Donald Trump ‘moaned he could not access PORN in White House as computers there were blocked'
The US President moaned he could not watch X-rated films as computers there blocked them.
2
Financier Anthony Scaramucci, who worked for Mr Trump in 2017 during his first stint in office, made the revelation while visiting the UK last month.
Mr Trump — who reputedly had flings with porn star Stormy Daniels and a Playboy model — has also discussed death with Sir Keir Starmer, it is reported.
During a White House lunch in February, the President quizzed the PM about younger brother Nick, who died of cancer aged 60.
According to The Spectator mag, he asked: 'Your brother, Keir…he died…was it a good death?'
Instead of replying in full, Starmer steered the conversation back to lowering car tariffs.
Sir Keir's team said Trump was 'obsessed with death', it was claimed.
The revelations came as Trump — a guest at Hugh Hefner's Playboy mansion during his 2016 presidential bid — signed his 'big beautiful Bill' into law.
It enacts key parts of his agenda including tax cuts and an immigration purge.
US President Donald Trump said Russia just wanted to -keep killing people- and hinted at sanctions after Moscow launched its largest ever drone and missile attack on Ukraine in the three-year-old war-
2
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
22 minutes ago
- The Guardian
‘I want my vote back': Trump-voting family stunned after Canadian mother detained over immigration status
The family of a Canadian national who supported Donald Trump's plans for mass deportations of immigrants say they are feeling betrayed after federal agents recently detained the woman in California while she interviewed for permanent US residency – and began working to expel her from the country. 'We feel totally blindsided,' Cynthia Olivera's husband – US citizen and self-identified Trump voter Francisco Olivera – told the California news station KGTV. 'I want my vote back.' Cynthia Olivera, a 45-year-old mother of three US-born children, thus joined a growing list of examples contradicting the Trump administration's claims that the immigration crackdown it has spearheaded since the president's return to the Oval Office in January has prioritized targeting dangerous criminals. Being in the US without legal status is generally a civil infraction rather than a criminal violation. Nonetheless, despite its claim that the immigration crackdown is mainly meant to rid the US of violent criminals, the White House has maintained that anyone in the US who lacks legal status is a criminal subject to deportation. Olivera was unwittingly thrust under the weight of those policies after Trump spent his successful 2024 presidential campaign promising to pursue them, earning her husband's vote along the way, according to what he told KGTV. She was just 10 when her parents brought her to the US from Toronto without permission, she said to the station. By 1999, when she was about 19, US immigration officials at the Buffalo border crossing had determined Olivera was living in the country without legal status and obtained an expedited order to deport her. But, after being removed, she was able to return to the US by driving to San Diego from Mexico within a few months. 'They didn't ask me for my citizenship – they didn't do nothing,' Olivera would later say to KGTV. 'They just waved me in.' She recounted spending the next 25 years working in Los Angeles, paying taxes and providing for her family. KGTV reported that its investigative team scoured California and federal court databases, but the unit found no criminal charges under Cynthia Oliver's name. In 2024, toward the end of his presidency, Joe Biden's administration granted her a permit allowing her to work legally in the US. She had also been navigating the process to obtain legal permanent US residency – colloquially referred to as a green card – for years. Nonetheless, instead of supporting the candidate Biden endorsed to succeed him, then vice-president Kamala Harris, Olivera's husband supported Trump in November's White House election. He told KGTV that Trump's promises to deport criminals en masse appealed to both him and Cynthia. And, echoing other mixed immigration status families who have had members affected by Trump's policies, the Oliveras did not believe she would be hurt by her lack of legal US residency. They learned she would in fact be affected by her immigration status when she went for a green card interview in Chatsworth, California, on 13 June. She was detained there by US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice) agents, according to a petition pleading for compassion on behalf of Cynthia. Olivera has since been transferred to an Ice detention center in El Paso, Texas, to await being deported. Speaking to KGTV over a video call from the El Paso facility, Olivera suggested her treatment was undeserved. Sign up to This Week in Trumpland A deep dive into the policies, controversies and oddities surrounding the Trump administration after newsletter promotion 'The US is my country,' Olivera remarked to the station in an interview published on 3 July. 'That's where I met my husband. That's where I went to high school, junior high, elementary [school]. That's where I had my kids.' But the Trump administration had little sympathy for Olivera, despite her husband's support of the president, with a spokesperson saying in a statement that Cynthia was 'an illegal alien from Canada'. Olivera had been 'previously deported and chose to ignore our law and again illegally entered the country', said the spokesperson's statement, as reported by Newsweek. The statement noted that re-entering the US without permission after being deported is a felony, and it said Olivera would remain in Ice's custody 'pending removal to Canada'. Canada's government commented to KGTV that it was aware of Olivera's detention but could not intervene on her behalf because 'every country or territory decides who can enter or exit through its borders'. Francisco Olivera, for his part, summed up his and his wife's disillusion by saying: 'My wife … up until [a couple of weeks] ago, was a strong believer in what was going to happen the next four years.' Cynthia Olivera, meanwhile, said she has told officials she and her husband are willing to pay for her to fly to Canada, where she plans to stay in Mississauga with a cousin. Yet there had been no immediate indication when she may be able to travel to Canada. As she fought back tears, Olivera said to KGTV: 'The only crime I committed is to love this country and to work hard and to provide for my kids.'
Telegraph
44 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Have no sympathy for Labour's ‘grown-ups', they brought this on themselves
The pattern for life under Labour has been set. Ministers, hopelessly out of their depth, try to save money, fail, reverse, ending up spending more, and yet the Left calls them closet-Tories and swans off to Jeremy Corbyn. The excess of lefty MPs in the Commons hasn't brought order to Labour but, like an experiment involving overbred mice in a cage, they've started to eat each other. No 10 will try to make a virtue of this. They will say: 'Keir Starmer is where the public is. He is trying to fix the mess left by the Tories in a fair way – balance the books, control the borders – and opposition from both Corbyn and Reform proves he is the non-ideological man we need.' He's the human version of the BBC. Everyone hates it, so it must be good. Except no one watches the BBC anymore, just as dwindling numbers vote Labour, and the vision of Starmer as a man patrolling the middle-ground doesn't ring true. It's more accurate of Rachel Reeves. For all her sins, she's been saying the same things for over a decade (loudly, through a fixed smile). As shadow work and pensions minister, she promised to be tougher on benefits than George Osborne. She did not serve under Corbyn. She called for immigration to be curbed after Brexit. By contrast, Starmer's career is built on a series of U-turns he believes it is our patriotic duty to forget. Forget that he was a militant Remainer, that he knelt for Black Lives Matter or that he won the Labour leadership calling Corbyn's manifesto 'our foundational document' stuffed with 'radicalism and hope'. Starmer, who said 'the free market has failed', stood for a 'moral socialism' that 'opposes austerity'. Left-wing activists had spent the 2010s alleging that welfare reform amounted to murder; John McDonnell quoted someone saying they wished to 'lynch' Esther McVey. Starmer's Labour might have turned on the Corbynites, but it drew from the same pool of assumptions and resentments. Torsten Bell called the two-child benefit cap immoral. David Lammy said his constituents were 'ruined by austerity, left hungry by Universal Credit'. Angela Rayner apologised for calling Conservatives 'homophobic, racist, misogynistic… scum.' Starmer ran ads that suggested Rishi Sunak was soft on paedophiles and his wife was a tax dodger. He called Boris 'pathetic', a man who 'had no principles, no integrity' (I 'loathed' him, he later said). Having abandoned a coherent critique of Tory economics – which, to be fair, had no coherence anyway – Starmer reframed politics from Left v Right to Good v Evil, and this is what a new generation of MPs presumably believed when they won in 2024. Everything the Tories had done was wicked and unnecessary, a choice born of greed. So, what happened when Reeves took over the Treasury, found Rishi had in fact spent too much money, and announced that 'Dickensian choices' had morphed into Labour necessities? Hurt and panic. Akin to a Puritan discovering their mother is a lush and daddy frequents a drag bar. And so the children rebelled – and we should have no sympathy for the adults who once claimed to be back in charge. Why? Because their moral tone before entering office implied that any effort to limit the state was class violence. Another example from Torsten Bell (there are many): in 2021 he wrote that revising the Covid-era uplift to Universal Credit, worth £20 a week, might damage not only 'family finances' but people's 'mental health'.Tory policy could drive you mad. Of course, the Left has well established in the popular mind that mental health is as serious as physical, so must get PIPs; that Britain is a nation of immigrants and human rights, so we can't deport lawbreakers; and the Earth is on fire, so we can't use new sources of fossil fuel. Many of the problems Labour inherited are the by-products of assumptions Labour has helped embed within British institutions (including within the Tory Party, which is why it did little to reverse the trend). Why was Starmer shouted at when he laid a wreath for the victims of the Southport killer last year? Why has Reeves been derided for crying in the Commons? Because most voters do not see Labour as a change agent with Fairy-soft clean hands, but rather as the latest iteration of a grubby establishment that has run this country for decades, and which shares as much blame as the Conservatives for where we are – arguably, more. New Labour bound Westminster with legal restraints, such as the Human Rights Act or the Climate Change Act, while empowering quangos that operate as watchdogs against elected officials. Whoever you vote for, policy options are narrowed so far that we can really only travel in one direction. Thus the economy is in constant crisis because spending is axiomatic, frugality penalised and alternatives for growth shut off (ask Liz Truss). Reeves, in her first year, found herself testing what this political system would tolerate with her modest mix of tax hikes and savings. Last week's welfare rebellion rules out further cuts, while her fiscal rules render it harder to borrow, leaving only taxes on the table, which will kill the growth that grows the pie that makes progressive government feasible. Changing course will be difficult. Starmer and Corbyn have profound differences, but they share the psychological defect of seeing themselves as Very Good People – a condition that makes it easy to give criticism but hard to take it. Good People cannot accept they are wrong because their rightness, or righteousness, is the rock upon which they construct a life. Sitting in Westminster, it's fun to hear Labour MPs bitch about each other. The Starmerites truly loathe the Corbynites; they are 'professional activists 'who harm the people they're meant to help'. The Corbynites say the Starmerites will never fix a capitalist system they don't understand, and thus haven't learnt to hate. Out of power, this conflict was barely worth a column in the Morning Star, but as we enter Year Two of the revolution, journalists must study every nuance, unpack every conference motion, to see where this civil war is taking us. If you want a vision of the future, Winston, it is pro-Gaza activists glueing themselves to a truck at London's Pride parade on Saturday. Black flags v rainbow flags. A family row with consequence, because the entire country is stuck in the traffic behind, pumping the horn, waving our fists, but going nowhere.
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
A glimmer of hope in Gaza? Inside the fragile ceasefire push as Trump hosts Netanyahu
A proposal for a badly needed ceasefire in Gaza will be top of the agenda during a key visit between Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and US President Donald Trump this week. After months of deadlock and a soaring death toll in Gaza, a potential breakthrough appeared when Trump announced a proposal for a 60-day truce, which he said could pave the way for discussions to end the 21-month-long devastating war. On Sunday, Netanyahu flew to Washington DC – a third trip since Trump took office in January. As he boarded the plane, he said he vowed to bring home the remaining 50 Israeli captives held by Hamas militants in Gaza, adding: 'the discussion with President Trump can certainly help advance these results. At the same time, an Israeli negotiating team flew to Qatar, where Hamas delegations are already meeting with Qatari and Egyptian mediators. Reaching a deal has felt impossible in the recent past. Previous negotiations have repeatedly broken down, with Israel stating it would not consider a permanent ceasefire until Hamas was defeated. Hamas, for its part, has refused to engage in any talks that do not outline a definitive end to the war. Speaking to officials from Israel and Hamas, those briefed on the negotiations, as well as US-linked mediators, it appears there is a genuine shift in momentum — although significant obstacles remain. In Gaza, Palestinian health officials say that since the last ceasefire collapsed in March, Israel's unprecedented bombardment of the narrow strip has killed nearly 7,000 more people — pushing the overall death toll since 2023 to nearly 57,500. Most of the 2.3 million-strong population is struggling through famine-like conditions, as Israel has intermittently imposed full blockades on the entry of aid and supplies. Hundreds of Palestinians have reportedly been killed by Israeli fire while attempting to collect food at controversial aid distribution points. Families — displaced multiple times and now living in tents — told me they can no longer survive under conditions which are 'worse than a Hollywood horror movie'. In Israel, the largest group representing the remaining 50 Israeli hostages believed to be held in Gaza, has taken to the streets almost every week, demanding Netanyahu agree to a ceasefire. Fewer than half of those hostages are believed to still be alive. The families held another protest on Sunday evening, as Netanyahu travelled to the US, declaring: 'This is the time to save lives.' They have repeatedly told me that every day their loved ones remain in Gaza could be their last. A turning point in Gaza? What's changed on the ground There does, however, appear to be some movement. An official close to the mediators in Doha told me that US guarantees that this deal would lead to a permanent ceasefire are a first and a key change that may help assuage Hamas's concerns. That official, who asked to remain anonymous as they are not permitted to speak to the media, believes that with proper promises from Washington, Israel's most powerful ally and primary arms provider, Hamas might remain at the table. A different official, briefed on Israel's position, who also asked for anonymity, told me that added to this there is more 'flexibility' from Netanyahu to discuss an end to the war. Netanyahu has faced fierce pressure from the extreme-right members of his fragile, razor-thin coalition not to enter into any truce. Israel's far-right Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich has called any deal a 'surrender' and threatened to exit the coalition — a move that would likely collapse the government. However, the Israeli prime minister is in a stronger position domestically after Israel's recent intense bombardment of Iran, which took out much of the military leadership and caused 'extensive' damage to Iran's nuclear facilities. That came on the heels of Israeli airstrikes in Lebanon that decimated the Iran-backed militant group Hezbollah — another of Israel's regional foes. 'There's a different kind of atmosphere altogether after Iran,' that official told me. 'Netanyahu is in a mindset to go for a deal.' Netanyahu reputedly hopes to use a Gaza ceasefire as a launching point to expand the Abraham Accords — the 2020 diplomatic normalisation agreements Israel signed with Bahrain and the UAE. The official added that Netanyahu hopes powerful regional players like Saudi Arabia may now be more inclined to sign on. Meanwhile, Hamas's position has undoubtedly been weakened. The militant group, which led the bloody 7 October 2023 attacks on southern Israel killing over 1,000 people and taking more than 250 people hostage, is under extreme pressure to end the war. It is struggling to survive: short on commanders, deprived of much of its tunnel network, grappling with rebellious local clans, enduring relentless Israeli bombardment, and now facing a decline in support from its most powerful ally, Iran. The lack of a military response from Iran-backed groups in the region to Israel's strikes on Iran — whether due to strategic restraint or lack of capability — has cast a long shadow over Hamas's strategic position. Hamas officials told me they still have firm red lines, including the unfettered delivery of aid to Gaza, which they insist should not be routed through Israel's controversial aid mechanism run by a US-based company called the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation. They also want the complete withdrawal of Israeli troops from the territory and an end to the war. And so that leads us to the potential obstacles. Before Netanyahu left Israel, he said that Hamas had proposed changes to the US proposal which were 'unacceptable to Israel.' A source familiar with the matter told me one of the main changes concerned delivery of aid: 'Hamas does not want GHF there, they want a mechanism run by the United Nations and the Red Cross'. Hamas also wants Israel to withdraw all its troops. Those briefed on Israel's position have made clear that in particular Israel will not agree to withdraw from the strategic border between Gaza and Egypt — a nine-mile strip of land known as the Philadelphi Corridor. In fact there are reportedly Israeli plans to connect it to a newly planned corridor around three miles deep into Gaza — named Morag after an Israeli settlement that used to exist before the 'disengagement' from Gaza in 2005. Hamas has also objected to US guarantees that this deal would herald an end to the conflict. 'The guarantees to end the war, the wording that comes from the American administration it is not apparently strong enough for Hamas,' the official added. Perhaps the most contentious sticking point is who governs Gaza in the future. Israel insists it cannot include Hamas in any future administration of the territory. There are also questions about whether the occupied West Bank will be dragged into the negotiations. In leaked reports of phone conversations between the US administration and Israeli officials — published in the Israeli press last month — Washington reportedly signalled it would be willing to acknowledge 'limited Israeli sovereignty' in parts of the West Bank. That has raised fears the US could effectively recognise Israel's de facto annexation of territory Palestinians hope will form the basis of a future state — including Israeli settlements, which are widely considered illegal under international law. There is still a long way to go until a deal can be signed, and a lot that could scupper any agreement. But for the first time in a while all sides are at the negotiating table, and that for now is a glimmer of hope for the civilians suffering slaughter and starvation.
