Kimberly Guilfoyle Was Dumped By Donald Trump Jr

As would seem fitting, Kimberly Guilfoyle’s fiancé Donald Trump Jr. spearheaded the rush to congratulate her upon the announcement of her unexpected selection as Ambassador to Greece this week.

‘I am so proud of Kimberly,’ he gushed on social media. ‘She will be an amazing leader for America First.’

Yet if Mr Trump, son of President-elect Donald, is suitably delighted, might he also be relieved to hear that his girlfriend of the past six years is scheduled to spend the foreseeable future in a foreign capital several time zones distant?

Trump and Guilfoyle’s relationship is no longer what it was, definitely not since this week’s extremely public displays of ‘moving on’.

First Don Jr, 46, was photoed taking a glamorous Palm Beach socialite Bettina Anderson to celebrate her birthday at a restaurant. He reportedly then ‘hard-launched’ his new girlfriend at dinner at his father’s Mar-a-Lago club on Wednesday night.

After months of conjecture about the condition of their relationship – not to mention the Mail’s images of Don Jr smooching the new woman in September – even twice-married Guilfoyle must indeed realise it’s over. A formal announcement is awaited.

A 55-year-old Maga-loyalist and former Fox News panellist noted for big hair and tight clothes, Guilfoyle claims to have been ‘blindsided’ by Don Jr’s new romance.

Some claim that the relationship has been in crisis for a long time.

Insiders claim that when Guilfoyle invited hundreds of people to her 55th birthday celebration at their Jupiter, Florida, home in March, tensions were already evident. There have been allegations that Don Jr. disappeared for a portion of the evening, seemingly withdrawing to his bedroom.

Others suggest Don Jr has found himself increasingly embarrassed by Guilfoyle’s little-left-to-the-imagination wardrobe, colourful public displays and her preference for a party lifestyle that might sit awkwardly with the Trump family increasingly mindful of its presidential legacy.

According to one former coworker at Fox News, the lawyer-turned-activist was known as ‘the Margarita girl’ thanks to her fondness of the popular cocktail and party lifestyle associated with it.

Although there is no indication that Guilfoyle regularly consumes excessive amounts of alcohol, the Trumps are undoubtedly sensitive to it.

Don Jr. is well-known for taking his sobriety very seriously because he drank his way through college. Ivanka, his sister, abstains from drinking.

As a result of his older brother Fred Jr.’s death from alcoholism at the age of 42, their father Donald is well-known for being a teetotaller.

Many will remember a scene first broadcast in a 2010 Larry King show in which Trump is shown instructing his son, Barron, then aged four, to avoid drugs, alcohol, cigarettes – and tattoos!

There’s no sign that she’s inked, but Guilfoyle is definitely sociable.

A high-ranking Trump official told the Mail that she would be perfectly suited to the life of an ambassador, which includes meeting, greeting, and hosting events.

However, the Trumps might not be totally comfortable with Guilfoyle’s flamboyance.

According to People magazine, a source close to the family believes Don Jr’s new lover, 38-year-old Bettina, will be a ‘better fit’.

‘Don Jr has always wanted to look good in his father’s eyes,’ said the source.

‘Someone like Bettina, who is and has been a model, and is in Waspy circles of Palm Beach is something that would impress him.’

Another source reportedly confirmed that Don Jr dislikes Guilfoyle’s wardrobe: ‘The tight dresses need to go, and she has been told that.’

Others speculate that their issues may go beyond party etiquette and short skirts.

For Guilfoyle’s undeniable drive and ability, insiders suggest that her approach to relationships might appear overwhelming – and that her younger partner sometimes found this ‘suffocating’.

‘Don Jr came to find her a little controlling,’ said one source. ‘She started taking over – his arrangements and so on.

‘She even described herself as his Mamacita – little Mama – which gives you an idea. At first, he might have liked the fact that someone was taking care of him. But it didn’t last.

‘She’s also amazingly ambitious. Don Jr is a smart guy and very right-wing, but he’s not so bothered about power. He needs some freedom.

‘He wants to spend his time hunting and fishing. But for Kimberly, it’s about power, power, power!

‘Kimberly said early on that she would try to be exactly the girl that Don wanted and seemed happy to tell people that she was the next Mrs Trump even when they’d just started dating.

‘She even went hunting with him – in full make-up, of course. But the idea that she was really into all that outdoorsy stuff faded.’

Has there been a problem with Guilfoyle’s spending habits, also?

One Republican insider reports that – always meticulously presented – Guilfoyle had been laying out money for hair and makeup artists at their home in Jupiter.

But that, whenever Don Jr appeared, the beauticians she’d employed were instructed to pretend they were Guilfoyle’s friends and therefore working for free.

A lawyer by training, Guilfoyle first rose to prominence as a public prosecutor in San Francisco and Los Angeles.

In 2011, she joined Fox’s primetime panel show ‘The Five’. Washington Post has reported that she was assigned ‘the leg chair’ at the end of the row because it would allow the audience a full view of her lower half.

It is said that Fox chairman Roger Ailes saw an image of the set-up and commented ‘There’s Kimberley, doing her job’.

She became a dedicated supporter of Trump after he announced his 2016 candidacy. She caught the notice of Don Jr, who told the Post in 2018: ‘When everyone else said that Hillary was unstoppable, Kimberly stood firmly with my father.’

Despite her success at Fox, Guilfoyle’s image began to deteriorate in the summer of 2016 when she mobilised women to protect Ailes’s reputation following his sexual harassment allegations.

Guilfoyle was introduced to Don Jr by mutual friends at a Manhattan party. Her 17-year-old son, Ronan, went to the same school as Don Jr’s daughter Kai, who was also 17, and the two parents grew close.

Guilfoyle and Don Jr. made their relationship public in May 2018.

Although she has consistently insisted that she left Fox because she wanted to be more active in the initial Trump campaign, the New Yorker revealed in 2020 that there were far more serious accusations involved.

It is believed Fox had to pay an assistant more than 4 million dollars after she ‘alleged that Guilfoyle, her direct supervisor, subjected her frequently to degrading, abusive, and sexually inappropriate behaviour.’

The assistant claimed, ‘she was frequently required to work at Guilfoyle’s New York apartment while the Fox host displayed herself naked and [that] she was shown photographs of the genitalia of men with whom Guilfoyle had had sexual relations’ and she once had to ‘massage her bare thighs’.

The accusations have been refuted by Guilfoyle.

She pushed herself into Trump’s campaign after leaving Fox, and the Republican party soon embraced her. She passionately praised Trump in talks at conservative gatherings and rallies.

With her political career on the rise, she acted as Trump’s spokesperson at rallies nationwide, establishing a reputation as someone who would stop at nothing to support him.

Guilfoyle was appointed chair of the finance committee for the Trump Victory Committee in 2020 and gave an infamous address at the Republican National Convention which was variously described as ‘impassioned’ or ‘unhinged’.

She was in similar shouty form at this year’s Republican Convention in Milwaukee.

On December 31, 2020, Guilfoyle and Don Jr. became engaged, although they didn’t tell anyone until 2022.

In the meantime, they purchased two homes together: one in Florida that they made their primary residence and another in the Hamptons which they eventually sold.

However, pictures of Don Jr. canoodling with Bettina Anderson, a woman, during brunch in Palm Beach surfaced in September 2024.

One source familiar with the family told the Mail this week: ‘There is no more Kimberly and Don – at least not romantically. Their engagement hasn’t officially been called off yet. They were waiting until after the inauguration to announce.’

Speaking after Don Jr’s affair was revealed, one source told the Mail: ‘Kimberly either didn’t know about Bettina – or didn’t want to know. Did she hear whispers that Don Jr was fooling around with someone else? Probably.

‘She’s no fool but it’s easy to deceive yourself when you’re so committed to someone and believe he’s committed to you.’

Since posting photos from a Mar-a-Lago party on November 14, Guilfoyle has not been spotted on Don Jr.’s arm.

Senior Republicans have been supporting Guilfoyle despite—or maybe because of—the unfortunate conclusion to her relationship with Don Jr.

As one pointed out, Guilfoyle will certainly ‘know where the bodies are buried’.

A source close to the Trump transition team contacted the Mail to say the nomination could be a chance, ‘to show her talents on the world stage. It’s tremendous for her, tremendous for the country and tremendous for Greece.’

A leading Trump insider told the Mail that Guilfoyle was genuinely happy to have been proposed as Ambassador to Greece – although she is yet to be confirmed in the role by the Senate.

‘She’s pleased because she’s a very sociable woman and this would suit her lifestyle, with plenty of hosting and socializing,’ said the insider.

‘President Trump has always been very keen on her. Was this her life plan? Clearly not. But she’s a strong and intelligent woman and she’s excited for the new role.’

Besides, as Guilfoyle told The Post in 2018 – explaining her remarkable transformation from Democratic wife to Republican loyalist – she’s adaptable.

‘I am always changing and doing stuff,’ she said. ‘Grass doesn’t grow too long under my feet.

‘I’m on the move.’

Bettina Anderson, therefore, started an affair with someone who was in a well-known and committed relationship. Not good news for the future, not forgetting that the person in that relationship is the cheater. Bettina needs to remember that if they cheat once, they’ll do it again, and cheaters don’t leave for someone better, they leave because it’s their tiny ego that needs stroking and presumably something else that is tiny too.

Don Jr was not committed to the relationship, but then he’s not married to Kimberly so can do what he wants.

If they do it with you, they’ll do it to you. Bettina had best sleep with one eye open. It’s a disgraceful way to start a relationship.

Don Jr obviously pursued Kimberly because of her ‘little left to the imagination’ wardrobe, but will he claim that’s why he left her or the fact that he has a roving eye and being faithful is challenging for him? If he doesn’t want to be with Kimberly, don’t destroy her reputation, it’s not an appealing quality.

Baroness Banned For Touching Black MP’s Braided Hair And Calling Asian Peer Lord Poppadom

A Tory peer is facing a three-week ban from the House of Lords for referring to a British-Asian peer as ‘Lord Poppadom’ and touching the hair of a black MP without consent.

Lady Catherine Meyer faces censure after two complaints were made about her behaviour during a visit by parliamentarians to Rwanda earlier this year.

The Lords Conduct Committee upheld a complaint that she referred to Lord Dholakia as ‘Lord Poppadom’ twice during a taxi ride, having earlier referred to him as ‘Lord Popat’ – a different peer of Southeast Asian origin.

Although he didn’t hear her, she was reprimanded by other committee members for her remarks.

She asked Labour MP Bell Ribeiro-Addy if she may touch her braids after having a drink of wine with her lunch on the same Joint Committee on Human Rights (JCHR) trip in February, and she did so before getting a response.

Lady Mayer, 71, is the widow of the former UK ambassador to the US Sir Christopher Meyer. She was dignified in 2018.

The report noted that she had apologised for her actions in both cases. As well as being banned for three weeks she will also have to undergo mandatory training. 

In his report, the Lords Commissioner for Standards said: ‘It is clear from both Lord Dholakia’s and Bell Ribeiro-Addy’s complaints and interviews that the incident had a significant negative effect on each of them.

‘The incident clearly upset them both, to the point where neither felt comfortable being a member of the same committee as Baroness Meyer.’

Ms Ribeiro-Addy told the inquiry she would probably have refused the ‘strange’ request from the peer if given the chance. 

‘It made me feel extremely uncomfortable. It made me feel as if she could just do whatever she wanted,’ she said.

‘I definitely found it violating because, as I said, I wouldn’t anywhere reach out and just grab my colleague’s hair.’ 

In responding to Ms Ribeiro-Addy’s complaint, Lady Meyer said that she had intended a friendly gesture, and had been unaware that it would be unwelcome.

She said she understood from the MP’s subsequent body language that: ‘Oh, gosh, I did the wrong thing’.

The commissioner suggested a three-week break from the Lords as a sanction, describing the racial element in the first case as an ‘aggravating’ factor, as well as for Lady Meyer to undertake ‘bespoke behaviour training’.

So, MP Bell Ribeiro-Addy complained because someone touched her hair without their consent. I don’t suppose she thought of taking it up with Lady Meyer directly so that more important things could be moved on to, which being an MP, I guess she had lots of.

Inquisitiveness is a good thing, that’s how we learn about others’ cultures and customs, but I guess it was a tad rude and ignorant to touch without consent. Nevertheless, just a face-to-face apology would have been enough.

She asked Labour MP Bell Ribeiro-Addy if she could touch her braids after having a glass of wine with her lunch, and did so before obtaining a response, and evidently, this had a negative effect. Was it really deserving of a complaint? It’s no surprise this country is now in the mess it’s in with these little children that we have controlling us.

However, what’s acceptable to one doesn’t mean it’s acceptable to another, and in life, we need to have empathy, and compassion, not ignorance. You do not touch another person without permission, and why dare to believe that you can? Perhaps Lady Catherine Meyer had more than one glass of wine with her chow which might have obscured her judgement.

Most new homes built in Labour’s ‘bulldozer blitz’ on the green belt will house migrants, claim Tories

Tories warned that Keir Starmer’s housebuilding bonanza will scarcely keep up with immigration today – even if he hits his target for 1.5million homes over the next five years.

Shadow housing secretary Kevin Hollinrake blamed the government for ‘concreting over the Green Belt’ to house arrivals as the PM pledged to rip up the ‘broken’ planning system.

Sir Keir said he would prioritise ‘human beings wanting to have a house’ over the environment as he joined his deputy Angela Rayner in unveiling a radical overhaul of the rules.

The changes for England – designed to stop so-called ‘Nimbys’ stopping development – could see hundreds of thousands of acres of Green Belt land redesignated as low-value ‘grey belt’ land.

The new framework also imposes mandatory housing numbers on local authorities across the country – many of which have already been condemned as unachievable.

But campaigners warned that lawyers would be the major winners from the move, while councils face being ‘swamped’ with ‘speculative’ proposals for building on protected land.

The government released estimates of the targets for local areas in the summer, which were revised today. The numbers for London and the South East increased after more weight was put on local ‘affordability’ in the formula. 

The projections included comparisons to existing targets under the present method, first presented in 2018, as well as the average number of new homes that have been built in recent years.

In Fareham, Labour’s new strategy would need the local Tory-controlled council to create 800 new houses a year – up from a target of 498 when calculated by the present method.

That was almost seven times the average number of new homes built in the Hampshire town – where Tory ex-home secretary Suella Braverman is the local MP – in 2020/21 and 2022/23 of just 115.

Mr Hollinrake told the Commons this morning: ‘This planning framework pushes development to rural areas, concreting over green belt, green fields and our green and pleasant land, rather than focusing and supporting building in urban areas where we need to build the most.

‘And to what end? Due to the loosening of restrictions on the visa requirements such as the salary threshold and the scrapping of the Rwanda deterrent, the majority of the homes they deliver will be required for people coming into this country rather than for British citizens.’

Sir Keir has blamed the Tory government after huge revisions to official data published last month revealed the net immigration to the UK was 906,000 in the year to June 2023.  

That was 166,000 above the initial estimate of 740,000.

A similar revision was made for net migration in the year to December 2023, which was originally thought to be 685,000 and is now put at 866,000, an increase of 181,000. 

Arrivals in the 12 months to June this year were 728,000 higher than those leaving the country. In itself, that was nearly as much as the previous long-term immigration record.

The Treasury’s OBR watchdog has predicted that net annual migration to the UK as a whole will subside to 315,000 a year over the ‘medium term’ – although that estimate now looks in grave doubt. 

Asked on a visit to a construction site in Cambridgeshire this morning whether environmental concerns would stand in the way of building, Sir Keir said: ‘The starting point is local plans, and that’s really important for councils to develop the plan according to the target, taking into account local need and working with developers.

‘But are we going to push it through if those plans don’t work? Yes, we absolutely are.

‘Are we going to push away the planning rules and make them clearer, as we have done today, get away the blockers that are stopping the houses being built? Yes, we are absolutely intent.

‘For years, we have had not enough houses being built. That means that individuals and families don’t have the security that they want.

‘We are determined to break through that, to do what’s necessary.

‘Of course, we want to get the balance right with nature and the environment, but if it comes to a human being wanting to have a house for them and their family, that has to be the top priority.’

Mr Hollinrake said that Labour’s housing plans would amount to ‘bulldozing’ green belt sites.

He told Sky News: ‘We’re not against building more homes. So we agree with those parts of the plan. What we disagree with is bulldozing greenfield, green belt sites. That’s what we’ll see. We’ll see many of these homes delivered in rural areas, yet a lowering of targets in urban areas, particularly London.’

The government plans would see 370,000 homes built every year for the rest of the Parliament. 

Portsmouth City Council has been told to add 1,021 under the new target, up from 897 using the current method.

Just 120 new homes have actually been built there, on average, in recent years.

North Yorkshire is being ordered to build 4,077 new homes, slightly down from the 4,232 pencilled in for July.

But it is up from the 1,361 homes under the previous target. An average of 3,150 new homes were built yearly across 2020/21 and 2022/23.

Cornwall must create 4,421 homes under Labour’s target, up from 2,707 using the old method and more than the 2,650 homes built, on average, in recent years.

The Isle of Wight has been told to build more than double the average annual number of new homes it achieved in those two years (370) under a proposed new target of 1,062.

Overall, the South East is required to create 70,681 new homes a year under the new strategy for determining housing targets.

This was up from 51,251 under the previous method. Only London has a higher goal at 87,992 – compared to the 80,693 Labour had originally proposed. The capital has been generating just 35,000 homes a year recently.

It was higher than the East of England (45,429), South West (39,992), North West (34,678), West Midlands (29,940), East Midlands (25,764), Yorkshire and The Humber (24,957), and North East (10,976).

One expert claimed the Green Belt overhaul could free up space for 2.5 million homes.

That sparked warning that the changes would trigger a new wave of ‘urban sprawl’ – which the designation was meant to avoid.

This action overturns the previous Conservative government’s decision to reduce goals after concluding they were ineffectual.

If a development complies with planning regulations, council members on the planning committee will lose their authority to prevent it.

The ability to circumvent the standard planning procedure for important infrastructure, including prisons and the power pylons connecting new wind and solar farms to the grid, would also be granted to ministers.

Today’s package provided £100 million to councils to enable them to revise their plans and assess which areas of their local green belt should be released for development.

But Victoria Du Croz, Head of Planning at Forster’s law firm, warned that the definition of the ‘grey belt’ was not clear enough.

‘Today’s response to the NPPF consultation means that there is going to be ongoing ambiguity around what land is classified as ‘grey belt’. 

‘Despite an overwhelming consensus from the industry that greater specificity is needed over what land should be removed from the greenbelt and made available to development, the Government has failed to provide this today, though has referenced that there will be further guidance around the grey belt definition in the New Year. 

‘Without increased clarity the definition of grey belt will be played out at appeal and in the courts, delaying planning applications and fundamentally delaying the provision of new homes.’

Countryside charity CPRE said the ‘broken housebuilding market’ was to blame for ‘painfully’ slow delivery of new homes. 

‘When big housebuilders deliberately limit the supply of new homes to maximise their profits, supercharging the current system will not lead to the change the government is looking for, chief executive Roger Mortlock said.

‘The government’s plans risk a huge hike in the number of unaffordable, car-dependent homes. Building on England’s 1.2 million shovel-ready brownfield sites would do far more to unlock growth, regenerate communities and provide sustainable, genuinely affordable new homes.

‘We welcome the commitment to local plans and affordable homes. However, local authorities responsible for delivering new homes will be swamped with speculative applications on high-quality Green Belt and farmland. Inevitably, many of these will be approved to meet nationally imposed targets.

‘The ‘grey belt’ policy needs to be much more clearly defined and exclude working farms. It will undermine the Green Belt, one of this country’s most successful spatial protections with enormous potential to help address the climate and nature emergencies.

Our greenbelt is being blitzed by the same individuals who claim to care about public health, carbon emissions, and other issues. Power is all that matters to them, and then these houses that they are going to create will accommodate millions of migrants that our government have let into this country.

We don’t have enough housing stock to accommodate people—and by people I mean people who were born in the UK, not migrants who are pouring over because our foolish government is permitting it. I find the loss of our lovely green places to be very upsetting.

Many of the green areas that I have such pleasant memories of are gradually vanishing, and we have been duped into believing that if we voice our displeasure, we are NIMBYs.

Labour intends to cause as much harm as possible in the time they have left because they are aware that they are unlikely to win the next election and that politics of envy have turned into politics of vengeance.

The NHS is in crisis, so why don’t we bring another couple of million or two into our country? There are not enough homes, so why don’t we bring in more migrants to our country? There are food shortages because farms are being bankrupted and sold to Starmer’s friends in energy firms, so bring in more migrants. Not enough school places, doctors surgeries or dentists, yes, just bring in a few more million to add to the waiting list. Not enough water or reliable sewage treatment plants, go on, bring in more and more and more! This country is a battleground.

Some Crown Court Cases Won’t Have Jury Trials

In certain Crown Court cases, the Justice Secretary has alluded to the elimination of jury trials.

Shabana Mahmood suggested an announcement will be made ‘imminently’ as the government scrambles to hear a tremendous backlog. 

Some 70,000 cases are facing waits of up to five years, with senior legal figures advocating an extreme overhaul. 

Criminals facing charges that attract punishments of up to two years – such as assault of a police officer or racially aggravated criminal damage – could go to an ‘intermediate’ court.

Hearings could be presided over by a judge accompanied by two magistrates.

Murder, manslaughter, and rape are among the more serious offences that would still go to trial before a jury.

The concept of an ‘intermediate’ court was first presented in a report commissioned under Tony Blair. 

Ms Mahmood told LBC this morning: ‘We do have a Crown Court backlog that is very high and likely to rise because the sheer number of cases that are coming into the system is so big, that even if we were sitting at maximum capacity across the whole of the Crown Court, we still wouldn’t be able to touch the sides of that backlog.

‘That does say that we need to think about doing things differently, and the announcements that we will be making will set out the Government’s proposals in this space.’

Ms Mahmood added: ‘I do believe that justice delayed is justice denied. So, we are going to have to think about a different way of managing our Crown Courts so that we can crack down on that backlog properly.’

A trial by a jury is a fundamental right in the UK, but our hopeless government believe they can change a basic right within the Justice system because they have a backlog. After all, there is so much criminality in the UK now, and we all know why but they don’t have the guts to admit it, or they don’t want to upset their prospective voting base.

Everyone is entitled to a jury trial, which is quite alarming and maybe a step towards communism, or maybe it’s more authoritarian than communism, but communist regimes are authoritarian. The thing is there are no prison places for these people at the moment, and if they speed the sentencing up, then where do they put these people?

The only other alternative is to have reduced sentences for them, but then you will have criminals being set free, so this is an extremely flawed concept.

A cornerstone of our legal system that has existed since the signing of the Magna Carta in 1215 is the right to a trial by peers.

Clause 39 of the Magna Carta stated that no free man could be imprisoned without a lawful judgment by his peers, or by the law of the land. This was the first time that the legal rights of the crown’s subjects were acknowledged.

Habeas Corpus Act 1679 – this act extended the right of an incarcerated person to go before a judge to determine if their confinement was legal.

The English Bill of Rights 1689 – this bill limited the powers of the monarch and set out the rights of Parliament. It included the freedom from cruel and unusual punishments and the freedom from being fined without trial.

Fair Trial – the right to a fair trial, which underpins criminal law in the United Kingdom, the USA, and numerous other countries, which can be traced back to the Magna Carta.

There should be no way after 800 years that one person can now arbitrarily remove that right, just to relieve the backlog from the system.

British MP Opposes First Cousin Marriage Ban

An independent member of parliament voiced opposition to a planned British restriction on first-cousin marriages.

Iqbal Mohamed, MP for Dewsbury and Batley, told the House of Commons that many people view family intermarriage as ‘very positive’.

He said it was seen as something that could help ‘build family bonds’ and put families on a more secure financial foothold’.

Mr Mohamed admitted there were ‘health risks’ for the children of such marriages.

But he said a ‘more positive approach’ would be to ‘facilitate advanced genetic test screening’ for couples wishing to marry.

He also called for ‘education programmes’ to be targeted at those communities where family intermarriage is most common, as he told MPs to reject an outright ban.

Mr Mohamed voiced his opposition to Richard Holden, a Tory MP, who was trying to introduce new laws forbidding first-cousin marriages.

The former Conservative Party chairman introduced his Marriage (Prohibited Degrees of Relationship) Bill to the Commons via a ten-minute rule motion.

Mr Holden told MPs: ‘Members across the House may wonder why first-cousin marriage is not already illegal.

‘In fact, many in this House and in the country may already think it is. And that is understandable.’

The MP for Basildon and Billericay added that laws on first-cousin marriage had been left ‘unchanged’ since the reign of Henry VIII.

He warned there had been a ‘worrying trend’ of an increased rate of cousins marrying among some communities in Britain – although he noted there were reports of rates falling in the last decade as ‘young people push back against this system’.

Mr Holden outlined ‘health, freedom and our national values’ as three areas of concern over family intermarriage in the UK.

He urged the Labour Government to look at his Bill as a ‘vehicle for positive change in our country’, adding: ‘Because, in the end, it’s about more than one marriage – it’s about the values and foundations of our society and our democracy.’

Mr Mohamed, who is part of the Independent Alliance of MPs – including ex-Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, agreed there were ‘documented health risks with first-cousin marriage’.

He also spoke of the need to prevent so-called ‘virginity testing’ and forced marriages, adding the ‘freedom of women must be protected at all times’.

But, speaking against Mr Holden’s Bill, Mr Mohamed said ‘The way to redress this is not to empower the state to ban adults from marrying each other, not least because I don’t think it would be effective or enforceable’.

‘Instead, the matter needs to be approached as a health awareness issue, a cultural issue where women are being forced against their will to undergo marriage,’ he told MPs.

‘In doing so it is important to recognise for many people that this is a highly sensitive issue and in discussing it we should try to step into the shoes of those who perhaps are not from the same culture as ours, to better understand why the practice continues to be so widespread.

‘An estimated 35-50 per cent of all sub-Saharan African populations either prefer or accept cousin marriages and it is extremely common in the Middle East and in South Asia.

‘The reason the practice is so common is that ordinary people see family intermarriage overall as something that is very positive, something that helps build family bonds, and helps put families on a more secure financial foothold.

‘However, as is well documented, it is not without health risks for the children of those relationships.’

Urging MPs to oppose Mr Holden’s proposed ban, Mr Mohamed added: ‘Instead of stigmatising those who are in cousin marriages or those inclined to be, a much more positive approach would be to facilitate advanced genetic test screening for prospective married couples, as is the case in all Arab countries in the Persian Gulf.

‘And, more generally, to run health education programmes targeting those communities where the practice is most common.’

Mr. Holden requested that his bill be taken up for a second reading on January 17 of the following year.

However, the amount of legislative time allocated to such private members’ bills to pass the required stages makes it difficult for it to become law.

If the government supports it, it might advance more quickly.

According to current law, relationships with a parent, sibling, or child are barred from marriage, however, first-cousin weddings are not.

Despite the health dangers, Downing Street stated that the government had no intention of outlawing first-cousin weddings.

A No 10 spokesman said: ‘I think the expert advice on the risks of first-cousin marriage are clear.

‘But in terms of legislation, the Government has set out its priorities.’

For millennia, this interbreeding has been taking place. Although I believe that genetic testing should be done before having children, two of my family members married their first cousins, therefore there was nothing wrong with them when they decided to have children.

People were forced to marry their blood relations around the turn of the century and even earlier because of the high rate of sickness, which left bereaved husbands and wives with children with no other option.

Queen Victoria married her first cousin and George V married his second cousin. It even occurred in some other walks of life. However, haemophilia was a sickness that was carried through the royal families for three generations after Queen Victoria but has since vanished. Today, none of Queen Victoria’s living descendants have haemophilia.

There are undoubtedly many more important laws or measures that need to be passed or changed in Parliament than this one that is now occupying the House. However, considering that many of his voters are originating from nations where intimate inter-family marriage is quite popular, it is not surprising who this MP represents or why he does not want the Bill to pass.

Labour Voters Hate Starmer More Than Thatcher

According to a poll, even Labour’s own supporters believe that Keir Starmer is proving to be a worse prime minister than Margaret Thatcher.

More in Common’s research provided more proof that Sir Keir’s start in No. 10 has left the British people utterly disappointed.

Questioned who has been the best premier in the past 40 years, only 4 percent said the Labour leader.

That was the same percentage that supported Theresa May, two points less than the support for John Major and one point more than Rishi Sunak.

Baroness Thatcher came top with 33 per cent, with Tony Blair ranking second at 20 percent and Boris Johnson tied for third with Gordon Brown at 10 percent.

Voters who supported Labour at the election five months ago had a considerably worse image.

They put three-time election winner Sir Tony at the head of the list at 37 percent, with Gordon Brown next best at 15 percent.

Lady Thatcher was the third most popular option with 14 percent.

But that was well ahead of Sir Keir, who was supported by a mere 9 percent and barely edged out Lord Cameron by 8 percent.

Despite having one of the lowest winning vote percentages ever, Sir Keir has had a turbulent first five months after winning a massive election landslide.

Outrage has been mounting over the incredible £40 billion tax raid in Rachel Reeves’ first Budget at the end of October, with farmers protesting at inheritance duties and pensioners angry about losing winter fuel allowance.

He announced further ‘milestones’ in a ‘reset’ speech last week attempting to get his stumbling premiership back on track.

His first months in No 10 also saw Sue Gray sacked as No 10 chief of staff amid Downing Street infighting.

When it was revealed that Louise Haigh had a criminal past, she resigned as transport secretary, dealing Sir Keir yet another setback in recent days.

Fears were raised that the UK economy is falling into the red as a survey showed business confidence was crashing after the Budget. 

According to research by the consulting company BDO, optimism has fallen to its lowest point in two years.

An activity tracker also fell by 3.2 points to 94.7 last month – the weakest in more than a year, with anything below 95 indicating contraction.

The darkening picture comes after GDP scarcely scraped into positive territory in the third quarter, recording 0.1 per cent growth.

The single month of September witnessed a 0.1 percent fall in output, with revision of the data still possible. 

A recession is technically characterised as two consecutive quarters of shrinkage.

Margaret Thatcher was a catastrophe for the United Kingdom, and her choices as prime minister are to blame for many of the problems we currently confront.

She destroyed businesses, particularly in Wales and the north of England, leaving people without other options for employment, resulting in a generation of people living on the dole.

We now have foreign government-owned firms controlling our energy, communication, and train systems at exorbitant costs after she sold them off.

She sold off social housing stock at ridiculously low prices, leaving the taxpayer to pay over the odds to build more, and something we never actually replaced leaving a considerable shortfall for almost three decades.

Although she did have some positive traits as prime minister, her legacy generated a lot of issues for this nation.

What she should have done is work with her government to improve those industries, especially in telecoms, energy and rail, but she made a major mistake, which we are all still paying the price for.

Thatcher began selling everything, even if it was profitable, which is why we are in a mess, and not a single person complained when they were able to purchase their own council home at a knockdown price.

The first of Keir Starmer’s issues is that he lacks any personal magnetism. In addition to being as boring as dishwater, it’s difficult to understand his values and beliefs.

While he seemed enthused in 2019, he later came clean about saying things he didn’t intend.

His seeming indifference to freebies has earned him no followers, and he has created a variety of missions, goals, and aims only to abandon the majority of them.

Regarding his acolytes, he surrounded himself with a group of inexperienced lightweights and worthless idiots.

Perception in politics counts for a lot, but there’s no one in the cabinet you’d describe as a serious national leadership figure.

Labour prevailed in July because the Tories were just so dreadful, and Nigel Farage wasn’t ready for it.

Being in government is much more difficult than being in opposition, and Starmer seems to lack the vision, moral fibre, and character traits necessary to be a viable prime minister.

Patients Who Call 999 For Heart Attacks Or Strokes Are Told To Get To A&E

Due to increased demand, people who contact 999 because they are experiencing a heart attack or stroke are being urged to travel to the hospital on their own.

The West Midlands Ambulance Service, which said last week that it was under ‘severe pressure’, confirmed a change to the script used by its 999 call handlers to suggest patients get themselves to hospital at peak times.

A leaked staff memo on November 29 said the change was needed due to patients’ long waits.

It said category three and four 999 calls patients with urgent abdominal pain or who have fallen or are vomiting will be told: ‘The ambulance service is under significant pressure and we don’t have an ambulance available to respond to you. It may be a number of hours before one is available.

‘Is there any way you can arrange to safely make your own way to a hospital emergency department?’

The memo, seen by the Sunday Times, says that when the ambulance service is under the highest pressure, as it was last week, the request will also apply to category two calls.

These are patients who may be having a stroke or heart attack or have suffered severe burns and who should be seen within 18 minutes.

All ambulance services have altered their scripts for periods of surging demand, with some replicating the West Midlands message while others warn of the prolonged waits patients will encounter.

Last week, six of England’s 10 ambulance services were operating at maximum alert.

This means they were facing ‘extreme pressure’ with a risk of ‘service failure’. The remaining four were all at ‘severe pressure’.

Across the Midlands last week, some patients who should have been seen within 18 minutes were waiting nearly an hour on average.

At one point there were 150 emergency calls in the region without an ambulance available.

The West Midlands Ambulance Service said: ‘When ambulances are delayed handing their patient over at hospital, they are unable to respond to the next call.

‘There is a direct correlation between hospital handover delays and our ability to get to patients in the community quickly.’

There have been regurgitated warnings about the failure in NHS emergency care since the end of COVID-19. Thousands are harmed by lengthy ambulance waits.

This year coroners have sent 33 warnings to ambulance trusts after deaths linked to delays.

How on earth does one make their own way to the hospital when they’re having a stroke or heart attack – this is utter madness and it’s a disgrace.

If our government doesn’t intervene and make any kind of reform in the healthcare system, people will undoubtedly perish as a result of this terrible service, and yet they’re pushing stroke adverts on TV which tell us to act FAST and ends with ‘your NHS is there for you.’

Both the House of Commons and the House of Lords should bow their heads in shame at the way they are treating UK citizens. If they were a company people could take them to court for the way we are being treated, but as it stands, there appears to be nothing that we can do.

However, the Ambulance Services aren’t always at fault. After transporting a patient to the hospital, an ambulance is essentially rendered inoperable for the hours it must wait to release the patient to A&E.

The UK used to be the envy of other nations, but today we are a disgrace and have been reduced to services that are almost third-world, but I guess we should be thankful because our NHS health care is free and we are not faced with having to pay for our treatment before we are admitted. In most nations, they would just let a person die right in front of their eyes.

It’s not free, though, as other people are unaware. We should be provided with a mediocre level of service because we pay for it through taxes. If he could see what was happening, Aneurin Bevan would be rolling in his grave.

Hands On The Shoulder And Other Signs That Might Go Unnoticed

After the year they have had, it was probably as close to the ‘new normal’ for the Royal Family that we are going to get, for the time being at least.

Naturally, all eyes were on the Princess of Wales as she returned to the public eye in her most significant official role since she effectively retreated from royal life at the beginning of the year following her shock cancer diagnosis.

Her amiable smile and dazzling sense of style made us all realise how much Kate had been missed, even if this particular princess wasn’t quite up to going to ‘the ball’ (aka the State Banquet).

MailOnline understands that this is all part of her ‘gradual’ and measured return to work, balancing her responsibilities generally, but also specifically this week between the State Visit and her own annual carol service on Friday.

Seeing her so content and healthy, though, was still a tonic. Prince William quietly put a reassuring hand on her shoulder once, but otherwise let his wife do what she does best—shine.

There were other ‘tweaks’ too throughout the day, most notably for Queen Camilla, who had been forced to pull out from the official ceremonial welcome on Horse Guards as she is still suffering from the side effects of what we now know to be a bad case of pneumonia.

Instead, she met the royal party inside Buckingham Palace – a sensible move for a 77-year-old suffering from such a debilitating viral infection in the circumstances – and announced an ever-so-slightly trimmed appearance at the evening’s glittering State Banquet.

Later, in the historic palace Picture Gallery, Old Masters looked down as the royal party studied a notably smaller collection of artefacts from the Royal Collection – including the late Queen Elizabeth’s speech from Qatar’s State Visit in 2010 – than in previous years.

There were only two tables, rather than a third of the room’s length as if the planners were subtly eager to keep things going a little faster.

All this might appear inconsequential to the untrained eye, but in royal terminology, it’s these little details that usually paint the bigger picture.

It is crucial to emphasise that this is by no means a picture of gloom and doom.

Think back to the beginning of the year, when King Charles and Kate were admitted to the hospital at the same time, she for major stomach surgery and he for a prostate ailment.

In a matter of weeks, we not only learnt that the monarch had been diagnosed with an unrelated type of cancer, but the princess also disclosed that she had been informed that cancer had been detected and that she would require preventative chemotherapy at the young age of 42.

Quickly following the death of Queen Elizabeth’s reassuring influence and Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh’s doughty stoicism and supposedly endless longevity, the country was left in deep shock.

It is very astounding that nearly every member of our Royal Family is on duty at the same time for such a significant diplomatic occasion less than a year after these seismic—and perhaps disastrous—events.

But it does also go to emphasise that, for the time being at least, we may have to cut them a little slack.

Recovery from a life-threatening illness like this takes time because when the physical treatment ends, the mental recovery begins, and let’s face it, all cancer is life-threatening, if not caught in time – that’s a given.

It puts a strain on families, whether royal or not.

Kate looks stunning and we should not be scrutinising her every move and she should be left alone to recuperate at her own pace.

As a toxin, chemotherapy is extremely hard on the body, causing widespread harm and a protracted healing period, but people will always gossip, looking over their fences and gossiping about other people because they have nothing better to do with their lives.

The most terrifying thing a person can have is cancer. That individual has no clue how the treatment will proceed or whether it will be effective at all. You either win or you lose, just as in a lottery game, and I wouldn’t wish that on my worst enemy!

Martin Roberts Finds A Dead Body In Bed On Homes Under The Hammer

Martin Roberts has recalled the terrifying moment he ‘found a dead body’ hidden in a bed upstairs in a sold property on Homes Under The Hammer.

The TV presenter and property expert, 61, revealed that during one visit to the Lake District, he experienced one of the most shocking moments of his career – which ended with a heart-wrenching twist.

He exclusively told MailOnline that while filming an episode in Cumbria, his producer came down from viewing the upstairs of the house looking ‘ashen in the face’ and revealed to the crew that there ‘was a dead body in the bed’.

Confused and shaken, Martin and his BBC crew ‘tiptoed’ upstairs to the bedroom where they saw the ‘body under the sheets’.

But as they stood shaken at the door, Martin explained that the ‘dead body’ started snoring and they soon found out ‘someone forgot their grandad’ and it was the previous owner’s relative.

Martin told MailOnline: ‘We went to this one house, which had clearly been lived in until very recently. Almost like the kettle was still hot kind of thing and we went in and then the director went and had a look around.

‘And she came out absolutely ashen in the face. And she said, ‘There is a dead body! There’s a dead body in the bed’.

‘And we were like, ‘well, that’s a first, we didn’t see that on the risk assessment’.

‘He said no, no, no. There is a dead body.’

‘So we all sort of tiptoed into the bedroom and sure enough, there’s this body underneath the sheet and we’re like, ‘we really don’t know how to deal with this’.

‘And then it started snoring and so we kind of nudged it.

‘And then this old man sat bolt upright, no teeth and said, ‘Where’s my family?’ and the people had left in such a rush that they forgot grandad.

‘Grandad was still sleeping in the bed. The family had left. The house had been sold. He’s suddenly faced with a film crew from homes under.’

Thankfully Martin, who was speaking to MailOnline on behalf of 10bet. revealed that their family had not moved too far away from the original house and once they ‘gave him a cup of tea and calmed him down’ the grandad was reunited with his family.

Since its debut in 2003, Homes Under the Hammer has followed both novice and seasoned purchasers as they bid on often dilapidated residences at auction.

It then tracks their remodelling endeavours to determine the profit or loss from rental or sales.

Martin has appeared on the show since it debuted in the early 2000s and has appeared in over 724 episodes.

The body wasn’t dead, and Martin wasn’t the one who discovered it, and this guy always looks like he’s just climbed out of a skip after a wild night out.

He used to be clean-shaven, but it appears that he opted to grow a beard to make up for his hair loss. Now, his thinning combed hair and beard give him a rather scruffy appearance.

To be honest, none of this makes any sense. So, the house was sold, but the grandfather was still in bed – that must have been some quick property sale – perhaps it should be in the Guinness Book of Records.

I believe it’s more likely that the poor man had some form of dementia and he probably wandered back to his old home and went back to somewhere familiar, but at least he was okay, that’s all that matters. This is the only explanation that makes any sense, and it’s been a bit exaggerated or perhaps they arrived at the wrong house and instead, they entered the House of Lords.

Abortion Pills Force Woman To Miscarry

A guy was shown on camera receiving abortion drugs, which he then used to covertly tamper with a pregnant woman’s drink to induce a miscarriage.

Stuart Worby, 40, secretly added an abortion-inducing substance to the victim’s orange juice.

He was sentenced to 12 years in prison after being found guilty of sexual assault and using an instrument or poison to induce a miscarriage.

Worby, of Dereham, Norfolk, crushed a tablet of mifepristone into the drink of his victim then inserted another abortion drug inside her, after sexually assaulting her while she was blindfolded.

Within a few hours, she experienced a serious bodily reaction that included bleeding, vomiting, diarrhoea, and a high fever.

Portuguese national Nueza Cepeda was seen on CCTV giving Worby the drugs that he used to spike the victim.

The duo were seen meeting in a pub garden, where Cepeda gives a bag containing the drugs to Worby. 

The victim of a sexual offence, who is entitled to lifetime confidentiality, miscarried at 15 weeks of pregnancy.

A team of detectives who investigated the crime described it as one of the most shocking cases they had ever seen.

Cepeda had obtained the drugs by calling a London clinic posing as a pregnant woman who already had a family and wanted to end her pregnancy. 

Cepeda, 39, of Dereham, was sentenced to 22 months in prison with a two-year suspension after entering a guilty plea to providing an instrument to induce a miscarriage.

The police-released video also shows authorities at Worby’s residence, where he was taken into custody.

Worby acknowledged that he had illegally gotten the drug, but he denied ever giving it to the woman. After a post-mortem assessment, one of the medications was discovered in foetal tissue.

Initially, the victim thought she had miscarried spontaneously but contacted police when she saw messages on Worby’s phone to his friend Wayne Finney saying ‘It’s working’ and ‘There is a lot of blood’.

Following today’s sentencing Det Insp Duncan Woodhams who led the investigation described it as one of the most shocking cases he and his team of detectives had seen.

He said: ‘Our thoughts remain with the victim who has suffered greatly as a result of Worby’s merciless actions and the subsequent trial.

‘It is difficult to imagine a more despicable crime. This took detailed planning and manipulation of the victim to inflict such lethal violence on her unborn child.

‘Worby has shown no remorse and there is no mitigation. He wanted to exert control in the most heinous manner and has now deservedly been punished for it.’

The woman miscarried her healthy baby the next day when Worby finally agreed to take her to Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital, despite his first refusal.

As she lost her baby, Worby texted a friend saying, ‘It’s working’ and, ‘There is lots of blood’.

In a victim impact statement read to the court, the victim said she felt she had ‘failed to protect my baby’. She said she had ‘gone from fertility clinic to fertility clinic’ and ‘being a mother was a dream to me’.

She added: ‘This pain will never leave me knowing that this baby could have been my only chance to be a mother in this lifetime. I haven’t been able to conceive and have another baby.’

Worby acquired two types of abortion drugs by convincing a friend’s partner to pretend she was pregnant so she could get prescribed them privately, and then give them to him.

He crushed a tablet of mifepristone into the drink of his victim – who was about 15 weeks pregnant – without her knowledge in what was described by prosecutors as ‘deliberate, well planned and callous’.

Worby, of Dereham, Norfolk, used deceit to have intercourse with the lady before inserting many pills of misoprostol, another abortion medication, into her.

Mr Justice Joel Bennathan jailed him for 12 years for administering poison or using an instrument with intent to procure a miscarriage, and a concurrent eight years for sexual assault by penetration.

At Norwich Crown Court Worby was also ordered to pay £10,000 compensation to his victim. He had denied both charges but was found guilty at an earlier trial.

Wayne Finney, 41, of Swaffham, Norfolk, the boyfriend of the mother-of-three, was found not guilty of purposefully inciting or aiding another person in committing a crime.

The woman who miscarried described her anguish at losing her baby in an emotional victim impact statement, saying she was now unable to have children after being diagnosed with an ovarian deficiency.

She said that her miscarriage had left her suffering ‘grief that will never heal’ knowing that she ‘had failed’ to protect her baby.

The woman said in her statement: ‘I keep thinking what I could have done to protect my baby, but I have the deep pain of knowing that I have failed.

‘This pain will never leave me, knowing that this baby could have been my only chance of being a mother in this lifetime.

‘Although I now have a wonderful partner, we have been unable to conceive. I have to face the knowledge that the only baby I could have had was lost.’

The victim described being cross-examined at Worby’s trial as ‘a horrible feeling’ which had made her ‘more upset’.

She added: ‘I had a healthy pregnancy and was looking forward to giving birth to a beautiful baby. Becoming a mother was a dream that I was always hoping for.’

The woman said she had been left suffering ‘relentless nightmares’ and sleepless nights and had been further traumatised by having to wait two years ‘to give my baby the right to have a funeral’.

The trial heard how the woman had found messages on Worby’s phone to Mr Finney which commented on the effect of the abortion drugs on her, saying ‘it’s working’ and ‘there is lots of blood’.

The woman realised then that she had not suffered a spontaneous miscarriage, but what was described by police as a ‘deceitful and planned termination’.

The court heard how Worby had convinced Cepeda to call a London gynaecology centre and inform them that she was expecting, had a family, and wished to abort the pregnancy.

His bank statement revealed he had paid her the £470 fee for the drugs and her consultation to have a medical consultation that resulted in the drugs being delivered to her home.

Despite being informed by the gynaecology facility that it was illegal to provide the medication to anybody else, CCTV captured her giving the packets to Worby on a table outside the George Hotel in Swaffham.

Prosecutor Edmund Vickers KC said it was ‘quite clear’ that the victim wanted to have her baby.

He said that a post-mortem found the abortion drugs in her baby’s body, and gave the cause of death as abortion drugs in the mother’s system.

Cepeda initially claimed that she did not believe the abortion drugs would be used with the consent of the victim.

The trial heard how she had made internet searches before getting her prescription for ‘abortion home remedies’ and ‘abortion home treatment’.

Andrew Oliver KC, defending Cepeda, who works as a cleaner, said she had only met Worby through Mr Finney and had acted ‘through a degree of pressure and panic’.

He added: ‘She has gone against her better judgement as a result of trying to help, although in a completely misguided way.

‘She knew the reasons why he was asking her to acquire medication. But she has been utterly conned by Mr Worby. He not only deceived (the victim) in the most cruel way, but she was also taken in by his lies.

‘She is devastated that she has played a part in the harm and suffering that this case has caused. She did not intend harm. She thought she was trying to help. It was misguided loyalty to someone who was a friend of her partner.

‘It has landed her in serious trouble and caused graphic misery for which she is truly sorry. She did not receive any financial or other benefit from the part she played. I accept she played a critical role.

‘She was a subordinate in this incident and did not think out the horrific consequences.’

Mr Justice Bennathan told Worby that he had been ‘anxious’ to terminate the woman’s pregnancy. He added: ‘You are a selfish man and you set about planning to abort the baby.

‘In the end, you used your friend’s partner to get abortion drugs. You must have known this was dangerous as the pills were designed for use in the early weeks of pregnancy.’

The judge added that ‘any normal person’ would be shocked to hear the victim’s impact statement.

But he told Worby, who has no previous convictions: ‘I am sure your thoughts are only about yourself as they always were.’

Worby asked if he could say something before being taken down, but the judge refused his request. Worby then added: ‘Thanks for your time.’

Mr Justice Bennathan told Cepeda: ‘Your actions have caused huge suffering and a great loss to another woman. I accept you only became involved due to the pressure or badgering of Stuart Worby.

‘I accept that you thought he might not go through with it, and that you feel remorse and pain about what happened.’

The judge also summoned her to do a rehabilitation activity requirement of 20 days and 40 hours of unpaid work.

Worby was given a concurrent 14-day jail sentence after he admitted having cannabis.

Twelve years is absolutely insufficient. This was a heinous and repulsive crime!

Her unborn child perished as a result of the poison he delivered. His sentencing ought to have been far harsher. This was not his choice to inflict a termination on her.

He put poison into her body without her knowledge and caused her and the foetus physical harm, which is not acceptable. He caused the termination of a baby, and potentially destroyed this woman’s likelihood of having another child. He should have been given a much harsher sentence.

Design a site like this with WordPress.com
Get started