As soon as the US president, Donald trump, touched down in London he was giving his blessing to both Brexit and Boris Johnson.


No sooner had Air Force One landed at Stansted Airport delivering the US President for the two day NATO summit that also marks its 70th birthday, than Donald Trump was giving his backing to Brexit and saying that the UK PM, Boris Johnson, was 'very capable'.

He also said that his administration wanted 'nothing to do' with our National Health Service (NHS) and also, when asked about working with Jeremy Corbyn should he win the election, Trump said he could work with anyone.

But all this did come directly after he said that he didn't actually want to get involved in the UK general election.

Now, although Trump did say he could work with anyone who ends up occupying Ten Downing Street, you have to wonder how close that relationship could possibly be, were it the Labour party leader.

And one of the big issues here would be defence and security matters.

It was just last month that the former Labour foreign secretary, Jack Straw, said that if Jeremy Corbyn won the election, then the four other intelligence 'Five Eyes' countries of the US, Canada, Australia and New Zealand could "lessen intelligence co-operation with us".

And The Sun reported that:

"One former permanent secretary with close links to the intelligence services said: “It would have a chilling effect. That would put us at greater risk. The Americans would be very wary indeed about having the same broad confidence in intelligence sharing.”

"The concerns stem from Corbyn's perceived support for anti-West states and his opposition to Trident."

And the report went on to say that:

"Several former defence chiefs, Labour cabinet ministers and high-ranking diplomats have since expressed their concerns over Labour moving to 10 Downing Street."

As well as quoting another Labour politician and former Defence Secretary, Lord Hutton of Furness, as saying that having a Corbyn led Labour government would:

"…place a major question mark over the continued operation of a vital source of intelligence. It’s impossible to look at it with anything other than extreme alarm.

"His views on Nato, his anti-Americanism, his failure to support any single British military expedition since he came into parliament, his opposition to nuclear weapons and his support for Putin’s Russia — his world view is completely at odds with every postwar Labour leader."

He also sounds to be completely at odds with what just about every Brit thinks too, as far as I can tell.

And there was also talk that, in the event of a Labour win, Corbyn's director of strategy, Seamus Milne, would be prevented from seeing the most sensitive intelligence.

And now we hear that there are concerns of Russian involvement in Labour obtaining a copy of the classified and sensitive documentation concerning UK-US post Brexit trade talks that Corbyn waved about at a recent press conference.

A company called Graphika, that specialises in using Artificial Intelligence techniques to 'reveal and study online communities', has issued a report that it says shows that those unredacted UK-US trade documents were leaked and "…amplified online in a way that closely resembles the known Russian information operation “Secondary Infektion.”

"The similarities to Secondary Infektion are not enough to provide conclusive attribution but are too close to be simply a coincidence. They could indicate a return of the actors behind Secondary Infektion or a sophisticated attempt by unknown actors to mimic it."

It seems that the full version of the trade documents were first published by a Reddit user on the 21st of October.

But despite it being talked about in articles in other websites by writers using 'single user burner accounts' and Tweeting to senior UK politicians and media figures, the leaked documents did not gain any traction.

In the end says Graphika, "Only after unknown actors emailed the Reddit
post directly to political activists in the UK in late November did the leaks make the news".

And the report says:

"The most urgent question is how the leaked documents – apparently genuine – came to be disseminated online in what appears to be an information operation, six weeks before the
UK’s general election."

And my supplementary questions would be, how come a social media campaign to get these documents in the news via Reddit and Twitter failed so miserably and why did it take the Labour Party itself to break the news?

Unless of course, the press had already seen them and concluded it was a complete non-story and so we ended up with Labour being forced to clutch at straws.

And Labour has been told by senior Tories that it should now come clean over how Corbyn came to have possession of the papers, as there are fears that Moscow is trying to influence UK politics, aren't there.

But here's a puzzling little piece if information.

As I understand it from a recent IMF report, the Russian state represents about 33% of the country's GDP, down from 80% in its enforced communist heyday.

But, the UK state has increased from about 12% of GDP in 1900 to now stand at about 40%.

And, as Corbyn wants to vastly increase the reach of the UK state, it would look like he wants to take us in the opposite direction to that the Russians themselves have taken.

So, if there is an anti-UK Russian influence at play here, I would reckon that the Russians know from their own history exactly how damaging to our nation Corbyn and his policies would be – so they would back him to the hilt.

And maybe more people in the UK have cottoned on to the danger of Corbyn than we realise.

The Telegraph reports that:

"Unite boss Len McCluskey has revealed that a “big number” of the union's members are not ready to vote Labour."

And Mr McCluskey told HuffPost UK:

"We did a survey of 75,000 of our own Unite members and got a lot of information, different sectors different areas of our union, and different areas of the country.

"It’s reinforced the fact that there is still a big don’t know group there. And that encourages me to an extent because I believe if people are not sure then trying to get them to look, in a sense, beyond Brexit, and to the type of country we want to be in the future, I think puts us in a good position."

And he went on to say that the Labour Achilles heel is in its heartlands where the people that voted to Leave the EU are still unsure whether or not to give Labour their vote.

And he also said that they needed to tackle "…the very real issues we’ve got over Brexit and with Jeremy in some places".

I would say that any Labour supporter that isn't part of the Islington Elite either already knows they have a major problem with Jeremy Corbyn and his cronies, or else they will soon find out they do have problem with him.

And now to the Lib Dems, who have just scored a bit of an own goal.

The Jo Swinson so-called 'party of Remain', boasted that it had managed to obtain the services of the actor Hugh Grant to help Chuka Ummuna and Luciana Berger in their support of the anti-Brexit 'Remain Alliance'.

But they pushed this out on social media with the message that "only the Lib Dems can take seats off the Tories".

The trouble is, that Hugh Grant supports tactical voting, therefore backing the idea that any remain party can take seats off the Tories, not just the Libs Dems, and he ended up pointing out that the Lib Dem statement wasn't true.

So, the Fib Dems are at it again, aren't they?


IMF Working Paper WP/19/53

Comment Here!