Trump ‘disappointed, but not done' with Putin after announcing new Ukraine deal
Date: 2025-07-15T07:31:53.000Z
Title: Brexit 'sloppy' but getting 'straightened out' by Starmer, Trump says
Content: Trump was also asked about his views on Britain, saying the implementation of Brexit 'has been on the sloppy side, but I think it's getting straightened out.'
'I really like the prime minister a lot, even though he is a liberal,' he said of Keir Starmer.
He also said he was 'looking forward' to his state visit in Britain in September, saying his focus was on having great time and showing respect to King Charles III.
Trump also said he believed the UK would support the US 'if we had a war,' hailing the special relationship between the two countries.
'I'm not sure that a lot of the other countries would be [fighting for the US], which is unfair, because we pay far more than anybody else.'
He ends by saying he wants America to be a 'great country, and it was a dead country one year ago,' and that's it.
Update:
Date: 2025-07-15T07:31:08.000Z
Title: 'Disappointed in him, but not done with him', Trump says of Putin as he offers his backing to Nato
Content: On Putin, Trump said he thought he had a deal with him on Ukraine 'four times.'
'I'm disappointed in him, but I'm not done with him, but I'm disappointed in him.
We had a deal done four times and then you go home and you see just attacked a nursing home in Kyiv. And so what the hell was that all about?'
Asked if he trusted him, he said:
I trust almost nobody, to be honest with you.
Trump also said he strongly supported Nato, saying that 'Nato is now becoming the opposite of' being obsolete, as he once said.
He added it was 'very unfair because the United States paid for almost 100% of it, but now they are paying their own bills.'
Asked if he believes in Nato's fundamental Article 5 on collective defence, he said:
Yeah, I think collective defence is fine.
Trump also spoke on how his relationship with European leaders changed over the years, saying 'it's maybe not all luck; it's like when you do it twice, it's a big difference.'
'Over the years, they've gotten to know me.
This is not an easy crowd to break into. You understand, these are smart people heading up very, very successful generally, countries, you know, they're all Germany and France, Spain and, you know, big countries.
And you know, I've gotten to know them, and I think they've come to respect my, respect me and my decision making.'
Update:
Date: 2025-07-15T07:30:44.000Z
Title: 'Like to think about it as little as possible,' Trump tells BBC of assassination attempt last year
Content: Trump spoke last night with the BBC's Gary O'Donoghue in a longer phone interview, just broadcast on BBC Radio 4.
They just played the entire interview on air, so let me bring you the key quotes.
Asked about last year's assassination attempt, he said:
Well, I like to think about it as little as possible.
Asked about his first reaction to the attack, he said:
'We had 55,000 people, and it was dead silence. And so, you know, I assumed that they expected the worst, yes, and so I had to let them know I was okay, which is what I did.'
Update:
Date: 2025-07-15T07:27:41.000Z
Title: Morning opening: 'Disappointed, but not done'
Content: US president Donald Trump said he was 'disappointed, but not done' with Russian president Vladimir Putin, hours after he announced a military deal with Nato countries to arm Ukraine.
His announcement, alongside Nato secretary general Mark Rutte, was rather short on detail, but marked an important change in tone from Washington.
But Moscow does not seem to be particularly impressed, with former Russian president and prime minister Dmitry Medvedev saying it simply 'didn't care' about his threats on arms or sanctions.
'Trump issued a theatrical ultimatum to the Kremlin. The world shuddered, expecting the consequences,' Medvedev wrote on X.
He added:
Belligerent Europe was disappointed. Russia didn't care.
We should hear more European reactions throughout the day as EU foreign ministers are meeting in Brussels for more talks on Ukraine, the Middle East, and other issues.
I will bring you all the latest.
It's Tuesday, 15 July 2025, it's Jakub Krupa here, and this is Europe Live.
Good morning.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
25 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Mike Johnson says Ghislaine Maxwell should testify before Congress
Top congressional Republican Speaker Mike Johnson has shockingly come out in favor of the Jefferey Epstein files being released, despite the administration claiming the 'client list' doesn't exist. The Republican shared on a podcast with conservative pundit Benny Johnson that he would like more transparency from the White House surrounding the highly sought after files on the deceased sexual offender. Asked if he would support efforts to have Epstein accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell testify before Congress, the speaker said 'I'm for transparency.' He also appeared open to congress issuing subpoenas to the FBI and Department of Justice to force them to turn over any previously undisclosed files. 'We're intellectually consistent in this... I trust him (Trump). He put together a team of his choosing and they're doing a great job,' the Republican said. 'It's a very delicate subject but we should put everything out there and let the people decide.' 'The White House, and the White House team, are privy to facts that I don't know. I mean this isn't my lane, I haven't been involved in that. But I agree with the sentiment that we need to put it out there.' He also specifically mentioned Attorney General Pam Bondi's previous remarks noting she had Epstein-related documents on her desk before the DOJ claimed last week that no 'client list' exists. 'Pam Bondi, I don't know when she originally made the statement, I think she was talking about documents, as I understood it they were on her desk,' Speaker Johnson claimed. 'I don't know if she was specific about a list or whatever. But she needs to come forward and explain that to everybody ... I am anxious to get this behind us.' His sentiment appeared to cut against the White House's reluctance to engage on the topic. Last week Trump balked after a reporter asked him about Epstein, and Trump posted over the weekend a sprawling Truth Social post seemingly questioning voter's interest in the case. However, as pressure has grown on Attorney General Pam Bondi to release sealed documents on the financier's crimes and jailhouse death, Trump has seemingly relented and is now for additional files being released. 'The attorney general has handled that very well. She's really done a very good job. I think when you look at it, you'll understand that. I would like to see that also, but the credibility is very important,' he said about the Epstein files Tuesday. Firebrand Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., along with other conservatives have been pushing for more information on the Epstein case. 'I fully support the transparency on this issue,' Greene said Tuesday. 'I also think Pam Bondi is doing a great job.' On Monday evening one Republican, Rep. Ralph Norman of South Carolina, voted for a amendment to a bill that would've forced Bondi to release unseen Epstein files on a public portal within 30 days of passage. Norman joined all the Democrats on the Rules Committee push the files into the light of day, however, most Republicans voted down the amendment. Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, did not cast a vote in the matter. Roy and Norman are both members of the House Freedom Caucus, a conservative flank of the House GOP that - in line with their anti-swamp antics - are eager to see what is contained in the elusive documents. Democrats, meanwhile, have seen Republican floundering over the files' release as a sign of division - and they are seeking to exploit it for political gain. 'It makes no sense why they want to hide the evidence against Epstein, and the potential client lists that the attorney general is talking about,' the amendments author, Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., told the Daily Mail. He heaped praise on Greene and Norman for being supportive of the documents' release. 'They should release the files and let the chips fall where they may for whoever for Democrats or Republicans,' Rep. Jimmy Gomez, D-Calif., similarly told the Daily Mail. 'It's really, I think, kind of insulting to their own base, because it's like they campaigned on it,' he added. 'Either they were lying from the get go, or they're covering something up that's in there that they don't want to get out.'
The Guardian
27 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Tread carefully with reform of bank ringfencing, chancellor
Rachel Reeves called it 'the biggest set of reforms to financial regulation in a decade', and, in one narrow sense, her Leeds Reforms would qualify for the description. If the ringfencing regime for banks were to be scrapped, we really would be entering a new era – or going back to an old one, since the separation of banks' retail and investment banking activities was the single biggest regulatory change introduced after the 2008-09 crash to try to prevent another blow-up. Reeves on Tuesday, however, merely announced a review to look at how reforms to ringfencing could 'strike the right balance between growth and stability, including protecting consumer deposits'. One hopes that does not mean outright abolition, which is what banks such as HSBC, Lloyds and NatWest have been urging on the grounds that the rules trap capital and impede growth. The stout defence of ringfencing from Andrew Bailey, governor of the Bank of England, has always felt more compelling: the regime has made banks safer and removal would increase the cost of loans and mortgages. It would surely be hard for a chancellor to override the Bank on this core question, especially when Barclays – which, in theory, might have most to gain from abolition as it has the largest investment bank – is also in the defence camp. A fudged outcome would see more activities allowed within the ringfenced entity. It is technical stuff, but also deeply important. Get it wrong and the cautious voices sounding the alarm over a government in search of a sugar-rush of growth via financial deregulation would have a point. Tread carefully, chancellor: ditching ringfencing in its entirety risks unlearning the lessons of the last crisis. In other respects, however, Reeves's red tape-slashing, investment-boosting, obstacle-removing reforms can be criticised in the other direction: yes, some changes are sensible tidying-up exercises but others are underwhelming. Take the showbiz headliner: the advertising campaign to encourage over-cautious savers to push a few quid into the stock market. The goal is admirable in itself for the reasons the Treasury gives: savers are doing themselves long-term financial harm if they do not understand that shares beat cash over most long-term periods. • Looser mortgage rules, which allow lenders to provide bigger mortgages worth more than 4.5 times borrowers' annual income. The move could help another 36,000 first-time buyers per year, according to the Bank of England • A permanent government-backed mortgage guarantee scheme, in which taxpayers will pick up the bill when a borrower defaults, in an effort to encourage participating banks to offer more 91-95% mortgages • A government-backed but industry-funded advertising campaign to encourage consumers to invest their cash savings in shares • Plans to allow banks to send information about 'investment opportunities' to savers that have cash sitting in low interest rate accounts, encouraging them to shift money to stocks and shares • A fresh review of ringfencing rules which were introduced after the 2008 financial crisis in order to protect consumer cash from a bank's riskier activities • A review of warnings attached to investment products to ensure that people are 'accurately' judging risk levels • Plans to 'radically streamline' accountability rules for senior bankers and finance bosses • Reining in the powers of the Financial Ombudsman Service, which settles complaints between consumers and businesses • Cutting the rate of interest – and therefore total compensation – paid out to consumers wronged by City firms and imposing a 10-year limit for claims • A new 'concierge service' to court international investors and create a one-stop-shop to promote the UK and provide tailored support to help businesses plan where to invest. But it's not as if the Treasury itself is doing much more than cheering from the wings. The ad campaign will be funded by the industry, which presumably could have launched the thing itself without government endorsement. At the very least, Reeves could have given the volunteers a hand by abolishing stamp duty on shares for purchases within ISAs. Even that gentle step was conspicuous by its absence. Tweaking risk-warning messaging may help at the margins. So will better access for retail investors to corporate debt and corporate fund-raising, as announced by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA). But if Reeves is truly alarmed (as she should be) by the statistic that the UK has the lowest level of retail investment in the G7 group of rich economies, bolder measures are needed. It could take a generation to change saving habits to encourage 'informed risk-taking' but the crisis in the London stock market is happening now. Stamp duty remains the drag in the background, and is the real test of the Treasury's seriousness. Elsewhere, several reforms look justified: help for 'challenger' banks on capital rules; some loosening of rules to help first-time buyers; a trimming of the size of the authorisation regime for bank senior managers in the interest of efficiency; changes to allow the London Stock Exchange to quote dollar- and euro-denominated shares. Sign up to Business Today Get set for the working day – we'll point you to all the business news and analysis you need every morning after newsletter promotion A third pot of policies are straightforward lobbying victories for the City. That lot includes the neutering of the financial ombudsman service, but the banks may have had a point about the body acting as a 'quasi regulator' within the FCA. The timing of the reform looks terrible while the unresolved car finance affair rumbles on, but the regulatory setup did look basically confused. The onus now falls on the FCA to act sooner to spot looming scandals, which is not a wholly reassuring thought. But let's not overstate the significance of the Mansion House speech. Yes, the financial services industry deserves its place as one of the eight growth-driving sectors within the government's overall industry strategy; it's too big to ignore. But, despite some of the rhetoric, it's not as if the City is currently being strangled by regulation in the way that purer industrial sectors are being hampered by high energy costs. So don't go overboard on ringfencing reform: it is the bit that matters the most.
Economist
34 minutes ago
- Economist
Cynical realism won't save India from Donald Trump
IT IS HARD to knock India's political and business elites off-balance, but President Donald Trump is managing. In Delhi's book-lined studies and the glass-walled corporate towers of Mumbai, grandees are suffering from vertigo. Normally, Indian diplomats and strategists take pride in being unshockable, remaining coolly transactional whatever a wicked world throws at them. But since Mr Trump's return to office, elites are off-kilter.
