Kid Rock may run for Senate, says voter registration ‘critical cause’

FILE PHOTO: 2017 CMT Music Awards Show - Nashville, Tennessee, U.S., 07/06/2017 - Kid Rock presents the Video of the Year award. REUTERS/Harrison McClary/File Photo

(Note: Strong language in paragraph 5)

By Brendan O’Brien

(Reuters) – Kid Rock, an outspoken supporter of Republican President Donald Trump, said on Thursday that he will decide over the next few weeks on whether to run for the U.S. Senate and in the meantime will work on the “critical cause” of registering voters.

The singer-songwriter said in a statement that he plans to create a non-profit organization to promote voter registration so he can raise money for the cause and get people registered to vote at his shows as he explores his possible candidacy in 2018.

“The one thing I’ve seen over and over is that although people are unhappy with the government, too few are even registered to vote or do anything about it,” he said.

Rock said he will discuss his political plans at a press conference in about six weeks.

“If I decide to throw my hat in the ring for U.S. Senate, believe me … it’s game on mthr*****,” he said in the statement.

Earlier this month, Rock drew attention on Twitter and his Facebook page to a “Kid Rock ’18 for U.S. Senate” website, stoking speculation that the 46-year-old Michigan native was considering a run next year.

“I was beyond overwhelmed with the response I received from community leaders, D.C. pundits, and blue-collar folks that are just simply tired of the extreme left and right bull****,” he said.

Born Robert James Ritchie in the Detroit suburb of Romeo, he rose to fame in 1998 as his debut album “Devil Without a Cause” sold some 14 million copies. He gained additional celebrity through his courtship of actress Pamela Anderson and their brief marriage in the 2000s.

The Capitol Hill-based newspaper Roll Call reported that Rock’s name surfaced as a possible candidate earlier this month during a state Republican Party convention in Michigan, which Trump carried in the 2016 presidential race, though no official decisions were announced.

Rock presumably would seek to challenge Michigan’s Democratic incumbent senator, Debbie Stabenow, who is up for re-election in 2018.

According to Roll Call, Rock endorsed Republican Mitt Romney for president in 2012 and initially supported Ben Carson for the Republican nomination in 2016 but switched to Trump when the former reality-TV star became the party’s nominee.

(Reporting by Brendan O’Brien in Milwaukee; Editing by Catherine Evans)

Exclusive: Moscow lawyer who met Trump Jr. had Russian spy agency as client

Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya speaks during an interview in Moscow, Russia November 8, 2016. REUTERS/Kommersant Photo/Yury Martyanov

By Maria Tsvetkova and Jack Stubbs

MOSCOW (Reuters) – The Russian lawyer who met Donald Trump Jr. after his father won the Republican nomination for the 2016 U.S. presidential election counted Russia’s FSB security service among her clients for years, Russian court documents seen by Reuters show.

The documents show that the lawyer, Natalia Veselnitskaya, successfully represented the FSB’s interests in a legal wrangle over ownership of an upscale property in northwest Moscow between 2005 and 2013.

The FSB, successor to the Soviet-era KGB service, was headed by Vladimir Putin before he became Russian president.

There is no suggestion that Veselnitskaya is an employee of the Russian government or intelligence services, and she has denied having anything to do with the Kremlin.

But the fact she represented the FSB in a court case may raise questions among some U.S. politicians.

The Obama administration last year sanctioned the FSB for what it said was its role in hacking the election, something Russia flatly denies.

Charles Grassley, Republican chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, has raised concerns about why Veselnitskaya gained entry into the United States. Veselnitskaya represented a Russian client accused by U.S. prosecutors of money laundering in a case that was settled in May this year after four years.

Veselnitskaya did not reply to emailed Reuters questions about her work for the FSB. But she later posted a link to it on her Facebook page on Friday.

“Is it all your proof? You disappointed me,” she wrote in a post.

“Dig in court databases again! You’ll be surprised to find among my clients Russian businessmen… as well as citizens and companies that had to defend themselves from accusations from the state…”

Veselnitskaya added that she also had U.S. citizens as clients.

The FSB did not respond to a request for comment.

Reuters could not find a record of when and by whom the lawsuit – which dates back to at least 2003 – was first lodged. But appeal documents show that Rosimushchestvo, Russia’s federal government property agency, was involved. It did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Veselnitskaya and her firm Kamerton Consulting represented “military unit 55002” in the property dispute, the documents show.

A public list of Russian legal entities shows the FSB, Russia’s domestic intelligence agency, founded the military unit whose legal address is behind the FSB’s own headquarters.

Reuters was unable to establish if Veselnitskaya did any other work for the FSB or confirm who now occupies the building at the center of the case.

‘MASS HYSTERIA’ OVER MEETING

President Donald Trump’s eldest son eagerly agreed in June 2016 to meet Veselnitskaya, a woman he was told was a Russian government lawyer who might have damaging information about Democratic White House rival Hillary Clinton, according to emails released by Trump Jr.

Veselnitskaya has said she is a private lawyer and has never obtained damaging information about Clinton. Dmitry Peskov, a spokesman for the Kremlin, has said she had “nothing whatsoever to do with us.”

Veselnitskaya has also said she is ready to testify to the U.S. Congress to dispel what she called “mass hysteria” about the meeting with Trump Jr.

The case in which Veselnitskaya represented the FSB was complex; appeals courts at least twice ruled in favor of private companies which the FSB wanted to evict.

The FSB took over the disputed office building in mid-2008, a person who worked for Atos-Component, a firm that was evicted as a result, told Reuters, on condition of anonymity.

The building was privatized after the 1991 Soviet collapse, but the Russian government said in the lawsuit in which Veselnitskaya represented the FSB that the building had been illegally sold to private firms.

The businesses were listed in the court documents, but many of them no longer exist and those that do are little-known firms in the electric components business.

Elektronintorg, an electronic components supplier, said on its website that it now occupied the building. Elektronintorg is owned by state conglomerate Rostec, run by Sergei Chemezov, who, like Putin, worked for the KGB and served with him in East Germany.

When contacted by phone, an unnamed Elektronintorg employee said he was not obliged to speak to Reuters. Rostec, responding to a request for comment, said that Elektronintorg only had a legal address in the building but that its staff were based elsewhere.

When asked which organization was located there, an unidentified man who answered a speakerphone at the main entrance laughed and said: “Congratulations. Ask the city administration.”

(Reporting by Maria Tsvetkova and Jack Stubbs; additional reporting by Polina Nikolskaya, Gleb Stolyarov and Darya Korsunskaya in Moscow; Editing by Andrew Osborn, Mike Collett-White and Grant McCool)

U.S. investigators seek to turn Manafort in Russia probe: sources

FILE PHOTO: Paul Manafort of Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump's staff listens during a round table discussion on security at Trump Tower in the Manhattan borough of New York, U.S., August 17, 2016. REUTERS/Carlo Allegri/File Photo

By Julia Edwards Ainsley and John Walcott

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – U.S. investigators examining money laundering accusations against President Donald Trump’s former campaign manager Paul Manafort hope to push him to cooperate with their probe into possible collusion between Trump’s campaign and Russia, two sources with direct knowledge of the investigation said.

Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s team is examining Manafort’s financial and real estate records in New York as well as his involvement in Ukrainian politics, the officials said.

Between 2006 and 2013, Manafort bought three New York properties, including one in Trump Tower in Manhattan. He paid for them in full and later took out mortgages against them. A former senior U.S. law enforcement official said that tactic is often used as a means to hide the origin of funds gained illegally. Reuters has no independent evidence that Manafort did this.

The sources also did not say whether Mueller has uncovered any evidence to charge Manafort with money laundering, but they said doing so is seen by investigators as critical in getting his full cooperation in their investigation.

“If Mueller’s team can threaten criminal charges against Manafort, they could use that as leverage to convince him to cooperate,” said one of the sources.

Manafort’s spokesman, Jason Maloni, said, “Paul Manafort is not a cooperating witness. Once again there is no truth to the disinformation put forth by anonymous sources and leakers.”

Manafort is seen as a key figure in the investigation because of his senior role in the campaign and his participation in a June 2016 meeting that included the president’s son, Donald Trump Jr., close adviser Jared Kushner and Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya.

The meeting was called after the lawyer offered damaging information about Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.

Mueller’s team asked the White House on Friday to preserve all of its communications about that meeting. Mueller is examining contacts between Russian officials and Trump associates during and after the Nov. 8 presidential election as part of a broader investigation into whether Russia tried to sway the election in favor of Trump.

Manafort became Trump’s campaign manager in June 2016 but was forced to resign two months later amid reports of his business relationship with the Kremlin-backed former Ukrainian leader, Viktor Yanukovich.

Manafort previously worked as a consultant to a pro-Russia political party in Ukraine and helped support Yanukovich. According to a financial audit reported by the New York Times, he also once owed $17 million to Russian shell companies.

Former Southern District of New York U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara was investigating Manafort’s real estate dealings before he was fired by Trump in March, and Mueller has now assumed control of that investigation, one of the sources said.

Bharara was not available for comment on his investigation on Friday.

(Writing by Julia Ainsley; Editing by Yara Bayoumy, Kieran Murray and Ross Colvin)

Trump’s son, close associates to appear before Senate

FILE PHOTO - A combination photo of Donald Trump Jr. from July 11, 2017, Jared Kushner from June 6, 2017 and Paul Manafort from August 17, 2016. REUTERS/Brian Snyder, Carlo Allegri (R)/File Photo

By Patricia Zengerle and Jeff Mason

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – President Donald Trump’s son Donald Trump Jr., son-in-law Jared Kushner and former campaign manager Paul Manafort have been asked to appear before U.S. Senate committees next week to answer questions about the campaign’s alleged connections to Russia, officials said on Wednesday.

The three men are the closest associates of the president to be called to speak to lawmakers involved in probing Russian meddling in the 2016 U.S. presidential election and possible collusion with the Trump campaign.

Trump, who came into office in January, has been dogged by allegations that his campaign officials were connected to Russia, which U.S. intelligence agencies have accused of interfering in last year’s election.

Trump has denied any collusion.

The U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee said on Wednesday that it had called Trump’s eldest son, Donald Trump Jr., and Manafort to testify on July 26 at a hearing.

The president’s son released emails earlier this month that showed him eagerly agreeing to meet last year with a woman he was told was a Russian government lawyer who might have damaging information about Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.

The meeting was also attended by Manafort and Kushner, who is now a senior adviser at the White House.

Kushner is scheduled to be interviewed by the Senate Intelligence Committee on Monday, July 24, behind closed doors.

“Working with and being responsive to the schedules of the committees, we have arranged Mr. Kushner’s interview with the Senate for July 24,” Kushner’s attorney, Abbe Lowell, said in a statement. “He will continue to cooperate and appreciates the opportunity to assist in putting this matter to rest.”

A special counsel, Robert Mueller, is also conducting an investigation of Russian meddling in the U.S. election and any collusion between Moscow and Trump’s campaign.

The issue has overshadowed Trump’s tenure in office and irritated the president, who told the New York Times on Wednesday that he would not have appointed ally and former Senator Jeff Sessions as attorney general if he had known Sessions would recuse himself from oversight of the Russia probe.

“Sessions should have never recused himself, and if he was going to recuse himself, he should have told me before he took the job and I would have picked somebody else,” Trump said in the interview.

Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, a Democratic member of the Judiciary Committee, said the committee’s hearing would enable the panel to begin to get testimony under oath.

“There has been an enormous amount that has been said publicly but it’s not under oath, which means that people are free to omit matters or lie with relative impunity,” Whitehouse told CNN.

The Senate Intelligence Committee is conducting one of the main investigations of Russia’s meddling in the 2016 U.S. election and possible collusion by Trump associates, but the Judiciary committee has been looking into related issues.

The public Judiciary hearing on Wednesday will look into rules governing the registration of agents working for foreign governments in the United States and foreign attempts to influence U.S. elections.

Chuck Grassley, the committee’s Republican chairman, has said he wanted to question the Trump associates, but has also raised concerns about why the Obama administration allowed Natalia Veselnitskaya, the Russian lawyer who attended the Trump Tower meeting in June, into the United States.

He also has called before the committee and threatened to subpoena Glenn Simpson, a co-founder of Fusion GPS, a firm that commissioned former British intelligence agent Christopher Steele to dig up opposition research on Trump, when he was a presidential candidate.

(Reporting by Patricia Zengerle and Jeff Mason; Additional reporting by Eric Beech, David Alexander and Julia Ainsley; Editing by Toni Reinhold)

Russian lawyer who met Trump Jr. says ready to testify to Congress

Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya speaks during an interview in Moscow, Russia November 8, 2016. REUTERS/Kommersant Photo/Yury Martyanov

MOSCOW (Reuters) – The Russian lawyer who met Donald Trump Jr after his father won the 2016 U.S. Republican presidential nomination has said she is ready to testify to Congress to dispel what she called “mass hysteria” about the encounter.

President Donald Trump’s eldest son eagerly agreed last year to meet Natalia Veselnitskaya, a woman he was told was a Russian government lawyer who might have damaging information about Democratic White House rival Hillary Clinton, according to emails released by Donald Trump Jr.

Veselnitskaya has previously said she is a private lawyer, that she never obtained damaging information about Clinton, and that she has no ties with the Kremlin.

“I’m ready to clarify the situation behind this mass hysteria – but only through lawyers or testifying in the Senate,” Veselnitskaya said in an interview with Russia’s Kremlin-backed RT TV channel released late on Tuesday.

Russian officials have repeatedly denied U.S. allegations that Moscow interfered in the presidential campaign to help Trump win the White House.

(Reporting by Maria Tsvetkova; Editing by Andrew Osborn)

Trump’s FBI pick vows independence, says Russia probe no ‘witch hunt’

Christopher Wray testifies before a Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing on his nomination to be the next FBI director on Capitol Hill in Washington, U.S., July 12, 2017. REUTERS/Carlos Barria

By Julia Edwards Ainsley

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – President Donald Trump’s pick to head the FBI, Christopher Wray, on Wednesday said he would refuse to pledge loyalty to Trump, rejected his description of the probe into Russian election meddling as a “witch hunt,” and vowed to quit if told by the president to do something unlawful.

Wray, nominated by Trump on June 7 to replace the fired James Comey as Federal Bureau of Investigation director, firmly sought to establish independence from the Republican president and even said it would be “highly unlikely” that he would agree to meet him in a one-on-one situation.

Wray appeared at his U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing amid an uproar in Washington over 2016 emails released on Tuesday involving the president’s son, Donald Trump Jr. The emails showed the president’s son agreeing last year to meet a woman he was told was a Russian government lawyer who might have damaging information about Democratic White House rival Hillary Clinton as part of Moscow’s official support for his father.

Wray deflected specific questions from Republican Senator Lindsey Graham about the president’s son’s emails, but said, “Any threats or effort to interfere with our election from any nation-state or any non-state actor is the kind of thing the FBI would want to know.”

Trump’s son did not notify the FBI and wrote that “I love it” of the Russian’s offer of information about Clinton.

Wray, who appeared on target to win confirmation, also said he had no reason to doubt the U.S. intelligence community’s finding that Russia interfered with the election to help Trump get elected in part by hacking and releasing emails damaging to Clinton.

In the aftermath of Comey’s firing, the Justice Department named Robert Mueller, himself a former FBI director, to serve as special counsel looking into alleged Russian interference in the 2016 presidential race to help Trump get elected and potential collusion between Moscow and Trump associates.

Trump fired Comey on May 9 and later cited the “Russia thing” as his reason.

Trump often has called the Russia probe a “witch hunt.” The Russia matter has dogged Trump’s first six months in office.

“I do not consider Director Mueller to be on a witch hunt,” Wray told Republican Graham.

Wray and Comey served together in the Justice Department under Republican former President George W. Bush, and both worked on the government’s case in the Enron Corp fraud scandal in the early to mid-2000s.

Wray said he was “very committed” to supporting Mueller in the special counsel investigation, calling him “the consummate straight shooter and somebody I have enormous respect for.”

Dianne Feinstein asked Wray to tell the committee “if you learn about any machinations to tamper with” Mueller’s probe.

“Understood,” Wray responded.

NO LOYALTY OATH

Wray said he spoke with no one at the White House about Comey’s firing. He said no one at the White House had demanded that he pledge his loyalty to Trump, as Comey said the president demanded of him, and said he would not give such an assurance if asked.

“My loyalty is to the Constitution, to the rule of law and to the mission of the FBI. And no one asked me for any kind of loyalty oath at any point during this process, and I sure as heck didn’t offer one,” Wray said.

Comey previously testified to the same committee that Trump pressed him in a one-on-one session to drop the FBI investigation into former national security advisor Michael Flynn’s ties to Russia and said he felt he was fired in a bid by the president to undercut the Russia probe.

Democratic Senator Patrick Leahy asked Wray, “If the president asks you to do something unlawful or unethical, what do you say?”

“First, I would try to talk him out of it. And if that failed, I would resign,” Wray said.

Asked by Democratic Senator Dick Durbin if he would ever meet in the Oval Office with the president with no one else present, Wray said, “I think it would be highly unlikely.”

Wray is a former U.S. Justice Department lawyer who has prosecuted and defended white-collar crime cases and represented New Jersey Governor Chris Christie in a political scandal.

The allegation involving Trump pressing Comey over the Flynn probe raised questions about whether Trump’s behavior amounted to obstruction of justice, a potential issue in any potential future effort in Congress to impeach the Republican president and remove him from office.

Wray repeatedly vowed independence.

“There’s only one right way to do this job, and that is with strict independence, by the book, playing it straight, faithful to the Constitution, faithful to our laws, and faithful to the best practices of the institution, without fear, without favoritism and certainly without regard to any partisan political influence,” Wray said.

(Reporting by Julia Edwards Ainsley; Editing by Will Dunham)

Republican avoids upset in costly Georgia congressional race

Karen Handel, Republican candidate for Georgia's 6th Congressional District, makes an appearance before supporters prior to giving her acceptance speech at her election night party at the Hyatt Regency at Villa Christina in Atlanta, Georgia, U.S., June 20, 2017. REUTERS/Bita Honarvar

By Andy Sullivan

SANDY SPRINGS, Ga. (Reuters) – Georgia Republican Karen Handel won the most expensive congressional race in history on Tuesday, avoiding a Democratic upset in a race that was widely seen as a referendum on President Donald Trump.

By a margin of 52 percent to 48 percent, the former Georgia secretary of state defeated Democrat Jon Ossoff, a political newcomer who sought to wrest control of a suburban Atlanta district that has elected Republicans to Congress since the 1970s.

The election will not significantly change the balance of power in Washington, where Republicans control the White House and both chambers of Congress.

But it could give Republicans a boost in confidence as they struggle to advance health and tax legislation that has been bogged down by infighting and investigations into whether Trump’s campaign colluded with Russia in last year’s presidential election.

Handel said at her victory rally that she knew it was going to “require all hands on deck” for Republicans to hold on to the district.

“Tonight I stand before you, extraordinarily humbled and honored at the tremendous privilege and high responsibility that you … have given me,” Handel told a boisterous crowd that chanted Trump’s name.

Ossoff and Handel both tried to focus on local issues and avoided mentioning Trump, whose approval rating sits at 37 percent, according to Reuters/Ipsos polling.

But that did not stop Trump from weighing in on Twitter, urging voters to support Handel before the election and celebrating her victory afterward.

“Fantastic job, we are all very proud of you!” he posted Tuesday night.

Spending on the race reached at least $57 million, nearly twice the previous record, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, a watchdog group. The special election was held to fill the seat vacated by Tom Price after Trump appointed him as secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Democrats celebrated the fact that they had turned a conservative stronghold into a competitive district.

“We showed the world that in places where no one thought it was even possible we could fight (that) we could fight,” Ossoff told supporters.

But the defeat was sure to prompt soul-searching in a party that is shut out of power in Washington and has steadily lost influence at the state level in recent years. Despite spending more than $30 million, Ossoff lost the district by a wider margin than Democrat Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential election.

Democrats also lost a special election in neighboring South Carolina on Tuesday, where Republican Ralph Norman easily prevailed over Democrat Archie Parnell in a seat formerly held by Republican Mick Mulvaney, who is now serving as Trump’s budget director.

Democrats are 0 for 4 in congressional elections this year, having earlier lost races to fill vacant seats in Kansas and Montana.

“All the Fake News, all the money spent = 0,” Trump wrote on Twitter.

Republicans, meanwhile, can now breathe a sigh of relief with the knowledge that they can still win in the kind of affluent, educated districts that often favor Democrats – even with a president who has divided voters in their own party.

“Do I agree 100 percent with what he does? God, no. But I believe he has the country’s best interests at heart,” said Jessica Podalsky, who voted for Handel on Tuesday morning.

(Additional reporting by Amanda Becker in Washington; Editing by Leslie Adler, Peter Cooney and Paul Tait)

Canada cyber-spy agency expects hacktivist attacks in 2019 vote

Communications Security Establishment (CSE) Chief Greta Bossenmaier takes part in a news conference in Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, June 16, 2017. REUTERS/Chris Wattie

By Leah Schnurr and Alastair Sharp

OTTAWA/TORONTO (Reuters) – Canada’s electronic spy agency said on Friday it was “very likely” that hackers will try to influence Canada’s 2019 elections and it planned to advise political parties next week on how to guard against cyber threats.

The Communications Security Establishment (CSE) agency said it had not detected any nation-state attempts to interfere in prior Canadian elections but saw risk from hacktivists.

CSE said Canada’s 2015 federal election, which brought Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s Liberals to power, was targeted by “low-sophistication cyber threat activity” that did not affect the outcome of the election, according to a report it released on Friday.

“CSE will be offering cyber advice and guidance to parliamentarians and to Canada’s political parties,” CSE chief Greta Bossenmaier told a news conference. “Cyber security is a team imperative; no one organization can go it alone,” she added.

Worries about interference in democratic processes have come to the fore amid allegations of Russian meddling in the U.S. presidential election last November and the French election in May.

U.S. intelligence agencies concluded last year that Russia hacked and leaked Democratic Party emails as part of an effort to tilt the presidential election in favor of Donald Trump, something Russia denies.

A British intelligence agency in March told political parties to protect themselves against potential cyber attacks, while the French government in March dropped plans to let its citizens abroad vote electronically in this month’s legislative elections because of concern about the risk of cyber attacks.

CSE said federal political parties, politicians and the media are more vulnerable to cyber threats than elections themselves, given that federal elections are largely paper-based.

Cyber security lawyer Imran Ahmed of Miller Thomson said engaging with political parties was “a good first step” but the spy agency should have already had a plan in place including expected standards for political parties to meet.

“We’re two years away from 2019 and there’s no timeline for what the next steps will be,” he said.

CSE said it expects some hacktivist efforts in 2019 will be well-planned, with targets ranging from voter suppression and stealing party information to trying to discredit candidates.

(Reporting by Leah Schnurr in Ottawa and Alastair Sharp in Toronto; Editing by Phil Berlowitz)

EU fears Brexit delay, uncertainty after shock UK vote

Britain's Prime Minister Theresa May leaves the Conservative Party's Headquarters after Britain's election in London, June 9, 2017. REUTERS/Peter Nicholls

By Alastair Macdonald

BRUSSELS (Reuters) – European Union leaders fear Prime Minister Theresa May’s shock loss of her majority in the snap British election will delay Brexit talks due to start this month and so raise the risk of negotiations failing.

“We don’t know when Brexit talks start. We know when they must end,” tweeted Donald Tusk, the EU summit chair overseeing negotiations that the EU had planned to start on June 19.

His reference to the March 2019 deadline when Britain will be out of the European Union with or without an agreed deal to avoid legal limbo for people and businesses reflected mounting concern that British chaos could further disrupt all of Europe.

“Do your best to avoid a ‘no deal’ as result of ‘no negotiations’,” Tusk said, calling for urgency to avert the risk that, having bound Britain in March to a two-year countdown to Brexit, May’s failed electoral gamble could waste further time.

Guenther Oettinger, the German member of the EU executive, warned that a weak British leadership was a problem for the Union: “We need a government that can act,” he told the Deutschlandfunk radio station. “With a weak negotiating partner, there’s the danger that the negotiations will turn out badly.”

Oettinger’s boss, European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker, told a German paper: “It’s up to the British to make the next move … We’ve been ready to negotiate for months.”

Juncker’s Brexit negotiator Michel Barnier made clear talks could only now start once Britain has a team in place: “Brexit negotiations should start when UK is ready,” he tweeted.

“Timetable and EU positions are clear. Let’s put our minds together on striking a deal.”

French Prime Minister Edouard Philippe was quick to scotch any suggestion that Britain might do a U-turn and ask to stay in the EU – something that would need EU agreement.

Few Europeans voiced much sympathy for May. Some compared her to her predecessor David Cameron, who sought to silence Eurosceptic fellow Conservatives by calling the referendum on EU membership which ended his career and shocked Europe.

“YET ANOTHER OWN GOAL”

“Yet another own goal, after Cameron now May, will make already complex negotiations even more complicated,” tweeted Guy Verhofstadt, the liberal former Belgian premier who is the European Parliament’s point man for the Brexit process.

German conservative Markus Ferber, an EU lawmaker involved in discussions on access to EU markets for Britain’s financial sector, was scathing: “At the most untimely point,” he said, “The British political system is in total disarray. Instead of strong and stable leadership we witness chaos and uncertainty.”

May, who had campaigned against Brexit last year, delivered her terms for withdrawal on March 29 that included a clean break from the EU single market. She then called a snap election hoping for a big majority to strengthen her negotiating hand.

That was also the broadly desired outcome in Brussels, where leaders believed that a stronger May would be better able to cut compromise deals with the EU and resist pressure from hardline pro-Brexit factions in her party to walk out without a deal.

Elmar Brok, a prominent German conservative member of the EU parliament, said Europeans would be disappointed: “Now no prime minister will have that room for manoeuvre,” he said.

European leaders have largely given up considering the possibility that Britain might change its mind and ask to stay.

Most now appear to prefer that the bloc’s second-biggest economy leave smoothly and quickly. Having recovered from last year’s shock, Germany, France and other powers see Brexit as a chance to tighten EU integration without the awkward British.

As news of British mayhem broke, Juncker was launching a new push for an expanded EU defence project which Britain long opposed, fearing a clash with the U.S.-led NATO alliance.

FEAR OF COLLAPSE

A breakdown in negotiations could lead to Britain ceasing to be an EU member without having in place the kind of legal agreements that would avoid a chaotic limbo for people and businesses. That would also make it improbable that Britain could secure the rapid free trade agreement it wants with the EU after it leaves.

In a note to clients, UBS wrote that a breakdown in talks was now more likely and would make it harder to reach a trade deal: “A tighter political balance could make it easier for Eurosceptics … to prevent the government from offering the compromises needed to secure a trade deal.”

Talk in Britain that a different ruling coalition could seek a “softer” Brexit than May has proposed, possibly seeking to remain in the single market, is also problematic for the EU.

While the other 27 states would quite possibly be willing to extend to Britain the same kind of access to EU markets they offer to Norway or Switzerland, they have made clear that would mean Britain continuing to pay into the EU budget and obey EU rules, including on free migration across the bloc, while no longer having any say in how the Union’s policies are set.

“Maybe there won’t be a hard Brexit,” Norwegian Foreign Minister Boerge Brende said. “Maybe Britain will have to show greater flexibility in the negotiations.”

But EU officials question how any British government could persuade voters to accept a Norway-style package and so would be wary of starting down the path of negotiating it for fear of ending up without a deal that both sides could ratify in 2019.

(Editing by Janet Lawrence)

Two days from UK election, security dominates campaign after London attack

Pedestrians carry umbrellas as they walk past floral tributes to the victims of the recent attack at London Bridge and Borough Market, in central London, Britain June 6, 2017. REUTERS/Toby Melville

By Estelle Shirbon and Kate Holton

LONDON (Reuters) – Two days from a national election, Britain’s ruling Conservatives and opposition Labour Party battled to defend their records on security after an Islamist attack that killed seven people in London upended the campaign.

After police named two of the attackers and revealed that one was previously known to security agencies, Prime Minister Theresa May faced further questions about her record overseeing cuts to police numbers when she was interior minister.

The latest opinion poll, by Survation for ITV, had the Conservatives’ lead over Labour narrowing to just one point from six points in the same poll a week earlier.

However, the consensus among pollsters remains that May’s party, who have been in government since 2010, will win a majority.

In Britain’s third Islamist attack in as many months, three men rammed a van into pedestrians on London Bridge on Saturday evening before running into the bustling Borough Market area, where they slit throats and stabbed people.

The rampage followed a suicide bombing that killed 22 adults and children at a pop concert in Manchester two weeks ago, and an attack in March when five people died after a car was driven into pedestrians on London’s Westminster Bridge.

One of the London Bridge attackers was 27-year-old Khuram Butt, a British citizen born in Pakistan. He was known to police and the domestic spy agency MI5 but, with resources scarce, had not been deemed enough of a threat to warrant close monitoring, police said.

Butt had appeared in a television documentary called “The Jihadis Next Door”, broadcast last year by Britain’s Channel 4, one of a group of men who unfurled an Islamic State flag in a park.

All three attackers were shot dead at the scene by officers within eight minutes of police receiving the first emergency call.

The Canadian Christine Archibald, a French national and a Briton were among the dead, while other French people, a Spaniard, Australians and a New Zealander were among the 48 who were injured in what May called “an attack on the free world”.

The family of 32-year-old Briton James McMullan said they believed he, too, had lost his life.

MINUTE’S SILENCE

A nationwide minute of silence was held at 11 a.m. (1000 GMT) to honor all the victims.

Before the recent attacks, Brexit and domestic issues such as the state of the health service and the cost of care for the elderly had dominated the election campaign.

When May called the election in April, her Conservatives led in opinion polls by 20 points or more.

But an announcement – made before the Manchester and London Bridge attacks – that they planned to make some of the elderly pay more for their care saw that lead start to shrink, to between one and 12 points now.

Security has become the number one issue and both main parties issued statements on Tuesday portraying their own positions on policing and intelligence as the most robust.

During a round of media interviews, Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson faced a barrage of questions about whether there had been security failures and about past police cuts. He sought to deflect the pressure onto Labour, accusing them of weakness.

Asked about repeated criticism of London Mayor Sadiq Khan’s response to the attack by U.S. President Donald Trump, Johnson said he did not think there was any reason to cancel Trump’s planned state visit to Britain.

As interior minister from 2010 to 2016, May oversaw a drop of 20,000 in the number of police officers in England and Wales, which Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn has said should never have happened and warranted her resignation.

The MI5 domestic intelligence service has seen its budget increased and has plans to expand its numbers to 5,000 officers from 4,000 over the next five years, MI5 chief Andrew Parker said last year.

Corbyn himself has faced repeated questioning over his own past views and actions on security matters.

He has been criticized for voting against counter-terrorism legislation and expressing reservations about police responding to attacks with “shoot-to-kill” tactics. Since the attack, he has said he fully supported the actions of the police.

Corbyn has also faced fierce criticism for past sympathies with the Palestinian group Hamas, Lebanon’s Hezbollah, and Sinn Fein, the political arm of the Irish Republican Army, a guerrilla group that waged a violent struggle to take Northern Ireland out of the UK.

“ALMOST EUPHORIC”

While the political debate raged, the investigation into Saturday’s attack continued, with police searching an address in Ilford, east London, in the early hours of Tuesday.

Police had arrested 12 people on Sunday in Barking, also in the east of the city, but said late on Monday all had been released without charge.

The second attacker who has been named was 30-year-old Rachid Redouane, who also went by the alias Rachid Elkhdar and claimed to be Moroccan or Libyan, police said. He and Butt both lived in Barking.

One of Butt’s neighbors, Ikenna Chigbo, told Reuters he had chatted with Butt – known locally as “Abz” – just hours before the attack on Saturday and said he appeared “almost euphoric”.

“He was very sociable, seemed like an ordinary family man. He would always bring his kid out into the lobby,” said Chigbo.

Police said they had to prioritize resources on suspects who were believed to be preparing an attack or providing active support for one. Butt did not fall into that category when they last investigated him.

(Additional reporting by Alistair Smout and William James; editing by Guy Faulconbridge and Kevin Liffey)