About that “foreign interference in U.S. elections” thing: not Russia, this time, but… Britain’s Labour Party? Even the Brits are appalled:
There are some basic rules in foreign policy obvious even to the most half-witted politician.
One is that you can never be seen to interfere in any way in the elections of a democratic country. You don’t state preferences about any of the candidates, and you don’t try to influence the outcome.
This cardinal rule has been spectacularly broken by the Labour Party, which has enraged Donald Trump by apparently lending support to his rival, Kamala Harris, in the presidential campaign.
Of course, having fucked around and been found out, the denials quickly followed:
Labour denies it has done any such thing, pointing out that its activists have often travelled at their own expense to help Democratic Party candidates in previous elections.
Uh huh.
Maybe. But the Trump camp has unearthed a LinkedIn post from Sofia Patel, Labour’s head of operations, encouraging ‘party staff’ to ‘help our friends across the pond elect their first female President’. Activists were invited to send Ms Patel an email. She added that she would be going to America for the final two weeks of the campaign.
What is this if not a call to Labour activists to roll up their sleeves on behalf of Kamala Harris? It would matter less if the post – which has been deleted as Labour desperately tries to cover its tracks – had come from an obscure underling.
But the head of operations is an important figure. She represents Labour. Ms Patel’s message is that activists should do whatever they can to defeat Donald Trump. This looks like a blatant attempt by the governing party to influence the election.
And it is. Glover points out:
Donald Trump won’t be [forgiving]. He is vengeful, and likes to bear a grudge. He also has a low opinion of Labour, which his aides describe in a formal complaint to the U.S. Federal Election Commission as being ‘far-Left’. This is a characteristic exaggeration.
Except, of course, that it’s no exaggeration. Compared to the U.S. political spectrum — which is the milieu in which Trump is active — Labour IS about as far Left as any Socialist party could be.
Doesn’t matter, one way or the other. As Glover points out:
Of course, if Trump isn’t elected on November 5, Labour’s injudicious meddling won’t matter. But if he becomes America’s next President – an increasingly likely eventuality, which I regard with foreboding – he could bear a grievance against the British Government. That would affect us all.
Trump already knows that the Foreign Secretary, David Lammy, has variously described him in the past as a ‘neo-Nazi sympathising sociopath’, a ‘dangerous clown’, and ‘a tyrant in a toupee’.
And then Glover panders to his readers by adding:
At least partly true.
Which part, Stephen? The “neo-Nazi”, “sociopath”, “dangerous”, “clown” or “tyrant”?
Lest we forget, Trump has already been President once before, during which time he exhibited none of those traits that the Left tried to smear him with (and continues, like Glover, to do so). And I hate to spoil your fun, you Lefty assholes, but he’s not going to do it during his next term, either.
Just don’t expect any special favors from him, Britishland — Trump’s not the only one who bears a grudge, and if nothing else, he’s keenly aware of what his supporters expect from him.
