Elon Musk leaves a mess for Trump and Mike Johnson with DOGE exit

Elon Musk departed Washington this week, bringing one of the weirdest sagas in the history of the presidency to a close.

Not everyone leaves DC with their reputation intact. But most people manage to get through it without their bladder control abilities making it into a New York Times exposé.

So ends the Elon show. On Sunday, Washington saw its last gasp — a final, awkward sitdown between Musk and CBS Sunday Morning. Despite an awkward attempt by Musk to change the terms of the interview last-minute and bar any mention of politics, he answered questions about the end of DOGE and the budget reconciliation plan endorsed by Donald Trump, Speaker Mike Johnson and the majority of House Republicans.

In his interview, Musk made it clear he hadn’t gotten the memo that Johnson and other Republicans want their caucus to lie about the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) score, which the speaker and others are now unconvincingly pretending is a group of liberal activists. Meanwhile, conservatives in their own caucus — the same deficit hawks who held Johnson to cuts of nearly $1 trillion affecting Medicaid — continue to cite the CBO’s methodology as they hammer Johnson and their colleagues for insufficient deficit spending cuts.

Musk’s comments on that budget bill, released in the lead-up to CBS’s interview last week, set off a firestorm in Washington. There was an obvious reason: Musk, in one fell swoop, undermined the entirety of the budget plan and essentially made Johnson out to be a liar — if you believe Musk, who no longer has a reason to play nice in Washington.

“I was, like, disappointed to see the massive spending bill, frankly, which increases the budget deficit, doesn’t decrease it, and undermines the work that the DOGE team is doing,” Musk told CBS News. Musk’s demeanor was similar to the eyebrow-raising performance he delivered during his final press conference this week with Donald Trump — when he seemed visibly distracted by the gold ornamentation of the room and stood in a decidedly odd manner next to the (literally) sitting president of the United States.

“I think a bill can be big or it can be beautiful,” he went on. “But I don’t know if it could be both. My personal opinion.”

Oops. With that quote, Musk did damage that was still being felt on Sunday, when the rest of his interview aired. At practically the same moment that his comments were re-broadcast, Speaker Mike Johnson was facing an uncomfortable grilling from NBC’s Meet the Press about the bill and whether it cut the deficit significantly, or even at all.

“I sent my good friend Elon a long text message explaining it can be big and beautiful,” Johnson claimed. He repeated his insistence that the bill is “not going to add to the debt” during his own interview, despite the CBO’s outlook.

Certainly, the guy who brought the motto “move fast and break things” to Washington is going to read that text.

Regardless of how that particular conversation turns out, the damage is done. Johnson’s problem is simple: his own caucus does not believe his insistence about the “big, beautiful bill” being deficit-neutral. Why should anyone else?

Johnson wishes it were as simple as convincing Americans (and the media) that Democrats are the only ones opposed to his deficit math. In reality, some of the staunchest debt hawks in Washington — all conservatives — are in the same camp.

If one needs proof, they can simply ask Chip Roy, one of the leaders of those debt hawks. Roy, in his final statement about the bill’s passage in May, explained that he voted for the bill to achieve deficit cuts — but even he lamented that the bill did not go further in that regard.

“The good news is that the bill technically held true to that framework by yielding modest deficit reduction over a 10-year budget window,” said Roy. “Importantly, it does this by cutting spending $1.5 trillion over 10 years, reforming programs like Medicaid and SNAP with work requirements.”

It should be obvious, but just to be clear: “modest deficit reduction” does not equal a budget that is deficit-neutral. The “one big, beautiful bill” is still projected to add nearly $4 trillion to the deficit after those cuts, according to the CBO and other analysts.

This offhand comment from Musk won’t make his life any harder. He returns to Tesla, now bearing the brunt of a stunning drop in profits tied directly to his political activism. By doing so, he exits an unfamiliar arena: Washington, a place where public perception matters and can change on a dime.

It will, however, make things a lot harder for Johnson and Senate Republican leadership, the latter of whom will now oversee the bill’s fate for the next month. Already, Republicans are talking about changing the bill — including, potentially, by splitting “one” big beautiful bill into several. Those Senate Republicans only acquired more ammunition to defy the White House and Johnson on Sunday.

One of those Republicans is Ron Johnson, who, like his conservative allies in the House, has been one of the most vocal deficit spending watchdogs in Congress. Even before Musk’s latest comments, Johnson was publicly prepared to buck the White House over the bill’s price tag. After Sunday, the combination of the Musk interview and the Senate’s hair-thin margin may give him all the political cover he needs.

“Republican leaders repeatedly say, ‘We don’t have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem,’” Johnson tweeted before the bill passed the House. “Right now, it doesn’t appear that they are willing to fix it.”

“I am going to insist that we do,” he warned.

Holocaust survivor among eight injured after Israel rally firebombed

A man has been charged with two counts of murder after eight people were injured in an attack on a “Run For Their Lives” event in Boulder, Colorado, on Sunday afternoon, a gathering for activists demanding the release of Israeli hostages held by Hamas.

Despite the charge, the authorities have yet to report that anyone died in the attack, which occurred around 2pm near the Pearl Street Mall.

Eyewitnesses reported that the attacker shouted “Free Palestine!” before firing incendiary devices, including a “makeshift flamethrower” and Molotov cocktails, at the demonstrators, according to the FBI, which is investigating what it called “a targeted terror attack.”

The injured are understood to be aged between 52 and 88 and were rushed to hospitals in the Denver metro area.

The eldest among them is also a Holocaust survivor, according to Rabbi Israel Wilhelm, the Chabad director at the University of Colorado Boulder.

A suspect detained at the scene on Sunday was named as Egyptian national Mohamed Sabry Soliman, 45, who is reported to have entered the United States on a visa that expired two years ago but was then granted work authorization lasting until March 2025.

Huge Mount Etna eruption in Italy sends tourists fleeing

Mount Etna has erupted in Sicily, spewing a huge column of smoke and ash into the sky above the Italian island.

Footage shared on social media showed people running for their lives down the mountainside of Europe’s largest and most active volcano, as a thick column of smoke intensified above them.

Italy’s National Institute of Geophysics and Volcanology said in a widely reported statement that the volcano was experiencing strong strombolian explosions – a type of eruption – “of growing intensity”.

“Over the past few hours, the falling of a little thin ash has been flagged in the Piano Vetore area,” the statement said.

According to the Volcanic Discovery website, prior to the eruption there were volcanic tremors which began at around 10pm local time and reached their peak shortly before 1am.

The Volcanic Ash Advisory Centre in Toulouse, one of nine such centres worldwide used to monitor aviation risks, warned that a volcanic ash plume had reached an altitude of around 6,400 metres.

Dive-bombing buzzard forces school to ban children from playground

A dive-bombing buzzard has forced a village primary school to ban children from going outside following a spate of attacks.

The bird of prey has been attacking villagers in Havering-atte-Bower, near Romford, Essex, since Easter weekend, according to residents.

Dame Tipping Primary School said “nothing can be done” but to keep pupils inside due to the animal being a protected species.

Resident Nikki Dix, 37, said she was “dead shocked” after the bird left scratch marks on her head while she was walking through a park in March.

“He was giving me an evil eye so then I carried on my journey for quite a while just swinging my bag above my head,” she said.

Footage showed the buzzard swooping down on Louise Whittle, a parent of a pupil at the school, as it appeared to aim for her head.

She said: “It’s absolutely bonkers that there is a buzzard attacking people. But it’s been a great learning experience for the children.

“They have learnt all about buzzards that they otherwise wouldn’t have done. The school has been absolutely fantastic in prioritising the children’s safety and finding other alternatives for getting out.”

However, she worried that “the birds are being prioritised over the children” and voiced her hope “hopeful that they fly away so everyone can get back to normal”.

Headteacher Ms McCarthy said: “We have also introduced additional indoor breaks with lots of engaging activities including traditional board games, cup stacking competitions and puzzles.”

A Havering Council spokesperson said: “The RSPCA has advised that the buzzard may be protecting its nest or chicks, which lines up with the information we have received.

“Buzzards are protected under UK law, therefore our intervention options are very limited, and we have advised that warning signs would be the easiest solution at this time.

“We completely understand how difficult and worrying this situation is for the school and local residents and we regret that there is not a quick or straightforward solution.”

In March, a rogue hawk caused mayhem in a Hertfordshire village after it began a campaign of violence, targeted mainly at tall men.

The bird, which is usually native to Brazil, Argentina and Chile, was responsible for over 20 attacks after a “sudden change in behaviour”.

The Harris hawk was sighted several times in the historic parish village of Flamstead, with professionals and local falconers recruited in an attempt to bring the bird under control.

Speaking to The Times, Roy Lambden, 68, said he was out walking when he “felt a whack” on his head, and soon realised he was bleeding.

“It was only from the corner of my eye that I realised it was a bird because I saw it fly away. I was one of the first to be hit by it,” he said.

“Since then, around 20 people I know have been attacked. Lots of bleeding heads — my friend who is bald has got two scars from it.”

The hawk was captured in April by a falconer, who said it had been carrying out the attacks because it was “hormonal”.

Cash for tricks: How teens are being seduced by online sexfluencers

Last week, I found myself deep in conversation with some students in year 9 and year 10. These teens are completely typical of their age group. They have dreams, aspirations, worries, families, friends, and smartphones. None of them are more online or more connected than any of their classmates.

They are mid-teenagers, and they are all aware of OnlyFans – ostensibly a social media platform, but one on which sexually explicit pictures and videos are sold to subscribers. It’s increasingly associated with famous influencers, or “creators”, and the students I spoke with all have their “number” – the amount of money it would take for them to consider becoming a creator themselves. They’ve thought about it a lot, and talked about it with their friends, discussing in detail how many followers they’d have to accumulate in order to create sexual content and post it online for cash, popularity, and fame.

Of course, many say that nothing would entice them to sign up to OnlyFans (or its many imitators) when they turn 18 – but many don’t. They have their number.

For Ebony*, 14, that number is “$4m [around £3m] and probably 1 million followers”, she tells me, going on to explain: “Maybe because then you could have sex, like once, maybe, and then get a Boohoo deal or a Sephora deal and be set for life.”

OnlyFans is a subscription-based platform where “creators” post mostly sexual content for paying subscribers. It was founded in 2016, and has seen a stratospheric rise over the last decade. Like TikTok, OnlyFans gained major prominence during the pandemic, when people were scared, bored, and looking for ways to supplement their reduced (or vanished) income.

And like the other big social media platforms, OnlyFans acts as something of a fame equaliser, allowing unknown individuals to rise to prominence and build a large fanbase. Subscription costs vary depending on the popularity of the creator and, perhaps more importantly, how explicit their content is. Unsurprisingly, subscribers tend to pay higher prices for the most popular creators, who are often either already famous or willing to provide extreme or niche content.

It is, of course, far easier for a celebrity, who already has some degree of fame, to get noticed and monetise their following. Lily Allen, for example, is reported to have around 1,000 subscribers, who each pay £10 a month – earning her an estimated £10,000 monthly for publishing pictures of her feet.

Musician Kate Nash sells coy photos of her bum, and told Woman’s Hour that the proceeds paid for her latest tour. Kerry Katona, the former Atomic Kitten singer, told a tabloid that OnlyFans “made her a millionaire again” after her bankruptcy. Kate Moss’s half-sister, Lottie Moss, claims to be making £30,000 a month on the site.

But it is becoming a “civilian” content creator on OnlyFans that is seen as the holy grail – someone with no fame or connections making thousands a month from just a few hundred subscribers. That sounds far more appealing to many than a minimum-wage job. And those who make serious money, gain attention, and achieve fame are usually the ones who post the most extreme content, or pull off the most outrageous stunts.

Creators like Bonnie Blue, Lily Phillips, and Annie Knight have become globally known for performing sexual stunts that, until recently, would only have been conceived of in the farthest extremes of pornography.

Blue’s recent attempt to sleep with hundreds of “barely legal” young men attracted global media attention, barely disguised by a thin veneer of disapproval. Her recent visit to Nottingham Trent University was covered widely, with reports of students, lecturers, and even parents “queueing around the block” to participate in the event.

Then there’s Phillips, who has particularly unsettled the mainstream because she looks and sounds like the girl next door – or, more disturbingly, your daughter or your daughter’s friend. Phillips’s parents run a successful cleaning company. She studied nutrition at the University of Sheffield before realising she could earn much more money by finding fame on social media.

When her content became too explicit for Instagram – where she had built a significant following – she moved to OnlyFans, quickly becoming a celebrity. This culminated in her December 2024 documentary I Slept with 100 Men In One Day, filmed by her friend, YouTuber Josh Pieters.

If the global press, and adults at dinner parties, are talking about this, guess what? So are the kids at school – including tweens and young teens. What’s frightening – and wasn’t the case with traditional pornography – is the total normalisation of this commodification of a person’s body, sexuality, and privacy.

Emma*, 15, says her number would be “£2m and 2 million followers – that’s how much I’d want [in order] to go on OnlyFans and sell myself. That way, you’d be set for life and have no more worries. It would sort of be ‘F-off’ money, you know? People can call you a sl**, but it’d be like, ‘I’m rich and famous, and you have to work a job and live with your parents – I win!’”

And boys, too, are in on this. Gabriel*, 14, says: “I follow Fabien Sassier on YouTube and TikTok, and he’s rich off OnlyFans. How much would you [have to] pay me to go on OnlyFans when I’m older? About £10,000 – if the girls are hot. I think my mum would be annoyed, but she’d be OK once I bought her a new kitchen. She hates her kitchen.”

The language around OnlyFans mirrors the way people talk about other social media platforms – users aren’t “performers” but “creators” (just like Instagrammers and TikTokers). Many teens insist that OnlyFans is different from porn, that it is ultimately less seedy – precisely because they keep hearing how many celebrities are on it, and how “easy” it is to make a fortune with just a few sexy stunts.

Maya*, 15, says: “I don’t think about OnlyFans like porn at all. I know it [involves] some sex, but it’s just completely different. OnlyFans people are more like normal people – especially girls. It’s just making extra money as a side hustle.”

The way in which OnlyFans became associated with the Gen Z and Gen Alpha obsession with entrepreneurialism is troubling. At a time when faith in the traditional job market is historically low, get-rich-quick schemes – crypto, social media hustling, and platforms like OnlyFans – look increasingly appealing.

“You don’t really think about the future or the consequences of your actions when you’re a teenager,” says one of the students. “So these stories of [people taking] extreme risks for maximum reward, like Lily Phillips or Annie Knight, are like siren songs for kids who are terrified of the future.”

They are well aware that Phillips experienced extreme pain. Knight ended up in hospital with excessive bleeding after she slept with 583 men. But – kerching! – they’re allegedly set for life. Phillips is reportedly worth £2m, and Knight, £2.4m. Wounds and sore bits heal, but bills and insecurity linger. What’s a bit of discomfort if it means you’ll never worry about money again?

And this is where we all have some culpability. Like the manosphere, the equally toxic “femosphere” now emerging didn’t appear out of nowhere. We failed to notice that many boys, stewing in loneliness and sadness, were turning to dodgy influencers offering easy answers. Likewise, a generation of girls didn’t stumble accidentally on the idea that their value lies in their sex appeal, and in showing off their bodies to the highest bidder.

As Laura Bates points out in her book The New Age of Sexism, this commodification of sex is harming all of us – from widespread online abuse to schoolgirls being driven out of classrooms by deepfake pornography made for free at the click of a button.

The last two decades have been saturated with sex and celebrity – an era in which a woman with a famous bum and a sex tape became one of the most famous people on the planet. And while Kim Kardashian hit payday, millions of women working in hospitals, schools, labs, and offices were cast as life’s real losers. We haven’t just elevated sex and celebrity: in some cases, we’ve made them the ultimate goals, eclipsing any seemingly “ordinary” aspirations young people used to possess. We can’t clutch our pearls if today’s teens are not shocked by OnlyFans – not in the culture we’ve created, which offers limited opportunities for the young.

Ultimately, the manosphere and the femosphere are two sides of the same dark coin, feeding off each other’s worst ideas and impulses. The “madonna versus wh***” trope is writ large in manosphere lore, where there are “bad” girls (the OnlyFans type) who exist to be used, and “good” girls, more suited to marriage and motherhood.

The femosphere isn’t much different, with its female sex influencers existing online alongside the phenomenon of hyper-conservative “tradwives” – women who style themselves like Norman Rockwell paintings, complete with dresses, doting husbands, and photogenic broods.

Neelam*, 15, reflects: “I love the tradwife thing. Being looked after by a man, and just having the space to be a good mum, sounds brilliant. Boys have gotten so disgusting, but so have girls – those OnlyFans girls are gross, but so are the men that sleep with them.”

Neelam’s point is worth pondering. The rationale offered by some prominent OnlyFans creators is that men are sex-obsessed hounds, and they’re simply cashing in on that. The long queues of balaclava-clad men lining up to sleep with Bonnie Blue or Lily Phillips suggest that the platform’s appeal is similar to that of dogging.

But just as the myth of OnlyFans as a digital goldmine is flawed, so too is the fantasy that a return to some imagined 1950s ideal will save us. An apron and a gaggle of kids won’t conjure a picket fence or a Mad Men-style husband who drinks too much but brings home a paycheck.

If we want to help prise impressionable teen minds away from the toxic stew of the femosphere and the manosphere, we need to offer balance and hope. Universities must make good on the promises tied to expensive degrees. Companies have to make the process of applying for jobs less alienating. School-to-work pipelines must be reinvested in. Affordable housing must be prioritised so that young people aren’t priced out of a stable future, and don’t feel pressured into finding alternative ways to afford the aspirational lives they are being sold.

If we fail to do these things, younger generations will continue to drift towards ever-darker get-rich-quick schemes. And more and more of them will have their number.

They deserve better than that.

*Names have been changed

Win a luxury ticket package for two to this year’s Wilderness Festival

Music fans can win a luxury package for two to this year’s Wilderness Festival, all courtesy of Audi.

Wilderness returns this year to the picturesque nature reserve at Cornbury Park, Oxfordshire, and will be headlined by rock band Supergrass, Nineties rave duo Orbital, and Brit Award-winning, Grammy-nominated indie-rock duo Wet Leg.

Completing the headliner lineup are Basement Jaxx, who are making their return to live shows for the first time in over a decade, as they celebrate the 25th anniversary of their groundbreaking album, Remedy.

The winner will receive a pair of complimentary festival tickets and boutique accommodation in a luxury cabin for two. They will also be treated to an Audi Kitchen experience and, for the ultimate luxury, your own private chauffeur to take you and your guest to the festival and return journey.

Enter the prize draw here.

Wilderness Festival is known for its eclectic music lineup, which this year includes performances from pop singer Lapsley, singer-songwriter Bess Atwell, Scottish musician Jacob Alon and DJ Craig Charles.

At The Sanctuary and Spa, guests will discover an oasis of calm, whether that means taking part in disco yoga or a workshop to explore your sensuality. Highlights include boating, massage treatments, sauna rituals, hot tubs, a wild sauna, Wim Hof method ice baths and wild swimming.

Gourmet food offerings can be found at Ben Quinn’s long table banquet in the woods, a once-in-a-lifetime experience set in the woods and lit by chandeliers. There, Quinn and his team will serve up a feast of flavour cooked right in front of you five courses of carefully curated, responsibly sourced, local and seasonal ingredients.

Elsewhere, attendees can join a number of talks, comedy sets and conversations, from Food Stories with Jay Rayner to a live recording of Jamie Laing’s podcast, Great Company.

Comedian, writer and NHS doctor Matthew Hutchinson will share a sharp and moving look at life on the frontline of British healthcare, while cultural historian Tiffany Watt Smith will uncover a bold and fascinating alternative history of female friendship.

The prize draw will open for entries at 3pm (BST) on 7 May 2025 and close at 3pm BST on 17 June 2025. Only one entry per person is permitted for the Prize Draw. Terms and conditions apply.

Why Max Verstappen’s red mist is the necessary evil behind an F1 genius

In hindsight, the fiery blow-up was somewhat inevitable. In the scorching heat of the Catalan sun on Sunday, enraged as a plethora of events rapidly unravelled against him, Max Verstappen eventually overheated. It’s not the first time; it won’t be the last.

The first thing to note is that his erratic swerve into the side of arch-rival George Russell, in the final laps of Sunday’s Spanish Grand Prix, was clearly deliberate. Russell was fortunate he did not sustain race-ending damage. If he did, the punishment for Verstappen would have been worse than a 10-second time penalty. A disqualification may have been inevitable.

Instead, Verstappen dropped from fifth to tenth, costing him nine points in the F1 world championship, received three penalty points on his FIA superlicence and will live to fight another day. Even if the Dutchman is now just one mishap away from a race ban, he only needs to keep it clean for the next two rounds before he has breathing space again.

Most uncharacteristically, Verstappen’s infuriation was on this occasion a by-product of a quickfire double error on the Red Bull pit-wall. Kimi Antonelli’s late mechanical failure resulted in a safety car with 10 laps to go. Most of the field pitted, switching to quicker soft tyres. Verstappen did not have that option, instead switching to more durable, but slower, hard tyres.

“What the f*** is this tyre?”, Verstappen queried over team radio to trusted engineer Gianpiero Lambiase. The Dutchman almost lost his car at the restart, magnificently saving his Red Bull from spinning into the wall, before losing third place to Charles Leclerc.

Given the tyre choice, Verstappen should not have pitted; he’d have been better served staying out, taking the lead of the race, and trying to defend in the closing five laps on older, soft tyres.

The second error soon followed. Verstappen then clashed with Russell at turn 1 and took to the escape road, rejoining ahead of the Mercedes. Believing his man to be at fault, Lambiase instructed Verstappen to give Russell the place. The Dutchman was apoplectic, seemed to move over to allow the overtake, before driving recklessly into the Brit.

Lambiase was wrong. The stewards’ verdict after the race stated neither driver was to blame for the Verstappen-Russell contact at turn 1. He should not have told his driver to give up fourth.

Of course, this does not excuse Verstappen’s road-rage and ramming of Russell, who dealt with the matter admirably post-race.

“I’ve seen those manoeuvres before in simulators and go-karting, not in Formula 1,” he said. “It seems completely unnecessary.”

Verstappen’s response: “I’ll bring some tissues next time.”

This is not the first time the red mist has descended on the four-time F1 world champion. His accruing of 11 penalty points in the past 12 months is evidence of that. Teetering on the edge of hero and villain, sometimes Verstappen crosses the line the wrong way. Not, in fact, unlike other F1 greats before him.

Sebastian Vettel, like Verstappen a four-time champion with Red Bull, was widely damned for driving into Lewis Hamilton at the 2017 Azerbaijan GP. Angered by Hamilton “brake-testing” him under a safety car, the German moved alongside the Brit and turned his Ferrari purposefully into Hamilton’s Mercedes.

Vettel received a 10-second stop-go penalty, effectively adding 25 seconds to his race. A similar time sanction would have been appropriate for Verstappen in Barcelona.

Further back, seven-time world champion Michael Schumacher was infamously disqualified from not just a race, but the whole 1997 world championship, after turning in on championship rival Jacques Villeneuve at the season-finale in Jerez. Title winner Villeneuve finished the race in third while Schumacher retired, but the FIA gave the German an unprecedented penalty, removing him from the championship standings.

Clearly, Verstappen is in this breed of driver. Inspired and mesmerising behind the wheel of a racing car, as shown in the last year by his terrific overtake on Oscar Piastri in Imola or his scintillating pole position in Suzuka or his incredible drive from 17th to first in the Sao Paulo rain last year, the Dutchman’s instinctiveness also flips the other way, bubbling overboard in clashes such as those seen with Russell in recent months.

Verstappen will not change. In fact, why would he change? His attitude towards racing, in attack and defence, in the stewards’ room and over team radio, is what makes him one of the modern-day greats.

It also makes him wonderfully authentic; he is a no-nonsense character and will say it completely as it is. His bona fide opinions are what endear him to a worldwide fanbase, even if his fans in the UK are at a premium, given past skirmishes with Hamilton, Norris and Russell.

A necessary evil, Verstappen’s self-destructiveness goes hand-in-hand with his generational genius. He admitted his error in a social media post on Monday morning, saying his manouevre was “not right.”

On Sunday, it cost him nine points, as he looks to somehow keep in touch with Oscar Piastri and Lando Norris in the championship standings. Given he was arguably fortunate to escape penalty points in Saudi Arabia and Miami earlier this year, Verstappen is lucky to have not accumulated a race-ban-worthy 12 penalty points already.

But those asking him to change, to adapt and modify in the heat of battle, will only be disappointed.

Liverpool close in on Florian Wirtz and Chelsea in talks over £50m winger

The summer transfer window has opened with a shortened window from 1 June and 10 June opening up for the Club World Cup.

Man City and Chelsea will represent the Premier League, while Liverpool look busy already having made a club-record bid for Bayer Leverkusen‘s Florian Wirtz after wrapping up a deal to bring Jeremie Frimpong to Anfield after triggered his £29.5m release clause.

It comes as Trent Alexander-Arnold will join Real Madrid before the Club World Cup, with a £10m fee agreed with Real Madrid. While Manchester United have an awful lot of work to do in the window after a disastrous season, though Matheus Cunha boosts hopes having triggered his £62.5m release clause after a fine season for Wolves £60m, but captain Bruno Fernandes could leave.

Arsenal, meanwhile, look to be close to their first addition with Martin Zubimendi set for a medical and Mikel Arteta has seemingly sanctioned talks with RB Leipzig over striker Benjamin Sesko.

You can sign up to DAZN to watch every Club World Cup game for free, while all the latest updates, rumours and done deals from what promises to be a chaotic transfer window will be covered in the blog below: