A Brexit deal in three weeks? Yeah, right.

I hope I'm proved wrong but I have lost faith in there ever being a satisfactory Brexit deal for this beloved country. Dominic Raab, the Brexit secretary, has today predicted that a deal will be agreed within the next three weeks. Obviously he knows a helluva lot more about what is going on in the negotiations than I do but is he really serious or is he just playing the latest round in the poker game between the UK negotiators and the Brussels bureaucrats? There have been 101 predictions in the last six months and I suspect that most people have given up believing any of them. It wasn't that long ago that Theresa May said 95 per cent of the agreement had been completed. A mere five per cent was left. Yes, but the last five per cent is wrapped in impenetrable reinforced concrete - the Northern Ireland question. How does Northern Ireland, the only bit of the UK that will share a border with an EU member country after March 2019, stay a solid part of the United Kingdom AND carry on trading with the South without frontier checks? If the UK leaves the EU customs union, Northern Ireland cannot have a special customs union of its own to enjoy continuing trade relations with the South because that would mean the province would be different from any other part of the UK; and that's unacceptable to the charming members of the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) who retain a vice-like grip around Theresa May's political throat. The Brussels lot says Northern Ireland has to have some form of border arrangement because the northern province will no longer be part of the EU and cannot benefit from EU trading rules unless it is put into a special status. Special to the DUP means not being part of the UK. Thus, impasse, eternal blockage, no solution, zilch, zero, end of life as we know it, or as the DUP knows it. So, Mr Raab, your latest prediction is wonderful news but by next week the newspapers will no doubt be saying "No-deal Brexit gets closer", "Dominic Raab in U-Turn", "Theresa May to be toppled" etc etc. We have been through it all again and again and again. So my plea is, no more predictions. Just get the hell on with it and find a way round the DUP issue before Christmas so we can all celebrate the festivities without having to worry whether the future is doom, doom, doom.

The US goes to war with caravan of migrants

The Pentagon has effectively gone on a war footing to help the civil border authorities stop thousands of migrants from Central America illegally crossing the Mexican border into the US. Most of the 6,500 migrants - in two separate caravans - are still nearly 1,000 miles away from America's southwest border. But next week are the US midterm elections and sending armed troops to the border to show strength, determination and America-First principles will undoubtedly help Donald Trump and the Republican Party. There is no more controversial an issue in the US than immigration. So the deployment of 5,200 regular troops plus helicopters, transport aircraft, 22 miles of razor wire and military police will set the tone for the midterms, although the migrants themselves will not reach the border for weeks. Some might say it's a cynical exercise in political exploitation and I can't imagine Jim Mattis, the defence secretary, was happy signing the deployment order. The problem for the Trump administration and for the thousands of migrants heading for what they hope is a better life than back home is that when the the caravans do eventually arrive, there could be unpredictable consequences. There could be violent confrontations. Let us hope that no shots are fired. Of course it is possible that this grand military operation may turn out to be a waste of time and resources. The original caravan of migrants mostly from Honduras was 7,000-strong but has already dwindled to 3,500. By the time it reaches the US border it could be just in the hundreds which would be manageable without military firepower. However, the second group which consists of 3,000 migrants is currently at the Guatemala/Mexico border. The multi-group phenomenon is relatively new and this is what is scaring the White House. Trump will be thinking if this kind of mass migration is not stopped in its tracks, the US could be facing an increasing security challenge, just like Europe has been facing since the so-called Arab Spring when Germany's Angela Merkel, in a moment of extraordinary but foolish generosity, opened her arms to a million migrants. Her announcement yesterday that she will not stand again as Chancellor had more to do with that decision than anything else because she and her party have been losing popular support ever since.

Is a Trump cabinet reshuffle imminent?

The White House whisperers are at it again. Look out, they say, for a big changeover in the president's cabinet after the midterm elections. The names being suggested are hardly surprising. Jim Mattis, the redoubtable but somewhat beleaguered defence secretary who has always dismissed such talk and soldiers on, Jeff Sessions, the poe-faced attorney general who has been nearly sacked half a dozen times, Kirstjen Nielsen, homeland security secretary who has been losing Trump's support for some time because of the perceived failure of her department to stop the flow of immigrants into the US, commerce secretary Wilbur Ross, Ryan Zynke, interior secretary, and maybe John Kelly, chief of staff. Trump has his eye right now on the midterms but as soon as they are over he will be surrounding himself with a new team to ensure victory in the 2020 presidential election. Trump has claimed that there are queues of people waiting to join his administration, so I guess there will be no shortage of candidates to fill these appointments. But the White House will no doubt do its best to play down the latest rumours because the last thing the president wants is an image of more chaos and confusion when he is desperate to ensure the Republican Party comes out on top in both the Senate and House of Representatives. If Mattis genuinely wants to stay on until 2020 at the Pentagon, then an early departure next month will be sign as a highly disruptive sacking. Being a retired four-star general he will go quietly, no doubt thanking the president for honouring him with the job for 22 months. But for the Pentagon it will be a serious blow. Mattis is popular and regarded as a tough and effective defence secretary. There is also trouble ahead because the Pentagon looks like having its budget reduced in 2020, from its 2019 budget of $716 billion to $700 billion. It will need a potent defence secretary to turn that around and persuade the White House to push for a bigger slice of the federal budget. Trump has boasted that he is building a bigger and better military, but an actual cut of $16 billion in 2020 will inevitably lead to a reduction in key programmes. Perhaps even the much-vaunted hypersonic weapons programme could be put back, allowing Russia and China to advance further ahead in this highly competitive technological race. There is no obvious instant replacement for Mattis. Trump would be wise to hang on to him. Sessions probably has no support and looks doomed, and Kirstjen Nielsen likewise, although she has her former boss at Homeland Security in the White House - John Kelly. She was his chief of staff at Homeland Security and he remains chief of staff in the White House, although his departure has been rumoured almost as many times as Mattis's and Session's. If Kelly survives, perhaps Nielsen will too. But that will depend totally on Trump's mood after the midterms. If the House majority falls to the Democrats, Trump is going to be very very angry and no one's job will be safe.

A terrible week in Trump's America

It has been a week of murder, mayhem, bombs and more murder. The Saudis at last admitted the killing of Jamal Khashoggi was premeditated, some right-wing Trump-supporting crazy man sent more than a dozen explosive devices to Democrat and Democrat-supporting VIPs, and a fascist walked into a synagogue in Pittsburgh and opened fire causing multiple casualties. There is no question that violence breeds violence. For the synagogue shooting to take place in the same week of the multiple mail bombs cannot be a coincidence. Both appear to have been inspired by hate and anger, two words that crop up regularly in Donald Trump's America. However much he condemns such incidents, the fact is his rhetoric and tweets have given comfort to the crazies of the United States. More than anything, Trump is clearly concerned that these acts of violence may cause voters to turn against him in the midterm elections. He has as good as said so himself in the case of the mail bomber. Unless I missed it, I don't think Trump has ever said how sorry he was that mail bombs were sent to Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and other notable Democrats. The Khashoggi murder has also caused divisions because of Trump's ambivalent reactions to suspected Saudi government responsibility for the planned assassination and dismemberment of the dissident journalist. It took Jim Mattis, the US defence secretary, to say what the White House should have said from the beginning, that the murder of Khashoggi will have a destabilising impact across the Middle East. All these violent incidents will also have an impact on the US midterm elections, now only ten days away. It could go either way, more support for the Republicans or a swing towards the Democrats.

Should Megyn Kelly be fired?

Having spent three years working in Washington I got to admire Megyn Kelly appearing every day on Fox News. She was always a very confident and assured interviewer, strong voice and looked great. With all those combined assets there were always people who were jealous of her. I just thought she was a good professional journalist and I liked her style. Her tough questions to Donald Trump before he became president were ruthless but necessary and as a consequence she received some pretty outrageous and disgusting putdowns by Trump. One particular comment by him was so mysogynistic that every woman - and decent man - on the planet would have been revolted. Now she is in trouble. She made some remarks on her NBC morning show which have caused outrage and she is about to be sacked it seems. I don't know her personally but I admire her as a television presenter and I seriously doubt that she meant her remarks to be racist. What she said was that when she was a kid people used to blacken their faces for Halloween and she didn't see anything wrong with it. She said that now white people who blackened their faces and black people who whitened their faces as part of a costume for Halloween were criticised but she questioned whether it was racist. She said one more thing, that a reality TV show star had blackened her face and put on an afro wig to look like Diana Ross of the Supremes. She didn't see anything wrong with that provided it was meant as a mark of respect for the superstar singer. Megyn Kelly got slammed for these "racist" remarks and was forced to make an on-air apology. Now she looks like losing her job and perhaps her career as a television presenter. Racism or perceived racism is a major major issue today, and rightly so. But I believe Kelly was merely alluding to what it was like when she was a kid when such things as dressing up as a black person was not seen as a racist act. When I was a child we had the Black and White Minstrel show on television where white singers had their faces painted black. It was hugely popular and it never entered my head that it was racist. I don't remember my parents ever saying: "This is disgraceful it shouldn't be allowed, it's an insult to black people." Nowadays, everything has changed. A show like that could never be broadcast. Greater awareness of the sensitivities of different races and different coloured skins and different religions is one of society's most significant developments. I hope that Megyn Kelly would agree but her remarks gave the impression that she didn't care. All she needed to have done in her show was to say something like this: "Of course that's my memory of when I was a kid but obviously today you have to appreciate that society has changed and this is why blackening faces is no longer acceptable." She didn't say that because I assume she wanted to provoke some responses from the audience by being a little controversial. It was a fatal misjudgment. But should her career be ruined? No.

Russian and Chinese governments have no moral scruples!

Surprise surprise. The US and western governments boycott the Saudi "Davos" investment conference at the Ritz-Carlton in Riyadh in protest at the premeditated (Saudi government word) and savage murder of Saudi dissident journalist Jamal Khashoggi, and thus miss out on cosying up to Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and signing big fat contracts. So who leaps in to fill the empty chairs at the conference, not minding the least about the brutal slaughter of a Saudi national in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul? Well the Russians and Chinese of course. It doesn't bother either Beijing or Moscow, they're used to dissident types mysteriously dying in unexplained circumstances, so why pass up a golden chance to snatch lucrative contracts away from the US and Europe? It's such a cynical world: money before morality; I suppose it was always thus. But for Beijing and Moscow, the murder of Khashoggi has provided a unique chance not only to win contracts with Saudi Arabia but also to screw the US and exhibit undying love for the Riyadh royal family. The empty chairs at the big money conference headed by the Crown Prince filled up so rapidly with Russian and Chinese delegates that the missing representatives from Saudi Arabia's oldest friends in the West were hardly noticed. Bin Salman turned the screw by telling the conference that now he knew who his best friends were and who his best enemies were. Ok Mr Crown Prince you're welcome to your new Russian and Chinese friends. But his sucking up to Moscow and Beijing will in the end be his undoing because, strategically, Saudi Arabia needs the United States almost as much as the United States needs Saudi Arabia. Lose American support, and the whole geopolitical landscape in the Middle East is going to change. That won't be good news for Saudi Arabia. The great "reforming" Crown Prince could be the one who irretrievably damages the kingdom's reputation. Trump must be fuming.

Bombs sent to Obama, Clinton and others prove the US remains Disunited

First and foremost those responsible for making and then sending pipe bombs to Obama, Hillary Clinton, CNN, John Brennan, former CIA chief, and others are guilty of a heinous, murderous criminal act. But the bombs were also a political punch in the face for liberal-minded people in America. This was an attack on democracy and on the Democratic Party. These bombs demonstrated how divided the US is. Nothing Donald Trump has achieved which could be regarded as positive, such as his charm offensive to North Korea, will change the fact that the country has never been so disunited. Trump will always be a divisive leader and a hugely popular president for those on the extremist right who have been waiting for years for someone like Trump to run the White House. They probably believe, wrongly of course, that having someone in the White House who has views which might seem similar to theirs on many issues, such as immigration, gives them carte blanche to stand up for extremism. Last week Trump praised the Republican congressman who physically attacked a reporter from The Guardian in May last year. He called Congressman Greg Gianforte of Montana "my guy" during a rally. Does this give carte blanche to all right-wing people to go around hitting reporters? Not in so many words but there are people on the extremist fringes who will think to themselves: "If the president says it's ok, then it must be ok." Leaders are supposed to lead by example; and if the president of the United States said, as has been reported, joked that it was ok to grab women in intimate places, then it's not surprising that this week a man appearing in court for sexually harassing a woman in the seat in front of him on a passenger plane claimed in his defence that the president had said grabbing a woman was fine. Trump of course has condemned the bombs sent to his political opponents. But someone somewhere probably thought to himself: "Let's teach those liberal motherf......s a lesson and do Trump a favour."

Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman gets applause at conference

Money has always talked. Whoever was responsible for ordering the execution of Jamal Khashoggi, whether it was the Crown Prince or an underling or someone high up in the Saudi intelligence service, business still has to go on. So when Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman entered the conference centre for what is being called the Saudi "Davos", the assembled businessmen and politicians from around the world applauded him. Every attempt is being made by the Saudi government, the US government and anyone interested in seeking trade deals with Saudi Arabia to distance the Crown Prince's name from the killing of Khashoggi three weeks ago. But in an extraordinary allegation last week, Sir John Sawers, the former MI6 chief, said he was convinced that it was the Crown Prince who authorised the deadly mission against Khashoggi. If he believes that, and obviously the US intelligence community believes it too, how is it going to be possible for Western governments to continue working with Saudi Arabia's heir apparent as if nothing had happened? Even Trump has now said that the Saudis are guilty of the worst cover-up in the history of cover-ups. It's time the Saudi government took full responsibility for what President Erdogan of Turkey described as the planned and savage murder of Jamal Khashoggi.

The full Khashoggi murder story is coming out bit by bit

It's all coming out bit by bit, the great Saudi assassination plot. How the Riyadh government thought it could get away with its original response - total denial - now seems laughable because as each day goes by the Saudis are slowly slowly confessing, but it's like extracting teeth from a grizzly bear. The latest version is that it was a "rogue" operation by people who had not been authorised by anyone to do what they did to poor Jamal Khashoggi. Hello!! I've heard that one before. Oh yes it was Donald Trump who first came up with that one, what seems like a long time ago. He must have got the idea from his chat with King Salman last week. Anyway up it pops again. No one in the government knew that more than a dozen Saudi "agents" and a forensic cutting-up specialist had flown out to Istanbul and then flown back two days later. But presumably having checked the manifests, the Riyadh explainers realised they needed to be somewhat more truthful. So a rogue flight and a rogue operation, says the Saudi Foreign Ministry. Plus a bloke who looked like Jamal Khashoggi and a large carpet. The former played a brilliant role, dressing up in Khashoggi's clothes and casually walking out of the Saudi consulate in Istanbul in order to be able to make the claim that the journalist had departed the consulate. Now that's clever stuff indicating very astute planning in Riyadh by the "rogues". But they missed one thing, they had no idea that Khashoggi's fiancee was waiting for him outside the consulate and she was certainly not fooled by the bloke disguised as her boyfriend. The carpet was needed to wrap around Khashoggi's body - very Mafia! Crown Prince Mohamed bin Sultan, the godfather of the Saudi royal family, whose consigliere was one of the members of the team of "rogues", knew nothing, according to the Saudi foreign minister, Abdul al-Jubeir. For the next stage in the search for the whole truth and nothing but the truth we will have to rely on the Turks. President Erdogan who has thrown thousands of coup suspects into jail after the failed plot against him in 2016 is currently riding high in the morality stakes and plans to make public the video and audio tapes of the murder of Khashoggi, proving that the Turks had bugged the Saudi consulate - Riyadh take note for future reference that their embassies and consulates are not safe from prying eyes and ears. Erdogan is due to make a statement to parliament tomorrow (Tuesday) and could then release the tapes for the world to see and hear. Riyadh I suspect will try to stick to its story that rogue agents murdered Khashoggi, wrapped him in a blanket and buried him somewhere unknown. Looking at it strictly from the Saudi government's viewpoint, they must be hoping/praying that the "rogues" did such a good job burying the body that it will never be found. Discovery of the body, especially if it is found to be dismmembered as the Turks have claimed, will put the ball back in Riyadh's court. But without the body, the Saudi government will hope the current nightmare publicity will die down.

Trump and Putin nuclear arms race

It's worth going back to 1987 to see Mikhail Gorbachev and Ronald Reagan exchanging quips as they signed the historic Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty. There was positive bonhomie between them as they signed a deal which was to eliminate a whole category of nuclear weapons for the first and last time in history. Reagan even attempted a joke in Russian. He said there was an old Russian proverb - "doveryay, no proveryay" - which means "trust but verify". Reagan suggested Gorbachev should remember that every time they had a meeting together. Much merriment followed. It was a truly extraordinary event, and the INF Treaty which banned ground-launched nuclear and conventional cruise and ballistic missiles with ranges of between 500 kilometres and 5,500 kilometres has lasted all this time - until today. Trump announced that the US was going to withdraw from the treaty because Russia had already breached the 1987 agreement by developing a ground-launched cruise missile called Novator which had a range of around 2,000 kilometres and therefore posed a threat to Nato. Actually the Russians have been developing this missile for ten years and it has been a point of fierce argument between Nato and Moscow since it first became known. The Russians deny - of course - that it breaches the treaty and have reacted with alarm over Trump's announcement. Obama went on about it too but never got close to pulling the US out of the INF Treaty. Putin took heart and carried on developing the cruise missile which is now apparently ready for deployment. I don't think Putin will worry one jot about the US withdrawing from the INF Treaty. He has got his new missile ready, its deployment will scare Nato which the Russian leader will always be happy about, and if the US starts developing a similar type of weapon, the Moscow propaganda machine will work at full pitch to denounce Trump as the architect of a new nuclear arms race. And, adding to Putin's smiles, any request by the US for European allies to host matching cruise and ballistic missiles all over again - remember Greenham Common and Molesworh in the 1980s? - there is almost bound to be a political backlash. So win win all round for Putin. I reckon he thinks farther ahead than even the Chinese if that is possible when it comes to strategic plotting. There is never going to be a smiling Gorbachev/Reagan-style relationship between Trump and Putin. So it will all be about who gets to be the more macho of the two. We can only sit and hope and pray that sensible minds will sort this one out.

Murder explanation: Khashoggi put up a helluva fight against 16 fellow Saudis!!

It is safe to say that not a single person in the universe apart from Donald Trump believes that Jamal Khashoggi died as a result of a fisticuffs inside the Saudi consulate in Istanbul. He was strangled in the brawl with 16 other people in the room. The additional details provided by the Turkish security authorities which indicate that Khashoggi, having died, was decapitated and cut up into small pieces and shoved into black bin bags and possibly buried in forests outside Istanbul, are not mentioned in the Riyadh palace explanation for the demise of the Saudi dissident journalist. But the man with the saw, one of the visiting assassins who helped bring Khashoggi's life to an untimely and brutal end, has been arrested. And of course the official statement from Riyadh following an initial investigation did not say anything about who from the ruling regime in Saudi Arabia authorised/ordered the murder. But Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman's closest aide was among those dismissed from his job. So he acted without any knowledge of his boss? Clearly this story is going to run and run until the appropriate members of the Saudi hierarchy are named and shamed and also booted out from the ruling elite. But Trump has thrown his weight behind the Saudi regime and insisted that last night's explanation was credible. Even Lindsey Graham, the robust senator from South Carolina who is supportive of Trump, has pronounced his total disbelief at the Riyadh statement and wanted to know why the blame had not been placed on Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. Khashoggi's poor fiancee who was the first person to sound the alarm when her boyfriend failed to exit the consulate - she had been waiting outside - deserves to know the full facts however horrible they are. The Turks are now saying they will reveal all, putting the video and audio tapes into the public domain. This will then place the Crown Prince and Trump in a trickier-than-ever situation. How credible will the Riyadh statement then look with all the gory details and the screams from the journalist as he is interrogated and tortured? Death from a fight is one thing, death by a team of assassins intent on murder and extermination is quite another. So a second statement will be required from Riyadh in due course. The Saudis started with a lie - that Khashoggi had left the consulate alive - and were only forced into acknowledging his death inside the consulate after the international uproar. They were obviously hoping that this latest explanation would appease everyone. They were naive and wrong.

Bolton and Kelly have stand-up row

Apparently there were so many expletives not deleted during a row between John Kelly, White House chief of staff, and John Bolton, old Cold War warrior national security adviser that nearby secretaries had to put their hands over their ears. They were arguing about immigration, with Bolton taking the Trump line that it was outrageous how many illegals were popping over the border and wanted to close the southern frontier with troops. Kelly, being a former Homeland Security Secretary and fully cognisant of the challenges of keeping control at the border, obviously thought Bolton was going over the top (he probably wishes Bolton would go over the top - over the top of the Trump border "wall" and stay in Mexico). Bolton had been rude about Kirstjen Nielsen who used to be Kelly's deputy and then took over as homeland secretary when Kelly moved to the White House. A breathless White House reporter for CNN could hardly get the story out she was so excited. She described the scene in the West Wing as ugly. To be honest, I'm not sure who would win if it came to a physical fight between Bolton and Kelly. Kelly is a retired four star US Marine Corps general and a tough cookie but Bolton is a wiry old bear who would probably target below the belt. That walrus moustache would positively bristle with venom in a bust-up. Anyway the row didn't end with fisticuffs but it was the talk of the West Wing, and therefore the talk of CNN. Trump hates CNN and probably thinks it's just another example of fake news, but even Sarah Sanders couldn't deny it happened when questioned by reporters. Kelly and Bolton are supposed to be part of the inner circle national security team in the White House who all, according to Jim Mattis, Pentagon chief, get on really well. But I bet these sort of rows are commonplace at the moment. The White House is right now full of high tension over the Khashoggi murder because no one can work out what the hell to do about it. A few expletives probably won't do any long-lasting harm.

Pompeo trying to play the diplomat in a gruesome murder

I suppose being what Americans like to call their "top diplomat", Mike Pompeo, Secretary of State, has been playing the trusty, diplomatic role over the Khashoggi murder affair. Even smiling when chatting to the Saudi Crown Prince, Mohammed bin Salman - known universally as MBS - although more and more signs are pointing to his likely involvement in the demise of Jamal Khashoggi, the Saudi dissident journalist. But Pompeo is also a former director of the CIA, an enormously powerful position. He knows what goes on in Saudi Arabia. He probably already knows everything about the murder of Khashoggi because the CIA and NSA will have fed all the stuff they've got on MBS to him before he left for Riyadh. NSA will have some electronic eavesdropping material, perhaps even from inside the Saudi consulate in Istanbul. Trump has demanded a full investigation but he, too, will have all the American intelligence on his desk. So he already knows exactly what happened and probably who was to blame in Riyadh. The US has the most powerful intelligence apparatus on the planet. They get to know everything. So the sending of Pompeo to Riyadh was just a diplomatic dance to pledge Washington's continuing love and devotion however the Khashoggi affair turns out. King Salman knows that he needs Washington's support as much as Trump needs Riyadh on side, so the two of them will have to come up with some sort of clever ruse to bring clarity and closure to the killing of Khashoggi. The obvious option is to blame a senior flunky for overstepping the mark, and the deputy director of Saudi intelligence is already being earmarked for blame. But General Ahmed al-Assiri, the fall guy-in-waiting, is very close to MBS. So the other option is for the King to summon MBS and to strip him of his Crown Princeship and put him under house arrest at perhaps the same five-star hotel where MBS held dozens of princely types for corruption when he became Crown Prince. The problem is that Washington has spent a lot of time and energy courting MBS as the man who is going to change Saudi Arabia for the better. So Trump and Pompeo don't really want MBS to be cast into the wilderness. This is why Pompeo was caught on camera smiling as MBS spoke. Diplomacy entails a lot of false bonhomie. I bet Pompeo really wanted to put MBS over his knee and spank him for destroying what was supposed to have been a beautiful friendship between Washington and Riyadh. King Salman is an old man but he needs to take charge of his kingdom once again.

The Saudi forensic expert who arrived in Turkey with a saw

The Khashoggi murder explanation/clarification is going down a very familiar path. Something went terribly wrong, we're so sorry, Khashoggi was only supposed to be questioned and then asked to return to Saudi Arabia for rehabilitation. But our people overstepped the mark, all unplanned, and they will be held responsible. No one back in Riyadh had any inkling of what was going on in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul. Please believe us! BUT what about the man with the saw? What about the Saudi forensic specialist whose carry-on baggage in the Gulf Stream jet that flew in the day before the killing of the dissident journalist contained a very very sharp saw. Now why would he want such an implement if the plan all along was to get Khashoggi to return in one of the two Gulf Stream jets? The man with the saw has been named in the papers but I'm going to be a little more cautious here. Nevertheless, the brutal narrative courtesy of all sorts of Turkish media outlets includes a scene in which the man with the saw starts cutting up Khashoggi's body on a table while music is played to drown out the gruesome sounds. A seven-minute dismembering job, then all the limbs etc into black bags and taken via a back exit to the Saudi consul's residence. All very neat and tidy. But please, don't give me the "it all went wrong" story. This appalling episode involved 15 Saudi gentlemen, some of them if not all of them, known to be from Saudi security services. Rogue they may be, as Trump claims, but someone equally rogue sent them to Istanbul, and included the man with the saw to carry out whatever orders were given in Riyadh. Perhaps this was an Archbishop Thomas Becket situation. In 1170 four palace knights overheard King Henry 11 say: "Will no one rid me of this turbulent priest?" The four knights rode to Canterbury Cathedral and slaughtered Becket at the altar. But this modern day slaughter was not a spur-of-the-moment situation. It was planned, the Gulf Streams were fuelled up well in advance, the team of 15 was gathered and given their orders and the man with the saw was told exactly what was expected of him. The only similarity is that Becket and Khashoggi were brutally murdered for being disloyal to the high-ups in their respective nations.

Hey I'm the president and not you, says Trump to TV interviewer

The back and forth between Donald Trump and Lesley Stahl, the veteran TV interviewer on CBS's 60 Minutes show, did not elicit any great revelations. No scoops, nothing really that we didn't know already. But one thing did emerge, and Lesley Stahl later acknowledged it when she was interviewed by another reporter about the programme. She said the last time she interviewed Trump was when he was president-elect and the sheer unbelievable fact that he had won the election and was heading for the White House seemed almost to have overwhelmed him. He - and the rest of the country - was in a state of shock. But now, nearly 21 months later, Trump was brimming with confidence. Nothing shook him. He enjoyed bantering with Stahl who never managed to knock him off course. At one point Trump said,"I'm the president, not you" and it seemed to give him enormous satisfaction to say those three words. Donald Trump I would say is loving being president of the United States despite probably the most intensive attacks against him and his leadership since the dark days of Richard Nixon. Nixon was always sombre and jowly and snarling. Trump was relaxed and having fun. He didn't mind any of Stahl's questions because she was just an interviewer although a "big one" as Trump acknowledged. But he was the president and nothing was going to make him look gloomy or startled or upset. It probably had something to do with the fact that he has had a pretty good few weeks in terms of political impact and he basks in the sunshine of personal achievements. He got his man onto the bench at the US Supreme Court, never mind the accusations of sexual assault against him when he was a teenager, he persuaded Canada at the last possible minute to sign a new tri-nation trade agreement with the US and Mexico, job statistics look better and better, and he reckons the Republicans are going to sweep the board at the November midterm elections. So, yes, it was all looking good for him when he appeared on 60 Minutes. As an extra boost to his ego, Stormy Daniels, the lady who claims she had an affair with Trump way back, lost her defamation case against the president. The judge said a nasty, very derogatory tweet by Trump was all about free speech. The irony of that was surely not lost on anyone.

Pompeo to the rescue

Mike Pompeo is doing what secretaries of state have to do which is to save the president from embarrassment, confusion, disaster and potential breakdowns in key relationships with close allies, all of which are acutely relevant in the case of the disappearance and probable murder of Jamal Khashoggi. Trump had a phone chat with King Salman who denied all knowledge of any nefarious activities by any of his people (henchmen) and was as keen as the US president to discover what had happened. Far be it for me to cast any doubt on the Saudi king's denial. He, after all, has as good as handed over control of the kingdom to his chosen heir apparent, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and may not be in touch with day-to-day decisions and orders by the rest of the government. But there are a lot of denials these days and it's difficult to guage whether a denial is a genuine heartfelt denial, a convenient denial, a denial with fingers crossed, a half-truth or a downright fib. Vladimir Putin has denied intervening in the US presidential election and denied any Russian military intelligence involvement in the attempted assassination of Sergei Skripal and his daughter etc etc. Well we know what to think of those denials. Trump denies everything all the time or just says allegations against him, whatever they are, are fake news. Bashar Assad has denied ever using chemical weapons in the Syrian civil war. I could go on but this is the era when denials come before anything else. Even when the evidence is shoved in the face, out come the denials. So whether King Salman knows anything about the disappearance of Khashoggi or not, the fact is he has denied Saudi involvement in the suspected killing, even though Turkish police have revealed the arrival of 15 Saudis at Istanbul the day before the vanishing, drove to the Saudi consulate where Khashoggi was visiting to get some documents signed to confirm his divorce, and returned to Saudi Arabia the day after the disappearance. And Khashoggi has not been seen since. Thus Mike Pompeo enters the stage. Trump doesn't know what to do. He wants to show respect to King Salman, he can't accuse him of lying. So he calls for Pompeo to whizz over to Riyadh to see the king and get things straightened out. Meanwhile as Pompeo packs his bag, Trump is going around saying the murder could have been carried out by rogue agents. This is always an easy one. So if official Saudi government assassins can't be fingered they must be rogue agents instead, murdering without the knowledge or approval of their government. Pompeo somehow has to come back from Riyadh with a slightly better explanation than that. I'm assuming he will also have a session with the Crown Prince!!

Trump says Mattis could leave

Sometimes I despair with Trump. He has a brilliant, steadfast, loyal, conscientious defence secretary but instead of saying all these things he implies in a television interview today that Jim Mattis might go because he's a Democrat at heart. Talk about pulling the rug out from under Mattis's feet. Why does he do this to the members of his cabinet? He has shafted Jeff Sessions so many times I'm amazed the attorney general is still alive, let lone still in his job. But that goes back to when Sessions recused himself from leading the Russia collusion investigation and handed over to Rod Rosenstein which infuriated Trump. He has never forgiven him. But Mattis has hardly put a foot wrong until Bob Woodward revealed to the world in his latest book that Mattis had referred to the president as a fifth or sixth-grader when it came to knowing about foreign policy issues like North Korea. Trump probably believed Woodward even though Mattis, through sources, tried to suggest he would never have said such a thing. But the Woodward book quote must have got under Trump's skin because here he was on TV saying Mattis might want to leave. The two of them had lunch together a few days ago at the White House. Did Mattis hint he might want to spend more time with his family? I seriously doubt it. Trump is just deliberately putting Mattis on notice and for no reason whatsoever. If I know anything about him he will go on doing his job as best as he can until his commander-in-chief tells him it's time to go. What a way to run a government. Is this how he ran his businesses?

One fatal decision and Saudi Arabia's standing falls to rock bottom

The suspected brutal torture and murder of Jamal Khashoggi, the dissident Saudi Arabian journalist, will cause a longlasting and damaging effect on relations between the royal kingdom and every other country in the world that does business with them. The repercussions, if foul murder is proven, will destroy the reputation of Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and could even lead to his ousting if it turns out he and he alone ordered this gross killing. When he was selected to be the heir apparent there were genuine hopes in the West that he would bring reforms so vitally needed for Saudi Arabia. He made a good although ruthless start by arresting masses of princes and top businessmen and accused them of corruption, although rather than put them in jail they were housed in a luxury hotel and not allowed out until they had paid billions of dollars into government funds. Then women were allowed to drive for the first time in the kingdom's history. But power is corrupting. Khashoggi had become a hate figure for the Saudi royals for being so outspokenly critical, and doing it from a safe distance in exile in the US. Someone in the hierarchy must have decided to bring such criticism to an end. The Turkish authorities have been extraordinarily revealing about what they know about Khashoggi's disappearance, including the startling claim that they have audio tapes of the journalist being physically restrained, interrogated, tortured and finally killed. It was a shocking revelation. The Saudis have denied all knowledge of the murder and insist Khashoggi left the consulate in Istanbul the way he entered it - out of the front door. But while there is CCTV of him going in there is no CCTV of him leaving. The unavoidabe conclusion is that the Saudi government is lying. All the focus now seems to be on what Donald Trump will do to punish Saudi Arabia if the Turkish evidence turns out to be accurate. But it cannot just be a matter for Trump. This is an issue for all western leaders who rely on Saudi Arabia for oil and fat defence contracts.

Release of US pastor from Turkish jail is bad news for Saudi Arabia

There can't be many people who don't think that the sudden decision to release US pastor Andrew Brunson from a Turkish jail might possibly have something to do with the current furore between the Turks and Saudis over the suspected murder of a dissident Saudi journalist in the Saudi Arabian consulate in Istanbul. Ok, so it was a judge who set the pastor free and approved his return to the US despite being accused of aiding terrorist groups. But the release this week is too much of a coincidence. Obviously President Erdogan, Turkey's leader, wants the US on his side on the question of the suspected killing and dismembering of Jamal Khashoggi, the missing journalist. One major problem for Turkish/US relations has been the continued detention of Pastor Brunson for what are seen in Washington to be trumped-up charges. So, lo and behold in the week when Turkey and Saudi Arabia are at loggerheads over the missing journalist, the Turkish authorities organise it so that the pastor gets his freedom, bringing the smile back on Trump's face. Trump had been vociferous about the pastor's "wrongful" detention. With that out of the way, Erdogan will expect Trump to give his full weight behind Turkey's battle with Saudi Arabia. Trump has so far expressed concern and demanded answers. So, too, has John Bolton, his national security adviser. But Trump has dismissed calls to suspend all arms deals with Saudi Arabia. With Erdogan breathing down his neck, Trump might just have to row back on that, especially if prima facie proof is provided by the Turks of Khashoggi's death at the hands of the Saudi intelligence service.

Why did Saudi Arabia think they could get away with murder?

The West has always courted Saudi Arabia. Immense oil reserves, immense arms deals, what more can I say? But always in this courtship there have been human rights concerns which have tended to get buried when the next defence contract comes up for signing. Now the whole of the West has a serious problem. There is no absolute proof at this stage that state murder has taken place but some facts are irrefutable:Jamal Khasshoggi, Saudi journalist and critic of the Riyadh regime as a dissident in exile entered the Saudi consulate in Istanbul on October 2 and has not been seen since. The Turkish government says 15 Saudi intelligence officers arrived in two Gulfstream jets and drove to the consulate in black 4x4s. The Turks have been amazingly forthcoming. They said the 15 Saudis were a hit squad who entered the consulate and killed Khasshoggi, dismmembered him and put his body parts into black bags before leaving and heading back to the airport. The finger of blame has been pointed in the direction of Saudi Arabia's most powerful prince, Mohammed bin Salman, Crown Prince. It's difficult to imagine anything of this nature happening without his authorisation but until we know who did what to whom and, much more importantly, whether the vanished Khasshoggi is actually dead, it's possibly prudent not to point too many fingers. But the circumstantial evidence is screaming from the rooftops. If, IF it turns out that the Saudi Royal Family ordered the assassination of the dissident Khasshoggi, the ingratiating respect always shown to the Crown Prince and the rest of his family will have to come to an end. And if that happens, it will mean that Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman made the worst decision of his life. He won't be ostracised as such because of the oil and defence contracts, but the deference will go. Even Prince Charles who has his own special contacts with the Saudi Royal Family, will have to cross bin Salman off his Christmas card list.

Who will have more impact in US midterm elections, a pop star or a judge?

The way things are going in the US of A, pop star Taylor Swift and Judge Brett Kavanaugh could well have a decisive effect on the US midterm elections in November. Taylor Swift of course is not just a singer and entertainer par excellence. She's a phenomenon in the US, what she says can change people's thinking. She's an icon with political and pop industry sway. If she says something people listen and take note. So her endorsement of the Democratic candidates in Tennessee could just make a big difference, and not necessarily only in Tennessee. No wonder her big fan Donald Trump says he likes her 25 per cent less now. Brett Kavanaugh of course is not just a judge. He is now a member of the US Supreme Court and a hate figure in the #MeToo movement, having got off scot free from the allegations that he sexually assaulted Christine Blasey Ford 36 years ago. But, weirdly, it won't necessarily be all negative publicity for the men and women standing for Congress. Some Republicans will win partly because Trump was so rude about Dr Ford and dismissed her allegations as lies, whereas in certain states Democrats might surprise their Republican rivals and win because Trump was so rude and dismissive about Judge Kavanaugh's accuser. Same argument but different result. Trump is trying to tell everyone that he knows his stand on behalf of Judge Kavanaugh and his criticism of Dr Ford and the whole Democratic party who supported her will help to splash red for Republican all over the country. The Democrats, not surprisingly, believe it will have the opposite effect. And with Taylor Swift stepping in with her political bombshell, it's almost impossible to guage who is right. Either way both Taylor Swift and Brett Kavanaugh will be ingredients in the political pot and over the next few weeks each party is going to strive to exploit them to their own advantage. One consequence is that more people are likely to vote. They will want to join the queues to demonstrate their support for or opposition to the pop star and judge.

Nikki Haley is a superstar and will be back!

Not many of Trump's cabinet members have stood out as superstar quality, but Nikki Haley, America's UN ambassador, has certainly been one of them. She has been in the forefront of many of Trump's key decisions and has always adopted a tough, read-my-lips approach when addressing the rest of the Security Council on the really big topics. This is probably sexist in today's world, but Ambassador Haley just sounds and looks the part. She always looks good. She is an attractive woman and I don't care what people might say but looking good helps, whether male or female. I can think of one high-ranking female ambassador to the UN who looks shambolic when she speaks. Nikki Haley always radiates confidence and everyone listens. Now she has resigned and although it appears to be for all the right reasons - she wants some time off from the intense pressures - I sincerely hope she returns to frontline politics at some time in the near future. Trump said at the press conference announcing her resignation today that she could have the pick of jobs whenever she returns. How about White House chief of staff when General John Kelly has had enough? Or she could be a future secretary of state when Mike Pompeo moves on, as he surely will unless he can wrap up the North Korea nuclear negotiations before 2020. Nikki Haley will step down at the end of the year but I bet within six months Trump will be begging her to come back. The other superstars in Trump's cabinet, by the way, are few and far between. Jim Mattis at the Pentagon is not exactly superstar status but is invaluable as a stalwart warrior, Pompeo has the toughest job of all but needs to buy better suits, General John Kelly, in his own quiet controlling way, is quite a dude with superstar dust on his shoulders, Jeff Sessions, attorney general, has no charisma, John Bolton could never be described as a superstar, not with that moustache, but you don't mess with him, Kirstjen Nielson at Homeland Security I know very little about but she couldn't even have a bit part in Homeland, and all the rest are nondescript with unmemorable faces. Apart from Gina Haspel, the cabinet-level director of the CIA. I think she could turn out to be a star but not if she wears that ghastly ankle-length skirt she appeared in a few months ago when she introduced her new team and had a photograph taken inside the CIA at Langley, Virginia. Now that really is a sexist remark, for which many apologies! But Nikki Haley, don't be away too long. The US of A needs you.

Putin trying to take the spotlight from Trump over North Korea

Vladimir Putin is probably seething over Trump's "successes". The one thing the Russian leader does not want is for Trump to score a major foreign policy victory. If Kim Jong-un does actually start to denuclearise in the face of sanctions pressure from Washington it will be such a triumph for the US president that poor old Putin will get pushed to one side, an irrelevance. Which is why he is jumping the gun and trying to set up his own summit with the North Korean leader who, by the way, seems to be getting, shall we say, fuller-faced every time his picture is taken. Too many carbohydrates I suspect. Putin hates to be left out and if North Korea and the US do forge a history-changing deal that brings real peace to the Korean Peninsula, he will want to grab something from it to benefit Russia. Kim, I'm sure, will agree to see Putin if only because it will give him a nice trip to Moscow, plenty of caviar blinis and a few days of media glamour. But is it really in Kim's interest to be friends with Putin when his focus should be on keeping Trump on board and making sure he doesn't piss off Xi Zinping. The Chinese leader by now must be bewildered, bemused and battered by Trump's contradictory China policy which can be summed as: make love to Zinping, then bash him on the head. Whatever Kim thinks of Putin, he might as well play the field, but what exactly is the Russian president up to? What can he offer Kim that Trump can't offer? Nothing comes to mind. But what can Kim offer Putin, now that's a different matter. If North Korea opens up and becomes part of the international community - and that's still a huge IF - Putin will want a slice of the potential trade action. So a grand summit in Moscow, with all the Kremlin trimmings might just persuade Kim to look to Russia for future economic deals, and that would certainly infuriate Trump. So a double whammy for the Russian president. Never take your eyes off Putin because he is always plotting and planning.

How will the #MeToo movement be affected by the Kavanaugh affair?

The #MeToo movement has been expanding almost daily since the revelations and allegations relating to Harvey Weinstein, the Hollywood producer. Women everywhere have been coming forward either to reveal their own experiences of being sexually mistreated by men or just to make public their views about the man/woman relationship in general. What has been most alarming is that so many women claim to have been sexually assaulted. There must be some horrifying statistics around somewhere which show how frequent these experiences are. It's a staggering indictment of the way some men treat women. So what will happen now after the Brett Kavanaugh debacle? He of course denied ever having sexually assaulted Christine Blasey Ford when they were teenagers at a house party, and under the basic tenets of the law, anyone accused of a crime is innocent until proven guilty. The FBI found no way of corroborating Professor Blasey Ford's allegation, so Judge Kavanaugh remains a presumed innocent and he will duly take his place on the bench of the US Supreme Court unless something extraordinarily unexpected happens in the Senate vote later today. For Christine Ford this must be a huge blow to her position as the woman who dared to speak out in public - actually to the whole world - about a traumatic incident she insists happened 36 years ago when she was only 15. Does she now try to withdraw from all the publicity and retrieve the life she was leading before the Kavanaugh issue broke or will she align herself firmly to the #MeToo cause and become one of its most quoted supporters? There will be plenty of friends, perhaps the same ones who urged her to speak out, who will want her to become a #MeToo champion. For the #MeToo movement itself I'm sure they would love to wrap their arms around her and bring her on board. She may well decide, however, for her own sanity and for her family's safety, against that. Either way, the Kavanaugh "victory" in overcoming the immense publicity over the sexual assault allegations and taking one of the most powerful legal roles in the US has to be a serious blow to the #MeToo cause. So many men have been exposed as sexual harrassers and have lost their jobs as a result, but this one man has survived. Will it, as a consequence, deter other women from coming forward if they have allegations to make against powerful men in American society? I think, despite the Blasey Ford experience, the momentum for the #MeToo movement is too strong for it to die just because one highly publicised case has ended in favour of the man, not the woman. It might even spur more women to come forward.

Putin's unhealthy obsession with Britain

This piece I wrote appears in The Times online today.................. RELATIONS between Russia and Britain have been reduced to a new form of megaphone diplomacy, with each side showering the other with accusations and counter-accusations. So, was the attempted assassination in Salisbury of Sergei Skripal, a former Russian military intelligence double agent, the launching point for this growing hostility? Or is there a more fundamental reason for the current total breakdown? Why, for example, does it seem that Britain, above all other European countries, has been picked on by the Kremlin for its malign activities? Britain is certainly a prime target for President Putin and his subversive agenda against the West, not least because Theresa May’s government has adopted a strong and outspoken position towards Russia. The government has indirectly accused the Russian leader of being the mastermind behind the novichok attack on Mr Skripal and his daughter and of waging cyber war on the nation. There is also history between Moscow and London going back decades, partly as a result of successful operations by MI6 and MI5 which disrupted the Kremlin’s espionage networks. Sir David Omand, the former security and intelligence co-ordinator at Downing Street and ex-director of GCHQ, said that the bad history between the two countries could go back to when a British division was sent in to Russia to try to quell the revolution a century ago. “The UK has always been a demon figure [in Russia’s eyes] and I wouldn’t be surprised if that colours the fact that the UK is seen in this kind of light today,” Sir David said. He claimed that MI6 was viewed as a prime adversary within the small circle of powerful intelligence and security figures in Moscow, “with Putin at its centre”. Sir David said that the Russian intelligence services had never got over the shock of having 105 spies expelled from Britain in 1971 when Sir Alec Douglas-Home was foreign secretary. The revelation that four officers from the Russian military intelligence service, the GRU, were caught trying to hack into the Office for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons in The Hague, and the evidence of Moscow’s covert interference in the 2016 US presidential election and the 2017 French election have demonstrated that the Kremlin’s malevolence spreads far and wide throughout the West, not just against the UK. Yet, Britain’s intelligence relationship with the US, which gives the UK a unique status in Europe, has always put this country in the forefront of Russian targeting. What is different today is that the UK government has made a point of being more open about the threats from Russia. Details of cyber attacks have been put into the public domain. So, too, has all the evidence gathered by the police against two members of the GRU accused of trying to murder Mr Skripal and Yulia, his daughter, last March. From Moscow’s viewpoint, often expressed by the Russian embassy in London, this proves that Britain is anti-Russian. As Andrew Parker, the director-general of MI5, said in a speech in Berlin last May, however, Britain was not anti-Russian but anti-Russian government. “The Russian government’s invasion of Crimea [in 2014], taking territory from another sovereign European country by force, is not acceptable,” he said. “Seeking to interfere with legitimate democratic elections in the US and in France is not acceptable . . . and neither is unleashing cyber attacks against our countries and institutions.” This was quite a political speech by the MI5 chief and would undoubtedly have been viewed as such in Moscow. The attempted killing of Mr Skripal who had worked as a double agent for MI6, and the 2006 fatal poisoning in London of Alexander Litvinenko, the former Russian FSB intelligence officer, could be judged in some ways as a separate issue and not part of Mr Putin’s all-embracing anti-Western approach. British diplomatic sources said the UK was ingrained in Russian minds of Mr Putin’s generation as “little Satan” to the US “big Satan”. “Not only defecting spies but critics and opponents of Putin’s regime have chosen to live in the UK in much larger numbers than in any other country,” one source said. “They feel less safe and secure in Germany, France, Italy or Switzerland. So in the eyes of the regime, the UK is seeking to act as a safe haven for traitors and enemies of the regime. This has a 15-year history,” the source said. “Poisoning the likes of Litvinenko and the Skripals helps to demonstrate to others that the UK is not as safe as they think,” the source said. The diplomatic sources also said the Russian regime was frustrated that it had less leverage over the UK than over other Europeans, especially Germany. “Other EU countries are more malleable and have more Putin sympathisers,” one source said. The Litvinenko and Skripal poisonings were both revenge operations, the action of a state wanting to underline the message that intelligence officers who did not remain loyal to their country would be punished. Mr Putin summed up his view of “traitors” when he called Mr Skripal a “scumbag” this week. The plot against the Skripals in March, however, and the use of a deadly nerve agent that subsequently killed Dawn Sturgess five months later, coincided with growing alarm throughout the West over Mr Putin’s antagonistic leadership, especially in Britain. Sir David said that the government had little choice but to point an accusing finger at the Kremlin. The fact that Moscow dismissed the UK’s accusations as fantasy only helped to worsen relations with Britain, making it impossible for the government to try to seek a more diplomatic dialogue. The casual nature of the two accused GRU officers recorded on CCTV in Salisbury and the relatively easy trail that led to their uncovering underlined for old-hand intelligence operatives one obvious conclusion. Both men knew that they had Kremlin backing and would be protected. After all, Andrei Lugovoi, the prime suspect in the killing of Mr Litvinenko in 2006, was made a national hero. These sort of emboldened acts by Russia’s military intelligence service, both in the UK and in the Netherlands, as has been revealed this week, presents an acute challenge for western governments. Sanctions and expulsions of Russian spies have only added to the fear that a new form of Cold War is unavoidable. In the meantime, relations between Russia and Britain are so low that it is difficult to envisage any hope of improvement while a former KGB lieutenant-colonel is running the Kremlin.

So the FBI's seventh investigation into Brett Kavanaugh was a waste of time.

Well surprise surprise, the FBI carried out the barest of inquiries into Christine Blasey Ford's accusation against Judge Brett Kavanaugh and it's all over. The judge will no doubt now be confirmed as the ninth member of the US Supreme Court in the next few days. I really don't know why the FBI bothered, except of course they were told to do so by the White House. They went through the motions. They didn't even interview either of the two main protagonists, presumably on the reasoning that they had said all they were going to say to the members of the Senate Judiciary Committee. The FBI managed to fill up 46 pages of interviews they carried out with nine people, one of whom presumably was Mark Judge, Kavanaugh's schoolfriend and alleged witness of the alleged sexual assault. What I found somewhat quixotic was the FBI's insistence on having only one copy presented to the Senate which meant all 100 senators had to queue to have a look at the document. The FBI also said none of the contents of the document was to be revealed to the media or public. But of course as soon as it was available to the Senate they all call came out to say what was in it or not in it. The Republicans said it contained nothing that wasn't already known and the Democrats effectively wondered why there was nothing it it which wasn't already known. Previously wavering Republicans made up their minds that as the FBI said there was nothing new, or at least nothing to corroborate Christine Ford's allegation, that was enough for them and they would vote to confirm Kavanaugh's nomination. Even Jeff Flake, the Republican who insisted on the extra FBI investigation after he had been berated by two women as he tried to walk out of a lift in Congress, agreed that he would vote for Kavanaugh after all. It has been a very unpleasant episode. Mrs Ford must regret ever coming forward. But hopefully, Kavanaugh will also regret the way he behaved before the Judiciary Committee. Somehow I doubt he will.

Would Trump really target Russia's controversial cruise missile?

Kay Bailey Hutchinson is not a household name. Not until yesterday that is. She is the US Nato ambassador who hasn't really emerged until now. Then suddenly at a press conference prior to a Nato meeting she talked about Russia's intermediate-range nuclear-capable cruise missile which has been in development for ages and is probably operationally ready, and then repeated often-stated US concerns about how this weapon is in breach of the 1987 Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces Treaty signed by the US and the then Soviet Union. Nothing new there. Except Ambassador Hutchinson went one step further. She said if diplomacy (Trump/Pompeo pressure) failed to persuade the Russians to remove this missile from potentially threatening Europe, then the US might have to "take it out". Yes, take it out. As Nato ambassador she must be fully aware that in military parlance, taking something out means you bomb it to hell with a handcart. So there is an option, according to the ambassador, to target and destroy any of these missiles which are put on launchers on Russia's frontline with Europe. Russia insists this missile, called Novator 9M729, or by Nato the SSC-8, does not breach the INF Treaty. The treaty signed by Mikhail Gorbachev and Ronald Reagan was intended to eliminate all Soviet and American ground-launched intermediate-range nuclear missiles, ballistic and cruise, with a range of between 500 and 5,500 kilometres. The key Russian systems were the SS-20s which, when they were first deployed, posed a clear danger to Europe; and the US, providing the nuclear umbrella for Europe, had nothing similar to act as a deterrent. As a result, ground-launched nuclear cruise missiles and Pershing 11 ballistic missiles were rushed into service into Europe, including cruise missiles at RAF Greenham Common and RAF Molesworth. This was proper Cold War stuff. So when Gorbachev and Reagan agreed to get rid of these weapons, it was an historic event. Both superpowers agreed to eliminate a complete category of missile. Under the treaty, nearly 2,700 missiles were destroyed by the June 1, 1991 deadline. But Vladimir Putin's Russia thought it could sneak in this new intermediate-range nuclear cruise missile without anyone noticing. Everyone in Nato agrees that the Novator cruise missile breaches the INF Treaty for the simple reason that it has the range prohibited in the text of the signed deal. Ambassador Hutchinson has now put the Novator firmly on the map. She wants to take it out!! It was probably an unfortunate choice of words but I wonder....She didn't get to where she is today by being either stupid or ignorant. I think her message to Moscow, probably delivered initially into her ear by the Trump White House was to put Putin on notice. The military option is now on the table. The Kremlin has already denounced her words as dangerous warmongering. But I think we're going to hear more about this. The selected words have a definite Trumplike ring to them.

Brett Kavanaugh ate my hamster!

They are all coming out of the woodwork now, people with memories of Brett Kavanaugh. He beat someone up in a bar, he once said boo to the next door neighbour, he drank so much he couldn't stand up straight for hours, he drove through a red light when he was 18, he killed someone's rabbit by mistake and, yes, he ate my hamster. Some of these things may be true but others are made up and silly. For those confused by my hamster story, you will need to become familiar with one of the UK Sun newspaper's most quixotic front-page headline of many years ago which was: "Freddie Starr ate my hamster". (Freddie Starr was/is a comedian). It was a daft story but the headline was hilarious. The trouble with the Kavanaugh story is that anyone who has ever known the judge, going back to his infancy, will now come forward with likely or unlikely tales of misbehaviour which, when put together, will turn him into some sort of lifelong monster. Everyone on the planet has done something in his or her life which, if made public, could look pretty bad. Kavanaugh is going to be hit by an avalanche of smut and disloyalty from so-called friends. But as the newspapers fill up with the latest denunciations from the past, it should be emphasised that the real story is quite simple. Can he be trusted to hold one of the most prestigious and influential roles in the American justice system? Does he tell the truth or does he lie under pressure? Does he have compassion, far-sightedness and wondrous judgment? Key to the answers to these questions has to be the alleged sexual assault of Christine Blasey Ford when she was 15 and he was 17. The incident was more than 35 years ago but still a terrifying memory in Professor Ford's mind. She said she is 100 per cent certain the man who attacked her on a bed with the bedroom door locked was Kavanaugh. If she is telling the truth and nothing but the truth, then Kavanaugh is lying. There is no more important a sentence than that! If he is lying, then he must not be confirmed as a judge for the US Supreme Court. Never mind whether he got drunk a lot in his youth or was aggressive when inebriated, although these images paint a picture of an adolescent jerk. A lot of people got and still get drunk and behave badly. Even judges in their prime. But it's the accusation of lying that will stick, IF Kavanaugh knows he is not telling the truth about an incident more than three decades ago. Oh and by the way I don't want to read any more stories, ever, about Kavanaugh allegedly waiving his "genitalia" in front of a young woman at another party. That's the act of a stupid lout full of himself and full of drink. Inexcusable but let's concentrate on Christine Blasey Ford's story. The FBI will waste a lot of time if they go around interviewing every Kavanaugh classmate who has tittle tattle about his past high school antics. If Kavanaugh is found by the FBI to be lying and he repeats the lie to the FBI investigators, that's a federal offence. End of Kavanaugh's career.

Who really thinks they can beat Trump in 2020?

The Democratic Party needs its own Trump. I don't mean it wants someone who looks and sounds like Trump, but, if the party has any chance of unseating him in the 2020 presidential election it's going to have to be a man or woman who can take on Trump face to face and win every time. Trump exudes confidence in his own abilities and believes all the potential Democratic rivals for the presidency are a joke. He is rude about all of them, especially Joe Biden, Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders, all of whom are right now considering running but not yet absolutely sure. I don't think they have a chance unless the hopelessly divided nation has a change of heart, a change of mood, and a yearning for a changed direction. That may happen but will it be enough to stop Trump from winning a second term? I think things will be a whole lot clearer in November when the midterm elections are held. For Trump to survive into a second term he needs a successful midterm election result. In other words, the Republicans have to retain their majority in both houses of Congress. If the Democrats win the majority in either the Senate or the House of Representatives, Trump's shock-and-awe style of politics will no longer work because he will be stymied by the political system, just as Obama was during his eight years in office. He started his administration with the Democrats in charge of both houses of Congress. But that was for only two years. In 2011 the Republicans took control of the House of Representatives while the Democrats had the majority in the Senate. That lasted for four years and then for his final two years, the Republicans had the majority in both the Senate and the House of Representatives. It meant months of frustration and anger and delays and government shutdowns. It was the American political system at its worst. Trump has been at war with the Democrats ever since coming into power and if he has to deal with a Congress without a Republican majority, the political breakdown could be immense. So, everything depends on the midterm elections on November 6; and the irony is that Trump's choice of judge for the Supreme Court - Brett Kavanaugh - could actually prove to be the most disastrous decision he ever made. Whatever the FBI discovers or fails to discover this week, the repercussions from Kavanaugh's battle of the truth with Christine Blasey Ford could jeopardise Trump's future in the White House. Millions of women will turn away from the Republicans for giving their support to Kavanaugh against Ford. If his nomination for the Supreme Court is confirmed by the Senate after the FBI inquiry is completed, there will be a backlash across the country, and ultimately Trump will lose. So however insulting he is towards his potential Democratic rivals for the 2020 presidential election, the Kavanaugh stain will stick. As a result, the Republicans could lose their majority in Congress and Trump could lose the election in 2020. But only if the Democrats come up with a feisty, charismatic new-look contender. Hillary Clinton was supposed to have been the super-professional, can't-lose candidate in 2016 but she lost to the political novice Donald Trump. No one has yet stepped forward from the Democratic Party with the right credentials to boot Trump from the White House.