Who's on JD Vance's Cotswolds guest list?
First up was Foreign Secretary David Lammy, who took a fishing trip with Donald Trump's second in command at the weekend to discuss the war in Gaza and the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Shadow justice secretary Robert Jenrick – and onetime Tory leadership contender – met with the Vice President on Tuesday, for a tête-à-tête before a drinks event. Jenrick wasn't the only shadow cabinet member to get the call up, however, with shadow home secretary Chris Philp also invited to see Vance on Tuesday.
His boss, Kemi Badenoch has not been so fortunate – although a Conservative spokesperson insisted that the VP and Tory leader 'just couldn't make it work with schedules'. Vance's press secretary, Taylor Van Kirk, added:
The Vice-President met with a number of people during his trip to the United Kingdom. He specifically tried to see Kemi Badenoch, a friend of his, but a meeting was not possible due to their conflicting schedules. Any suggestion otherwise is false.
That's that then! Reform leader Nigel Farage didn't manage to meet President Trump during his visit to Scotland last month, but he has been luckier this time. The Clacton MP secured an eleventh-hour meet with the VP, and is seeing Vance this morning for breakfast in the Cotswolds.
And there's more: Vance met with his friend (and Spectator writer) James Orr on Monday for a barbecue, alongside Tory MP Danny Kruger and, er, even one Thomas Skinner – who befriended Vance online. It's certainly not the first time the Apprentice and MAGA have crossed paths, eh? Bosh.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Spectator
23 minutes ago
- Spectator
Tories split on Ricky Jones' verdict
The decision to clear Ricky Jones of encouraging violent disorder has not gone down well with many senior politicians. Footage of the suspended Labour councillor went viral last August after he suggested that far-right protesters should have their throats slit. Jones, 58, drew his finger across his throat and called demonstrators 'disgusting Nazi fascists'. On Friday, jurors found him not guilty after just half an hour of deliberations. Many were quick to contrast it to the Lucy Connolly case, whereby the wife of a Tory politician was jailed for 31 months during the Southport riots after writing 'set fire to all the… hotels [housing asylum seekers]… for all I care'. Some senior Conservatives certainly see it this way. Chris Philp, the Shadow Home Secretary, made that comparison explicit, writing that 'the development of two tier justice is becoming increasingly alarming.' He added that ministers 'must come forward with plans to ensure justice is handed out equally, regardless of the background or views of the perpetrator' but 'this Labour government seems to be quite happy with two tier justice'. His colleague James Cleverly, the Housing spokesman, called the verdict 'unacceptable', writing on X that 'decisions like this are adding to the anger that people feel and amplifying the belief that there isn't a dispassionate criminal justice system'. Clearly, this decision is a controversial one. But there is a crucial difference between the Jones trial and the punishment meted out to Lucy Connolly: she pleaded guilty so she did not receive a jury trial. Had she done so, she might well have been acquitted. Take the case of former Royal Marine Jamie Michael. Charged with stirring up racial hatred after Southport, he was acquitted by his jury after just 17 minutes. It was only five weeks' ago that Robert Jenrick was leading a big campaign against proposals to limit jury trials. For some of his fellow Tories to now rush to condemn them, off the back of one verdict, is an overreaction, given the essential pressure valve they function. All this matters because judicial reform is likely to be a cornerstone of the next government of the right. Kemi Badenoch is reviewing how Britain to leave the European Court of Human Rights; others want her to go much further. The last Tory administration found itself fighting endless battles in the courts, in a fruitless bid to halt illegal migration. Picking the right battles over the right principles is essential if the next government is to avoid repeating that fate.
Spectator
an hour ago
- Spectator
Putin was the real winner of the Alaska summit
Vladimir Putin couldn't stop smiling at the spectacle awaiting him in Anchorage yesterday, as American soldiers knelt to adjust a red carpet rolled out from his presidential plane. Donald Trump applauded as the Russian President walked towards him under the roar of fighter jets and stepped onto American soil for the first time in a decade. The pair shook hands for the cameras, ignoring a journalist who shouted, 'Mr Putin, will you stop killing civilians?' before riding off together in the presidential limo to the summit site. A royal reception, not a ceasefire, was what the international pariah had come out of his bunker for. After almost three hours of negotiations, Trump left Alaska with neither peace nor a deal. The lunch between the two delegations was cancelled. The brief press conference allowed no questions from the media. A seemingly energetic Putin gave an eight-minute speech on the history of Alaska while Trump stared blankly into the void. On Ukraine, Putin called it a 'brotherly nation', hypocritically claiming that 'everything that's happening is a tragedy for us, a terrible wound'. He then repeated the need to eliminate the 'root causes' of the war, signalling that Russia's demands for Ukraine's capitulation have not shifted. Yet there still seemed to be some sort of an agreement taking shape behind closed doors. Putin said he expected Kyiv and European capitals 'will perceive it constructively and won't throw a wrench in the works'. Trump said that 'many points were agreed' and announced later in a Fox News interview that now it was up to Volodymyr Zelensky to 'get it done'. Trump added that Ukraine would have to make territorial concessions, though Kyiv may not agree because Joe Biden 'handed out money like it was candy'. Asked what advice he would give to Zelensky, Trump said: 'Make a deal. Russia is a very big power. And they [the Ukrainians] are not.' Putin left the summit having achieved the goals he came for. He emerged from international isolation and was welcomed as a king rather than as an indicted war criminal. He left with plenty of photos alongside Trump for the Kremlin propaganda wing to talk about and contrast with pictures of Trump lecturing a humiliated Zelensky in the Oval Office in February. Russia also avoided further sanctions despite rejecting a ceasefire, with Trump promising once again that he might think about it in another 'two or three weeks'. As for Trump, he has nothing to show for the meeting except for being laughed at in Russia and at home. Had there been progress, he would already be boasting about it, but he knows too little about the conflict he is trying to fix, and the stick he carried was too short to make Putin care. The summit labelled 'Pursuing Peace' failed to achieve even a partial ceasefire. No trilateral meeting with Zelensky has been agreed. The war will grind on, soldiers will keep dying and Russia will continue bombing Ukrainian cities. All Trump has to offer is his refrain to Ukraine: make a deal – whatever that means.
Spectator
an hour ago
- Spectator
The good, the bad and the ugly of the Alaska summit
The three-hour Friday summit in Alaska between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin ended as well as it conceivably could have ended: as a big nothingburger. But that does not mean that Ukraine and its supporters can breathe a sigh of relief. Trump may be unhappy that the prospect of his Nobel Peace Prize remains elusive as Putin has not agreed to an immediate ceasefire in Ukraine. But it is far from clear that he will end up directing his anger against Russia. To be sure, it is a good thing that nothing of substance was agreed in Anchorage. Any big great-power bargain made over the heads of Europeans and Ukrainians, which Trump and Putin would then seek to impose on the hapless old continent, would mean the end of any semblance of a rules-based international order, in which borders of European nations are not redrawn by force. We can be reasonably confident that Putin would have been happy to agree to an immediate ceasefire in exchange for Ukraine meeting his maximalist demands – Ukraine's capitulation, the ceding of territories that Russians do not yet control, or a prompt election to unseat Volodymyr Zelenskyy. The failure to reach a deal with Trump suggests that the US administration has not bought into Russia's interpretation of the war and how to end it – at least not yet. The presence of Secretary of State Marco Rubio, once a Russia hawk, in the room might have played a role in preventing the worst-case outcome – unlike in Helsinki where the US president was left with Putin unsupervised for several hours. Yet, 'normie' Republicans must have felt more than a bit of shame about the spectacle that Trump orchestrated – the red carpet, the ride in the 'Beast', and the apparent warmth extended to a mass murderer and child kidnapper all reflect poorly on the United States – and help return Putin from pariah status to a respected global leader. Relatedly, while the summit did not bring about a catastrophe for Ukraine, neither is it likely to lead to better Ukraine policy in Washington. It is hard to imagine now a tightening of existing, congressionally mandated sanctions by the executive branch – never mind the bill put forward by Senators Graham and Blumenthal, imposing a de facto trade embargo on countries buying Russian oil and gas, getting through a Republican-controlled Senate. And, even if Trump does not stand in the way of military sales to Ukraine, it will have to be the Europeans who continue to do the financial heavy lifting – all while being held hostage by America's sluggish defence industrial base. Finally, an ominous, ugly thought. In his remarks, Vladimir Putin warned Kyiv and European capitals against 'throw[ing] a wrench' into the works of the emerging deal (whatever it may be) between Russia and the United States. Clearly, the Russian dictator is playing the long game here: hoping to peel off the United States away from the broader pro-Ukrainian coalition. By itself, the summit has not accomplished that goal yet, but it has likely opened new opportunities to lure Trump and his inner circle closer to Russia. Even before the summit, there was speculation about 'money-making opportunities' that could bring the two world powers closer together. The presence of US Treasury and Commerce Secretaries, Scott Bessent and Howard Lutnick, and Russia's Kirill Dimitriev, the head of the country's sovereign wealth fund – alongside 'tremendous Russian business representatives', as Trump put it – signalled a desire on both sides for normalisation of 'businesslike' relations. In practice, that might mean more investment, trade and other 'deals' – especially ones that generate cash for the Trump family enterprise. What lies at heart of the summit is that the US president neither understands nor cares about understanding Putin's motives and the threat he poses to the world. In contrast, Putin, a former KGB lieutenant colonel, has a solid grasp of what makes Trump and his entourage tick. He might make the occasional mistake and overplay his hand but he has focus, consistency, and a voracious appetite. And all of those, wrapped in a thoroughly delusional view of the world and Russia's place in it, were both on full display and unchallenged on Friday.
