Just as Cyprus’ government should be concentrating on its presidency of the Council of the EU, it has to firefight controversy at home over a video circulating online that alleges top-level corruption. The furor centers on a mysterious video posted on X with a montage of senior figures filmed apparently describing ways to bypass campaign spending caps with cash donations, and seemingly discussing a scheme allowing businesspeople to access the president and first lady. One segment made reference to helping Russians avoid EU sanctions. The government denies the allegations made in the video and calls it “hybrid activity” aimed at harming “the image of the government and the country.” The government does not say the video is a fake, but insists the comments have been spliced together misleadingly. The footage appears to have been shot using hidden cameras in private meetings. Unconvinced, opposition parties are now calling for further action. Cypriot President Nikos Christodoulides hit back hard against the suggestion of illicit campaign funding in remarks to local media on Friday. “I would like to publicly call on anyone who has evidence of direct or indirect financial gains during the election campaign or during my time as President of the Republic to submit it immediately to the competent state authorities,” he said. “I will not give anyone, absolutely anyone, the right to accuse me of corruption.” In relation to the reference to payments made by businesses, he said companies “must also offer social benefits within the framework of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) for the state, I want to repeat, for the state. And they do so in the areas of health, welfare, defense, and many other areas.” The contentious video was posted on Thursday afternoon on social media platform X on an account under the name “Emily Thompson,” who is described as an “independent researcher, analyst and lecturer focused mainly on American domestic and foreign policies.” It was not immediately possible to find public and verifiable information confirming the real identity of the person behind the account. The video includes footage of former Energy Minister George Lakkotrypis and the director of the president’s office, Charalambos Charalambous. In the recordings, Lakkotrypis is presented as a point of contact for people seeking access to Christodoulides. He appears to walk his interlocutor through the process on payments above the €1 million campaign limit. In a written statement, Lakkotrypis said it is “self-evident” from the video that remarks attributed to him were edited in order to distort the context of the discussions, with the aim of harming Cyprus and himself personally. He added that he filed a complaint with the police. The police have launched an investigation into the video, after Lakkotrypis’ complaint, its spokesman Vyron Vyronos told the Cyprus News Agency. The video then shows Charalambous, Christodoulides’ brother-in-law, who explains gaining access to the presidential palace. “We are the main, the two, contacts here at the palace, next to the president,” he says, adding that interested parties could approach the president with a proposal and money that could be directed toward social contributions. There was no official statement from Charalambous. The video alleges that social contributions made by companies through a fund run by the first lady are being misused to win preferential treatment from the presidency. Concern over this fund is not new. The Cypriot parliament last year voted through legislation that called for the publication of the names of the donors to that fund. The president vetoed that move, however, and took the matter to court, arguing that publicly disclosing the list of donors would be a personal data breach. The court ruled in favor of the president and the names were not revealed. Stefanos Stefanou, leader of the main opposition AKEL party, said the video raised “serious political, ethical, and institutional issues” which compromised the president and his entourage politically and personally. He called on the president to dismiss Charalambous, abolish the social support fund and — after the donors have been made public — transfer its responsibilities to another institution. AKEL also submitted a bill on Friday to abolish the fund within the next three months and called for the first lady to resign as head of the fund. AKEL also requested that the allegations from the video be discussed in the parliament’s institutions’ committee. Another opposition party, Democratic Rally, said: “What is revealed in the video is shocking and extremely serious … Society is watching in shock and demanding clear and convincing answers from the government. Answers that have not yet been given.” Cyprus has parliamentary elections in May and the next presidential election is in 2028.

Elon Musk’s pledge to step back from campaign spending — if he means it — is rippling across the United States’ political landscape. Some Republicans are worried that they might be losing their whale. Some Democrats fear they are losing their foil. It matters because Musk injected an unprecedented level of spending into the presidential race and could do the same in November’s Virginia governor’s race and around the country in the midterms. That was suddenly put in doubt Tuesday, when the Tesla CEO told an interviewer that he’s backing away from political spending after shelling out hundreds of millions of dollars to help Donald Trump win the presidency last year. “Taking his toys and going home,” said Steve Bannon, a Trump ally who has verbally sparred with Musk. Musk, the world’s richest man with a net worth estimated at more than $420 billion, announcement that he will “do a lot less” political spending, a surprise reversal of his promise to continue to play a major role influencing U.S. elections. It’s a significant turnaround from the days after Trump’s win in November, when Musk posted on social media that he would “keep grinding” away at election funding and “play a significant role in primaries.” Musk’s group, America PAC, spent nearly $20 million aiming to boost Republicans in swing House districts. He also joined Trump regularly on the campaign trail last year and offered cash giveaways — including $1 million prizes to a few voters. He eventually spent more than $260 million on the 2024 election cycle and even contributed to two Florida special elections this year. But Musk’s political capital seems to have faded after he and groups he backed — America PAC and Building America’s Future — contributed more than $19 million to support Wisconsin Supreme Court candidate Brad Schimel, a Republican who lost by 10 percentage points. The public face of the Department of Government Efficiency’s massive overhaul of the federal workforce, Musk earned the ire of many Americans. His car company Tesla faced financial headwinds, and Musk said he’d refocus his efforts on the flailing company along with his other businesses. In Virginia, Republicans were expecting Musk would want to make his mark, given that’s where the most competitive statewide races are taking place this year. Some are still holding out hope that will happen: GOP gubernatorial candidate Winsome Earle-Sears faces a major cash disadvantage against Democrat Abigail Spanberger. Whether or not Musk actually stops contributing is still an open question. Asked about Musk’s decision to withdraw as a GOP donor, one Virginia Republican, granted anonymity to speak freely, said: “Eh, we’ll see.” In Pennsylvania this year, Republicans and Democrats are gearing up for Supreme Court races, where three justices are up for retention in November. It could bring a repeat of the Wisconsin election: Democrats and Republicans started discussing whether Musk would play a role in the races, with the Philadelphia Inquirer reporting that one Democratic candidate, Justices Kevin Dougherty, warned that “Elon Musk has already invested $1 million,” though that couldn’t be verified yet through campaign reports. Democrats especially don’t expect the tech billionaire to fully withdraw from political spending, and they expect him to funnel contributions legally through non-public, dark money means. “I believe he will start moving his money in the background, through nonprofits,” said Pat Dennis, president of American Bridge, a major Democratic super PAC. “It’ll be a lot more of that now.” Dennis also argued that Musk stepping away publicly may help Democrats narrow their focus back on congressional Republicans for cutting federal programs and that Musk had initially served as a “shield” for them when he was the de facto head of DOGE. A spokesperson for America PAC declined to comment on what Musk’s announcement meant for the group. Even some Republicans are unsure exactly what Musk’s announcement will mean for the future. “I believe he means it right now. But every election is unique,” said Republican consultant Josh Novotney. “So he may be motivated to be active again in the future.” Even if Musk greatly reduces his amount of campaign spending, several lawmakers on Wednesday said they appreciated what Musk had done for the party. Sen. Ted Cruz said Musk made “an extraordinary difference in the 2024 race.” Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-Okla.) said he texted Musk Tuesday to say how thankful he was for what he’d done. “He’s worked hard. He wasn’t involved in politics and he jumped all in because he saw an opportunity to make a change,” Mullin said. “Now he’s going back to his life. I don’t blame him. In fact, I commend him.” Elena Schneider and Jessica Piper contributed to this story.

Elon Musk said he plans to cut back on political spending, saying he has “done enough,” a move that coincides with the billionaire entrepreneur taking a step back from President Donald Trump’s Washington. Speaking at the Qatar Economic Forum on Tuesday, the Tesla CEO said he would “do a lot less” political spending “in the future,” adding: “I think I’ve done enough.” Musk brushed aside a question about whether his move was a response to pushback he has received for his prominent role in reshaping the federal government, marked by his leadership of the agency-slashing Department of Government Efficiency. “If I see a reason to do political spending in the future, I will do it. I don’t currently see a reason,” he said. Musk, who poured over $290 million of his own money into the 2024 election to support Trump and Republicans, had established himself as a major political force. He also sought to influence state-wide elections, including a key Wisconsin Supreme Court race last month.

Romanian presidential hopeful Elena Lasconi finds herself in a weird position. Not only is she running in a controversial election do-over, but she’s now battling her own party just to stay in the race. The leadership of Lasconi’s center-right Save Romania Union (USR) pulled support for her last week to swing behind independent Bucharest Mayor Nicușor Dan, whom they see as more likely to make it into the election runoff next month. Polling currently shows Lasconi running behind Dan and two nationalist candidates. Those standings sparked a crisis of confidence among USR leaders as to whether their candidate could repeat last year’s successful result, when she qualified for the second round before the election was annulled.  USR leaders now want the party to coalesce around Dan as the pro-European candidate in the race. Otherwise, they fear, Romania’s pro-EU centrist votes will be split between Lasconi and Dan, risking catapulting two far-right candidates into the runoff: Alliance for the Union of Romanians leader George Simion, and the former center-left prime minister-turned-nationalist Victor Ponta. Lasconi, who is actually president of USR and mayor of Câmpulung, a town of 30,000 three hours from Bucharest, rejected that scenario as “a false path” in an interview with POLITICO. “I have the exact same chances as last year to make it into the runoff,” she said, even though polls currently show her running in fifth position with around 5 percent support.  HOLDING OUT HOPE At stake in the seismic election is whether Romania will turn hard to the right by electing a president who would align the country with the agenda of U.S. President Donald Trump. A win for Simion or Ponta also threatens to bring another Eastern European contrarian to decision-making in Brussels, from a country of 19 million people that has been a stalwart member of NATO and the EU for years. But Lasconi, a 52-year-old who spent a quarter century as a TV journalist, says she doesn’t entirely believe the polls. After all, no survey predicted that Călin Georgescu would win the first round of last year’s presidential ballot, before the country’s top court canceled the election over allegations that the ultranationalist had run an illegal campaign with potential Russian backing. Indeed, as Lasconi pointed out, many polls saw her coming in fourth or fifth in that race too. She ultimately finished second with 19 percent of the vote. Lasconi argues that her personal appeal exceeds that of her center-right party, claiming the data shows that some women who voted for far-right parties in last year’s parliamentary elections actually chose her in the presidential vote. This time around, she’s again counting on some of those votes. Most of the roughly 40 percent of undecided voters are women between 33 and 60 years of age who live in small towns or villages, she noted, as well as young people — both groups that voted for her last year. “In 25 years of journalism and five years as a mayor I dealt with vulnerable people, women, victims, children. Who’s fighting for these people? I can do that, that’s why I’m so confident that I’ll become Romania’s president,” she said.  CAMPAIGNING WITHOUT MONEY Lasconi has taken her party to court to force it to restore funding for her campaign, which USR cut after withdrawing its support. “It’s a big injustice, a major abuse,” Lasconi said of the decision to pull backing and funding. She insists that the party’s membership chose her as a candidate, and that the USR leaders who reversed course just weeks before the first round of the presidential election on May 4 don’t represent the whole party. USR is legally barred from steering Lasconi’s campaign funding to Dan, who is running independently. Romania’s Central Electoral Bureau said on April 12 that USR cannot campaign for Dan because the deadline for any candidate to drop out of the race was March 19, meaning that Lasconi remains USR’s official candidate. The USR leadership has challenged the electoral authority’s decision in court. Party leaders, meanwhile, said they would campaign for Dan on the streets and on their personal social media accounts. Lasconi, who has condemned the USR leadership figures who turned against her as “traitors” and “losers,” said in the interview that their actions were dangerous. “I’m afraid that some institution would take notice and say that USR is trying to rig the election,” she said. Unless a court decides to restore her campaign funding, however, Lasconi says she’s prevented from competing on an equal footing with other candidates. “But people see it, and even if it now looks like they took everything away from me, they didn’t take away my voice.” Lasconi has also accused her party colleagues and Dan of playing the same games that plagued the old mainstream political system in Romania — in which backroom deals subverted the democratic order — abuses that both Dan and Lasconi claim to be running against. At stake in the seismic election is whether Romania will turn hard to the right by electing a president who would align the country with the agenda of U.S. President Donald Trump. | Daniel Mihailescu/AFP via Getty Images “People started to understand that I am truly the independent candidate — I don’t play games with anyone,” Lasconi said. FOLLOWING THE POLISH EXAMPLE  Should she overcome the odds (and her own party) to become president, Lasconi aims to unite the nation.  “You cannot imagine how much anger there is in society. I feel it when I am among people,” Lasconi said. That anger comes from injustice, she said, from retirees struggling to make ends meet on a €250 monthly pension. “There are so many who go to work for 25 lei (€5) a day,” Lasconi added. In her own town, Lasconi said, she was instrumental in building parks and playgrounds where people can get together instead of sitting around on their phones. “I invested in education and health from European funds,” she said of her record as mayor, explaining that the money had gone to renovating hospitals and schools. On foreign affairs, Lasconi doesn’t believe her country has to choose between the EU and the United States. While she admits she doesn’t understand the purpose of Trump’s trade war with the EU, which is affecting business on both sides of the Atlantic, she does agree with the U.S. president that Romanians and Europeans need to do a better job of taking care of their own security. “We relied too much on someone taking care of us, of our security, and I think we should follow Poland’s example, which made important progress in the last few years,” Lasconi said.

LONDON — He’s a billionaire firebrand at the forefront of green tech, owns a powerful political media platform — and has the ear of the incoming president of the United States.  So it’s little wonder governments across Europe are in turmoil over how to navigate Elon Musk, while dodging his erratic and often ill-informed criticisms about their domestic politics. The Tesla and X owner — tapped up to lead a government efficiency drive in Donald Trump’s second U.S. presidential term — has no compunction about lambasting serving administrations and throwing his weight behind opposition movements on the populist right. That’s despite him complaining about foreign interference when others attempt to get involved with U.S. politics.  His biggest beef appears to be with the British Labour government under Prime Minister Keir Starmer. But he has sharply criticized German Chancellor Olaf Scholz too and endorsed hard-right movements in both nations. Other European leaders have attempted to court Musk in the hope of avoiding his ire and smoothing their relations with Trump, who Musk helped into office via millions of dollars in campaign funding. French President Emmanuel Macron invited the Tesla and Twitter owner to the re-opening of Notre-Dame cathedral and wants him at an upcoming tech summit.  Italian Prime Minister Georgia Meloni has built her own bond with Musk. And Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy was forced to play nice with him during a post-election call with Trump, despite sharp disagreements over the response to Russia’s full-scale invasion. Leaders from further afield, including Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, also increased their dealings with the businessman as the U.S. election loomed, to avoid the kind of harsh treatment meted out to Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. Musk appeared to endorse Trudeau’s Conservative rival this week to boot. Those who put the time in are being vindicated. Trump rewarded the SpaceX mogul with his cost-cutting government appointment and has rarely been seen without Musk at his side since the election, cementing his influence on the coming administration. Among his political allies and enemies, a consensus has formed that Musk is one of the most powerful people in the world — if not the most powerful. Getting on his bad side can have dire consequences. “As a chameleon, you never know which version of Elon Musk is showing up,” said one former U.K. government adviser who dealt with Musk and was granted anonymity to speak candidly about him. “He’s a dangerous figure. And it’s in no one’s interests to have him as an enemy.” Elon Musk’s biggest beef appears to be with the British Labour government under Prime Minister Keir Starmer. | Leon Neal/Getty Images JUST ASK KEIR STARMER Musk launches social media attacks at Starmer with near-obsessive routine. He has backed the Reform U.K. movement led by Brexit campaigner Nigel Farage — a long-standing friend of Trump who met Musk last month and discussed a potential overseas donation. In recent days, Musk has also thrown his weight behind far-right rabble-rouser Tommy Robinson — a step too far even for Farage. He did so while peddling claims Starmer failed to take the issue of child grooming gangs seriously while he was head of the British prosecution service.  The latest Musk musings on X earned a rebuke from Labour minister Andrew Gwynne. “Elon Musk is an American citizen and perhaps ought to focus on issues on the other side of the Atlantic,” he told LBC radio. But Gwynne’s boss, Health Secretary Wes Streeting, offered the Tesla chief an olive branch in a later interview — demonstrating the tension in the British government over whether or not to rile the billionaire further. Streeting said Musk’s criticisms were “misjudged and certainly misinformed,” but stressed the British government is keen to cooperate with tech giants to tackle child sexual exploitation, Musk’s latest crusade and a campaign point for Farage. “We’re willing to work with Elon Musk, who I think has got a big role to play with his social media platform to help us and other countries to tackle this serious issue,” Streeting told ITV News. “If he wants to work with us and roll his sleeves up, we’d welcome that.” But Musk shows no signs of backing down and the U.K. government’s refusal to invite him to a crucial investment summit last October may have sealed its reputation with the tech mogul. For its part, Starmer’s Downing Street studiously avoided commenting on Musk’s latest attacks, even as Musk branded the prime minister “complicit in the RAPE OF BRITAIN” and demanded a fresh election. Starmer’s MPs — nervously eyeing a challenge from Farage’s party — were less circumspect. One, also granted anonymity to speak candidly, lamented that “at a time when communities need to come and work together, we have someone with a lot of influence sowing divisions and spreading hate.” GERMANY GIVES THE MIDDLE FINGER In Germany, mainstream political leaders are increasingly concerned about what Musk’s endorsement of the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) could mean for relations between the Trump administration and Germany’s next coalition government. The center-left Chancellor Scholz — a Musk bête noire — called a snap election for Feb. 23. | POOL photo by Soeren Stache/AFP via Getty Images And they have been less shy than the U.K. government about taking on Musk directly. The center-left Chancellor Scholz — a Musk bête noire — called a snap election for Feb. 23 and has found himself in a struggling campaign against the entrepreneur as well as his domestic political opponents. In an interview with Funke Mediengruppe published in recent days, Social Democratic co-leader Lars Klingbeil compared Musk’s interventions in the German election to the influence operations backed by the Kremlin and Russian President Vladimir Putin. “Both want to influence our elections and specifically support the AfD’s enemies of democracy,” said Klingbeil. “They want Germany to be weakened and plunged into chaos.” The conservative candidate in pole position to be Germany’s next chancellor, Friedrich Merz, has portrayed himself as a leader who will be able to make “deals” with Trump — at a moment when German exports are exposed to the president-elect’s repeated threats of a trade war with Europe. Many German mainstream politicians worry that, at the very least, Musk and the incoming administration will further undermine German centrist parties by normalizing the AfD and playing down its radicalism. Those worries grew more pronounced when U.S. Vice President-elect JD Vance reposted an English-language translation of Musk’s controversial tribute to the AfD in Germany’s Welt am Sonntag newspaper. “I’m not endorsing a party in the German elections, as it’s not my country and we hope to have good relations with all Germans,” Vance wrote on X. “But this is an interesting piece,” he added. FLATTERY FROM MACRON Musk hasn’t yet thrown his endorsement behind Marine Le Pen and the French far right. But President Macron — who, like Scholz in Germany, is politically fragile and facing domestic turbulence — is desperate to get him onside. He has been urging the tech entrepreneur, alongside Trump, to attend a major artificial intelligence summit in Paris next month. The duo’s appearance at the recent Notre-Dame reopening was a diplomatic coup for Macron.  “Trump doesn’t seem to hold Paris in the same contempt he holds the EU or Germany,” said a Republican foreign policy expert working with Trump’s transition team, who spoke on condition of anonymity in order to discuss the team’s internal thinking. “Macron can take solace in the fact that he’s not Scholz.” Musk hasn’t yet thrown his endorsement behind Marine Le Pen and the French far right. | Kent Nishimura/Getty Images Making life difficult for Macron, however, is the European Commission, which continues investigations into whether X complies with its information rules. It has found the microblogging site in breach of the Digital Services Act, the EU’s landmark content moderation law, for the deceptive design of “verified” badges and a lack of transparency to researchers. The jury is still out on X’s potential violations around the dissemination of illegal content and measures to fight information manipulation, and the Commission is mulling whether it could slap Musk with a mega-fine.  A back and forth between Musk and former European Commissioner for digital policy Thierry Breton became increasingly hostile. Breton resigned from his post shortly after their war of words, prompting glee from his nemesis. European leaders are waiting to see where Musk turns his attention next once Trump takes office later this month. The one certainty is the old rules of diplomacy are out the window. “While his behavior is dubious, business and trade is fickle,” said the former U.K. government adviser. “Governments should never rule out a significant opportunity to do business with him.” Noah Keate in London and Sue Allan in Ottawa contributed to this report.

WASHINGTON, DC — U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer had spent the summer making cautious overtures to woo Donald Trump. Then a Labour staffer threw a diplomatic grenade onto LinkedIn.  It was less than a month ago that Starmer bagged not just a meeting with the Republican presidential candidate, but also a dinner at Trump Tower that stretched into the night.  British government officials were ecstatic at the outcome of the encounter, which took place during Starmer’s visit to New York for a global summit and saw the unpredictable ex-president praise the newish British PM. Their tête-à-tête ended up lasting two hours, with joyful aides said to have called the airport to push back the departure time of Starmer’s waiting plane as it readied to return home. The successful head-to-head was a coup for a left-wing prime minister desperate to get into the good graces of the hard-right possible returnee to the White House. The reserved former human rights barrister and prosecutor from Britain could hardly be more different from the bombastic and controversial American businessman. But in a land where the “special relationship” with the U.S. is a defining one, even the staunchest socialist in the new government understands the need to keep Trump onside. All that hard work risks being undone, however, after a Labour aide took to the business networking site LinkedIn with a callout for staffers to help campaign for Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris. “I have nearly 100 Labour Party staff (current and former) going to the U.S. in the next few weeks heading to North Carolina, Nevada, Pennsylvania and Virginia,” Labour Head of Operations Sofia Patel wrote. “I have 10 spots available for anyone available to head to the battleground state of North Carolina — we will sort your housing.” “WE WILL SORT YOUR HOUSING” Patel had no reason to think she was about to cause a diplomatic incident. She had shared similar posts on LinkedIn in the preceding months. “I’m planning a trip for Labour Party staff to help our friends across the pond elect their first female president (second time lucky!),” she wrote in August. “Let’s show the Democrats how to win elections!” But this time her actions triggered a chain of events that risks damaging the delicate relationship Starmer and his team have spent months forging with the possible future leader of the free world. An X (formerly Twitter) account named “max” with a paid-for blue tick and a profile photo of the late French writer Albert Camus posted a screenshot of the Patel post, after a Labour staffer friend flagged it to the account owner 14 hours after it went live. Max wrote, without providing proof, that those campaigning were “funded by the Labour Party.” Then the Politics UK account — which shares political headlines with its more than 300,000-strong following, prompting instant viral boosts — picked it up.  The post bounced around political Twitter, shared via pro-Trump accounts with ever-larger followings. Then things really got out of control.  > This is illegal https://t.co/EHuKfyMcnj > > — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) October 17, 2024 X owner and Trump supporter Elon Musk shared one of the screenshots with a simple comment: “This is illegal.” Whether he was right was irrelevant: The grenade exploded.  Mainstream news organizations began running headlines as Republicans weighed in to criticize Labour. Pro-Trump House Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene said “foreign nationals are not allowed to be involved in any way in U.S. elections,” while Senator Tom Cotton said the British invasion of campaigners was “yet another reason” to vote for Trump.  Labour swiftly scrambled into furious reverse ferret mode. Top brass shut down the central coordination of campaigners — even though the plans appeared to fall within U.S. electoral rules on foreign volunteer spending, since the activists were funding their own expenses. Patel deleted all her previous LinkedIn posts about the plan. Aides tried to play down the row in conversations with reporters. But it was too late. One state Democrat group canceled its plans to host Labour activists. Whatever the rights and wrongs, the outrage had become toxic; it was now simply too damaging to have Brits knocking on voters’ doors. There the matter may have remained, had the former president himself not weighed in. COURTING ATTENTION Just as the row appeared to have died down, on Monday night the Trump campaign revealed its legal team had filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission watchdog. It alleged that the Labour actions amounted to “foreign interference” and were therefore a breach of campaign funding rules. The crux of the argument rested on the LinkedIn post, and whether it could be interpreted as implying Labour was pumping significant funds into the attempts to get Harris elected. Electoral rules in the U.S. stipulate that overseas volunteers can help out as long as they fund their own expenses and do not make campaign decisions. There is a $1,000 dollar limit on travel bills, but costs for food and board are uncapped. U.S. locals can put overseas volunteers up in their homes — as long as those homes aren’t rentals. In its first on-the-record statement, Labour insisted staffers heading to the U.S. were doing so within the rules. “Where Labour activists take part, they do so at their own expense, in accordance with the laws and rules,” the statement said. But Republicans were reluctant to take them at their word. “In these kinds of investigations it’s the details that matter,” said Jason Torchinsky, a Republican finance lawyer. “Labour can claim the campaigners are funding themselves, but the clear central coordination of this and some of the wording on LinkedIn raises questions. There is certainly enough smoke here that it’s worth checking whether there’s a fire.” Some observers argued the Republican response was just Trump being Trump — weaponizing an issue to create a political row. “This complaint against the Harris campaign by the Trump campaign seems calculated to generate headlines and campaign talking points for candidate Trump and has little to do with the legal merits of the complaint,” said Ciara Torres-Spelliscy, a professor in electoral law at Stetson University, Florida.  Some observers argued the Republican response was just Donald Trump being Trump — weaponizing an issue to create a political row. | Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images She added that the Federal Election Commission was “notorious for not enforcing campaign finance laws” — another reason little is expected to come of the complaint. The FEC’s own timetabling suggests it won’t respond before the election is over.  GRENADE BLOWBACK Regardless of the merits of the legal complaint, internal fire began to turn on Patel for the ambiguous wording of her LinkedIn posts. “She’s getting a ton of blowback on this,” said one person familiar with the initial coordination of Labour campaigners, “particularly from colleagues who think she acted recklessly. Labour is distancing themselves from her, not only from her actions but from her professionally.” Some, however, jumped to the defense of an aide who had just wanted to help, and who is unable to defend herself in public. “This has been blown way out of proportion and it’s unfair for the staffer — who has always stayed behind the scenes — to be thrown into [the] international spotlight for what is clearly an innocuous project,” said Tara Jane O’Reilly, a former Labour aide, on Twitter. “I hope the higher-ups at Labour are supporting her.” Labour allies in Washington agreed the furor was a storm in a teacup — and argued that despite causing waves in the U.K., the row was having little impact in the U.S. “In a multibillion dollar election in the United States, the question around a handful of volunteers coming over from the U.K. is a sideshow of a sideshow,” said Josh Freed, a senior vice president at the center-left think tank Third Way in D.C.  He noted that volunteer exchanges happen each election between Labour and the Democrats, as well as between the U.K. Conservatives and Republicans. Even in the U.K. general election last summer, a Cabinet minister offered to coordinate a team of Republicans to help the Tories campaign. Even very senior right-wingers have been known to assist each other across the pond.  In February, former Prime Minister Liz Truss appeared at the right-wing CPAC conference, while Reform UK leader Nigel Farage joined Trump at his campaign rallies in 2016 and 2020. Both Farage and former Tory PM Boris Johnson attended the most recent Republican National Convention. Conservatives argued it was different for Labour now it’s in government.  NEVER RELAX Freed admitted, however, that Labour had been clumsy in how its scheme became publicized  — allowing Trump and his supporters to make hay. The free hit put a downer on long-standing work between Labour and the Democrats to coordinate and bolster the center left. “There’s a general lesson in politics that everything that happens digitally happens in public and people need to be very careful and explicit and deliberate about what they are saying,” he said. “Everything is now viewed and interpreted through a partisan lens.” The concern for Keir Starmer is whether his delicate attempts to get Donald Trump on side have been rendered pointless, or whether the damage can be repaired. | Pool photo by Jaimi Joy via AFP/Getty Images The unnamed person quoted above agreed a long-standing, hitherto uncontroversial campaign scheme had been weaponized for Trump’s political purposes — using Starmer and the U.K. government as collateral. “They are trying to turn the whole foreign interference story on its head,” the person said about the MAGA camp. The concern for Starmer is whether his delicate attempts to get Trump on side have been rendered pointless, or whether the damage can be repaired. Farage, who is influential in the Trump camp, said Starmer had “insulted the incoming Trump administration,” while Richard Grennell, tipped in Washington as a possible Trump pick for secretary of state, criticized Labour on BBC television.  Starmer himself was forced to insist the row would not jeopardize his relationship with Trump, if the Republican candidate does indeed return to the White House.  “I spent time in New York with President Trump, had dinner with him and my purpose in doing that was to make sure that between the two of us we established a good relationship, which we did,” he told reporters. “We had a good, constructive discussion and, of course, as prime minister of the United Kingdom I will work with whoever the American people return as their president.” John Johnston contributed reporting to this article.