The furore over Labour activists travelling to the US is utter nonsense. It involves Donald Trump. It’s pretty much nonsense by definition. If the man ever did a thoughtful or decent-minded thing, he would have to apologise later for betraying his political values.
On Tuesday, the Trump campaign submitted a legal complaint to the Federal Electoral Commission accusing Labour of breaking US election law and meddling in the country’s affairs by sending out volunteers to campaign for Kamala Harris.
It centres – deep breath – on Daily Telegraph reports of a now-deleted LinkedIn post from Sofia Patel, Labour’s head of operations, which mentioned an offer to “sort your housing”. According to the legal complaint, this suggests a formal paid-for campaign by the party rather than activists paying their own way, apparently. Honestly, the formal complaint is borderline illiterate. Indeed it misspells Britain in the second sentence.
The arguments are so weak they make Ribena taste like whisky. “It is true that the Telegraph article suggests ‘Labour activists’ are ‘volunteers,’ responsible for their own travel and board,” it reads, quite literally trying to build a legal case on implicit linguistic analysis of anonymous briefings to a foreign newspaper.
“However, the Telegraph article draws a distinction between ‘Labour activists’ and ‘staff,’ creating ambiguity as to whether these conditions also apply to paid staff.” A Few Good Men this is not.
There is a lesson to take from this little tantrum, however: Keir Starmer is going to have a difficult time if the Republicans win.
Starmer was at pains to say that he had a “good, constructive discussion” with Trump over a recent dinner. He has to do this. He is the Prime Minister and must establish decent working relations. But in my view, Trump will eventually try to humiliate him, as he has done to so many others before him. This is how he operates. He acts as though every human relationship is zero-sum. He only speaks the language of dominance. He simply does not seem to recognise mutual respect or joint endeavour. He does not even recognise friendliness, which he misinterprets as submissiveness. He is the reptile part of the human brain.
We’re seeing tell-tale signs of that this morning. “When representatives of the British government previously sought to go door-to-door in America, it did not end well for them,” the complaint read. Richard Grenell, Trump’s former national intelligence director and his likely next secretary of state, said on Newsnight: “Whenever a foreign government tries to interfere in an election – that’s desperation.”
You can shrug off references to the US war of independence, or the sneering condescension of Grenell’s quote, but we know what it adds up to. British politicians would never dare to speak to the Americans in this way. And yet Trump most certainly will. It’ll get worse from here. In his interactions, we see how he denigrates, demeans, and belittles those around him. He recently branded Nancy Pelosi “an enemy from within” and called Harris a “shit vice president”.
If Trump becomes president again, Starmer is going to have to try and maintain the UK-US relationship without being humbled in the process. It is imperative that he succeeds. The Prime Minister, and by extension Britain, must not be degraded by this man.
There is also a more significant problem: lack of parity. At least one news cycle will be dedicated to this latest bout of Trump’s doggerel. Questions will be asked about the extent of Labour activity in the US. As Grenell said on Newsnight: “We don’t want to have any foreign interference in our elections”.
But the truth is, they do. It’s just not considered newsworthy. The Trump campaign seemed remarkably unoffended by Nigel Farage’s repeated visits to the US to support him. They seemed unperturbed by Liz Truss’s desperate attempts to ingratiate herself with his campaign. People interfere in other country’s elections all the time. They state what they want to happen.
The big question isn’t about their right to do so. It is what their preference says about them.
Trump attempted to launch a mob assault against American democracy and has threatened to deploy the military against his internal critics. He therefore operates as a red line in British politics.
He separates those on the right who have lost their mind from those who have retained it, no matter how poor their judgement might be in other areas. Generally speaking, the results of this test are reassuring.
Fifty-seven per cent of British Conservatives want Harris to win against just 25 per cent who want Trump to win. Senior Conservative figures who have previously dabbled in populism have said they want a Harris victory, and thereby retain some credibility.
But that is not the whole story. There is a list of British Conservatives who have crossed the red line. They include Truss, Farage, Boris Johnson, Suella Braverman, Jacob Rees-Mogg and Robert Jenrick and several others. We can therefore come to firm conclusions about these people.
They will not support democracy when it collides with their political preferences. No point debating that – it’s clear as day. Trump lied about an election, attempted to conspire against it, and tried to prevent the peaceful transfer of power. If you support him, you are accepting and condoning that behaviour. You are no friend of democracy. You cannot be, by definition.
That is the real story. We have senior figures in British politics, including former prime ministers, who are prepared to jettison their support for democracy. That’s what should be front-page news, rather than cynical gibberish about Labour activists.
'President Musk' is flexing his muscles and revealing how weak Trump is