Demonstrating he has the thinnest skin of any politician, Donald Trump once again lost it at a journalist, while citing excerpts from the White House dinner shooter’s manifesto:

TRUMP LOST IT ON CBS REPORTER AFTER SHE READ SHOOTER MANIFESTO

"I am NOT a pedophile. You read that crap from some SICK person."

"Your friends on the other side of the plate are the ones who were involved with Epstein."

Advertisement

"You shouldn't be reading that on 60 Minutes. You are a… pic.twitter.com/M2dtKSCLGQ

— Sulaiman Ahmed (@ShaykhSulaiman) April 26, 2026

Attempt #3

As we reported, an alleged gunman charged through security at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner. Trump initially used the event to promote his plans for a White House ballroom:

If I was a conspiracy theorist I would be certain that Trump staged all of this just to get people on board for him to build his illegal White House Ballroom, and save his floundering, all-time-low approval ratings. pic.twitter.com/b1oYCMcG4V

— Brian Krassenstein (@krassenstein) April 26, 2026

Trump actually spoke about the ballroom in the immediate aftermath of the shooting:

Donald Trump is trying to make the case for his ballroom after the incident at the White House Correspondents' Dinner.

You've got to be kidding me. pic.twitter.com/O7Kofd9yq7

— Art Candee (@ArtCandee) April 26, 2026

Trump’s Department of Justice is now using the shooting to try to ensure there are no more legal delays preventing the ballroom from being built:

DOJ sends letter urging dismissal of lawsuit against Trump’s White House ballroom, citing last night’s events. pic.twitter.com/3iyfH1As8j

— Molly Ploofkins (@Mollyploofkins) April 26, 2026

“I’m not a paedophile”

In the clip at the top, the interviewer notes that the gunman’s:

so-called manifesto is a stunning thing to read, Mr. President. He appears to reference a motive in it. He writes… ‘administration officials, they are targets’. And he also wrote this: ‘I’m no longer willing to permit a paedophile, rapist, and traitor to coat my hands with his crimes’. What’s your reaction?

Trump responded:

Well, I was waiting for you to read that because I knew you would, because you’re horrible people, horrible people. Yeah, he did write that. I’m not a rapist. I didn’t rape anybody.

The interviewer then said:

Oh, you think he was referring to you?

We think she was protesting a little too much here; clearly the alleged gunman meant Trump (if the manifesto is genuine).

Trump continued:

I’m not a paedophile. You read that crap from some sick person. I got associated with stuff that has nothing to do with me. I was totally exonerated. Your friends on the other side of the plate are the ones that were involved with, let’s say, Epstein or other things. But I said to myself, you know, I’ll do this interview and they’ll probably… I read the manifesto. You know, he’s a sick person. But… You should be ashamed of yourself reading that because I’m not any of those things.

Contrary to Trump’s complaints, the Epstein Files did reveal what one congressperson described as “credible FBI receipts”:

CRAZY: Congressman Goldman showed 'credible FBI receipts' that Trump "unzipped his pants, forced a 13-year-old’s head down, and when she bit his p*nis, he punched her and called her a b*tch!"

"AG Pam Bondi lied under oath about this." pic.twitter.com/eZ4XEI3QeM

— Coinvo (@Coinvo) March 28, 2026

Advertisement

Inexplicability

It’s since come out that the White House may have been unusually lax with its security at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner:

Surprise! https://t.co/aGFe6FQfL2

— Mehdi Hasan (@mehdirhasan) April 26, 2026

Advertisement

This is feeding into the conspiracy theory that the authorities knew about the alleged gunman, and that they opted to make things as easy as possible for him.

It would obviously be bizarre if Trump allowed all this to happen for the sake of a ballroom. At the same time, the Strait of Hormuz is currently blocked because Trump saw some mysterious benefit to attacking Iran, so who knows with this guy?

Featured image via the Canary

By Willem Moore

Source link

On 27 April, Birmingham City Council leader John Cotton announced that an end is now in sight for the city’s 15-month-long bin strike saga. Meanwhile, Unite—the union representing the strikers—has claimed the councillor’s statement as vindication of the workers’ long struggle.

The strike itself began back in January 2025. Birmingham Council had indicated that it planned to abolish roles within its waste service, ostensibly to bring the department in line with other comparable local authorities. Quite unacceptably, the move could have resulted in some workers being up to £8,000 a year worse off.

‘A challenging and complex process’

Today, however, Labour council leader John Cotton announced that:

After months of frustration and delay, for the first time in over 12 months, a negotiated settlement to end the bin strike is now within sight.

This has been a challenging and complex process, but after months of hard work on the principles and parameters of a deal, I believe a new, improved offer can be made and terms can be put in place that addresses the ballpark issues discussed at Acas [dispute resolution service], that Unite members can agree in order to end the strike once and for all.

Advertisement

A deal that would be good for the workforce, represent good value for money and would not repeat the mistakes of the past and risk creating new structural equal pay liabilities.

I want our workforce to be able to return to work and help us deliver the quality refuse and recycling services the people of this city deserve. That’s why, throughout this dispute, I have resisted those who would dismiss the striking workers instead of negotiating.

I have instructed officers to move forward with negotiations so that we can bring this matter to a close.

Because of rules restricting political announcements in the run-up to the local elections, we won’t know the exact details of the deal until after May 7. Likewise, council members will have to finalise the details of the proposals, which will then be put to the workers themselves for their approval.

The rough outline

Unite lead officer Onay Kasab indicated that the proposed terms include a one-off compensatory payment of up to £16,000 for the wronged workers. Significantly, this deal now includes compensation for the drivers, which wasn’t previously the case.

Unite also gave a rough outline of further details:

• The deal mirrors that proposed by conciliation service Acas. This means that workers will receive a minimum of two years’ cushion from the impacts of the job evaluation process. This is four times the previous 6-month proposal.
• Striking agency workers who’ve been under contact for over a year will have a path to permanent employment.
• Issues of gross misconduct will be reviewed, and other disciplinary issues quashed.
• The dispute will be treated as an authorised absence for the purposes of the workers’ pensions.
• Both sides will end their respective legal actions.

In its 27 April press release, Unite struck a triumphant tone — and highlighted the meddling of unelected commissioners dragging out the process:

This move shows the power of workers and how that can be realised when they are backed by their union.

It is an absolute abhorrence that this deal has been blocked not just once but twice by unelected unaccountable commissioners and officers at Birmingham City Council, who enjoy eye watering pay packets and no consequence for their actions. […]

The reason the offer has not yet been completed and gone to our members is because at the eleventh hour the government backed commissioners attempted to stop it, which has led to today’s statement of intent by the leader of the council.

Advertisement

The union also thanked West Midlands mayor Richard Parker and trade-unionist-turned-life-peer Brenan Barber. Both individuals reportedly helped bring the negotiations to a close by recognising the reasonable nature of the proposed deal.

‘The workers come first’

Sharon Graham, Unite’s general secretary, said:

As I have said on many occasions, the workers come first and we will always do everything in our power to ensure that our members are treated with dignity and respect.

The move made today by the leader of the council is a vindication of the bin workers’ struggle for a decent deal.

Over the last few months, there have been intense negotiations to get the blocked “ballpark” deal back on the table, so that our members could vote on it.

Advertisement

Of course, even among the happy news, the union leader was clear on the guilty parties in this whole sorry mess:

The reason why we are not yet at that stage is purely down to the vindictive interference of the government backed commissioners who have attempted to block the deal again and clearly overstepped their remit.

Their lack of both experience and industrial relations competence has been a major factor in this dispute, and their malevolent game playing has been an absolute disgrace.

The commissioner model is a licence for a few unelected individuals to print money and play games.

They have let the workers down, the people of Birmingham down and the council down.

Advertisement

Salute to the workers

Graham signed off with one last salute to the workers, the negotiators, and the people of Birmingham:

I salute the fortitude of my members who have needlessly been forced to endure months of attacks and hardship to get us to this point.

I thank mayor Richard Parker and Lord Brendan Barber for the important roles both have played in getting us to this point.

And I thank the people of Birmingham for their continued patience and support.

Here, at the Canary, we’re thrilled to hear of an end in sight. Here’s to a swift resolution, and news of a win for the workers and their union!

Featured image via Unsplash/the Canary

By Alex/Rose Cocker

Source link

Zack Polanski sat through several interviews on Monday to promote the Green Party’s local election campaign. The problem is that UK journalists don’t seem to understand what the ‘local’ in ‘local elections’ stands for.

.@ZackPolanski is asked, is it official green party policy to abolish the monarchy?

Sensible answer. pic.twitter.com/QWKMK9y8wy

— Saul Staniforth (@SaulStaniforth) April 27, 2026

Advertisement

Yeah, abolishing the monarchy is what you would call a ‘national issue’.

Think monarchy, ask locally

Just so it’s clear to any BBC presenters reading, the ‘monarchy’ is another word for the ‘Royal Family’. The head of the family serves as the UK’s head of state, either as a king or queen. This is very much a national thing in that we only have one monarch, and said monarch is the head of state for every British citizen.

The monarchy, then, isn’t relevant to the local elections. We don’t have local kings for councillors to abolish. Instead, councillors are tasked with abolishing things like potholes (we should be so lucky!).

Green Party policy

In the clip at the top, the BBC asked Polanski:

Abolishing the monarchy, is that a Green Party official policy?

Polanski responded:

Well, there’s a difference between what our members vote on and what a policy that is updated and reviewed. But just to answer the direct question, I don’t have any support for the monarchy. And I feel sorry for King Charles today that the prime minister sent him to be paraded for Donald Trump.

We don’t feel sorry for Charles, honestly. After all, our king gave his wretched, nonce brother Andrew over a million quid to silence his accuser, the late Virginia Giuffre.

Polanski continued:

But I don’t think that’s the number one issue at this local election. I think people are worried about their bills.

That’s correct, Zack.

This is a local election for local people; we’ll have no talk of your monarchy here. Or will we?

Cost of living

The BBC seemed pretty determined to keep it off topic, asking next:

So what you’re saying is that the Green Party would look again because it’s had quite an anti-monarchy stance in the past, but maybe relaxing that a bit?

It’s easy to see why the BBC would care so much about the Royal Family. After all, both institutions have a history of covering up for perverts. At the same time, this has absolutely nothing to do with the local elections.

Polanski answered:

Well, it wasn’t actually in the manifesto. So the party is definitely an anti-monarchy party. We don’t support the monarchy.

But also what goes in our manifesto, particularly at local elections, is what people are voting on in 10 days time. And really, that’s looking at reducing their rents, reducing the cost of living.

The monarchy isn’t part of that conversation.

As a wider question, though, no, we don’t support the monarchy.

Advertisement

The Westminster Broadcasting Corporation

The BBC is supposed to be a corporation that broadcasts on behalf of Britain. Too often, however, the station gets locked into issues which are primarily of concern to the Westminster bubble.

Don’t get us wrong, we understand there are citizens who will vote in the local elections based on which party is or isn’t pro-Royal. We just also understand it’s the BBC‘s job to explain to these voters why that’s a boneheaded thing to do.

Featured image via X/ Saul Staniforth

By Willem Moore

Source link

!function(n){if(!window.cnx){window.cnx={},window.cnx.cmd=[];var t=n.createElement(‘iframe’);t.display=’none’,t.onload=function(){var n=t.contentWindow.document,c=n.createElement(‘script’);c.src=”//cd.connatix.com/connatix.player.js”,c.setAttribute(‘async’,’1′),c.setAttribute(‘type’,’text/javascript’),n.body.appendChild(c)},n.head.appendChild(t)}}(document);(new Image()).src=”https://capi.connatix.com/tr/si?token=19654b65-409c-4b38-90db-80cbdea02cf4″;cnx.cmd.push(function(){cnx({“playerId”:”19654b65-409c-4b38-90db-80cbdea02cf4″,”mediaId”:”5a43f3c7-4730-480c-ba67-8f8b70f7aa96″}).render(“69ef5364e4b0f3a433cbfdb5”);});

Source link

Source link

Foreign secretary, Yvette Cooper, said on Monday that the fuel, food and fertiliser fallout from the Strait of Hormuz closure will compound for months following the disruption.

Events in the Strait of Hormuz remind us that we’re in a new era of geoeconomics, where economic security must be at the top of our foreign policy agenda.

My words in @TheEconomist https://t.co/mJtTk1n2uq

— Yvette Cooper (@YvetteCooperMP) April 27, 2026

Yvette Cooper excludes key points in her column

In her op-ed, the Labour Together-endorsed candidate blamed Iran for the closure, erasing the US and Israel’s role in starting the illegal war on Iran. She also failed to mention the UK’s role in assisting Trump’s deranged war.

Her comments follow reports in the Mail on Sunday that food and pharmaceutical shortages could hit UK households within weeks due to the Strait of Hormuz disruption, and that the government was busy with the Starmer-Mandelson scandal.

Crippling fuel and medicine shortages could hit UK households within weeks ‘because No 10 is too distracted by Starmer’s leadership crisis to deal properly with Iran fallout’ https://t.co/3WFDSqQ28a

— Daily Mail (@DailyMail) April 25, 2026

One government source involved in emergency contingency planning told the Mail on Sunday that airlines can only maintain their current level of consumption for another three weeks as their stockpiles dwindle.

Brits are already feeling the consequences

Data shows that the UK is already feeling the hit. Retail sales have collapsed at their steepest pace since records began in 1983, a devastating Confederation of British Industry (CBI) survey revealed this week. The CBI’s monthly retail sales volume measure plunged to -68 in April, down from -52 in March, with 77% of firms reporting that sales were lower than a year ago.

UK retail sales tumble by most in over 40 years, CBI survey shows https://t.co/0ronseduN2 https://t.co/0ronseduN2 pic.twitter.com/XZH4S8aOT9

— Reuters UK (@ReutersUK) April 27, 2026

Advertisement

Meanwhile, civil society is mobilising. More than 50 organisations, including the End Fuel Poverty Coalition, Greenpeace and trade unions, have signed the Make Green Fair open letter, demanding the government guarantee every UK household a fair share of renewable energy benefits.

With energy prices surging again due to the war on Iran, campaigners warn that fuel poverty will deepen unless Ed Miliband acts now.

Miliband announced an “era of clean energy security” last week, promising to “significantly expand the pipeline of renewables”.

The Government’s measures to deal with the coming energy shocks are baby steps says Ruth of Fuel Poverty Action @FuelPovAction
@financialeyes pic.twitter.com/FxIHMJkJuk

— Canary (@TheCanaryUK) April 27, 2026

Advertisement

Miliband’s promise is welcome as fossil fuel companies like BP are expected to enjoy “exceptional” profits from trading this quarter, while the rising prices are passed on to consumers.

Missing from both Cooper and Miliband’s framing, however, is the money flowing into the war itself — the very war that has led to this economic crisis and now threatens to trigger a severe economic fallout in the UK.

Early on Monday, data showed that European NATO countries’ military spending had rapidly increased in 2025.  Without tackling the US-led aggression on West Asia, South America and elsewhere, how can these politicians expect us to believe they want to shield us from the fallout of the very instability they are encouraging?

Featured image via the Canary

By The Canary

Source link

Source link

ITV has responded to accusations of favouritism following the chaotic I’m A Celebrity: South Africa finale.

On Friday night, the cast of the all-star I’m A Celebrity came together for a special live reunion, during which contestants Jimmy Bullard and David Haye claimed that the show – which was pre-recorded last year, and aired on ITV over the last month – was edited to make Adam Thomas appear, in the former boxer’s words, “look like a victim”.

Jimmy specifically took issue with the coverage of a blazing row he and Adam had towards the end of their time in camp, during which the soap star repeatedly called him a “cunt”, which did not make it into the final edit.

Jonathan Hordle/ITV/Shutterstock

When the former footballer raised this at the reunion, hosts Ant and Dec pointed out that Adam’s language had been “unbroadcastable”, with ITV insisting at the time: “We show an accurate and fair representation of events.”

Advertisement

Since the final, a representative for the broadcaster told The Mirror: “Suggesting ITV favours anyone is an incorrect and harmful accusation. All campmates were invited to the live finale to celebrate the series and to share their thoughts, individually and collectively.

“Once all campmates were invited on stage, Ant and Dec spoke to Jimmy first; he arguably received the most airtime during this part of the show.”

During the final, viewers chose Adam as the winner of the show, ahead of runner-up Sir Mo Farah, meaning the soap star is the second former contestant to be crowned an I’m A Celebrity “Legend” after Myleene Klass in 2023.

Jonathan Hordle/ITV/Shutterstock

Following the broadcast, both Jimmy and David claimed they’d been ejected from the I’m A Celebrity studio.

Advertisement

A show source told HuffPost UK: “Some campmates were uncomfortable being on stage with David and Jimmy, so we sent them home during Unpacked.”

I’m A Celebrity will return to our screens for its regular series, filmed in Australia, later this year.

Source link

Euphoria star Chloe Cherry has shared her take on some of season three’s most divisive scenes.

Chloe previously worked as a pornographic performer and OnlyFans model, at one point even appearing in a porn parody of the Emmy-winning series, before being cast as Faye Valentine in the second season of Euphoria.

During a recent interview with Refinery29, the actor was asked for her thoughts on the recent season three storyline in which Sydney Sweeney’s character turning to OnlyFans to pay for her wedding, posing in a series of increasingly provocative photo-shoots, which has raised eyebrows among many viewers, with some critics suggesting that these scenes cross a “degrading” line.

She responded that people today have the “weirdest ideas” and “fantasies of sex work being so empowering” based on news stories about OnlyFans making huge amounts of money.

Advertisement

“I don’t even really understand what it means to be on OnlyFans. Honestly, I don’t even really know what people are doing on there,” she explained. “It’s really hard to say if it would give [Cassie, Sydney Sweeney’s character] any power.

“Obviously, Cassie is extremely attractive, so it probably would lead to her making a lot of money. But it just feels crazy as fuck to see somebody living like Cassie turn to sex work. It’s like, ‘holy shit, that’s where we’re at in society?’.”

She added: “I really think that OnlyFans is a crazy, weird phenomenon of the 2020s that we will look back on and be very confused by.”

Euphoria creator Sam Levison previously weighed in on Cassie’s OnlyFans storyline before the new season began airing.

“What we wanted to always find is the other layer of absurdity that we’re able to tie into it so that we’re not too inside of her fantasy or illusion,” he insisted, pointing out the use of lighting and the inclusion of her housekeeper as a makeshift photographer was intended to provide a “gnarly and jarring” contrast.

Advertisement

He added: “We wanted to capture what she’s trying to show the audience and be inside of it, but then also pull back wider and see how depressing it is.”

New episodes of Euphoria are coming to Sky and HBO Max every Monday in the UK.

Source link

Ongoing rearmament efforts by European NATO members led to the sharpest annual growth in spending in Central and Western Europe since the end of the Cold War, with 2025 marking the record increase.

While this is sombre news from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), resisting rearmament offers the British left a historic opportunity to link working class material gains with anti-imperialist struggle.

Military spending continues to rise

Between 2024 and 2025, global military expenditure rose by 2.9 per cent to $2887 billion, the eleventh consecutive year of growth. European NATO rearmament efforts have largely driven the increase, which led to the sharpest annual spending surge in Central and Western Europe since the Cold War, even as US spending declined.

Although the decline in US military expenditure in 2025 is likely to be short-lived — US Congress has approved more than $1 trillion for 2026 and President Trump’s latest budget proposal could raise spending to $1.5 trillion in 2027 — the 2025 decline shows transfers to Ukraine by the US are falling.

Xiao Liang, a researcher with SIPRI’s military expenditure and arms production programme, said:

Given the range of current crises, as well as many states’ long-term military spending targets, this growth will probably continue through 2026 and beyond.

Lining the pockets of arm dealers

The real question is who is benefiting from this eleventh consecutive rise in military spending.

BAE Systems, Rheinmetall, Thales and Leonardo led a record $5 billion shareholder payout in 2025, according to Vertical Research Partners.

British BAE Systems has paid a total of $16 billion to its shareholders since 2016. Its shareholders are the usual suspects — America’s Capital Research & Management Co, BlackRock Investment Management (UK) Ltd, WCM Investment Management LLC, Fidelity Management & Research Co, and The Vanguard Group. Together, they hold more than 25% of the company’s equity.

The wealthiest 10% of Americans hold 93% of all stocks, the highest level ever recorded. Therefore, the profits from this military spending surge flow overwhelmingly to the wealthiest American households.

War and death are opportunities for the arms dealers of the world. The FT summarised their fortunes well recently:

Many defence contractors have seen their fortunes transformed by the Ukraine war, with order books and revenues hitting record highs. The Middle East conflict promises another injection of cash into the sector as the US and its allies rush to refill their weapon stockpiles.

Resisting rearmament as a political strategy

The UK, as a part of NATO, has clearly subordinated itself to the needs of US monopoly capital. The extensive dealings of the UK government with Palantir are another case in point.

Britain’s subordination to US monopoly capital is evident in its support for three pillars of US grand strategy: NATO enlargement, Zionist hegemony in West Asia, and strategic confrontation with China.

Climate Vanguard recently published a primer on why resisting British rearmament should be a primary strategic focus of the British left.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Climate Vanguard (@climatevanguard)

The four reasons they articulate are:

1. Resisting rearmament can provide material gains to the British working class while weakening imperialism. It is a historic opportunity to link material gains for the British working class with the imperative of anti-imperialism.
2. Resisting rearmament has the potential to re-energise, unite, and strengthen a scattered left.
3. Resisting rearmament is a wedge issue that can fracture the far right’s coalition. It distinguishes the left as a genuine insurgent force from the far right’s faux populism.
4. Resisting rearmament is necessary to prevent the two existential threats of our time: thermonuclear war and ecological breakdown.

While the news from SIPRI is somber, Climate Vanguard is right to argue that resisting rearmament presents a historic opportunity: one that links material gains for the British working class and weakens US imperialism.

Featured image via the Canary

By Nandita Lal

Source link