Zelensky demands ‘clear position’ from Trump on Russia sanctions

A Nato-enforced no-fly zone over Ukraine would be the best way to protect the alliance from incursions into its own member states’ airspace, Poland‘s foreign minister has said.

Radoslaw Sikorski was speaking after 19 Russian drones violated his country’s airspace last week and another Russian drone entered Romanian airspace over the weekend.

“Protection for our population – for example, from falling debris – would naturally be greater if we could combat drones and other flying objects beyond our national territory,” foreign minister Radoslaw Sikorski said.

Poland would be able to shoot down Russian drones over Ukrainian territory, he said, calling it an “advantageous” move.

His remarks came after the UK announced British fighter jets will join Nato air defence missions over Poland amid the threat from Russian drones.

The RAF Typhoons are expected to start flying the missions in the coming days, the government announced.

Prime minister Keir Starmer said: “Russia’s reckless behaviour is a direct threat to European security and a violation of international law.”

Prince Harry’s conscience is clear… but it really shouldn’t be

We can all agree that it’s nice that Prince Harry is talking to his dad again. The King and his youngest son enjoyed tea together last Wednesday at Clarence House, a thawing of relations that led a happy Harry to tell the BBC that there is “no point fighting any more – life is precious”.

Whatever the optics of finding yourself estranged from your father for 19 months as he undergoes weekly cancer treatments, this, at the very least, is a heartwarming story of a lad and his dad making up at a time when nobody in this country seems particularly interested in getting along.

So why go and spoil it? Clearly in a good mood, Harry went and gave an interview to The Guardian in which he absolved himself of any wrongdoing in the family fall-out. “I don’t believe that I aired my dirty laundry in public … My conscience is clear,” he said of Spare, the tell-all memoir that most sensible people agree drove a pretty sizeable wedge between father and son.

Your conscience is clear? It shouldn’t be. Having had a daughter myself a year ago, I couldn’t help but think of all the moments the King must have missed with his grandchildren: tottering first steps, first words, food being flung laughingly across a California kitchen, storytime with grandad. Lilibet, Harry’s youngest, is now four. You don’t get those moments back.

I find it so desperately sad that Harry appears to have lost sight of what passes for a fresh start in the first place. Perhaps he feels that all that has transpired was for the best. You wouldn’t bet against it.

“I know that [speaking out] annoys some people and it goes against the narrative,” Harry said this week. “The book? It was a series of corrections to stories already out there. One point of view had been put out and it needed to be corrected.”

To which you say, well, up to a very narrow point. If we reduce family life to a series of competing views, what room is there for anything other than discord? In the bunfight to be right, it’s the little acts of love that go missing.

The irony, as ever, is that Harry is, like his mother, prodigiously gifted at doing good.

In the last week, he has been charming wounded troops in Ukraine on a surprise visit, cheering sick children at a London hospital, and laying a wreath on the tombstone of his beloved grandmother, Elizabeth II.

Perhaps he has had time recently to reflect. The late Queen’s unofficial motto was “never complain, never explain”.

If life gives you castles and power and unimaginable wealth, it is perhaps best to focus on deeds, not words.

Harry has tried to explain himself at length, in podcasts, in print. It so often sounds an awful lot like complaining to me.

Life is precious. It’s also short. As the Prince himself says, over the coming year, “the focus really has to be on my dad”. Saying it is a first step. The next, frankly, is showing it.

Luigi Mangione due in court amid double jeopardy fight in CEO killing

Luigi Mangione is due in court on Tuesday, with his lawyers seeking to dismiss state murder charges for the killing of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson. They argue the New York case and a parallel federal death penalty prosecution constitute double jeopardy. This marks Mangione’s first state court appearance since February.

The 27-year-old Ivy League graduate has attracted a cult following as a stand-in for frustrations with the health insurance industry. Dozens of his supporters showed up to his last hearing, many wearing clothes in the same green as Nintendo’s Luigi character as a symbol of solidarity. His April arraignment in the federal case drew a similar outpouring.

If Judge Gregory Carro permits the state case to go forward, Mangione’s lawyers have said they want him to dismiss terrorism charges and bar prosecutors from using evidence collected during Mangione’s arrest last December, including a 9mm handgun and a notebook in which authorities say he described his intent to “wack” an insurance executive.

Prosecutors want the judge to force Mangione’s lawyers to state whether they’ll pursue an insanity defense or introduce psychiatric evidence of any mental disease or defect he may have.

Carro could either rule on those requests on Tuesday, schedule additional hearings or issue written decisions at a later date.

Mangione has pleaded not guilty to multiple counts of murder, including murder as an act of terrorism. Surveillance video showed a masked gunman shooting Thompson from behind as he arrived for an investor conference at the New York Hilton Midtown. Police say “delay,” “deny” and “depose” were scrawled on the ammunition, mimicking a phrase commonly used to describe how insurers avoid paying claims.

Mangione was arrested five days later after he was spotted eating breakfast at a McDonald’s in Altoona, Pennsylvania, about 230 miles (about 370km) west of New York City and whisked to Manhattan by plane and helicopter. Since then, he has been held at the same Brooklyn federal jail where Sean “Diddy” Combs is locked up.

The Manhattan district attorney’s office contends that there are no double jeopardy issues because neither of Mangione’s cases has gone to trial and because the state and federal prosecutions involve different legal theories.

Mangione’s lawyers say the dueling cases have created a “legal quagmire” that makes it “legally and logistically impossible to defend against them simultaneously.”

The state charges, which carry a maximum of life in prison, allege that Mangione wanted to “intimidate or coerce a civilian population,” that is, insurance employees and investors. The federal charges allege that Mangione stalked Thompson and do not involve terror allegations.

U.S. attorney general Pam Bondi announced in April that she was directing federal prosecutors to seek the death penalty for “an act of political violence” and a “premeditated, cold-blooded assassination that shocked America.”

The Manhattan district attorney’s office quoted extensively from Mangione’s handwritten diary in a court filing seeking to uphold his state murder charges. They highlighted his desire to kill an insurance honcho and his praise for Ted Kaczynski, the late terrorist known as the Unabomber.

In the writings, prosecutors said, Mangione mused about rebelling against “the deadly, greed-fueled health insurance cartel” and said killing an industry executive “conveys a greedy bastard that had it coming.” They also cited a confession they say he penned “To the feds,” in which he wrote that “it had to be done.”

Mangione’s “intentions were obvious from his acts, but his writings serve to make those intentions explicit,” prosecutors said in the June filing. The writings, which they sometimes described as a manifesto, “convey one clear message: that the murder of Brian Thompson was intended to bring about revolutionary change to the healthcare industry.”

Why the Trump blimp won’t make an appearance at this week’s state visit

The Donald Trump baby blimp that soared above London during the US president’s last visit will not make an appearance this week after its creator said it is “not really a laughing matter anymore”.

The orange inflatable, which depicts the leader as an angry baby wearing a nappy and holding a mobile phone, first floated over Parliament Square in July 2018 in protest of Mr Trump’s visit to the UK. It was flown for a second time during his state visit in June 2019, which also sparked mass protests.

But on his visit to the capital this week, the US president will not have to face an unflattering, air-filled caricature, which now sits in storage.

The balloon, created by Leo Murray and co-designed by artist Matt Bonner, was originally created to mock Mr Trump. But Mr Murray says the political climate is different today, and it is “not really a laughing matter anymore”.

He told The Independent: “Back in 2019, Donald Trump was a figure of fun for the British public. Most people thought he was an idiot, and we were amazed that the American people had elected this guy to be the president.

“ We no longer own the blimp. We gave the blimp to the Museum of London. We just didn’t think we would need it again.”

He said after the protests, people involved with the blimp received death threats and were tracked down at their places of work by far-right activists. They had thought about doing it again this year, but said the situation was worse today.

At the time, Mr Murray said they wanted to prick Mr Trump’s ego. He said: “Liberals crying with placards is just water off a duck’s back to Trump. He really doesn’t care. The only thing that ever seems to have any effect on him at all is personal insults.

“And I was like, what? Could we do that?”

The Museum of London, which was gifted the balloon, brought it to the skies once again in January 2023 as it wanted to test how best to preserve it and check if it was structurally sound.

It will next be unveiled in 2026 when the museum opens its new home in West Smithfield, Farringdon.

Expert reveals the small daily habit that brings big health benefits

It’s 2025, and there are myriad headlines around health hacks, each promising perks disproportionate to the amount of effort they require. You can understand why these are appealing; people are busy, time is a finite resource and effective exercise is, by its very nature, hard.

However, Professor Emmanuel Stamatakis of The University of Sydney says this information is often diluted, frequently leading to misrepresentation of the data and “snake oil” messaging. And he should know. A lot of the recent headlines are based on his studies around easy behaviour changes people can make to improve their health, but he stresses you need to pay attention to the details for them to be effective.

“Our epidemiological research findings are certainly encouraging, but sustained behaviour change is not easy,” says Stamatakis, a professor of physical activity, and one of the world’s leading authorities on how it can be used to improve health.

“It will take a lot of effort from us, the researchers, to identify the best ways to support people to change habits, and people need to be aware that it will take a fair amount of effort [from them] to change their habits and stick to them long term.”

For this reason, much of his research centres around small and feasible interventions which, if incorporated consistently into the routines of less active people, could offer measurable perks. Case in point: his most recent research demonstrates how five to 10 short daily bursts of vigorous lifestyle activity, such as climbing the stairs or carrying heavy shopping, can potentially lower the risk of cardiovascular disease, cancer and premature death among less active populations.

“It’s about making sure we distil our most promising findings into tangible and attractive physical activity messages that encourage people who are not keen on traditional exercise to give it a go,” he says. “Brief bursts [of activity] can be tools in your toolkit for improving your health. It’s not about a silver bullet or a quick fix. This quick-fix mindset is detrimental for everyone.”

So what should we take from the learnings from the latest studies that move from magic bullet to practical and helpful advice to help more people live a better, healthier life?

Read more: Everyone is talking about calisthenics – here’s a 4-week strength training plan (no gym membership required)

Stamatakis’s most recent research centres around VILPA – an acronym for vigorous intermittent lifestyle physical activity. This refers to more intense daily movement that doesn’t fall under the umbrella of formal exercise, such as stair climbing, uphill walking, carrying heavy shopping or even vigorous gardening.

“We place a lot of emphasis on incidental physical activity because we want to lower the bar of participation and help more people get benefits from movement,” he explains. “Between five to 10 episodes of vigorous-intensity activity, lasting up to one minute, done on a daily basis, seems to be associated with between 30 and 50 per cent lower risk of cardiovascular conditions, cancer and mortality. This is a substantial effect, considering that it comes from a relatively low amount of daily physical activity.”

However, when this research was released, it was widely interpreted as 60 seconds of exercise per day being capable of adding years to your life – an “easy” message Stamatakis warns could detract from his serious efforts to encourage people to move more.

“Our research concerns a habitual behaviour which involves people who don’t exercise and are not keen to go to gyms or run, swim and cycle,” says Dr Matthew Ahmadi, co-investigator in this research programme and deputy director of the Mackenzie Wearables Research Hub at the University of Sydney’s Charles Perkins Centre. “This is a very different perspective, as you can imagine, to the idea that ‘one minute of exercise can save your life’.”

Yet, the introduction of a few minutes of intense incidental activity remains a feasible and more sustainable option for the target demographic: “The 80 to 85 per cent of the population, usually middle-aged and older adults, who are not keen on regular structured exercise”.

“It’s not about an optimal fitness solution,” Dr Ahmadi says. “If you want to become fully fit, of course, structured exercise is the way to go, but it comes with major commitments. You need to have the time, motivation and skills to know how to do it; sometimes you need to spend money on gym memberships and gear, and even travel to another place because not everyone lives near a park.

“There is a long list of reasons why most people don’t exercise regularly, or at all. This is the target population that our research is addressed to, and these are the people we want to help because they are at the highest risk of chronic disease and compromised lives.”

Read more: A cardiac nurse says these five daily behaviours can reduce your risk of heart disease

As mentioned above, VILPA in sedentary populations has been associated with a lower risk of cardiovascular disease, cancer and mortality. Stamatakis believes another major potential benefit lies outside measurable health metrics – VILPA’s role as a catalyst for encouraging people to move more, and potentially try structured exercise later down the line.

“If people haven’t exercised at a vigorous level in years or decades, it may get them accustomed to the idea and the reality of physical exertion – the discomfort that often comes with it,” he says. “It may be a lot easier for someone to get a flavour for vigorous-intensity activity by walking faster or climbing up a few flights of stairs, as opposed to doing a gym session.

“Gyms and the offerings of the fitness industry are not necessarily everyone’s cup of tea – for many, it’s a very intimidating space. Add to this [the fact that many] environments prioritise cars and are hostile to pedestrians and cyclists, and it’s not people’s fault that they don’t move.

“So for us it’s about creating more options for them, and giving them more accessible ways to get started. The biggest benefit of short bursts of intense activity for this group would be that they become a gateway to people initiating a more formal exercise programme, or introducing a few faster and longer walks into their weekly routines.”

Read more: The 5-minute daily bodyweight workout that can boost fitness and mental health when you sit down all day

The intensity of an activity can be interpreted as how hard your body is working to perform it.

“Vigorous-intensity activity is defined as physical activity that significantly increases breathing and heart rate, typically characterised by an intensity level of 70 to 90 per cent of maximum heart rate, such as jogging or competitive sports,” a definition published in the ScienceDirect journal states. “It requires considerable metabolic effort, equivalent to six to nine times resting levels.”

Physical indicators that you are working at this level of intensity include hard, fast breathing and the inability to say more than a few words without pausing for breath.

“We focus on vigorous-intensity physical activity in this research programme because it is by far the most time-efficient form [of activity for achieving various health benefits]. It is the ‘physiological language’ the body best understands – the extra effort acts as a signal for the body to make adaptations and improvements in, say, how the heart functions or how the body absorbs and transports oxygen to the muscles. For these beneficial health adaptations to happen, the body needs to be pushed regularly, even if it is for a short period of time under one minute,” Stamatakis says.

“Essentially, we are talking about a basic athletic training principle. The adaptations represent the body’s preparations for the next time the same physical challenge is present. That’s why we want to harness the power of vigorous-intensity activity through this programme.”

Read more: I walked 10,000 steps a day with a weighted backpack for a week – here are five reasons I’m not stopping

Ask most people what they want from a routine and they will probably deliver the same surface-level answer: better health. But Stamatakis provides a more in-depth rationale.

“Exercise is wonderful,” he says. “There’s no doubt that it’s extremely powerful for preventing and managing disease, but it is an artificial behaviour. It is an adaptation to the lifestyles of the industrialised world we live in. Most jobs are sedentary, mechanised transportation is the standard and most of our leisure pursuits are screen-based, so the norm is to be static for much of the day.

“Our civilisation, mostly for the sake of convenience, efficiency and speed, has removed the need to be physically active in day-to-day life, and our bodies pay a high price for that.”

Cast your mind back to the roots of humanity, however, and you have hunter-gatherers – physiologically and genetically identical to us – who were forced to move continuously to source food and find safety. Now that need is gone, and movement must be engineered into our lifestyles to prevent a further downturn in humanity’s physical health.

“That was the deeper background thinking of our research,” says Stamatakis.

Read more: I’m a trainer specialising in longevity – these are the five changes that have the biggest impact on my clients

I wish my mum had contacted Macmillan Cancer Support

I wasn’t at my mum’s side when she learned she had breast cancer, but that made me determined to be there the day she was getting the all-clear 18-months later. However, things didn’t go to plan that day.

Mum’s cancer journey started over a decade ago, a few months after a routine mammogram – when she developed “a pain”. She told herself it was probably nothing, because the scan she’d just had was fine. When she mentioned it to her GP – a small lump that didn’t feel quite right – she convinced herself that she was just being silly. The biopsy begged to differ.

In the list you keep in your head of the cancers you worry your mum might get, breast wasn’t that high on mine. Yes, it’s long been the number one cancer affecting women, with Macmillan Cancer Support reporting that about 55,000 women are diagnosed with breast cancer in the UK each year  – the risk factor only increasing with age. But my mum had other health concerns to contend with.

As a schoolgirl in swinging London, she’d been a back-of-the-bikeshed smoker, which had graduated into a lifelong habit. Lung cancer seemed like a possibility.

Mum’s also the biggest sun worshipper I know. Long before any of us had heard of SPF, she would think nothing of spending an afternoon in the garden, stretched out on a blanket, slathered in baby oil. So, given what we know now about UV radiation, I wondered about skin cancer too.

Mum went on to have a series of lumpectomies to get rid of three spots of malignant tissue. She would also have lymph nodes removed as a precaution, as well as undergo extensive chemotherapy.

For me, her diagnosis was as though a stopwatch had been started. How long might she have left? She did her best to be stoic. Which was just as well, given what government austerity measures at the time were doing to the NHS: budget cuts, hapless reorganisations, and an end to the “gold-standard” two-week referral from detection to the start of treatment.

All mum could do was wait for the brown envelopes to drop on the doormat detailing appointments at unfamiliar hospitals many miles away, sometimes after the appointment had been and gone.

If she felt let down by the bureaucracy of our health service, the same could not be said for the army of individuals involved in her care. On a human level, she found her nurses and doctors to be uniquely composed and compassionate throughout her treatment.

When the day finally came for her oncologist to tell her that all the signs of her cancer had gone, I was invited along to hold her hand. “The scans are back,” he began. “And I need to discuss your options for the next course of action.” It seemed the cancer hadn’t quite gone after all. She had fought so hard to get to this point, she was expecting good news, and was unprepared for the knockback.

But she did go on to beat cancer – and has been in remission for more than five years, which we couldn’t be more grateful for. However, should it ever come back, there’s one thing we’d do differently from the off: make a call to Macmillan Cancer Support.

Only with hindsight, did we realise how much help Macmillan would have been. Someone to provide her with a calming companion for the journey, someone to help with the cancer admin – the appointments, the prescriptions, the test results – and someone to explain what all the scans and tests were for, what the results might mean, and what to expect next.

I couldn’t always be around while mum was living with cancer, and that’s where Macmillan steps in. Now, enjoying a slice of cake at a Coffee Morning, which is raising money to fund the work they do, seems like the least I can do.

Find out how you can help raise vital funds by hosting a Macmillan Coffee Morning. Sign up now on the Macmillan website

Macmillan Cancer Support, registered charity in England and Wales (261017), Scotland (SC039907) and the Isle of Man (604). Also operating in Northern Ireland.

Why three English players reflect growing crises at Spain’s biggest clubs

When Thomas Tuchel called Trent Alexander-Arnold to tell him he was out of September’s England squad, the German said he was conscious of the right-back having to adapt to a new life in Madrid, but still stressed another point. This was also a football decision.

Alexander-Arnold isn’t as settled as some of his right-back rivals, and Tuchel wants to see how Xabi Alonso uses him. The England manager knows he’s going to spend a lot of time watching Spanish football this season, and may well witness an interesting dynamic in the Champions League this week.

Atletico Madrid’s trip to Liverpool – before Real Madrid follow in November – will showcase it through Conor Gallagher. For the first time in history, all three of the big Spanish clubs feature an English player at the same time.

Madrid even have two, given that Alexander-Arnold has joined his close friend, Jude Bellingham.

Marcus Rashford has meanwhile gone to Barcelona after first discussing a move there as far back as 2019. This is a dream long achieved, even if reality is going to be a bit more challenging.

In a different era, maybe even at that time in 2019, such signings would have been a show of strength all-round.

It would be rightly said that England is now producing so much elite talent that they’re good enough for the Clasico two, for so long, the great white sharks at the top of the football food chain.

Madrid and Barcelona would meanwhile have proved they still have the clout to take the best of the Premier League, regardless of the competition’s power. Even the newly assertive champions, Liverpool, lost another star to Spain through Alexander-Arnold.

His return to Anfield in November could bring quite a reception, given the residual noise about that departure.

Except that this sub-plot is a lot more complicated than that.

These are actually signs of weakness, to a certain degree. Or, as some insiders put it, the situations of the English players in Spain actually reflect different types of difficulties – even crises – at their clubs and even LaLiga as a whole.

You only have to look at Alexander-Arnold, on the occasions he actually plays. He is described by sources as having started “very timidly”, with the warning that he’ll have to improve a lot to oust Dani Carvajal from the team.

There have already been quips over whether he was signed merely to keep Bellingham company. Such jibes are undercut by the fact that Alonso likes Alexander-Arnold. The manager knows his class.

Bellingham is one of the most valued players at Madrid, mind, both for his brilliant first season and since he is only behind Kylian Mbappe in terms of commercial appeal. Many of the club’s biggest deals involve Bellingham.

Such advertisements are the only place you can see him right now due to his summer operation, however, and that after a more muted second season. People are waiting for the great star to properly take the stage again.

That more muted second act is partly down to the evolution of Bellingham’s position, and that has involved a certain irony. The 22-year-old was initially signed to be Luka Modric’s long-term successor, but instead excelled in his first season as Karim Benzema’s successor… only for Madrid to now need a Modric again. They badly need that midfield controller.

Alonso insisted on such a player in the summer, but top target Martin Zubimendi had already long agreed a deal with Arsenal. This has been viewed with particular frustration at the top levels of the Bernabeu, because Zubimendi was considered such an obvious Madrid signing.

It was even anticipated that he could offer the extra satisfaction of usurping Rodri from the national team. There is instead intense aggravation that they missed out, especially with so few comparable players around.

If it’s obviously a stretch to describe this as a “crisis” for a club that won the Champions League in 2024 and was being lauded for its long-term recruitment, Madrid are at something of a crossroads.

The very appointment of Alonso represents a bold new direction, where the club is willing to invest in becoming an “ideology team” for the first time in their modern history. Alonso’s approach, put bluntly, is more associated with Barcelona.

Bellingham may now be expected to carry a different responsibility when he returns. That’s nevertheless tempered by the possibility that Alonso actually figures out a working system without him.

There was already a suggestion of that with England last week, as Tuchel’s side excelled with Morgan Rogers. The manager even spoke conspicuously about squad “behaviour” expectations amid growing murmurs regarding Bellingham’s “ego”.

If it’s all true, Bellingham is arguably at exactly the right club – in a good way. Madrid value that type of personality.

Gallagher has never been talked about in such terms, and Diego Simeone especially loves him for his humility. The midfielder, in the words of one source, “runs his b******s off” – exactly what the manager appreciates more than anything.

And yet that is exactly why Gallagher almost articulates a certain philosophical anguish at the club. Some within Atletico feel other midfielders are technically superior, and by some distance.

That has run parallel to the hierarchy’s long desire to move to a more modern approach, but they have found they can’t bring themselves to move against Simeone. Almost more than any individual in any comparable situation, the Argentine has restored Atletico as a force.

And yet that very strength may now be weighing them down, as questions again arise over his effect. It is described as a potential football crisis and a political one, too.

Rashford has meanwhile been adapting to a strangely dysfunctional club that goes beyond all that. Barcelona continue to experience almost every problem conceivable, from ongoing financial challenges to the Negreira case.

The leadership’s response to all of this has repeatedly been questioned, given the arguments they have potentially made these issues worse. Rashford’s signing illustrates some of this.

Barcelona wanted Nico Williams – and might have been in for Alexander Isak in a different era – but their financial pressures ensured they couldn’t do a suitable deal. They instead had to go for a cut-price option in Rashford, and that for a player who has obviously faced a few questions of his own.

Hansi Flick’s football even reflects this, as it constantly seems to teeter between chaos and brilliance in the biggest games.

They still have Lamine Yamal, after all. He is the best illustration of how LaLiga still has so many stars, including some of those from England.

Spain itself continues to produce exceptional players… except most of those now go to the Premier League.

Strengths and weaknesses, both of which may be illustrated by this Champions League season, and more acutely than usual.

Donald Trump says he will sue New York Times for $15bn

Donald Trump on Monday filed a defamation and libel lawsuit against the New York Times, calling it one of the most “degenerate newspapers” in the U.S., days after the newspaper published articles about his alleged ties with Jeffrey Epstein.

The U.S. president accused the newspaper of lying and defamation, calling it a “virtual mouthpiece” for the Democratic Party.

Trump threatened to sue the NYT last week for its recent coverage related to a sexually suggestive note and drawing given to Epstein.

“Today, I have the Great Honor of bringing a $15 Billion Dollar Defamation and Libel Lawsuit against The New York Times,” Trump said in a post on his social media platform, Truth Social.

“The New York Times has been allowed to freely lie, smear, and defame me for far too long, and that stops, NOW!” he added.

The NYT has not yet issued a comment on the matter.

Highlighting the paper’s endorsement of Kamala Harris in the 2024 race, the president said it was “the single largest illegal Campaign contribution, EVER”.

“Their Endorsement of Kamala Harris was actually put dead center on the front page of The New York Times, something heretofore UNHEARD OF!” he said.

He accused the newspaper of “decades long method of lying about your Favorite President (ME!), my family, business, the America First Movement, MAGA, and our Nation as a whole”.

He pointed to earlier lawsuits filed against ABC News and anchor George Stephanopoulos, as well as against Paramount over its 60 Minutes interview with Kamala Harris, noting that both cases were settled for $15m and $16m, respectively.

The lawsuit cites a number of NYT articles, including one editorial published prior to the 2024 presidential election which said he was unfit for the office, and a 2024 book published by Penguin titled “Lucky Loser: How Donald Trump Squandered His Father’s Fortune and Created the Illusion of Success”.

“Defendants maliciously published the Book and the Articles knowing that these publications were filled with repugnant distortions and fabrications about President Trump,” according to the filing lodged on Monday in the U.S. District Court, Middle District Florida.

In the filing, Trump’s lawyers argued that the publications damaged both his business and personal reputation, inflicting major economic harm on his brand value and significantly affecting his future financial prospects.

“The harm to the value of TMTG (Trump Media and Technology Group) stock is one example of how the defendants’ defamation has injured President Trump,” said his lawyers, citing “a precipitous decline in the stock price.”

Epstein, the disgraced financier and sex offender, died by suicide while awaiting his own trial for sex trafficking. Since then, the billionaire financier’s alleged connections with and influence over multiple high-profile individuals including Prince Andrew, former president Bill Clinton and Trump, have been thrust back into the limelight – with the so-called “Epstein files” becoming a source of multiple conspiracy theories.

Trump campaigned on releasing more information, but then, over the summer, the Department of Justice said no more information would be released. That sparked backlash on both sides of the political aisle.

Trump has said he parted ways with Epstein before the financier’s legal troubles became public in 2006.