddamning messages about Mandelson, between Mandelson and Starmer, that are now lost forever.

Now, the Metropolitan Police have released the transcript of the call you made relating to the theft of your mobile phone.You didn't say, this is the Chief of Staff to the Prime Minister, my government issue phone has been stolen.which one would imagine would have been taken pretty seriously.You just said, oh hello, someone just robbed my phone.Why did you not make it clear that this wasn't just an ordinary theft, this was a phone which was likely to contain highly sensitive information?

Pretty much as soon as I left, within a couple of days, I handed all my kits back to Number 10.My phone was stolen on the 20th of October.I was a victim of crime.Somebody hopped onto the pavement and took my phone from me.The first thing I did was to try and retrieve it.I tried to chase, which was probably a mistake.

The next thing I did was I phoned Number 10 and I would have gone whatever they told me to do.Now, I thought at the time that they would be able to track the phone, and that's what would happen, given, as you say, what's potentially on that phone, and that was my assumption.I then called 999.If number 10 had told me, you need to tell the police, or you need to tell the call handler, what's going on.I would have done so.But otherwise, I didn't do that as a matter of course.

I didn't, in any part of my job, go around saying I'm a very serious and senior person.If number 10 had asked me to do that, I would have done that.I also thought, wrongly again at the time, I thought a squad car might come by and I could explain a bit more.If the squad car had come by, Okay, none of the MPs did.

I'm just gonna do it.Bullshit!Absolute bullshit!I do not believe a word you are saying.I do not believe your phone was stolen.and it got worse.

That wasn't anywhere near Stepney.It was in Plymouth, I understand.

I also said I was in Westminster.So I said I was in Belgrave Street, Westminster, where I think I was on Lower Belgrave Road.No, I think I might have been on Lower Belgrave Street.OK.So it was some months ago.And I missed the lore.

I didn't see it.

I missed the operator saying Stepney Park.

I was also quite adrenalised.So what happened was,

Morgan McSweeney was the most powerful man in the country.And he can't even properly fake a phone theft.No wonder we are screwed.Now, earlier in the day, Former Blob leader Sir Philip Barton was equally damning to Slippery Starmer regarding his claims that due process was followed regarding Mandelson.Instead, he was simply told to get on with it.As Lee Harris reported, Philip Barton couldn't be more clear.

This directly contradicts Keir Starmer.He lied.Watch.

Had you been, would you have wanted to raise, or would you have said you had concerns about the reputational risks that he carried?

I think that is genuinely a really hard question to answer, because hindsight is a fantastically wonderful thing, and it is hypothetical.But let me have a go at what I was thinking at the time.Firstly, it's just worth repeating, at no point did anyone consult me, ask me. I was presented with a decision.There was no space and told to get on with it.There was no space for that.You know, you know that.

Now I want to show you when he was asked if Starmer was right in saying that full due process had been followed.The silence here is damning.

Do you think the Prime Minister's statement that full due process was followed is a fair description of what happened in Madison's case?

I, you know, I, I'm, I'm not sure.I'm really sorry, but I just actually don't think it's for me to sit here.It's not for me, it's for others, including all of you as Members of Parliament, to come to a view on that.

As Kemi Badenoch, who in fairness to her has been on fire today, put it, this is no longer just about Peter Mandelson.It's about whether the prime minister tells the truth when Parliament asks, whether he takes responsibilities for his own decisions and whether standards in public life still mean anything at all.The country is watching.And Hodges added starmeline to the House.There is now no doubt.Barton has confirmed the pressure that was placed on civil servants to appoint Mandelson at pace also extended to the DVB.

process.So it's done.It's done.Even Starmer stenographer Patrick Maguire of The Times now concedes Cabinet knows that Keir Starmer is done for.He says there's little loyalty owed to a PM who showed so little interest in MPs, which is why a planned exit looks likely.And even The Guardian Even the Guardian agreeing, now reporting on plans for how to get rid of the most hated PM ever.

They write that Labour figures from across rival factions have begun circulating informal proposals for an orderly transition of power away from Keir Starmer, MPs have shifted discussions from speculating about whether the Prime Minister could be removed to how, including timelines, potential triggers and the mechanics of forcing a leadership contest.One Labour MP said, there have been conversations about process, when the time comes, and if the numbers are there, a process will be found.And that's why it's even more disgusting that Cathy Newman, the new Wicked Witch of Sly News launched her new MSM show, after a dire career at Channel 4 News and Times Radio with a softball interview with Starmer.that Goebbels would have been proud of.She actually asked the PM about Donald Trump's digs and advocated to stop treating him as an ally.Then she ludicrously compared two -tier care to, wait for it, Hugh Grant in Love Actually.

UK relations and Iran as you've rightly brought up.I mean you appointed Lord Mandelson to charm Donald Trump and now obviously the King this week has got to play nice with him.Let's just look at some of the things that Trump has said just in the last six weeks alone.He's repeatedly slagged you off, he's dismissed UK aircraft carriers as toys, he's threatened new tariffs, he's questioned Britain's sovereignty over the Falklands Islands.Is it time to stop pretending this man is an ally?

I think it's important, just as you went through that list, to remind ourselves what that's all about.I took a very clear decision at the outbreak of the conflict in Iran that the UK would not be dragged into the conflict.

It was your love -actually moment, wasn't it?

Well, I'm the British Prime Minister, I act in the British national interest, and it's not in our national interest to get dragged into that war.What has happened since there is a huge amount of pressure has been applied to me to change my mind.I'm not going to do so.

Just looking at the live check.Commie Cathy, as Mark Stevens8899 puts it.That's a good description because Commie Cathy, let me tell you, he is about as far from a Love Actually moment as any politician possibly could be.As Mike Graham raised it, it's also bloody cosy, pathetic.And can we just remember for one moment who Cathy Newman is?She is the woman dismantled by Jordan Peterson in 59 excruciating seconds.

Why should your right to freedom of speech trump a trans person's right not to be offended?

Because in order to be able to think, you have to risk being offensive.I mean, look at the conversation we're having right now.You know, like, you're certainly willing to risk offending me in the pursuit of truth.Why should you have the right to do that?It's been rather uncomfortable.

Well, I'm very glad I put you on the spot.

Well, you get my point.You get my point.It's like, you're doing what you should do, which is digging a bit to see what the hell's going on.And that is what you should do.But you're exercising your freedom of speech to certainly risk offending me.And that's fine.

I think more power to you as far as I'm concerned.

You haven't sat there and I'm just trying to work that out.

I mean, ha, gotcha.

You have got me.You have got me. I'm trying to work that through my head.Yeah, it took a while.It took a while.It did, it did.

And yet Sly News gave her a job and she did this totally cozy interview with Slippery Stomach where he totally dismissed as not even a big deal.wholesale changes that we might have to all make to our lives because of his failure as if it's no big deal.

You've repeatedly said it's not our war.The problem is, as you already mentioned, it is affecting all of us, isn't it?And people are desperately worried about that.So you're chairing this crisis cabinet committee tomorrow.I wondered if you could just level with the British public.Are you worried about fuel and food shortages?

Is that why you're chairing that committee?

There is going to be an impact on the UK, there already is, and I think it's really important I level with the public that we are doing everything we can to get the Strait of Hormuz open because obviously that is vital in terms of minimizing the impact.But I don't want anybody to think that once the Strait is open that that's the end of the damage.It'll go on longer than that.And that's why we've got almost daily meetings of ministers and officials looking at how we manage the impact.At the moment we're confident about supply.We have reopened the CO2 plant in the northeast.

airlines are telling us that they've got enough jet fuel at the moment.We monitor this all of the time and they have told us so far that they've got the supplies that they need.

But summer holidays could be in jeopardy.

Well that's why we manage it.I think we'll see how long the conflict goes on.I can see that if there's more impact, people might change their habits, where they go on holiday this year, what they're buying in the supermarket, that sort of thing.

So you are, I mean, really your message to the public is don't panic, but actually there may be some shortages of food and fuel.

Don't panic.But we chose not to get involved in this war, that was the right thing to do, but we must protect the British people from the impact of it.

Both pathetic creatures, as Christian in the Trench has put it, Sly News has finally given Cathy Newman her own programme.In the opening episode, she did something truly revolting.She sat opposite Keir Starmer and fed him his lines.While Britain burns, Highest taxes in 70 years.Energy prices through the roof.Pension is freezing.

Small boats still arriving in record numbers.Kathy Newman chose to blame Donald Trump.The wars, the tariffs, the chaos, all Trump's fault apparently.Starler didn't even have to think.He was answering questions before she had finished asking them.It was so rehearsed it was painful to watch.

Every time she tossed him a gentle lob, he was already swinging at it.This wasn't journalism.This was state -sponsored damage control with a friendly face and a microphone.Cathy Newman, the woman who was publicly dismantled by Jordan Peterson in 2018 and has spent the last eight years trying to scrub that humiliation from the public memory, has now fully revealed herself.She is no longer a journalist.She is a willing instrument of power.

She gave Starmer the softest landing imaginable.She let him hide behind his wife.She let him blame the world.She never once pressed him on the real questions that matter.The British people saw it for what it was, a performance, a script, a lie.Cathy Newman's first show was also her last, because after last night, the mask is gone, and so is whatever credibility she had left.

And after today, the mask and whatever credibility Slippery Starmer had left is gone too.Now, the superstar panel.Christine and Neil Hamilton with me.Neil, where to begin?I mean, the fact that there is this three -line whip given the way that Slippery Starmer was so sanctimonious in terms of Boris Johnson and the Privileges Committee over that piece of cake.Any Labour MP that votes for this I don't think can come back from it, do you?

Well, Starmer's clearly a dead man walking, actually a dead man crawling and stumbling, as we know.He's completely finished, as indeed is the Labour Party, as far as I can see.The 7th of May elections will be an illustration of quite howfar they've fallen back.They'll probably lose two -thirds of the councillors that they had before the election.And if the Labour Party sticks with Starmer, it's entirely up to them of course, and who can predict what those idiots will do, then any glimmer of hope that they might have that in the next three years they could possibly haul back something from the brink, I simply can't conceive how they can continue to exist.

You know, I was a member of parliament under John Major and when we were turfed out of the exchange rate mechanism in September 1992, just a few months after we were elected again for the fourth time, we then stayed we would have fell off a cliff in the opinion polls and never recovered in the next five years, and then Armageddon overtook us all in 1997.Labour are in exactly that position, and whoever they get in isn't going to be any better.Of course, just look at the choice, if you can call it that.Rayner or Burnham, if they can shoehorn him into a seat some, which would be a massive gamble as well.Where on earth do they turn?So, I mean, I do think that this is the end game for So you said a moment ago, where do we begin?

We begin at the end.

Totally.And Christine Hamilton, I mean, the fact that Morgan McSweeney was meant to be his human shield today and put in one of the least convincing performances I've ever seen.I mean, that little dweeb and those lies about his phone.I mean, seriously, I do not believe it, Christine, for a single second.He can sue me if I'm wrong.

I don't think he'll dare.I've never heard the word dweeb before, but it suits him very well.I've no idea what a dweeb is.

Well, you're looking at him when you see Milgan McSweeney on screen.

OK, thank you.It's a wonderful example of that old saying, what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive with his telephone.I mean, John Whittingdale got the homed in on just the right question about that.It is inconceivable that he didn't say to the police, look, I am the Prime Minister, this phone is really important, instead of which, hello, my phone's been stolen.It's just not credible.And if that really was the way he approached situations, then no wonder Labour are in such an awful mess.

It was absurd.And he blithely expected, as far as the phone was concerned, can you believe it, that a squad car was going to come by.What?Does he not know what's happened to policing in the last...I'm not blaming the Labour government in the last goodness knows how many years.

Well, we can blame Sadiq Khan in London, though.

Well, of course we can.And he keeps using this phrase, which, again, I've never...I'm learning so much today.I mean, dweeb is one.Adrenalised.I've never heard of adrenalised before.

I mean, I don't know.Is that a word?I suppose it is now.Minister, when he was talking to Cathy Newman and he said, I am the British Prime Minister, that reminds me of somebody who shall be nameless, but they were elected to the European Parliament to their total surprise in 2004, I suppose it was.And I heard them go up to somebody and say, Hello, I'm ABC.I'm a member of the European Parliament.

I know it doesn't seem possible, but it's true.She honestly said that.And that's it was like something out of Monty Python.

I know.How did we end up here?How did we end up here?Sorry, Christine, I just cut you off.How could we end up here?

Doesn't matter.Well, I have no idea that he was even more unpopular than Richard Nixon at the time of his departure.I mean, just get out of the way.We have had enough of you.

Gobsmacking.And that was from CNN, which is, of course, a left -wing liberal network.Now, Cathy Newman of Sly News and this new show which she's managed to launch despite being a complete disaster on Channel 4 News, engaged in the most shocking cover -up with Slippery Starmer last night in regards to the real state of his marriage.I reported last week that Lady Victoria Starmer, deeply unhappy, completely miserable, is no longer residing at Number 10 Downing Street.She has moved out, along with the couple's two children.And Starmer knew that he needed to do some damage control and speak positively about his wife during this interview.

But what you will note, because I'm about to show you, is that never does Cathy Newman follow up and say, okay, well, why is she no longer living with you at number 10?It was pointedly not referred to as two -tier care, pretended to be a human being in what was a setup and a direct attempt to try and discredit my reporting.Watch.

this pressure is intolerable.Would you listen to her?

I always listen to Vic and I think she was the one in the first place that basically said why on earth would you want to go into politics?She is an absolute rock and I confide in her all of the time and hers is the best advice and I'm just thankful that she'sthat I've got her every day.

And at the moment she's advising you to keep going?

She is, yes.And we talk everything through and it's fantastic.We've got also two fantastic kids, a 17 -year -old and a 15 -year -old.I can't tell you how much joy and happiness they bring.They are my pride and joy every single day.

Okay, so I post immediately after that interview broadcast, this is a complete lie.Lady Victoria Starmer no longer resides in Downing Street with the children, is more miserable than she's ever been, and wants him out of the job ASAP.I feel sorry for her being used as a political tool based on a fantasy.And you know that's what Starmer does when he is in trouble.He will invoke his family, invoke his wife, invoke his two children when he was in trouble.Do you remember he did it with his son, who he claims he wants to be out of the spotlight, when he blamed his son setting his GCSEs for the reason that he was living in Lord Ali's Mayfair at Penthouse, when I believe it was nothing to do with that.

It was to do with these ongoing troubles in the marriage in regards to the real shape of Starmer's family.Then there is the court case this week.The court case which Cathy Newman also asked nothing about.These three men charged in connection with arson attacks on two properties and a car linked to Keir Starmer who are facing trial.At the Old Bailey, the charges relate to three incidents.On the 8th of May 2025, a car previously owned by Starmer was found on fire on a street he used to live on in Kentish Town, North London.

On 11th of May, a fire was discovered at flats linked to Starmer on Islington.And on the 12th of May, a fire was discovered at the entrance to Starmer's Kentish Town home, which is currently rented out.The three men are Mr. Lavrovich, Ukrainian, Mr. Kapushik, a Ukrainian born Romanian, and Mr. Poshinov, a Ukrainian, all pleaded not guilty.Now, Katie Hopkins has pointed out that as we head to the second day of the, her words, Ukrainian rent boy trial tomorrow, where are you BBC News, Daily Mail, GB News, Guardian, Channel 4 News, you fucking cowards.Here's what I heard.

Watch.So, it's the second day of the Ukrainian bum boy trial, where three Ukrainian bum boys, red boys, are on trial for arson alleged.against Keir Starmer's car, his previous home and his other properties but no one's allowed to talk about it because there's a media ban.The establishment media has closed ranks on it because contempt of court is not the same as silence but somehow silence has been achieved and obviously I wouldn't be reporting because I'm just a little housewifey here doing my ironing as you'll notice.And all I can tell you about is the gossip that I've heard, which is not the same as reporting, and it's not clearly contempt of court.So I heard that the one that burnt his car, his old car, Keir had said, get me in there because I want to fold you like a pretzel.

The one that burnt his former flat, I heard that Keir had given him the keys to the back door, if you know what I'm saying.And the other one, evidently, had been shown Keir's sphincter.which is looser than Angela's flange and has been worked harder than Phil Schofield on a school field trip.But obviously that's just gossip and hearsay and has no bearing on anything at all because I'm just a little housewife here.doing my ironing.

She's naughty, isn't she?But in terms of the actual reporting, nothing from the MSM.So thank goodness we can rely on the independent media like Will Coleshill of Vox Populi, who was at court yesterday.Watch his report.

Hello this is Will Coleshill reporting for Vox Populi.Three Ukrainian men, Kir Starmer and Arson.What do these three things have to do with each other?Well we're down here today outside the Old Bailey where we're covering the trial of three Ukrainian men.Three men all charged with conspiracy to commit arson, recklessly endangering life and Roman Lavrinovich who's argued to have caused arson with intent to harm human life.The three men I've mentioned, one of them Roman Lavinovich, Petro Pocinok and Stanislav Kapriuk are all here today in the Old Bailey.

We saw the jury sworn in, they've sworn in the jurors and on Wednesday we're going to be back to hear the opening prosecution argument.A lot of people haven't heard very much about this case but it is now underway so we're going to find out what is actually going on.There's been huge speculation online, we're not going to repeat it but We're down here to find out what the story is going to be.We've been told there are no reporting restrictions.So we're going to be back here on Wednesday when the jury is going to be sitting again, the case is going to resume, and hopefully we'll find out what is actually going on in this very peculiar case with Kirstahmer and three Ukrainian lads.Will Colesil reporting for Vox Popular.

The thing is, is surely if Kathy Newman was any sort of journalist, she could have just said to Slippery Starboard during the interview,so why are Lady Victoria and the children no longer living at number 10 Downing Street?Is that something to do with security or their education?But she was there as a propagandist, and I felt that was very planned, the way that he came out with almost like a stump speech in regards to his wife and children.

Sorry, I wasn't sure if you were going to play that.clip or not?

No, you come in please, Christine.We want to hear from you.We've had enough of these two.God.

It was like a sort of party political broadcast for Starmer, wasn't it?It was extraordinary.Now, I have no idea about the state of their marriage, no idea at all.And I didn't know that she'd moved out of number 11, apparently, with the children.I didn't know that.But then, you know, I don't have my ear to the ground like you do.

But If these rumours are going around, which they obviously are, she is a journalist.It's her job to know about these things and it should have been her job to say what you've just set out.And I don't know why she didn't do it.I mean, why on earth would somebody like Cathy, who is a serious journalist, who's just landed herself her new own eponymous show on Sky, Why should she want to give the Prime Minister such a patsy interview, in particular, when it's perfectly clear to anybody over the second form that he's on his way out?Why does she want to ingratiate herself with him and give him such a softball interview?I don't see, from her point of view, what the point was.

It was absolutely unbelievable.And the thing is, Neil Hamilton, for me, this is an issue of hypocrisy, OK?Starmer and the Labour Party and the mainstream media, they made the rules.Neal during the last government and those rules were that every single piece of theJohnson's personal life was scrutinised.Do you remember all of the details about the rumoured affair with Jennifer Acuri?

In the most lurid of detail.all of the information about how he ended up with his current wife, Carrie Johnson, including the fights that they used to have at the flat that he'd moved into, all reported in lurid detail.Yet when it comes to their guy, Keir Starmer, total blackout.He's just allowed to sort of talk about his wife and his children when it suits him.So I'm just playing by the rules that the Labour Party actually began when they were in opposition.They were the ones that decided, Neil, that a Prime Minister's private life was of public interest.

How can they have one rule for Boris Johnson and now a totally different rule for Slippery Starmer?

You're absolutely right, Dan.You know, the word hypocrisy goes through them all like on a stick of Blackpool rock, if that still exists.And this has always been the case.All the row about so -called sleaze in the 80s and 90s under the Tories and the big meal that Labour made about that.And then we had the Blair government and all the scandals that flowed out of Mandelson and Alastair Campbell and so on in that era.And then we had Keir Starmer moralising on the steps of number 10 when he first became Prime Minister about how everything was going to be very different from now, he's going to be whiter than white, you know, a white knight to lead the charge for honesty and truth.

Total bollocks, isn't it?That's the best way to describe it, I think.And he's been unmasked now, and of course he's going to use his wife as a tool, as you put it.He's the son of a toolmaker, never forget.No, he was telling us about that again yesterday.

Okay, and then let's just talk about this Ukrainian firebomber trial.Now, the very least,Christine, if you just look at this from a news point of view, the fact that three of the Prime Minister's personal pieces of property were firebombed by three young Ukrainian men is surely a story of the highest public interest.They all pleaded guilty yesterday, Christine.And I promise you, this did not make The news on the British Bashing Corporation, on Wokai TV, on Sly News wasn't reported on GB News.Do they not have a natural curiosity about what the hell is going on here?

This is a court case.And as Katie Hopkins says, they're just not covering it.I've never seen anything like it.

It is completely extraordinary.I mean, you wouldn't catch us watching the BBC anyway, so I have no idea what they're reporting.Good on you.Well, occasionally some great big huge national occasion or something I might, but basically I wouldn't, I haven't watched it for donkey's years.I am surprised that GB News didn't cover it.I mean, they're supposed to pick up the stories that the rest of the mainstream media won't cover.

So, I didn't know anything about it until I sat down here at the computer and saw your story.I didn't know it was going on.Why on earth hasn't it been on the news?I know there's quite a lot going on today, so there's not a lot of room, but it's a pretty important story.even if the underlying rumours are completely untrue.Let's not go any further than that.

Let's assume that all the underlying rumours are not true.It's still a very important story.

Exactly.Because if this isn't sexually motivated, Neil Hamilton, then there's a lot of discussion that this could be politically motivated, that this could have been some type of underhand force in yousending a warning to Stammer.Now, they've pleaded guilty.We need to know why they were doing this.Who was paying them to do this, Neil?

It doesn't make sense that three random Ukrainian men would know where Stammer's car was, where Stammer's properties were, then would firebomb them on consecutive days.This is the most intriguing story in the country at the moment.And again, the mainstream media of say oh nothing to see here it's bizarre.

Well three separate incidents in disconnected places where the only connection is that the property concerned has some connection historically with Keir Starmer is certainly a curiosity worth reporting isn't it?

Yeah and I believe his family was still living near at the property.Now I wouldn't know how to locate Slippery Starmer's car You know, in order for them to do that, they had to at least have some degree of inside information.Now, look, I'm being very careful because, of course, we know that there are contempt of court laws in this country.But my point is, this should all be coming out in court.Now, personally, I think there's going to be a cover up anyway.I don't believe it is going to come out.

But they have pleaded not guilty now, which means surely this information should come out.

well presumably it will form part of the examination or cross -examination or at least it'll be referred to in the course of the legal proceedings if it's relevant as it very obviously should be because if the connecting link is kia starma then that's going to be part of the prosecution's case i would have thought to establish some similar fact evidence about the separate events which would point to their guilt in the argument of the prosecution so looking at it as a lawyer, that's the way I would see it.So we'll wait with bated breath to see what comes out of the Old Bailey.I'm fascinated now that I know about this like Christine.I knew nothing about it until you revealed it.So I'm very grateful to you for drawing it to our attention.

Well I'm going to keep across this because there's a brilliant network of independent journalists now and I give them such credit.People like Jonathan Wong, and Will Coleshill, who we saw there, who are going to be at court across this story.By the way, there was another thing that happened which the mainstream media have basically avoided because I think, especially on the right, there is this view that everything Reform UK does is just brilliant and turns to gold.Whereas there are some signs that as a result of this ongoing feud with Rupert Lowe and Restore Britain, actually that party's popularity is waning.And they promised this week to host a massive fuel protest.And they said that it was going to be the biggest fuel protest in the history of Britain.

But in a mortifying moment for Reform UK, just a handful of people showed up and actually most of them were sort of people connected to the party like Richard Tice and Leila Cunningham.Here's GB News who had been promising their viewers because even Nick Dixon, you know Nick Dixon of GB News, said this week GB News sort of has to decide like is it MUTV for Manchester United, or is it actually a news channel that reports the truth?Because all morning they had been saying this is going to be massive, it's going to be the biggest fuel protest in British history.But in fairness to them, they did go on air and admit that nobody had shown up.

Watch.

Andrew Miriam, good morning to you.Yeah, that protest finished, but it never really got started.We were told there'd be tractors, lorries, even ice cream vans here today, with a message, one common message, urging the Chancellor to bring about change when it comes to the rising prices at the petrol pumps.Well, they didn't show up today.Reform politicians were here on a bus, and some protesters, maybe 10 to 15 protesters, one of them is Kate.Thanks for joining us on GB News.

You're a little bit disappointed more people weren't here?

Yes, I think a few of us made the effort.We're a bit disappointed that there weren't more people here.It's such a good cause, it's so disappointing.

Christine Hamilton is the Reform UK bubble bursting.

Well, I've no idea.I have to say on that fuel tax thing, rising fuel prices, I am slightly astonished that there weren't more people.I mean, if I'd been living in London, I might well have popped along myself.I wasn't going to do a 200 mile round trip for it at my age, but I am surprised and it's actually quite disappointing how British people don't rise up more often and show their feelings.But who knows whether the bubble has burst.We're going to discover quite a lot on the 7th of May, of course, although a lot of those votes will be protest votes, just like the votes for Labour last time were protest votes against the Tories.

I mean, who on earth is going to want to vote Labour on the 7th of May at whatever level?So I'm sure they'll do very well.I mean, it's Politics is lurching towards a pretty complicated situation.It'll be a brave person who put any bets on the final outcome of the next general election, whenever it is, because we've got so many parties in the mix.I mean, who would have thought that a party led by Zach Polanski was going to do as well as that?I mean, he's the most unlikely charismatic party leader imaginable.

but he's going to do very well.So who knows what's actually going to happen.

I wanted to ask you about that, actually, Neil.Before you come in, let me just show you the interview from Sly News, because Zak Polanski, for the first time, has said that if Labour gets rid of Slippery Starmer and brings in this dreaded combination of Red Rainer, the tax evader and Andy Burnham, and apparently that is the sort of deal that's being discussed, the Blair -Brown pact that's being discussed, Polanski says he will be open to some type of deal between the Greens and Labour.Watch this.

He's always said that there would be no Green -Labour agreement at an election if it's Keir Starmer running the Labour Party.What if it was Andy Burnham or Angela Rayner?Would that lead to a different answer to that question?

As you know, I always want to directly answer questions to you, Sophie.I am going to have to put a caveat there that say it's almost impossible to know, because until we know who that leader is, what their policy platform is, and how they behave as Prime Minister, and how they treat the Green Party, and more importantly, the policies we care about, it's very difficult to judge.That being said, I do like to answer a question.It's no secret that Andy Burnham and Angela Rayner would be much closer to my politics than Keir Starmer are.I think they're people who do care about tackling the cost of living crisis, and do care about people in this country.still have reservations about their policies.

They're still in the Labour Party.And my question would be, why have they been so quiet while the Labour Party and the Labour government have done some pretty egregious things, both in this country and around the world.But I do think it'd be a significant improvement to remove Starmer and make sure that the party was leaning more towards the left, more towards a progressive direction, and more towards ending rip -off Britain.

So Neil, this is very much going to encourage the leftists within Labour to hurry up and get rid of Starmer.

Absolutely.And obviously the Greens are a Jew -hating communist party, so that is going to make a big difference to our lives if they ever get anywhere near the smell of power, let alone have any hands on the levers of power.But Labour are desperate, aren't they?They can't move towards reform because that would offend the Muslim base of their vote on migration and so on, which is why we have no control of migration over this country, and why we've not supported Americans in the Middle East either.It's all to do with Labour Party internal politics and votes have leached to the Greens to the left and they've lost the votes of the white working class many, many years ago.So I can well see this new alliance of Rayner and Burnham as a last desperate attempt to leech votes away from the Greens back to their own party and in order to do that of course they will have to be more explicitly communistic than Starmer would ever dare to be.

So yeah I think in some ways I don't think that this is going to benefit the Labour Party at the end of the day because the British public will not vote for something like Zach Polanski, in my opinion.Hitherto, the Greens have been a collection of wacky environmentalists, but they've recently since Polanski been taken over by a far more sinister group of people who fundamentally want to sovietize this country.They want to tax wealth out of existence.They want to have everybody on benefits as of right.Who's going to pay for it?It's going to be the few people who are left in work and so on and so forth.

It's a complete crackpot party.So in some ways I say bring it on becauseworse is better in one sense if it makes them and the Labour Party even less electable than they might otherwise be.But who knows?Three years is a long time until the next election, assuming as we must that Labour Party MPs are not going to vote for early P45s.So anything could happen in the meantime.

I don't myself see the Labour Party making any substantial recovery in any possible circumstances.We now have a broken economy on top of a broken society in this country, entirely as a result of the kind of policies which Labour are espousing, which of course just builds on the inheritance of the hopeless Tories and the Uni Party that we've endured ever since Blair took over in 1997.Nothing.so bad that the Tories can do, which Labour can't make worse.And you can say the same thing about the Greens.There's nothing that Labour can do that the Greens can't make worse.

So, I mean, that's the prospect that lies before us.And there'll be a stark choice of the next election between one side or the other in a way which we've not seen properly in this country since the 1980s, when the Labour Party were explicitly committed to unilateral nuclear disarmament.They were completely controlled by trade unions.They were really socialistic in their tax policies.We now have the highest taxes that we've had in 70 years today.So they start from a high level if they're going to make it even worse.

But that's the world that we live in.

This is unquestionably the greatest story of the year so far.So King Charles gets on a plane to go to the White House and meet Donald Trump and discoversthat the US President is actually his cousin.No, I'm not joking.This revelation has emerged from Robert Hardman, who traced Trump's family tree and found out he's the King's cousin.Related to this old bloke, I'll just show you the royal relative that links these two together.

And Donald Trump is actually so excited about this that he thinks he now has a claim to spend a bit of time in London.posting on Truth Social.Wow, that's nice.I've always wanted to live in Buckingham Palace.I'll talk to the King and Queen about this in a few minutes, President DJT.Now, if you're wondering how this all works out, Robert Hardman has done the detailed research.

I'll take you through it.Okay, so Trump and the King have a common ancestor in the form of the 3rd Earl of Lennox, a great -grandson of King James II of Scotland, which means that Donald Trump and Charles III are 15th cousins.Their shared forebear met an unfortunate end, however.Lord Lennox was involved in a vicious power struggle for control over the infant King James V, and was eventually defeated in the Battle of Linlithgow Bridge in 1526.After being taken prisoner, he was murdered by a rival lad known as the Bastard of Arran.His son, the fourth Earl of Lennox, went on to produce Lord Darnley, husband of Mary, King and Queen of Scots.

Their son became King James V. the first of England, from whom the Stuarts and eventually the House of Windsor would all descend.Are you keeping up with this?From this Donald through generations of Mackaysand then of McLeods, including another Donald, the line comes down to Mary Ann McLeod of Lewis, who emigrated to the USA in 1930.There she married property developer Fred Trump and had five children.Donald Trump, born in 1946, was the fourth.

Now online genealogists had previously struggled to ascertain a clear line of Mr Trump's ancestry due to confusion and gaps in ancient Scottish record keeping.However, veteran genealogist Robert Barrett, former research editor at the Daily Mail, has studied multiple land records, church records, and Scottish parish documents to piece together this intriguing research.For example, Mr. Trump's descent from Donald McKay is confused by his daughter's first marriage to a McDonald, after which she married a clergyman called Hugh Munro, and the Trump line hails from there.Now, this was a pretty brilliant piece of news.as the king and queen camilla descended on the white house in the past few moments watch and upon hearing that brilliant news that trump is actually a relative of charles it was his time to take to the microphone now thiswas a moment of key tension for Buckingham Palace.

Trust me, the courtiers have been very nervous.They know that Trump can go off -piste and they were very worried.Oh gosh, what if he slags off Slippery Starmer?What if he says something about wanting to take control of Canada?But no, Trump was actually incredibly behaved, although of course he did reveal that his mother, who was born in Scotland as we know, for the first time he revealed that she had a crush on King Charles.You've got to watch King Charles's face.

It's a picture.

My mother would be glued to the television and she'd say, look Donald, look how beautiful that is.She really did love the family.But I also remember her saying, Very clearly, Charles, look, young Charles, he's so cute.My mother had a crush on Charles, can you believe it?Amazing how, I wonder what she's thinking right now.

She's amazing.Now, Trump then reminded everyone how important Queen Elizabeth II was to him and our two nations.

woman who I had the privilege of getting to know, Queen Elizabeth II, very, very special woman who is very greatly missed on both sides of that mighty Atlantic, long ago planted a young treeIt was a very young and beautiful tree, and look at it now.It's tripled in size and tripled in strength, very much as our nations have even more than tripled.Like our nation itself, it was laid with British hands but grew in American soil.Today, it stands tall and proud, reaching ever higher.And this morning, it reminds us that the mightiest of trees like the greatest of nations must be anchored by the strongest and deepest of roots.

So he's stuck to the script.Despite Slippery Stub and doing anything possible to weaken the special relationship in recent weeks, Trump suggested the friendship is still strong.Watch.

In the centuries since we won our independence, Americans have had no closer friends than the British.We share that same root.We speak the same language.We hold the same values.And together our warriors have defended the same extraordinary civilization under twin banners of red, white and blue.

But there was something a little bit more concerning when Trump first went to the White House yesterday with a lip read employed by the Daily Mail, revealing the conversation.that took place between the king and the president.Now this is the lip reader Nicola Hickling.And so Trump started by saying this shooting I'd rather not stand about here too long.The king appeared to respond.I feel I shouldn't be here.

Trump asked King Charles if he wasokay.I mean, it's not a good thing.I wasn't prepared, but now I am prepared, the President offered.Trump then changed the subject, telling the King he had been in contact with Russian President Vladimir Putin.So right now I am talking to Putin, Trump said.

He wants war.King Charles said they would discuss that topic later.We will discuss that later, the King replied.But Trump continued, I've got a feeling if he did what he said, he will wipe out the population.Trump warned.The monarch tried to switch topics again.

Another time, King Charles said.Then the conversation moved on to the ballroom.that Trump wants to build at the White House.And he said, you can see right through there, right the way through to the ballroom, would you like to see?The monarch can be seen having a light laugh.I'm sure you shall show us, the king replied.

Trump answered, that's right, you're right.The king then asked where they were off to, which way do we go?He asked, we're going this way, Trump said, guiding the group into the White House.So, oh my goodness, to my superstar panel, Christine and Neil Hamilton.Christine, absolutely as we expected.This is a state visit like none other, right?

So we find out that Trump is related to Charles and he's posted on Truth Social saying, I now want to move into Buckingham Palace.Then he gets up and says that his mum had a crush on Charles.And you can just see Charles is like, what is going on here?I can't quite cope with this.But I would argue, Christine, perhaps far more concerning is this private conversation which the lip reader picked up on with Putin having said that he wants to wipe out the population.But goodness, where do you want to start, Christine?

I mean, it's been quite a day already.

It's been the most extraordinary day.I mean, take either just theKing's visit to America or all the starboard business going on on this side of the Atlantic would be enough.But I mean, to have both of them going on at the same time, one didn't know where to look.But I mean, good old Trump, all the sort of bad stuff about Trump, and there is quite a lot, is factored in.He's risen to the occasion.

I mean, can you imagine what he thought when he realized that he was related to a king?I mean, Bless him, he must have been absolutely over the moon.And I loved his comment about, you know, I'd quite like to move into Buckingham Palace or something.Good for him.And there were all these whispers that people shouldn't forget in the last few days and weeks, that the king shouldn't go, he shouldn't go, all the lefties were saying he shouldn't go.Of course he should have gone.

He's got an absolutely almost irretrievable breakdown in communications to repair.And he's somebody who's going to be able to do it brilliantly.And they've got off to a wonderful start.he was quite right just to brush aside these things about Putin.Honestly, Trump, he's a nightmare.That was not the moment to start talking about Putin wanting to wipe out the world.

I mean, it really wasn't.In front of the world's cameras.It's great.I know.And the king knew that.So he was basically saying, shut up, Donald.

Just shut up.until we've got inside.Neil, I just want to show you.I just loved it.

Me too.I just want to show you the latest images we've got, Neil, in from the White House.This is Melania Trump and Queen Camilla.So they've separated off.And while the Donald and the King are having their bilateral behind closed doors in the Oval Office, the two ladies, are off to witness, it looks like a tennis court of some form at the White House.So we'll just take in some of these images, Neil, while you come in.

Yeah.No, well, I listened to Trump.I thought it wasthe most fantastic, moving speech, actually.It was really eloquent.Now, I know he didn't write it.

Prime Ministers have speechwriters and presidents have their speechwriters as well.But I felt that he really meant the words that he was delivering and, of course, the asides that he inevitably comes up with as well.He really does have a true emotional attachment to the United Kingdom, despite all the appalling humiliations of having a Prime Minister like Starmer and all the damage that he's done to the UK -US special relationship, I think Trump is wise enough to be able to see through all that.And he's quite right to talk about the historical links and the cultural affinities that connect us, regardless of who happens to be in 10 Downing Street for the time being.And Trump is well aware that Starmer is not likely to survive more than the next few weeks.I think the King is absolutely perfect at these kinds of events.

And he's got long experience, not as long experience as his mother had, obviously, but nevertheless, he's grown up in her shadow.And he's absorbed an enormous amount of wisdom about how to handle these delicate situations.So I've no doubt that he will do as much anybody possibly could to undo the damage that his ghastly, useless Prime Minister has done in two short years.

By the way, sorry, Christie.

Well, I was just going to say, can I put in, and it is not just the King who's over there, the Queen is over there too.And she is equally brilliant in her own way.And didn't she look fabulous.I thought Melania had another of those rather silly flat hat things on, she looked like a sort of Spanish bullfighter to be honest, whereas I thought Camilla looked absolutely fabulous, that's all I wanted to say.Speaking up for the older lady.

No, good on you, good on you.

As for the royal connection with President Trump, I think the king can build on it.He could make him the Duke of Turnberry in view of his connection to the royal family.

Exactly, exactly.Oh, just imagine how well that would go down with John Swinney and the SNP too.I would love that.I have to say there is another moment that has gone viral this afternoon, and I'm loving it because we need some light.We need some frivolity.Benny Johnson has described it, Christine, as the love moment.

And basically, Trump is going viral because he got a little touchy -feely with Melania's bum.Can I show you?

He did that to Theresa May, do you remember as well?

Yes, maybe for very different reasons though, Neil.But Christine, you know, you two keep the passion alive, don't you, after all of these decades?Surely that's not a bad thing.

There's nothing wrong with that at all, and I mean, she could hardly be in tighter clothes if she tried, could she?She's almost been sort of zipped into them.Well, we're all zipped into our clothes, but you know what I mean.And why shouldn't he, for heaven's sake?In all innocence, he was possibly just saying, down you go, but that's lovely.And what's wrong with that?

I mean, it's just a...Other world leaders get up to far worse sexual things than a little tap on the bum of your own wife.

Indeed.

I will leave it at that.

And on the whole, people are saying that so far this state visit has been a great success.Shauna Kay posting, there are so many takeaways from the royal state visit to the USA so far.A properly planned, disciplined, diplomatic tour looks worlds apart from the odd little junkets and chaotic side quests we've seen from Harry and Meghan.King Charles anddecades of experience are showing, and it's good to see him finally operating in an arena where competence matters and he can display his skills.This visit carries real weight, reopening channels, cooling tensions and restoring a balance to a relationship that's been wobbling for years.

Royal soft diplomacy is doing what it does best, lowering the temperature and proving its value in real time.A good and positive thing to see.And I do think, Neil, This shows you what a real royal tour is all about, right?Because we saw Harry and Meghan sort of faking it in Australia, and it just was so tacky.And it's like, no, this is the real royalty.I think that is a fair point to make, don't you, Neil?

Absolutely.No, the Australian tour was absolutely pathetic.And we know it was basically a commercial enterprise on Meghan's part.It was nothing to do with royal duty.She has no interest whatsoever in royal duty.That's why she's exiled Harry to California.

He's called the inside Buckingham Palace because she's kidnapped him and taken him away and wrecked him psychologically.So no, the contrast is absolutely stark.Here we have the King doing some real diplomacy and we have those useless idiots in California just trying to feather their own nests in different parts of the world, masquerading under the guise of charity.

Indeed.Well, look, stand by, you two, because we're about to reveal today's greatest Britain and Union jackass.But first, I want to get to some of your feedback.A lot coming in about the trouble that Slippery Starmer, the UK Prime Minister, is in, especially after this disastrous evidence from Morgan McSweeney earlier today.Emma Coots3159 says, that face of Morgan McSweeney and the body language is a real shifty bloke.Not one I would trust.

Gingerweed, she describes him.You know, I'm describing him as the dweeb.Philip Jones 9458 says unless evidence is given under oath, there's no point.Dino575 says Morgan plugged the phone, that's why they can't find it.Martin Scott 1227 says Morgan McSweeney sums up what's wrong with Labour lightweight activists with no proper life experience and Juliet Johnson says McSweeney is a deceitful man.Lies, lies, lies.

And I have nominated Morgan McSweeney as Union Jackass today for that unconvincing evidence.But Neil Hamilton went for Lord Herma for insulting British war heroes.And Christine Hamilton went for to Ed Miliband for having no solar panels on his house.He is a hypocrite.OK, well, this is an unpredictable one today.And sorry, Christine, you're in third place.

23 % of folk going for Ed Miliband.I can't believe it.I haven't won.I'm the runner up.I thought I was a definite winner with Morgan McSweeney today.But no, you've taken it, Neil Hamilton.

47 % agreeing with you and backing you and saying, Lord Herma, is our Union Jackass.Now, you've both chosen the same person as today's Greatest Britain, haven't you?

Yeah, well, can I just, on the Union Jackass business, I've done it again, you see, just before we came on air, Neil said, you know, I said, come on, we've got to decide who has which.And he said, I don't mind, you have whichever you like.And I plumped for Miliband, which was mad.And he plumped for the winner.

Well, no, Miliband would usually win.But I think there's just this hatred at the moment to anything connected to Starmer.But anyway, we had a little spoiler there.We saw The Greatest Britain.So you've gone for King Charles.And do you want to explain why, though, Christine?

Well, I think we've just amply, oh goodness, there's the phone.That's the, it's the King.

He's delighted.He's on it.

I'm so sorry about that.You've just amply demonstrated why, I mean, what he's doing over there.in America is absolutely superb.Talk about soft power.I mean, it's just...He's wonderful.

I've always adored Prince Charles.When I was little, I wanted to marry him, of course, like any girls who are just a tiny bit younger than him did.But he's just doing such a wonderful job.He's making me feel proud to be British again, which is something which I haven't felt for a long time because of his awful, awful, awful ghastly government.

OK, well look, very, very, very well put.Well, I'll let you two go.Adore you both.Thank you both so much.We will speak very, very soon.That is Neil and Christine Hamilton.

A very important reminder, though, we are back in just over one hour.So please do just keep on this feed, this live stream until the end, and then you will be automatically redirected.Or actually, you can head there right now and just tap a notification alert, because we have the most important speech in the reign of King Charles III.It is coming in just over an hour's time.We have a special edition of Outspoken to bring it all to you, all the action.You don't want to rely on the mainstream media for this, do you, folks?

So please stay with us and we will be back live.I am delighted to say that I'm joined by a very special superstar panel, Lauren, the insider, and The T with Lee are joining us.Lauren from the UK, Lee Cohen is in Washington DC for this very special state visit.So be back with us just over an hour's time, a very special edition of Dan Wootten Outspoken for the King's Bombshell live TV speech.And as I say, you can either hit there now, it's on our main feed, Or you can just hang around on this feed to the end and it will redirect you or going to plan to that new feed which is starting in just over an hour's time.That's 7 .30pm UK time, which is 2 .30pm Eastern Time, 11 .30am Pacific Time.

But we are moving over to Substack before then for the Royal Uncancelled Aftershow, because can you believe it?Meghan Markle and Prince Harry managed to overshadow the King's first engagement in Washington, D .C.as a garden party American guest goes viral with a new photo of the couple's daughter.So we'll cross the U .S.

for all the latest from Tom Sykes of the Royalist Substack.He is in New York.We're covering it from all angles for you today.Sign up at www .outspoken .live .

au.to watch.So I hope to see you all in an hour.If not, I will be back with you live tomorrow.As usual, 5pm UK time, midday Eastern, 9am Pacific.Hit subscribe right now on YouTube, turn on the notification bell.

Remember, we are also now available as a podcast on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, wherever you get your podcasts.And most importantly, I promise to keep fighting for you.